>> OKAY, GOOD AFTERNOON,
EVERYONE. I AM TAMMY MORALES.
IT IS MARCH 20, 2024, AND THE
REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF
THE LAND USE COMMITTEE WILL
COME TO ORDER. IT'S 2:03 P.M.,
I'M TAMMY MORALES, CHAIR OF
THE COMMITTEE. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE?
>> PRESENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> PRESENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER WOO?
>> PRESENT.
>> VICE CHAIR STRAUSS?
>> PRESENT.
>> CHAIR MORALES?
>> HERE.
>> FIVE PRESENT.
>> THANK YOU. IF THERE IS NO
OBJECTION, TODAY'S AGENDA WILL
BE ADOPTED. HEARING NO
OBJECTION, TODAY'S AGENDA IS
ADOPTED. OKAY, WE WILL MOVE
INTO THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
THIS WILL BE A GENERAL
IN-PERSON AND VIRTUAL PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD. I'LL MODERATE
IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER. PUBLIC
COMMENT, CLERK, HOW MANY PEOPLE
DO WE HAVE SIGNED UP IN PERSON?
?
>> WE HAVE SIX PEOPLE SIGNED UP
FOR IN-PERSON COMMENT.
>> ALL RIGHT, I'M GOING TO
GIVE EVERYONE ONE MINUTE TO
COMMENT SO THAT WE -- WE'VE
GOT A LONG AGENDA TODAY, TWO
ITEMS BUT LONG. SO I'M -- I'LL
GIVE EVERYONE ONE MINUTE, AND
WE WILL START WITH IN-PERSON
COMMENTERS, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE
TO VIRTUAL. SO WILL YOU PLEASE
CALL THE FIRST TWO SPEAKERS IN
PERSON.
>> STAND BY. THANKS FOR YOUR
PATIENCE, EVERYONE. WE HAVE A
NEW COMMITTEE CLERK TODAY,
WELCOME.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR GRACE,
AND WE ARE READY. RON HORNING
IS THE FIRST SPEAKER.
>> HELLO, THANK YOU FOR
ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK. I'M
COMMENTING ON THE MEMO ABOUT
UNIT OWNERSHIP, AND I KIND OF
TALKED TO AN ARCHITECT ON HOW
MAYBE SOME WORDING COULD GO
INTO THE DIRECTOR'S RULE ON
PROCESS AND I GOT A COPY HERE.
MY COMPUTER KIND OF MESSED UP,
SO IT'S A LITTLE KIND OF
MESSED UP. JUST SOME RULES
MAYBE THAT COULD GO IN, SO BOTH
SIDES KNOW OR ALL THREE SIDES
KNOW, YOU KNOW, WHO DOES WHAT
AND WHAT TIMELINES THERE ARE
AND STUFF LIKE THAT. SO I HOPE
SOME SORT OF FACTS OF THAT TYPE
GET INTO THE RULE. THANKS.
>> APPRECIATE IT, THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
>> CADEN COOK. I APOLOGIZE IF I
MISPRONOUNCED THE LAST NAME.
>> EITHER MICROPHONE, SURE.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS CADEN
COOK, I USE THEY/HE PRONOUNS,
AND I'M A CURRENT UW STUDENT
LIVING IN CAPITOL HILL. AS SOME
OF YOU KNOW, I'M PRETTY
INVOLVED IN ORGANIZING AND
RECENTLY WORKED WITH A GROUP OF
QUEER RENTERS IN THE CAPITOL
HILL AREA TO TRY AND PASS RENT
STABILIZATION AT THE STATEWIDE
LEVEL. BECAUSE THAT DIDN'T
PASS, THAT JUST KIND OF, TO ME,
SYMBOLIZES WHY THE COMP PLAN IS
INCREASINGLY IMPORTANT,
ESPECIALLY WITH OUR LACK OF
SUPPLY. I LOVE LIVING IN
CAPITOL HILL. I LOVE LIVING IN
SEATTLE, WHICH IS THE CITY THAT
I WAS BORN. I LOVE THE
DIVERSITY OF QUEER PEOPLE WHO
HAVE ORGANIZED TOGETHER TO
PROTECT OUR COMMUNITY. AND I
DON'T WANT TO BE FORCED OUT
DUE TO A RENT INCREASE. SUPPLY
IS NOT THE ONLY SOLUTION TO OUR
HOUSING PROBLEM, BUT IT IS A
MORE LONG-TERM SOLUTION THAN
JUST STABILIZATION. WHEN SUPPLY
IS LOW -- THAT'S SIMPLY HOW IT
WORKS, AND I URGE YOU TO FIX
THE MAYOR'S PLAN. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, CADEN.
>> NEXT WE HAVE JORGE CHAVEZ
II.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON,
COUNCILMEMBERS, MY NAME IS
JORGE CHAVEZ II. NICKELSVILLE
SUPPORTS COUNCILMEMBERS MORALES
CONNECTED COMMUNITIES PILOT
LEGISLATION. WE ALL KNOW THAT
THE NUMBER ONE REASON OF
HOMELESSNESS IS LACK OF
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. LOW-INCOME
FAMILIES ARE BEING PUSHED OUT
INTO FARAWAY PLACES WHERE
TRANSPORTATION IS LIMITED AND
GOOD PAYING JOBS ARE RARE.
WE'RE SURROUNDED IN WATER IN
ALL DIRECTIONS AND THERE'S NO
ROOM TO EXPAND BUT TO GO UP. WE
URGE YOU TO VOTE YES ON THIS
LEGISLATION. PEOPLE NEED MORE
AFFORDABLE PLACES TO LIVE.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ALICIA BURTON.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON,
COUNCILMEMBERS, MY NAME IS
ALICIA BURTON, I LIVE IN
NICKELSVILLE CENTRAL DISTRICT.
NICKELSVILLE SUPPORTS THE PILOT
LEGISLATION. THIS LEGISLATION
WOULD ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL
HEIGHT, ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA,
EXCEPTIONS FROM FLOOR AREA
CALCULATIONS AND OTHER STANDARD
MODIFICATIONS. IT ESTABLISHES
PROVISIONS FOR SOCIAL HOUSING
DEVELOPMENTS AND EARMARKS 30%
OF UNITS RESTRICTED AND
AFFORDABLE TO HOUSEHOLDS MAKING
BELOW 80% OF THE AREA MEDIAN
INCOME. WE URGE YOU TO VOTE YES
ON THIS LEGISLATION. PLEASE,
PEOPLE NEED MORE AFFORDABLE
PLACES TO LIVE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT, DAVID.
>> HELLO, MY NAME IS DAVE, AND
I LIVE IN DISTRICT FIVE. AND
THOUGH I'M HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT
THE CONNECTED COMMUNITIES, AND
IT HAS VERY ADMIRABLE GOALS,
BUT I THINK THERE'S TOO MANY
EXCEPTIONS IN THIS FOR SEATTLE
POLICIES. WE HAVE A POLICY FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT
THERE'S AN EXEMPTION FOR THIS.
SO THEREFORE WE DON'T GET AS
MUCH AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS WE
COULD GET. THE CITY HAS A
DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS BUT ARE
WE USING THAT FOR THIS SO THE
COMMUNITIES THAT ARE IMPACTED
CAN LET YOU KNOW IF THIS IS
THIS DESIGN FITS THEIR NEEDS,
THERE'S AN EXEMPTION FOR THAT.
SO WE HAVE ALL THESE EXEMPTIONS
IN THERE. AND THEN THERE'S AN
EXEMPTION YOU CAN BUILD UP TO
FIVE FEET AT THE EDGE OF THE
PROPERTY. SO THAT MEANS
THERE'S NO ROOM FOR CHILDREN
TO PLAY, THERE'S NO ROOM FOR
TREES THAT WE KNOW THAT PROVIDE
NUMEROUS HEALTH BENEFITS. ALL
THIS DOES IS PROVIDE URBAN HEAT
ISLANDS. SO I ASK YOU TO AMEND
THIS PROPOSAL OR TO REJECT IT.
THANK YOU. .
>> AND STEVE.
>> I TOO AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE
PROPOSAL. STRANGELY ENOUGH,
WHAT FEW LIMITATIONS YOU HAVE
ARE ALL TAKEN OUT. YOU'RE
GOING TO BE SERVING LARGELY 8%
PEOPLE, WHICH ARE PEOPLE WHO
CAN ALREADY AFFORD SOME HOUSING
IN SEATTLE. NOT MAYBE BUY A
HOUSE BUT CAN AFFORD SOME
HOUSING IN SEATTLE, AND AGAIN,
WHO'S TAKING IT IN THE SHORTS?
THE GOOD OLD WORKING CLASS,
BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO
CONTINUE TO PUSH PEOPLE OUT
BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO HELP
PAY FOR UPPER END HOUSING,
WHICH PEOPLE OUGHT TO BE ABLE
TO AFFORD THEMSELVES, PEOPLE
WHO ARE NOT LIKELY TO BE ON THE
STREET, AND VERY LITTLE FOR THE
PEOPLE ON THE BOTTOM. I'VE NOT
SEEN ACCOUNTING ON MHA. I HAVE
NOT SEEN AN ACCOUNTING OF HOW
MUCH BETTER OR WORSE, AND I
SUSPECT WORSE, IT IS RIGHT NOW
FOR HOMELESSNESS IN SEATTLE.
BUT COUNCIL DECLARED EMERGENCY
ALMOST A DECADE AGO, AND THAT
WENT ON TO NORMAL BUSINESS.
>> IN-PERSON PUBLIC COMMENT IS
COMPLETED.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU. WE'LL MOVE
ON TO VIRTUAL. LET'S SEE. THE
FIRST PERSON WE HAVE IS NIVI
FOLLOWED BY MARTHA, SO AS A
REMINDER, PRESS STAR SIX TO
UNMUTE. AND YOU HAVE ONE
MINUTE. NIVI, YOU ARE FIRST.
>> WAIT, JUST ONE MOMENT.
>> HELLO, CAN PEOPLE HEAR ME?
>> YES, HOLD ON ONE SECOND
PLEASE. SORRY. WE'RE GOING TO
SET THE TIMER.
>> OKAY.
>> OKAY, PLEASE BEGIN.
>> WELL, WHILE YOU'RE DOING
THAT, I'LL JUST GET STARTED SO
I SAVE YOU TIME. MY NAME IS
NIVI, I LIVE IN DISTRICT FOUR.
I LIVE IN FREMONT. I FREAKING
LOVE IT. IT'S AWESOME. IT'S
THE BEST PLACE I'VE EVER
LIVED. AND I RUN AN
ORGANIZATION CALLED SOAPBOX
PROJECT. OVER THE PAST THREE
WEEKS WE'VE BEEN MEETING SO
MANY YOUNGER PEOPLE LIKE ME
THAT LIVE IN SEATTLE THAT ARE
REALLY AFRAID OF THE CLIMATE
CRISIS AND THE HOUSING
AFFORDABILITY CRISIS
OVERLAPPING, SO I'M HERE TO
SUPPORT THE CONNECTED
COMMUNITIES PILOT LEGISLATION.
I DON'T THINK THE COMP PLAN IS
ACCOUNTING FOR ENOUGH
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND
EVERYONE DESERVES TO LIVE
SAFELY IN SEATTLE. I'M AFRAID
I WILL GET PUSHED OUT OF THE
CITY AND SO I WANT TO TAKE
PROACTIVE MEASURES TO URGE YOU
TO SUPPORT THE CONNECTED
COMMUNITIES PILOT SO WE CAN ALL
LIVE AND WORK IN THE CITY THAT
WE LOVE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER
IS MARTHA FOLLOWED BY RICHARD
ELLISON. MARTHA, PLEASE GO
AHEAD.
>> YES, HELLO, HELLO. YES,
HELLO, MARTHA HERE. HELLO, GOOD
COUNCIL PEOPLE. I'M PUZZLED BY
LEGISLATION THAT PROMOTES
EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT BUT NOT
EQUITABLE CLIMATE RESILIENCE.
LANGUAGE IN THE BILL CONTENDS
THAT IT WILL, QUOTE, NOT IMPACT
SEATTLE'S RESILIENCY OR
ABILITY TO ADAPT TO CLIMATE
CHANGE IN A MATERIAL WAY. AND
WHILE THE CITY RECOGNIZES HEAT
ISLANDS IN FRONTLINE
COMMUNITIES CAUSE BID THE LACK
OF TREE COMPANY PI FEELS LIKE
THIS IGNORES TREE POWER TO
PROMOTE RESILIENCE. AS WRITTEN,
THERE ARE INSUFFICIENT SETBACKS
TO PROTECT TREES OR PLANT NEW
ONES, AND AS A RESULT THESE
CONNECTED COMMUNITIES WILL
BECOME CONNECTED ISLANDS.
SETBACKS ARE SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH
TO MANT TREES ON PRIVATE
PROPERTY AND WILL ALSO
ELIMINATE PLANTING STREET
TREES, WHICH ALSO COOL
COMMUNITIES. SO SURELY, THE
CITY CAN ENCOURAGE EQUITABLE --
THAT UNDERSTANDS THE GRAVITY OF
THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS
AND THE REALITY OF A RAPIDLY
WARMING CLIMATE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. I DO HAVE THE
NEXT TWO SPEAKERS LISTED AS NOT
PRESENT. LISA MARCUS AND AMY.
SO IF YOU ARE ON, PLEASE MAKE
SURE THAT YOU ARE --
>> HELLO?
>> JUST A MOMENT, PLEASE. LISA
AND AMY, I'M SHOWING YOU AS
NOT PRESENT, SO YOU MAY NEED TO
CALL BACK IN. NEXT I HAVE
RICHARD ELLISON, FOLLOWED BY
JENNIFER GODFREY. RICHARD,
PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HELLO,
MY NAME IS RICHARD ELLISON. I
LIVE IN COUNCIL DISTRICT FOUR.
ONE OF THE FOUR CORE VALUES OF
SEATTLE'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
IS ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP.
THE SEATTLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
CALLS FOR SEATTLE TO CONTINUE
TO BE A NATIONAL LEADER IN
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP.
QUOTE, EVEN AS THE CITY BECOMES
INCREASINGLY URBAN, SEATTLE IS
DEDICATED TO PROTECTING AND
RESTORING THE GREEN SPACES AND
WATER THAT MAKE OUR CITY
SPECIAL. TO DESIGN, BUILD, AND
MANAGE THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENT
IN WAYS THAT PROTECT AND STRIVE
TO RESTORE NATURAL RESOURCES
AND NATURAL SYSTEMS AND TO ACT
AS A ROLE MODEL IN
ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE
PRACTICES. THE CONNECTED
COMMUNITIES PRO30 SAL ALLOWS
FOR ONLY FIVE-FOOT SETBACKS. IT
WILL BE IMPOSSIBLE TO SAVE
EXISTING TREES -- HAND IN HAND.
THE SOLUTION, BUILD TALLER, NOT
LOT LINE TO LOT LINE. GET EXTRA
HEIGHT BONUSES. CONNECTED
COMMUNITIES SHOULD BE A LIMITED
EXPERIMENT, IS SEATTLE CLEVER
ENOUGH TO BUILD HOUSING FOR
WITH OPEN SPACE AND TREES, IS
SEATTLE GOING TO BE THE LEADER
IN ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP OR
JUST CLEAR CUT OUR WAY TO
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE. THANK
YOU.
>> HELLO.
>> SORRY.
>> THIS IS JENNIFER GODFREY, I
LIVE IN DISTRICT SIX. HELLO?
>> YES, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> OKAY. I'M JENNIFER GODFREY,
DISTRICT SIX WANTING TO COMMENT
ON THE CONNECTED COMMUNITIES
BILL. I HAVE SOME CONCERNS THAT
THE FIVE-FOOT SETBACKS WILL
GUARANTEE SEATTLE WILL LOSE
MORE CANOPY THAN WE ARE ALREADY
LOSING. THIS WOULD ALSO
GUARANTEE THAT THE PEOPLE
LIVING IN THESE BUILDINGS WOULD
HAVE NO SHADE TREES WHICH WOULD
PROVIDE THEM WITH FREE COOLING
DURING HOTTER WEATHER. WITHOUT
SHADE FROM BIG TREES, THIS WILL
MAKE THEM MORE VULNERABLE TO
HEATSTROKE, HEAT-INDUCED HEALTH
PROBLEMS OR DEATH, NOT TO
MENTION POLLUTION. KING COUNTY
PUBLIC HEALTH RECOMMENDED
INCREASING TREES IN FRONTLINE
COMMUNITIES FOR THESE REASONS.
WHY SHOULD PEOPLE GETTING
SO-CALLED AFFORDABLE HOUSING BE
REQUIRED TO BUY AIR-CONDITIONER
S TO SURVIVE IN THEIR
OVERHEATED APARTMENTS. SMALL
ORNAMENTAL TREES WILL NOT
PROVIDE SHADE TO THESE
BUILDINGS, AND THAT'S ALL THAT
WOULD FIT IN A FIVE-FOOT
SETBACK. WE CAN BUILD
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND SAVE BIG
TREES AT THE SAME TIME. OUR
STARVING AND DEPLETED SOUTHERN
RESIDENT KILLER WHALES WILL
ALSO SUFFER FROM THIS BILL AS
TREES RETAIN STORM WATER WHICH
PREVENTS POLLUTED WATER FROM
BEING DUMPED INTO THEIR HOME IN
TIMES OF HEAVY RAIN.
>> THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE
JASON WALSH FOLLOWED BY LOIS
MARTIN . JASON, PLEASE PRESS
STAR SIX. .
>> HELLO?
>> YES, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> HI, GOOD AFTERNOON, MY NAME
IS JASON, HE/HIM, A RESIDENT OF
DISTRICT TWO, SPEAKING IN
SUPPORT OF THE PILOT PROGRAM.
I'VE WORKED IN THE NONPROFIT
SECTOR, NEITHER HAVE PROVIDED
ME WITH THE INCOME NECESSARY TO
PROVIDE A PERMANENT HOME IN ONE
OF THE COUNTRY'S LEAST
AFFORDABLE CITIES. AS A BIKE
RIDER, I'M JUST ONE DISTRACTED
DRIVER AWAY FROM MAJOR
FINANCIAL HARDSHIP. THIS
PROGRAM WILL PUT MORE HOUSING
ON THE BOOKS WHO ARE NOT HIGH
INCOME EARNERS AND BRING
GREATER LEVELS OF AFFORDABLE
HOUSING TO NEIGHBORHOODS WITH
GREATER ACCESS TO SERVICE. IT
WILL LEVERAGE RESOURCES GREATER
THAN WHAT THE CITY CURRENTLY
POSSESSES AND BRING A
COMMUNITYWIDE APPROACH TO A
COMMUNITYWIDE ISSUE.
>> THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE LOIS
MARTIN FOLLOWED BY ALICE
LOCKHART. LOIS, PLEASE PRESS
STAR SIX.
>> HELLO, MY -- YES, THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS LOIS MARTIN, AND
I'M A LEGACY AFRICAN AMERICAN
RESIDENT OF DISTRICT THREE.
I'M ASKING THAT YOU NOT PASS
THE CONNECTED COMMUNITY
LEGISLATION. USING THE LANGUAGE
OF JUSTICE TO ADD DENSITY
DISPROPORTIONATELY IN ZIP CODES
THAT ARE FURTHEST AWAY FROM
ENVIRONMENTAL EQUITY -- THIS
LEGISLATION IS PROBLEMATIC. THE
CONTENT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROCESS,
NOT PULLED OUT AS A PILOT. OUR
NEIGHBORHOODS CAN BE NEGATIVELY
IMPACTED BY PILOT DEVELOPMENTS.
THESE BUILDINGS CANNOT BE TAKEN
BACK. POLICY SIMILAR TO THIS
HAS INCREASED TAXES FOR MANY OF
US WHOSE HOMES WERE UPZONED,
CAUSING PROPERTY TAXES TO GO UP
WITH NO RELIEF. IT DOES NOT
HAVE GUARDRAILS IN PLACE TO
PROTECT THOSE WHO DO BUY TO BE
ABLE TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE
SECTY THAT GROWS OVER TIME. THE
INTENT IS COMMENDABLE BUT
UNINTENTIONAL CONSEQUENCES CAN
LEAD TO LASTING DAMAGE. THERE
ARE TOO MANY LOOPHOLES THAT CAN
END UP NOT MEETING --
>> THANK YOU, LOIS. NEXT WE
HAVE ALICE LOCKHART FOLLOWED BY
JUDY. ALICE, ARE YOU HERE?
>> HI, HELLO, HI, COUNCIL, CAN
YOU HEAR ME?
>> YES, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> EXCELLENT. I'M A D5
RESIDENT AND A CATHY MOORE
CONSTITUENT. THANKS FOR THIS
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK IN FAVOR
OF BOTH CONNECTED COMMUNITIES
AND THE COMP PLAN THAT ALLOWS
MORE HOUSING TO BE BUILT IN ALL
NEIGHBORHOODS. MY NEIGHBORHOOD,
LICK TEN SPRINGS, WAS REEZONED
BY MHA. WE ARE SEEING ACTUAL
INCREASES IN BOTH SIDEWALKS AND
STREET TREES AS MULTIFAMILY
HOUSING WE BADLY NEED REPLACES
SMALL, SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES
SITTING IN THE MIDDLE OF LAWNS.
COUNCIL, MAKE NO MISTAKES, AND
CHECK WITH STAFF IF YOU DOUBT
ME, THE CONNECTED COMMUNITIES
PILOT BUILDINGS ARE OF A SIZE
THAT WILL REQUIRE BOTH
SIDEWALKS AND PLANTING STRIP,
WHICH WILL ON THE AVERAGE IN
MANY NEIGHBORHOODS INCREASE,
NOT DECREASE, TREES. BEFORE WE
WERE REZONED, WE WERE SEEING
LOTS OF HUGE, SINGLE-FAMILY
HOUSES REEPLACING THOSE SAME
LITTLE HOUSES WITH TREE LOSS
BUT NO COMPENSATING STREET
TREES OR SIDEWALKS. PLEASE
LET'S GET A --
>> THANK YOU, ALICE. PLEASE
FEEL FREE TO SUBMIT THE REST OF
YOUR COMMENTS TO CITY
COUNCILMEMBERS. NEXT WE HAVE
JUDY FOLLOWED BY SANDY.
>> HI, MY NAME IS JUDY, AND
I'M A RESIDENT OF D4. I
ENCOURAGE YOU TO VOTE AGAINST
THE CONNECTED COMMUNITIES BILL
BECAUSE OF THEIR SELECTIVE
CLIMATE JUSTICE IN THIS BILL.
FIVE-FOOT SETBACKS WILL
ELIMINATE PUBLIC STREET TREES
WHICH SHADE AND COOL
COMMUNITIES, BECAUSE THERE'S
NO ROOM FOR THEIR CANOPY. AND
THERE'S NO ROOM VIRTUALLY FOR
ANY TREES AT ALL. RIGHT NOW I
WILL READ FROM TAMMY MORALES
HER CITY COUNCIL'S SOCIAL
MEDIA PAGE WHICH SAYS, WE MUST
KEEP AND ADD GREENERY WHERE WE
BUILD. 80% OF RESIDENTS ARE NOW
EXPOSED TO HEAT EXTREMES MUCH
WORSE THAN RURAL SURROUNDINGS.
MISS MORALES ALSO SAYS ON HER
FACEBOOK PAGE, CLIMATE ACTION
AND BUILDING AFFORDABLE ACTIONS
-- BUILDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING
CAN'T WAIT. SO PLEASE PUT THE
CLIMATE ACTION INTO THIS BILL.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, JUDY. NEXT WE
HAVE SANDY FOLLOWED BY AKIKSHA.
>> HI, YES, THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBERS. I'M SANDY. THIS
BILL ALLOWS DEVELOPMENT WITH
JUST FIVE-FOOT SETBACKS ON ALL
SIDES, LEAVING NO ROOM FOR
TREES ON SITE OR EVEN STREET
TREES UNLESS THEY ARE VERY
THIN. PEOPLE IN THESE HOMES
WON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE
COOLING, AIR CLEANING, AND
OTHER HEALTH BENEFITS TREES
PROVIDE. WHY ARE WE FORCING
HIGH, HARDSCAPE HOUSING ON TO
FRONTLINE COMMUNITIES? THESE
ARE THE PLACES WE SHOULD BE
ADDING TREES, NOT CUTTING THEM
DOWN. TREE EQUITY MEANS
EVERYONE DESERVES ACCESS TO
TREES. IN CONTRAST, THIS BILL
TELLS MARGINALIZED
NEIGHBORHOODS THAT IF THEY WANT
HOUSING, THEY HAVE TO GIVE UP
HEALTH AND TREES AND LIVE IN
URBAN HEAT ISLANDS. I HAD HOPED
THIS WELL INTENTIONED BILL
WOULD BE AMENDED TO INCLUDE
TREES AND HEALTHY DESIGN IN ITS
CURRENT STATE IT PERPETUATES
ENVIRONMENTAL INJUSTICE, SO
PLEASE VOTE NO. THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS
AKIKSHA FOLLOWED BY WOODY
WHEELER.
>> HI, MY NAME IS -- I'M FROM
DISTRICT FOUR, AND I'M TO
SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THE
CONNECTED COMMUNITIES PILOT.
I'M A CAMPAIGN DIRECTOR WITH
350 SEATTLE . AFFORDABLE
HOUSING IS A CORE PART OF ANY
GREEN NEW DEAL AND ABSOLUTELY
ESSENTIAL TO ADDRESSING CLIMATE
CHANGE. NOW MORE THAN EVER WE
NEED THE CONNECTED COMMUNITIES
PILOT, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE
SEATTLE'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
IN ITS CURRENT STATE WILL NOT
MEET OUR HOUSING NEEDS. IT
MAINTAINS INEQUITABLE AND
EXCLUSIONARY ZONING PRACTICES
AND FALLS SHORT OF ZONING
HEALTHY, WELL CONNECTED
COMMUNITIES THAT WILL REMAIN
RESILIENT IN THE FACE OF A
WORSENING CLIMATE CRISIS.
CONNECTED COMMUNITIES IS A MUCH
NEEDED STEP. -- URGES CITY
COUNCIL TO VOTE YES. AND THANK
YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU. NEXT IS WOODY
WHEELER, FOLLOWED BY PAT
HANSON.
>> HELLO, THIS IS WOODY
WHEELER, I'M IN DISTRICT FOUR.
ALTHOUGH THE WORD CONNECTED IS
IN THE TITLE OF CONNECTED
COMMUNITIES LEGISLATION, IT
REPRESENTS A MAJOR DISCONNECT.
INSTEAD THIS BILL WOULD CREATE
ANOTHER URBAN HEAT ISLAND. IT
SHOWS A LACK OF THOUGHTFUL
PLANNING AND CONCERN FOR THE
HEALTH AND WELL BEING OF THE
CITY AND ITS RESIDENT, NEARLY
HALF OF REMAINING MATURE TREES
IN SEATTLE VIA PRIVATE LANDS.
THIS IS HOW THEY CONTINUED TO
BE DESTROYED, ONE POORLY
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AFTER THE
OTHER. REMEMBER THE HEAT TOME
IN JUNE 2021, SEATTLE
TEMPERATURES OVER 100 DEGREES
FOR THREE DAYS. DOZENS DIED AND
BIPOC NEIGHBORHOODS SUFFERED
THE MOST. TREES CAN BE THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LIFE AND
DEATH. I SUPPORT HOUSING,
PARTICULARLY AFFORDABLE
HOUSING, AND HAVE VOTED FOR
EVERY HOUSING LAW DURING MY 30
PLUS YEARS OF LIVING HERE. MY
WIFE AND I SPONSORED A TINY
HOUSE FOR LOW-INCOME HOUSING
INSTITUTE. BECAUSE WE CARE, WE
WANT THE BEST FOR THOSE LIVING
IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS.
THAT INCLUDES TREES.
>> THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE PAT
HANSON FOLLOWED BY COLLEEN
McCLEAR AND THEN I DO SEE LISA
MARCUS IS PRESENT. I STILL DO
NOT SEE AMY PRESENT. SO PAT AND
THEN COLLEEN.
>> OKAY, GOOD AFTERNOON. CAN
YOU HEAR ME?
>> YES.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL AND
TAMMY MORALES, MY NAME IS PAT
HANSON, I LIVE IN DISTRICT
FIVE. I'VE LIVED IN SEATTLE
FOR 60 PLUS YEARS. I'VE --
DOWNTOWN SEATTLE FOR 40 YEARS.
I'VE ALWAYS -- OF THIS CITY
FOR ITS TREE, ITS MOUNTAIN, ITS
WATER, FOR ITS PEOPLE THAT
SUPPORT AND INVEST PROTECTING
THOSE VERY THINGS. IT'S THE
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP AND
THE BEAUTY OF OUR AREA THAT
MAKES US SHINE AND MAKES US WHO
WE ARE. REGARDING CONNECTED
COMMUNITIES BILL I'M FINDING
IT VERY DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND
WHY THE CITY AND THE COUNCIL
APPEAR TO BE WORKING AGAINST
THE VERY GOALS SET OUT
INCREASING TREE CANOPY IN THE
COMING YEARS. IT'S LIKE
THERE'S A COMPLETE DENIAL OR
LACK OF UNDERSTANDING TO THE
HEAT ISLANDS, THE HEALTH
ISSUES.
>> THANK YOU. PAT, PLEASE DO
FEEL FREE TO SEND THE REST OF
YOUR COMMENTS IN TO COUNCIL.
LET'S SEE, NEXT WE HAVE
COLLEEN McCLEAR AND THEN THE
LAST SPEAKER WE HAVE IS LISA
MARCUS. SO COLLEEN, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. COLLEEN, IF YOU PRESS
STAR SIX, YOU CAN TAKE YOUR ONE
MINUTE. THERE WE GO.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON,
COUNCILMEMBERS, AND THANK YOU.
-- OF SEATTLE HAS SEEN A LOT OF
PILOT PROGRAM, AND HERE'S
ANOTHER ONE. MHA PILOT,
RELIGIOUS EXTENSION PILOTS, IN
LIEU PAYMENTS THAT HAVE NEVER
BEEN MADE, SOMETIMES FOR
PROJECTS, AND THE TREE
ORDINANCE THAT HAS 85% OF LOT
COVERAGE. SO NOW WE HAVE
ANOTHER PROJECT FOR CONNECTED
COMMUNITIES, WHICH IS A GREAT
IDEA, BUT RACIAL EQUITY IS ALSO
A VERY IMPORTANT IN THE CITY OF
SEATTLE AND LEGISLATED STRONGLY
AGAINST ANY TYPE OF
DISCRIMINATION IN THE PAST. THE
UW, IN FACT, FOUND 46 DIFFERENT
NEIGHBORHOODS ACROSS THE CITY
HAD COVENANTS IN THEM THAT WERE
RACIAL INEQUALITY. SO DESIGN
REVIEW IS ONE OF THOSE FACTORS
THAT CAN REALLY CREATE EQUALITY
AND NOT REQUIRING DESIGN REVIEW
IN THIS PROJECT IS A POLICY
ITSELF OF INEQUALITY. -- DEEMED
AFFORDABLE FOR # 5 YEARS IS
CRITICAL. MAKE SURE THAT
THAT'S IN THERE. AND FINALLY,
THE DEFINITION OF A DEVELOPER
APPLICANT FOR A QUALIFIED
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OR --
>> THANK YOU. LET'S SEE. LISA
MARCUS IS THE LAST SPEAKER THAT
WE HAVE.
>> HI, COUNCIL, MY NAME IS LISA
MARCUS. I'M A D6 RESIDENT AND
SUPPORT CONNECTED COMMUNITIES.
I THINK WE SHOULD DO ALL THAT
WE CAN TO BUILD MORE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING, ADDRESS THE CLIMATE
CRISIS, AND FIGHT RACISM. I'VE
LIVED IN THE GREEN LAKE AND
WALLINGFORD NEIGHBORHOODS FOR
27 YEAR, WHERE SADLY WE HAVE
MORE AND MORE MEGA MANSIONS FOR
SINGLE FAMILIES BEING BUILT TO
PROPERTY LINES, FORCING PRICES
UP. DISPLACEMENT OF WORKING
PEOPLE, LOSS OF DIVERSITY, LOSS
OF LARGE TREE, AND LOSS OF
AFFORDABLE MULTIUNIT HOUSING
POTENTIAL. THIS DISPLACES
PEOPLE WITH LONG COMMUTES,
THOSE WITH FAMILIES, AND ADDS
HEAVILY TO TRANSPORTATION
POLLUTION, EXACERBATING THE
CLIMATE CRISIS. I HOPE TO SEE
CONNECTED COMMUNITIES PROJECTS
IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD TO MAKE
HOMES AVAILABLE TO PEOPLE OF
ALL BACKGROUNDS AND CREATE
OPPORTUNITIES FOR GENERATIONAL
WEALTH TO THOSE WHO'VE BEEN
HISTORICALLY RED LINED AND WHO
CAN'T OTHERWISE AFFORD TO LIVE
IN THIS AREA NEAR PARKS, WITH
TREE, DOWNTOWN JOBS, AND
SERVICES. PLEASE VOTE YES FOR
THE CONNECTED COMMUNITIES
PILOT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, LISA.
THAT IS ALL THE SPEAKERS THAT
WE HAVE, SO I'M GOING TO GO
AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.
AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR
FIRST LEGISLATIVE ITEM. WILL
YOU PLEASE READ ITEM ONE INTO
THE RECORD.
>> AGENDA ITEM ONE, SEATTLE
PLANNING COMMISSION'S ROLE AND
THE 2020 ISSUE BRIEFS ON THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WILL BE
BRIEFED AND DISCUSSED TODAY.
>> THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES, WE
HAVE WITH US VANESSA MURDOCH,
WHO IS THE DIRECTOR OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION. McCAELA
DAFFERN, AND I BELIEVE RADICA,
THERE SHE IS. I'M GOING TO
HAND IT OVER TO YOU IN JUST A
MOMENT. COLLEAGUES, AS I
MENTIONED IN OUR COUNCIL
BRIEFING LAST WEEK, GIVEN THAT
THE MAYOR'S DRAFT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS JUST
RELEASED, I'M ASSUMING
COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE NOT HAD
A CHANCE TO READ IT. I HAVEN'T
HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW IT IN
FULL, AND I KNOW MOST
INTERESTED PARTIES HAVEN'T
EITHER. SO I INVITED THE
PLANNING COMMISSION HERE TODAY
BECAUSE WHILE THEY ARE
THEMSELVES STILL REVIEWING THE
DRAFT, THEY'VE DONE IMPORTANT
WORK TO HELP COMMUNITY MEMBERS
UNDERSTAND WHAT THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS, HOW TO
THINK ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ON OUR CITY,
AND TWO YEARS AGO, TWO YEARS
AGO, THEY LAID OUT SOME
INTERESTING ISSUE BRIEFS FOR
THE MAYOR AND THE COUNCIL TO
CONSIDER AS PART OF OUR
ANALYSIS TO SUPPORT THE
CRITICAL DECISIONS THAT WE HAVE
TO MAKE. SO I'M GOING TO HAND
IT OVER TO THE PANEL TO
INTRODUCE THEMSELVES, INTRODUCE
THE ROLE OF THE COMMISSION, AND
THEY HAVE PROVIDED US A SUMMARY
OF THE FOUR ISSUE BRIEFS THEY
DRAFTED FOR OUR CONSIDERATION.
THOSE ISSUE BRIEFS ARE PART OF
THE AGENDA PACKET, AND THEY ARE
ALSO AVAILABLE ONLINE. SO I
WILL HAND IT OVER TO YOU,
VANESSA, AND TAKE IT AWAY.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, CHAIR
MORALES, AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
WE REALLY APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO INTRODUCE
OURSELVES AND ALSO TO GIVE YOU
AN OVERVIEW OF THOSE ISSUE
BRIEFS. MY NAME IS VANESSA
MURDOCH, I USE SHE/HER
PRONOUNS. I'M EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE SEATTLE
PLANNING COMMISSION. I WILL
INTRODUCE -- LET MY TWO
COLLEAGUES INTRODUCE
THEMSELVES, STARTING WITH
McCAELA.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, McCAELA
DAFFERN, SHE/HER PRONOUN, I
LIVE IN CAPITOL HILL. FOR MY
DAY JOB, I WORK FOR KING
COUNTY'S DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AND HUMAN SERVICES ON
AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICY AND
PLANNING ISSUES, BUT I AM NOT
HERE AT ALL IN THAT CAPACITY
TODAY. I AM HERE TODAY IN MY
CAPACITY AS CO-CHAIR OF THE
SEATTLE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HAVING
ME, AND I'LL PASS IT TO
RADICA.
>> HI, EVERYONE, I'M RADICA, I
USE SHE/HER PRONOUNS. I LIVE IN
WEDGEWOOD. IN MY DAY JOB I RUN
A COMMUNITY PLANNING FIRM
CALLED SAVER WORKSHOP. I'M AN
URBAN PLANNER. LIKE McCAELA
SAID, I'M NOT HERE AS THE
PRINCIPLE PLANNER AT ALL HERE,
JUST AS A MEMBER OF THE SEATTLE
PLANNING COMMISSION.
>> THANK YOU BOTH. NEXT SLIDE,
PLEASE. JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU
ALL A QUICK OVERVIEW OF THE
PURPOSE AND ROLE OF THE SEATTLE
PLANNING COMMISSION. THE
PLANNING COMMISSION IS AN
ADVISORY BODY TO THE CITY
COUNCIL, THE MAYOR, AND CITY
DEPARTMENTS. IT WAS ESTABLISHED
IN 1946 AND IS ESTABLISHED IN
THE CITY CHARTER. WE HAVE THREE
MAIN AREAS OF WORK. THE
PLANNING COMMISSION ARE
STEWARDS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN, WHICH MEANS THAT WE ARE
VERY INVOLVED IN THE MAJOR
UPDATE THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY IN
FOR THE -- FOR THE COMP PLAN.
WE ALSO REVIEW THE ANNUAL
AMENDMENTS THAT ARE PROPOSED AS
WELL AS REGULARLY CHECK IN ON
THE EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT
MONITORING REPORTS THAT ARE
PRODUCED BY OPCD. WE REVIEW A
NUMBER OF PROGRAMS, POLICIES,
AND PLANS THAT ARE DEVELOPED BY
CITY DEPARTMENTS AND PROVIDE
FEEDBACK. WE ENDEAVOR TO DO
THAT AS EARLY ON IN THE PROCESS
AS POSSIBLE. SO TO HAVE THE
ADVICE OF THE COMMISSION BE OF
TRUE VALUE ADD TO THE PROJECT.
AND THEN OUR THIRD AREA OF WORK
IS PROACTIVE WORK THAT THE
COMMISSION TAKES ON THEMSELVES
TO DO INDEPENDENT WORK THAT WE
WILL TOUCH ON LATER AND INCLUDE
THE ISSUE BRIEFS THAT CHAIR
MORALES MENTIONED EARLIER ON.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE
COMMISSION HAS 16 MEMBERS,
SEVEN APPOINTED BY CITY
COUNCIL, SEVEN APPOINTED BY THE
MAYOR. ONE GET ENGAGED MEMBER,
WHICH IS A PROGRAM RUN BETWEEN
THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND THE
YMCA TO ENCOURAGE YOUNGER
MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITIES TO
SERVE ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
ACROSS THE CITY. AND ONE OF THE
COMMISSIONERS ARE APPOINTED BY
THE COMMISSION ITSELF. ALL
APPOINTMENTS ARE SUBJECT TO
FULL CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL.
COMMISSIONERS SERVE THREE-YEAR
TERMS AND MAY SEEK TO BE
REAPPOINTED TO A SECOND TERM
AND THE REQUIREMENTS TO SERVE
ON THE COMMISSION ARE TO BE A
CITIZEN -- SORRY, A RESIDENT OF
SEATTLE AND TO HAVE -- THAT WE
HAVE AT LEAST ONE URBAN PLANNER
AND AN ARCHITECT ENGINEER ON
THE COMMISSION. NEXT SLIDE,
PLEASE. IN TERMS OF THE
COMPOSITION OF OUR CURRENT
COMMISSION, YOU SEE THEIR
SHINING FACES THERE ON THE
SCREEN, WE HAVE A DIVERSITY OF
LIFE EXPERIENCES AND
PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUNDS ON THE
COMMISSION, INCLUDING
PROFESSIONAL URBAN PLANNERS AND
DESIGNERS, BOTH IN THE PUBLIC
AND PRIVATE SECTOR,
TRANSPORTATION PLANNER, BOTH IN
THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR,
ARCHITECTS IN THE PUBLIC AND
PRIVATE SECTOR, COMMISSIONERS
WITH EXPERIENCE IN CLIMATE
RESILIENCE AND JUSTICE, PUBLIC
HEALTH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING,
YOUTH MENTORING AND PLAY
EQUITY, AND WETLAND BIOLOGIST,
SCIENTISTS. SO NEXT SLIDE,
PLEASE. I MENTIONED EARLIER
THAT WE RESPOND TO DEPARTMENT
PROGRAMS, POLICIES AND
PROGRAMS, THOSE INCLUDE THE
SEATTLE HOUSING LEVEE, THE
INDUSTRIAL MARITIME STRATEGY,
THE SEATTLE TRANSPORTATION
PLAN, SEATTLE TRANSPORTATION
DEPARTMENT'S VISION ZERO, THE
SUBAREA PLANS THAT ARE PRODUCED
BY THE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, THE
MANDATORY HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
PROGRAM, AND EQUITABLE
DEVELOPMENT MONITORING PROGRAM.
THESE ARE JUST EXAMPLES OF THE
KINDS OF PLANS AND POLICIES
THAT WE PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS
ON. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. IN
TERMS OF THE INDEPENDENT WORK
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE
COMP PLAN BRIEFS THAT McCAELA
AND RADICA WILL SPEAK TO
SHORTLY ARE OUR MOST RECENT
WORK COMPLETED IN 2022. BEFORE
THAT WE DEVELOPED A REPORT ON
EVOLVING SEATTLE'S GROWTH
STRATEGY, A REPORT SUGGESTING
HOW SEATTLE MAY MOVE TOWARDS
BEING -- TOWARDS A RACIALLY
EQUITABLE AND RESILIENT
RECOVERY. OUR NEIGHBORHOODS FOR
ALL REPORT IN 2018 CALLED FOR
MORE HOUSING CHOICES ACROSS THE
CITY. OUR FAMILY-SIZED HOUSING
REPORT BEFORE THAT MADE THE
CASE FOR MORE FAMILY-SIZED
UNITS. AND MANY YEARS AGO, THE
FUTURE OF SEATTLE'S INDUSTRIAL
LAND STARTED THE CONVERSATION
AROUND THE IMPORTANCE OF
MAINTAINING SEATTLE'S
INDUSTRIAL LANDS AS AN ECONOMIC
DRIVER AND SOURCE OF WORKFORCE
JOBS IN OUR CITY. FOR MORE OF
OUR REPORTS, YOU CAN SEE THE
WEB LINK AT THE BOTTOM OF THE
SLIDE. YOU CAN ALSO JUST GO TO
SEATTLE PLANNING COMMISSION,
GOOGLE THAT OR SEARCH THAT IN
YOUR PREFERRED SEARCH ENGINE,
AND YOU WILL COME TO OUR WEB
PAGE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
McCAELA AND RADICA ARE GOING TO
SPEAK TO THOSE FOUR
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ISSUE
BRIEFS. THESE WERE INTENDED --
DEVELOPED TWI COMMISSION 2022
IN THE HOPES THAT THESE ISSUE
BRIEFS WOULD INFORM THE MAJOR
UPDATE TO THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN THAT IS NOW OUT, HAS BEEN
OUT FOR TWO WEEKS AND ONE DAY,
AND AS COUNCIL -- AS CHAIR
MORALES MENTIONED, WE ARE --
THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AMONG
OTHERS, ARE REALLY STILL
DIGGING INTO THAT PLAN AND THIS
WILL BE DISCUSSING IT OVER THE
NEXT FIVE WEEKS WITH THE
INTENTION TO APPROVE A THOROUGH
AND THOUGHTFUL COMMENT LETTER
ON BOTH THE PLAN AND THE DRAFT
EIS AT THE END OF APRIL. WITH
THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO
McCAELA. THANK YOU.
>> ALL RIGHT. FOR OBVIOUS
REASON, I'VE BEEN ASKED TO
TALK ABOUT THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING ISSUE BRIEF FIRST,
WHICH I THINK IS ON THE NEXT
SLIDE. AND THIS BRIEF WAS
SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT HOW THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNUP DATE
COULD BE A TOOL FOR
SPECIFICALLY INCREASING MEETING
THE HOUSING NEEDS FOR THE
LOWEST INCOME HOUSEHOLDS IN
SEATTLE. SO THOSE ARE TYPICALLY
HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE AT OR BELOW
-- WHO MAKE AT OR BELOW 08% OF
AREA MEDIAN INCOME. THE ISSUE
BRIEF STARTED OUT WITH THE
FRAME THAT SEATTLE IS WORKING
REALLY HARD TO PROVIDE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT THAT
THE NEED IS ENORMOUS. SO
ACKNOWLEDGING THE GREAT WORK
THAT SEATTLE IS DOING BUT
POINTING OUT SOME OPPORTUNITIES
FOR SEATTLE TO IMPROVE WITH THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE. IT
POINTS OUT SEVERAL
OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE STUDY
THAT THEY COULD HAVE CONSIDERED
DURING THE SCOPING PROCESS. AND
ONE OF THOSE WAS THAT THE PLAN
MUST IDENTIFY AND ADDRESS
BARRIERS AND LEVERAGE RESOURCES
TO ADVANCE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
IT ALSO ENCOURAGED THE CITY TO
ANALYZE AND PROVIDE SUFFICIENT
LAND CAPACITY TO ACCOMMODATE
SEATTLE SHARE OF HOUSING NEEDS
THAT HAVE BEEN ALLOCATED FROM
ACROSS THE REGION. AND THAT
INCLUDES DETERMINING WHAT
HOUSING TYPES BEST SUPPORT EACH
LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY. NOT ALL
HOUSING TYPES MEET THE NEEDS OF
THE LOWEST INCOME HOUSEHOLDS IN
SEATTLE. AND SO THAT WAS REALLY
AN ENCOURAGEMENT TO CONSIDER
WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE TO PLAN FOR
AND ACCOMMODATE ZERO TO 80% AMI
HOUSEHOLDS. ALSO THE ISSUE
BRIEF ASKED THE CITY TO
CONSIDER HOW THE GROWTH
STRATEGY AND HOUSING POLICIES
CAN BE ALTERED TO BETTER
SUPPORT THE PRODUCTION AND
PRESERVATION OF SUBSIDIZED
HOUSING FOR VERY LOW-INCOME
HOUSEHOLDS. AND FINALLY, TO
ASSESS HOW CURRENT HOUSING
OPTIONS IN SEATTLE ARE SERVING
THE NEEDS OF HOUSEHOLDS LOOKING
FOR FAMILY-SIZED HOUSING,
INTERGENERATIONAL HOUSING
OPPORTUNITIES, AND HOUSING
ACCOMMODATIONS -- HOUSING WITH
ACCOMMODATIONS FOR THE ELDERLY
AND FOR PEOPLE WITH
DISABILITIES. SO A LOT OF
OPPORTUNITIES ON THE HOUSING
FRONT. ON THE NEXT SLIDE, THE
ISSUE BRIEF ALSO PROVIDED SOME
DATA TO KIND OF UNDERSCORE THE
COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
IN PARTICULAR, IT PULLED IN
SOME INFORMATION TO DEMONSTRATE
THAT THERE ARE GAPS CURRENTLY
IN SEATTLE'S HOUSING SUPPLY.
THE FOLKS WHO LIVE IN SEATTLE
WHO MAKE THE LEAST ARE THOSE
WHO ARE PAYING THE MOST OF
THEIR INCOME ON THEIR HOUSING
COSTS ON A MONTHLY BASIS.
THAT'S WHAT THE PURPLE AND
ORANGE BARS ARE SHOWING ON THE
LEFT-HAND SIDE HERE. YOU CAN
SEE THAT OUR LOWEST INCOME
HOUSEHOLD'S AT ZERO TO 30% OF
MEDIAN INCOME. THE MAJORITY OF
THOSE HOUSEHOLDS ARE HOUSING
COST BURDEN, AND AS YOU MOVE UP
THE INCOME LADDER, YOU CAN SEE
THAT HOUSEHOLDS MAKING ABOVE
100% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME,
VERY FEW OF THOSE HOUSEHOLDS
COMPARATIVELY ARE COST BURDENS.
YOU CAN ALSO SEE THAT WHILE
SEATTLE HAS MADE GREAT STRIDES
IN CREATING HOUSING THAT IS
AFFORDABLE AT ALL INCOME
LEVELS, THAT THE SUPPLY FOR THE
LOWEST INCOME HOUSEHOLDS IS IS
MUCH LOWER THAN MARKET RATE
HOUSING FOR HIGHER INCOME
HOUSEHOLDS. ON THE NEXT SLIDE,
WE ALSO DID SOME -- BROUGHT IN
SOME DATA TO DEMONSTRATE THE
EXISTING POLICIES DO NOT
SUPPORT ENOUGH HOUSING FOR
SMALL TO MEDIUM-SIZED
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS OR
FAMILY-SIZED HOUSING. CHART ON
THE RIGHT IS SHOWING THAT THE
AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS IN
APARTMENT COMPLEXES AND THE
AVERAGE UNIT SIZE IS ONE
BEDROOM. AND IF YOU ARE A
FAMILY WITH, YOU KNOW, NEEDING
TWO OR THREE BEDROOMS, YOU'RE
PROBABLY LOOKING AT THE HOUSING
TYPE THAT IS A TOWNHOME OR A
SINGLE-FAMILY HOME. AND THOSE
ARE NOT TYPICALLY THE MOST
AFFORDABLE OPTIONS IN THE CITY.
AND SO AS PART OF THE GROSS
STRATEGY, WE WERE ENCOURAGING
THE CITY TO CONSIDER HOW THE
GROSS STRATEGY WOULD REALLY
TRULY FACILITATE AND CREATE
MORE HOUSING OPTIONS FOR ALL
HOUSEHOLDS ACROSS THE CITY,
INCLUDING GIVING SEATTLE
HOUSEHOLDS WHO WANT TO GROW
FAMILIES THERE OPPORTUNITY TO
STAY. AND THEN ON THE NEXT
SLIDE, AS A COMPANION TO THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ISSUE BRIEF,
WE ALSO DID A SPECIFIC BRIEF ON
HOW THE CITY SHOULD CONSIDER
AND THINK ABOUT DISPLACEMENT IN
PREPARING THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN UPDATE. SEATTLE'S HAD A
LONG HISTORY OF GROWTH IN MANY
DIFFERENT PHASES, AND I THINK
IT'S WELL DOCUMENTED THAT THIS
HAS BEEN AT THE EXPENSE OF
BLACK, INDIGENOUS, PEOPLE OF
COLOR COMMUNITIES, AND THAT THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS NOT ONLY
AN OPPORTUNITY, BUT IT'S --
THE CITY HAS A RESPONSIBILITY
THROUGH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
TO BEGIN TO ADDRESS AND REVERSE
THAT TREND. THE PAST APPROACH
TO GROWTH, THE CITY HAS
EMBRACED HAS FACILITATED AND
ACCELERATED DISPLACEMENT AND
INEQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S
SEEN THROUGH THE SKYROCKETING
HOME PURCHASE PRICES AND RENTS
AND THE PAPER TALKS ABOUT THAT
IN A LITTLE BIT OF DETAIL AND
PROVIDES SOME DATA ON THAT. IT
TALKS ABOUT HOUSING DEMAND
OUTPACING SUPPLY AND
PRODUCTION. IT SPEAKS TO THE
LACK OF HOMEOWNERSHIP
OPPORTUNITIES IN THE CITY AND
THE DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT ON
LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS AND BIPOC
HOUSEHOLDS IN SEATTLE. IT
ENCOURAGES -- IT ENCOURAGED THE
CITY TO EMBRACE GROWTH BY
WEAVING GROWTH AND
ANTIDISPLACEMENT STRATEGIES
TOGETHER IN THE PLAN AND TO
ADDRESS ANTIDISPLACEMENT
POLICIES AND INCORPORATE THOSE
POLICIES IN MULTIPLE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENTS
RATHER THAN TREAT IT AS ITS OWN
STAND ALONE ISSUE. FINALLY, THE
PAPER LAID OUT SOME GOALS FOR
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RELATED
TO ANTIDISPLACEMENT THAT
INCLUDED FOCUSSING ON
COMMUNITY-LED POLICY AND
INVESTMENTS, EMBRACING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRODUCTION
AS WELL AS OTHER CULTURAL
BUSINESSES AND THERE'S ANOTHER
-- MAYBE IT WAS ART FACILITIES,
I CAN'T QUITE REMEMBER NOW.
IT'S BEEN A WHILE. AS WELL AS
HOUSING STABILIZATION AND
COMMUNITY RESILIENCE. SO THOSE
ARE TWO OF OUR ISSUE BRIEFS.
WITH THAT I'M GOING TO PASS IT
OVER TO RADICA TO TALK ABOUT
THE OTHER TWO.
>> THANKS, McCAELA. SO IN
ADDITION TO THESE MORE
TOPICALLY FOCUSED ISSUE BRIEFS,
THE PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO
LOOKED AT THE GROWTH STRATEGY.
AND THE GROWTH STRATEGY,
INVOLVING THE GROWTH STRATEGY
ISSUE BRIEF LOOKED AT SOME OF
THE LIMITATIONS OF THE GROWTH
STRATEGY IN THREE BROAD
CATEGORIES OF AFFORDABILITY,
CLIMATE CHANGE, AND LIVABILITY.
AND ALSO NOTED SOME
OPPORTUNITIES TO IMPROVE IN
THOSE AREAS AND THE GOAL OF THE
ISSUE PAPER WAS THAT THIS COULD
SUP FORT CITY'S EFFORTS TO
REALIZE AN EQUITABLE VISION IN
THE COMP PLAN ITSELF. SO SOME
OF THE IDEAS THAT WERE INCLUDED
IN THAT EVOLVING ISSUE STRATEGY
PAPER, ONE OF THE FIRST ONE WAS
TO GROUND CHANGES IN A GENUINE
AND EFFECTIVE COMMUNITY INPUT
PROCESS. MOVING FROM GROWTH
STRATEGY HEAVILY WEIGHTED ON
URBAN CENTERS TO A MORE POLY
CENTRIC, NEIGHBORHOOD-BASED
BROAD STRATEGY. AND THE
PLANNING COMMISSION TALKED
ABOUT THE FRAMEWORK WHERE DAILY
NEEDS ARE WITHIN A SHORT WALK
AND REPLACING LONG TRIPS WITH
THESE APPROXIMATE TRIPS. AND AS
McCAELA MENTIONED, DISPLACEMENT
ACROSS SEVERAL OF THE TOPICS,
BUT MOST SPECIFICALLY IN THE
GROWTH STRATEGY OVERALL.
LOOKING AT HOUSING, BOTH
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY AND
DIVERSITY AS A KEY GOAL OF THE
GROWTH STRATEGY, ADDING DENSITY
CONCURRENT WITH IMPROVEMENTS TO
TRANSPORTATION TO EMBRACE THE
15-MINUTE CITY CONCEPT AND ALSO
SPEAKING TO THE STRATEGY
THAT'S HEAVILY WEIGHTED ON
URBAN RELIGIOUS TO MOVE TO A
BALANCE THAT -- WITH THE NEED
FOR MORE HOUSING SO THE NEED
FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION
COULD BE BALANCED WITH MORE
HOUSING NEEDS. AND THEN IN
ADDITION TO THE URBAN VILLAGE
GROWTH STRATEGY, THE COMMISSION
WORKED ON A MORE TOPICALLY
FOCUSED PAPER ON REPURPOSING
THE RIGHT OF WAY. AND THIS
ISSUE PAPER WAS CONNECTED TO
THE GROWTH STRATEGY IN THAT --
OF THE 15-MINUTE NEIGHBORHOOD
CONCEPT BOTH REQUIRES A MORE
POLY CENTRIC CITY BUT ALSO
IMPROVING TRANSPORTATION
CONNECTIONS, ESPECIALLY WALKING
AND BIKING. AND THE PLANNING
COMMISSION CAME UP WITH SOME
MULTIPLE POLICY GOALS THAT
COULD BE IMPROVED BY TAKING
THIS APPROACH. AND SOME OF
THOSE ARE AROUND. THINKING
ABOUT THE RIGHT OF WAY AS A
LIMITED AND REALLY VALUABLE
RESOURCE AND AS A PUBLIC SPACE,
ESPECIALLY AS THE CITY GROWS
AND THERE'S LIMITED SPACE TO
ACCOMMODATE BOTH THE NUMBER OF
CARS AND THE NEEDS AROUND
PUBLIC SPACE THAT THE CITY HAS.
SO THINKING THROUGH LAND USE
POLICIES AND CHANGES THAT COULD
USE THIS VALUABLE RESOURCE TO
ADDRESS MULTIPLE PLANNING GOALS
IMPROVING SAFETY, URGING THE
CITY TO GO BEYOND THE VISION
ZERO CONCEPT AND ACTUALLY
REDESIGN ROADS AND REALLOCATE
ROADS TO REDUCE TRAFFIC,
DECREASE SPEEDS, INCREASE SAFE
SPACES, AND LASTLY NOTING THAT
THE GOAL OF CLIMATE ACTION
REQUEST, EVOLVING THE GOOD
STRATEGY AND ALSO INVESTMENTS
IN REALLOCATING RIGHT OF WAY AS
WELL AS INCREASING TREE CANOPY
VEGETATION AND GREEN
INFRASTRUCTURE TO MEET MULTIPLE
GOALS. AND THAT'S A BRIEF
OVERVIEW OF OUR ISSUE PAPERS.
THEY ARE FAIRLY DETAILED AND
COMPLEX, AND WE'VE DONE OUR
BEST TO ENCAPSULATE THEM. WE
WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR
ATTENTION AND HAPPY TO TAKE ANY
QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH. I
WOULD ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY TO
GET YOUR HANDS ON THESE BRIEFS
AND REVIEW THEM. THEY PROVIDE
REALLY IMPORTANT CONTEXT FOR
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
CONVERSATION THAT WE'LL BE
HAVING THIS YEAR AND REALLY
HELP SET THE STAGE FOR THE
DIRECTION THAT WE SHOULD BE
MOVING. I DO HAVE SEVERAL
QUESTION, AND THEN I'M HAPPY
TO HAND IT OVER TO COLLEAGUES
IF YOU'VE GOT QUESTIONS TOO.
I'M GOING TO START ON SLIDE
NINE. TALKING ABOUT THE HOUSING
AFFORDABILITY ISSUE. WE HAD A
STUDY IN 2021 OF SEATTLE'S
MARKET RATE HOUSING THAT SHOWED
A SHORTAGE OF ABOUT 21,000
RENTAL UNITS AVAILABLE FOR
HOUSEHOLDS AT 80% OR BELOW. CAN
YOU TALK ABOUT WHETHER THAT
SHORTAGE HAS INCREASED AND HOW
DO WE RECONCILE THAT PEOPLE WHO
EVEN IN THE HIGHER INCOME
LEVELS BETWEEN 80% AND 100% ARE
STILL COST BURDENED EVEN IF,
YOU KNOW, NOT AS GREAT A LEVEL
AS THE OTHERS. BUT I THINK IT
SPEAKS TO THE FACT THAT HOUSING
IS SO EXPENSIVE HERE THAT THERE
ARE STILL FOLKS WHO ARE DEALING
WITH HOUSING STRUGGLES.
>> DO YOU WANT ME TO TAKE THIS?
>> I WAS -- YES, IF YOU COULD,
PLEASE, AND THEN I CAN HOP IN
IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE TO
SAY. THANK YOU, McCAELA.
>> I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY NEWLY
COMMISSIONED STUDIES FROM THE
CITY ON HOUSING NEEDS. I THINK
THE BURKE STUDY THAT YOU
MENTIONED IS THE MOST RECENT
ONE THAT I HAVE SEEN. SO I
CAN'T SAY FOR CERTAIN IF THE
NEED HAS INCREASED BEYOND WHAT
THAT STUDY DID FIND EXCEPT TO
SAY THAT I DON'T THINK IT'S
ANY EASIER FOR FOLKS TO FIND
AND SECURE AND MAINTAIN HOUSING
THAT THEY CAN AFFORD IN
SEATTLE. SO ANECDOTALLY, I
WOULD SAY THERE'S STILL A
CHALLENGE AND A CRISIS THAT
MANY FOLKS IN THE CITY ARE
EXPERIENCING AND THEN CAN YOU
REPEAT THE OTHER QUESTION?
>> I THINK WHAT YOUR CHART
DEMONSTRATES IS THAT EVEN FOLKS
WHO ARE AT 100% OF AMI ARE
STILL STRUGGLING. NOT NEARLY AS
MANY, BUT TO ME THAT DOES SPEAK
TO THE FACT THAT THE HOUSING
MARKET IS SO OUT OF WHACK, TO
USE A TECHNICAL TERM. SO YOU
KNOW, I'M JUST WONDERING HOW
WE RECONCILE THE FACT THAT
THERE ARE STILL FOLKS WHO ARE
COST BURDENED EVEN AT THAT
LEVEL.
>> YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK THAT
SUGGESTS A NEED THAT SEATTLE
NEEDS MORE HOUSING UNITS ACROSS
THE BOARD AT ALL INCOME LEVELS
AND THAT THERE'S FOLKS ACROSS
SEATTLE NO MATTER WHAT YOU'RE
MAKING YOU'RE STRUGGLING. SO
YES, AGREED. WE'VE HAD ONE
INITIAL SCOPING CONVERSATION,
SORT OF A STUDY SESSION AS A
COMMISSION. SO WE ARE IN THE
VERY BEGINNING STAGES OF TRYING
TO GET OUR HANDS AROUND THE
PLAN OURSELVES. AND SO WE'VE
ALSO BEEN SORT OF LOOKING AT
THE NUMBER OF UNITS THE CITY OF
SEATTLE IS CONSIDERING PLANNING
FOR, WHAT THAT MEANS FOR
MEETING OUR AFFORDABLE NEEDS.
>> AND THEN WE KNOW THAT THE
OFFICE OF HOUSING GENERALLY
PRIORITIZES FUNDING AND
PRESERVATION OF YUBLTS UP TO
60%. AND WE KNOW TO IT'S
DIFFICULT TO FINANCE BUILDINGS
WITH DEEPLY SUBSIDIZED UNITS.
AND WE KNOW THAT EMPLOYERS
AREN'T NECESSARILY PAYING
WAGES THAT HELP KEEP BUT THE
PACE OF HOUSING COSTS, SO CAN
YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW
WE CREATE MORE MIXED INCOME
PROPERTIES AND PROVIDE SORT OF
AN ARRAY OF OPPORTUNITY FOR
FOLKS.
>> I DON'T KNOW, VANESSA AND
RADICA, HELP ME. DO ANY OF OUR
ISSUE BRIEFS SPEAK TO THAT
SPECIFICALLY? HAVE WE AS A
COMMISSION EVALUATED THAT AND
MADE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS ON
THAT TO DATE?
>> WE HAVE NOT. I WILL SAY THAT
WE -- THE COMMISSION WAS
BRIEFED ON THE EQUITABLE
DEVELOPMENT ZONING THAT I
BELIEVE THIS COMMITTEE WILL BE
DISCUSSING AFTER OUR
PRESENTATION AND WAS IN SUPPORT
OF THAT. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED A
FULL BRIEFING ON THE CONNECTED
COMMUNITIES LEGISLATION THAT IS
UNDER CONSIDERATION. HOWEVER,
WE ARE TESTIFY IT INIALLY VERY
SUPPORTIVE OF EQUITABLE
DEVELOPMENT ZONING THAT
ADDRESSES THE ISSUE THAT YOU
MENTIONED, CHAIR MORALES. WE
HAVE NOT DONE THAT STUDY. WE
ARE INTERESTED IN FOLLOWING,
OBVIOUSLY, STATE LEGISLATION
THAT WILL BE REQUIRING ALL
JURISDICTIONS TO PROVIDE DATA
AND INFORMATION ON HOW EACH
JURISDICTION WILL MEET EACH OF
THE INCOME BAN NEEDS WITH WHAT
KIND OF HOUSING. SO WE ARE
LOOKING FORWARD TO THE DATA
THAT THE CITY WILL BE PRODUCING
IN TERMS OF HOW THEY'LL
ADDRESS THAT NEED ACROSS INCOME
BANDS.
>> WELL, I HAVE A FEW MORE
QUESTIONS, BUT LET ME ASK ONE
MORE, AND THEN COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE HAS A QUESTION. CAN YOU
TALK ABOUT HOW MANY
FAMILY-SIZED UNITS ARE
PROJECTED FOR DEVELOPMENT FOR
SERVING PEOPLE AT OR BELOW 80%.
>> I DON'T HAVE THOSE NUMBERS
AT MY FINGERTIPS. I DON'T KNOW
IF YOU DO, McCAELA. CERTAINLY
THAT'S -- THAT IS AN IMPORTANT
DATA POINT AS WE'RE LOOKING TO
THE DATA AND THEN TRYING UP THE
DAY TO TO THE POLICIES THAT ARE
PROPOSED IN THE DRAFT PLAN THAT
WE ALL ARE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW
WHERE THE GOALS ARE VERY STRONG
AND LOOKING FOR WILL THOSE --
WILL THE POLICIES INDICATED IN
THE DRAFT PLAN, ACTUALLY, WILL
THOSE GOALS BE ACHIEVED?
>> OKAY.
>> I, YOU KNOW, I WOULD -- I
THINK A GOOD PROXY DATA POINT
FOR THAT WOULD BE TO REACH OUT
TO THE OFFICE OF HOUSING STAFF.
GENERALLY IN SEATTLE UNITS THAT
ARE AFFORDABLE AT OR BELOW # 0%
OF AMI ARE PROBABLY GOING TO
HAVE SOME SORT OF SUBSIDY IN
THEM FROM THE OFFICE OF
HOUSING. SO THEY MIGHT MIGHT BE
ABLE TO TELL YOU AND BREAK IT
DOWN FOR YOU BY UNIT SIZE. I'VE
SEEN THE DATA SOMEWHERE. I
DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS A
COMMISSION PRESENTATION FROM OH
STAFF OR WHERE I SAW IT. IT'S
NOT A LOT. AND IT'S A PRETTY
-- VERY SMALL NUMBER OF THE
UNITS THAT ARE GETTING PRODUCED
THAT ARE GETTING PRODUCED AT
THAT SIZE. AND THAT'S JUST A
CHALLENGE OF FUNDING TWO PLUS
BEDROOM UNITS IN SEATTLE.
>> RIGHT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AND THEN
I SEE COUNCILMEMBER WOO ALSO
HAS A QUESTION.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THIS
PRESENTATION. I JUST HAD A
COUPLE OF -- LOOKING AT YOUR
SLIDE RELATING TO MEETING THE
CHALLENGE. SO I'M CURIOUS AS
TO, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU TALK
ABOUT 80% OF SEATTLE AREA
MEDIAN INCOME, WHAT EXACTLY IS
THE INCOME FIGURE YOU'RE
REFERENCING, BECAUSE THAT'S
DIFFERENT THAN THE HUD FIGURE.
>> VANESSA, DID YOU UNMUTE
YOURSELF? GO AHEAD.
>> NO, GO AHEAD, I WAS LOOKING
TO SEE IF I COULD FIND THAT
NUMBER AT MY FINGERTIPS. I
DON'T HAVE IT AT THE TOP OF MY
HEAD.
>> ME EITHER. WE DID DO AN
EXPLAINER, I REMEMBER, IN THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ISSUE BRIEF.
LIKE THE SECOND OR THIRD PAGE
OF THE REPORT IS WHAT IS AREA
MEDIAN INCOME, BECAUSE IT IS
SORT OF A CONFUSING CONCEPT. IT
IS AN AREA MEDIAN INCOME, SO IT
DOES INCLUDE MORE THAN SEATTLE
IN TERMS OF GEOGRAPHY OF WHERE
IT'S PULLING ITS DATA FROM.
BUT I CAN'T TELL YOU OFF THE
TOP OF MY HEAD WHAT THAT NUMBER
IS RIGHT NOW, NOR WHAT IT WAS
IN 2017 WHEN -- THE 2017 DATA
SET WHEN THESE SLIDES WERE --
AND THAT GRAPHIC WAS PREPARED.
>> THE GRAPHIC IS ALSO SEVEN
YEARS OLD AT THIS POINT?
>> I THINK IT WAS THE MOST
RECENT DATA THAT WAS AVAILABLE
IN 2022 WHEN OUR ISSUE BRIEF
WAS PUT TOGETHER. SO IF WE WERE
TO PULL THE DATA NOW, IT WOULD
ALSO BE A COUPLE OF YEARS OLD.
>> OKAY. JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE
SEATTLE AREA MEDIAN IS
SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT THAN
THE HUD AREA MEDIAN INCOME OR
EVEN A RENAL NAL AREA MEDIAN
INCOME, CORRECT?
>> Reporter: IN ESSENCE, THE
MEDIAN INCOME THAT WE USE FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAMS --
I KIND OF MOW WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT THIS STUFF AS A MEDIAN
REGIONAL INCOME BECAUSE IT
DOESN'T INCLUDE SNOHOMISH AND
KING COUNTY IN IT. SO --
>> RIGHT, BUT WHEN WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE ARE
ACTUALLY BRINGING HOME IN THEIR
PAYCHECK, SEATTLE IS VERY
DIFFERENT THAN, SAY, KENT.
>> YES. AS IT IS DIFFERENT THAN
SAMMAMISH. THERE IS A RANGE,
BUT WE USE A REGIONAL AVERAGE.
WHICH SO, IT DOES, YES, YOU'RE
RIGHT.
>> OKAY. AND SO I'M ALSO
INTERESTED IN WHEN YOU SAY COST
BURDEN. SO THAT MEANS 30% OF
SOMEONE'S INCOME AS OPPOSED TO
-- CORRECT?
>> CORRECT, YES.
>> OKAY. AND WHAT DID YOU -- IF
THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT --
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SOMEBODY
WHO'S MAKING 51% OF THE, AMI
VERSUS 81% OR EVEN -- WELL,
FIRST IT WAS 08% OF AMI.
>> CORRECT. IF IT GROUPED INTO
ONE BAND, YES, IF YOU'RE
MAKING 51% OF AREA MEDIAN
INCOME VERSUS 49% OF MEDIAN
INCOME, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
THAT COULD MEAN A LOT FOR YOU,
IN TERMS OF MEETING YOUR DAILY
ESSENTIAL NEEDS. AND THE
CONCEPT OF LIVING PAYCHECK TO
PAYCHECK BUT IT IS ONE OF THE
WAYS THAT WE SORT OF GROUP
DIFFERENT INCOME LEVELS. AND IT
DOES HAVE ITS DRAW BACKS, BUT
YES, THAT IS ONE OF THE TRUTHS.
>> SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT
WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE
RANGERS TO BE VERY MINDFUL OF
THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, BASED
ON SOMEBODY'S DAY-TO-DAY
BUDGET THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 51% AND 80%.
>> YEAH.
>> WHICH LEADS ME TO MY NEXT
QUESTION, WHICH IS MY
UNDERSTANDING FROM THE COUNTY
GROUP AND MANAGEMENT REGIONAL
IT IN TEE IS THEY DIDN'T
IDENTIFY THE AREAS IN MOST NEED
OF SUBSIDIZED HOUSING AS THE
ZERO TO 30 AND THEN THE 50 TO
60 AMI, ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH
THAT IN.
>> I AM, YES. BECAUSE THE GAP
IS -- AND THE NEED IS THE
GREATEST AT THE LOWEST INCOME
LEVELS, AND BASICALLY ONCE YOU
GET BELOW 50% OF AREA MEDIAN
INCOME, IT BECOMES PRETTY
DIFFICULT TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE
HOUSING FOR THOSE HOUSE HOLDS
WITHOUT SOME KIND OF SUBSY SUB
CITI TO THE PROJECT. DEPENDING
UPON WHERE YOU ARE IN KING
COUNTY PROVIDE A UNIT THAT IS
-- DOESN'T NEED SUBSIDY AT
ABOUT 8 FROM OT OF AMI, AS IT
GETS LOWER YOU NEED SOME
SUBSIDY IN THOSE BUILDINGS,
WHICH IS WHY YOU DON'T SEE AS
MANY UNITS PRODEUCED AT THOSE
INCOME LEVELS.
>> RIGHT, OR ANYTHING BELOW
80%, YOU'RE SAYING NEEDS
SUBSIDY?
>> CERTAINLY BEELOW 60%. IT
DEPENDS ON THE JURISDICTION.
>> RIGHT, EXCEPT MOST OF WHAT
MHA AND THE OFFICE OF HOUSING
HAS BEEN SUBSIDIZING IS AT 60%,
CORRECT?
>> YEAH.
>> THAT'S THE BULK OF WHAT'S
BEING BUILT AS AFFORDABLE
HOUSINGOUT SIDE OF HOUSING LEVY
MONEY, CORRECT?
>> I DON'T WORK IN THE OFFICE
OF HOUSING, SO I DON'T WANT TO
SPEAK CONCRETELY ABOUT THAT.
BUT THEY DO PRODUCE ANNUAL
REPORTS ON THEIR WEBSITE THAT
I'VE SEEN AND THAT I'VE READ.
COULD BE A GOOD RESOURCE FOR
FINDING THAT INFORMATION.
>> SO YOU ARE UNFAMILIAR WITH
THE INFORMATION FROM KING
COUNTY THAT SAYS THE BULK OF
THE HOUSING THAT IS NEEDED TO
SUBSIDIZE HOUSING THAT NEEDS TO
BE BUILT IS 0 TO 30 AND 50 TO
60.
>> OH, NO, I AM FAMILIAR WITH
THAT, BECAUSE I DO WORK WITH
THAT DATA IN MY DAY JOB, YES,
SORRY.
>> OKAY, SORRY, I
MISUNDERSTOOD.
>> I THOUGHT YOU WERE ASKING IF
THE OFFICE OF HOUSING PRODUCES
MOSTLY -- I THOUGHT YOU WERE
TALKING ABOUT OFFICE OF HOUSING
PRODUCTION NUMBERS.
>> RIGHT. WHICH I WAS TALKING
ABOUT THAT IN LEAD-UP TO THE
QUESTION ABOUT MHA AND THE
FUNDING THAT'S COMING FOR LOW
INCOME 50 TO 60 IN SEATTLE
COMES FROM MHA AND FROM
DEVELOPMENTS, RIGHT? SO AND
THEN I GUESS THE OTHER THING I
WOULD ASK ABOUT IS ONE THING
THAT YOU -- HAVE YOU
CONTEMPLATED HOW MFTE WORKS IN
ALL OF THIS AND MHA IN TRYING
TO GENERATE MORE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING?
>> I CAN TAKE THAT QUESTION. SO
THE -- WE HAVE BEEN IN SUPPORT
OF THE MFTE LEGISLATION OVER
THE PAST YEARS AS WE HAVE ALSO
BEEN IN SUPPORT OF THE HOUSING
LEVY. AND AN IMPORTANT POINT
THAT I THINK I FORGOT TO MAKE
AT THE TOP OF THIS PRESENTATION
IS THAT THE -- ALL THE PLANNING
COMMISSIONERS ARE VOLUNTEERS,
AND MOST HAVE A DAY JOB. SO ONE
OF THE REASONS WHY WE TAPPED
McCAELA FOR THIS PRESENTATION
TO SPEAK TO THE HOUSING IS
BECAUSE OF HER WORK AT KING
COUNTY, HOWEVER, SHE CAN ONLY
REFERENCE THAT WORK JUST
BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT SHE DOES
IN HER DAY JOB. IT'S NOT THE
WORK THAT SHE DOES NECESSARILY
AS A VOLUNTEER PLANNING
COMMISSIONER. I'M HAPPY TO
CONNECT -- TO TRACK DOWN
INFORMATION THAT MAY BE
AVAILABLE AT THE OFFICE OF
HOUSING THAT THE COMMISSIONERS
AND I DON'T HAVE AT THE TOP OF
OUR HEAD AND PASS THAT ALONG TO
CHAIR MORALES AND THE REST OF
THE COMMITTEE, IF THAT WOULD BE
HELPFUL.
>> THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL, THANK
YOU.
>> PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WHEN
WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE COST
BURDEN FIGURES TO NOTE THAT
PEOPLE WHO ARE MAKING 81% TO
100% AMI ARE ONLY A FRACTION
ARE SEVERELY COST BURDEN AND
33% ARE -- EVEN AT 51% TO 80%,
THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 51 AND 80.
SO I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT
WHEN WE'RE HAVING THESE
DISCUSSIONS TO BE MINDFUL ABOUT
THE DIFFERENCE THAT A DOLLAR
CAN MAKE IN SOMEBODY'S ABILITY
TO SUPPORT THEM TO BE HOUSED.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER WOO?
>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR ALL
YOUR WORK. I APPRECIATE THAT
YOU MENTIONED AND TALKED ABOUT
HOW THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
FITS IN WITH THIS AS WELL AS
THE NEED FOR BALANCE AND
EQUITY, ESPECIALLY THE PART
WHERE YOU MENTIONED -- YOU
ACKNOWLEDGED HOW DIFFICULT
THESE POLICY CHOICES ARE, AND
IT TAKES TIME. THIS IS NOT A
CHANGE OVERNIGHT, IT'S
GRADUAL. SO I APPRECIATE THAT.
ALSO REALLY APPRECIATE THAT YOU
DID PUT THAT AMI EXPLAINER IN
HERE, BUT I HAVE A QUESTION
REGARDING WHEN, YOU KNOW, YOU
TALK ABOUT -- YOU SAY THE WORD
AFFORDABLE, AND IN THEIR
INTRODUCTION YOU SAY AFFORDABLE
HOUSING IS DEFINED IN A VARIETY
OF WAYS, BUT I GET KIND OF
CONFUSED SOMETIMES WHEN WE'RE
JUST USING IT SO BLASE. SO WHAT
DO YOU MEAN SPECIFICALLY WHEN
YOU MENTION AFFORDABLE HOUSING
IS THIS 80% AND UNDER?
>> VANESSA, DID YOU COME OFF
MUTE -- OR, SORRY.
>> YOU GO AHEAD, McCAELA, THANK
YOU.
>> I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT WE
WERE THINKING WHEN WE WERE
WRITING THAT PART OF THE
REPORT. I THINK AFFORDABLE -- I
WORK IN A REGIONAL CONTEXT, AND
SO I KNOW IN SOME JURISDICTIONS
IN KING COUNTY A HOME THAT IS
AFFORDABLE TO A HOUSEHOLD AT,
SAY IF THEY MAKE 79% OF AREA
MEDIAN INCOME, IT DOESN'T HAVE
ANY SUBSIDY IN IT, BUT IT'S
JUST AT MARKET, SOMETHING THAT
THEY CAN AFFORD. MORE TYPICALLY
IN SEATTLE WHEN WE'RE USING
AFFORDABLE OR WE ARE GENERALLY
TALKING ABOUT UNITS THAT HAVE
SOME TYPE OF INCOME RESTRICTION
OR, YOU KNOW, COVENANT PLACED
ON THE DEED TO HELP IT MAINTAIN
ITS AFFORDABILITY OVER TIME.
BUT I THINK MORE SPECIFICALLY
IN THAT ISSUE BRIEF WE WERE
TRYING TO TALK ABOUT HOW THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COULD BEST
BE TAILORED TO PRODUCE AND
HOUSING UNITS AND MEET THE
NEEDS OF HOUSEHOLDS AT OR BELOW
80% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME IN
SEATTLE.
>> AND I LOVE HOW SHORT YOUR
CONCLUSION IS, BUT I THINK THE
TAKEAWAY FOR ME WAS -- AND WHAT
YOU SAID IN THE CONCLUSION WAS
YOU NEED TO BUILD MORE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT FOR ME
LOOKING AT THIS GRAPH, IT'S
ZERO TO 50% WHERE WE NEED TO
BUILD MORE UNITS AS WELL AS HOW
DO WE HELP PEOPLE BECOME LESS
COST BURDENED. AND SO I'M ALSO
VERY INTERESTED, ECHOING
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, FINDING
THE STATS ON SEATTLE AMI,
BECAUSE YOU DO USE THE HUD,
WHICH IS TACOMA, SEATTLE
FIGURES, BUT WE'LL HAVE TO SEE
HOW THAT IS IN CONTEXT BREAKING
IT UP BY DISTRICT AS WELL.
BECAUSE I KNOW DISTRICT TWO IS
VERY DIFFERENT THAN THE OTHER
DISTRICTS. DISTRICT FIVE HAS
UNIQUE ISSUES AS WELL. WHAT
DOES THAT LOOK LIKE DISTRICT TO
DISTRICT. AND I THINK YOU
MENTIONED EARLIER IT CAME FROM
THE OFFICE OF HOUSING, SO I
WOULD ALSO BE INTERESTED IN
SEEING THAT AS WELL. BUT
OVERALL, THANK YOU FOR THIS.
AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.
I KNOW THIS IS A VOLUNTEER
POSITION, AND IT'S -- IT TAKES
UP A LOT OF TIME. AND I HAVE NO
FURTHER QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU. I WAS GOING TO
ASK ONE OTHER QUESTION RELATED
TO SLIDES 10 AND 11 WHERE
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT
ANTIDISPLACEMENT AND YOU'RE
TALKING ABOUT THE GROWTH
STRATEGY. IN 2021 OPCD
CONDUCTED A PRELIMINARY RACIAL
EQUITY ANALYSIS OF THE URBAN
VILLAGE STRATEGY. THEY
CONDUCTED A COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT PROCESS. THEY WORKED
WITH A NATIONAL RESEARCH FIRM
TO ANALYZE THE IMPACT OF OUR
GROWTH STRATEGY THAT WE'VE
BEEN USING FOR THE LAST 30
YEARS. AND THESE SLIDES KIND OF
EXPLAIN SOME OF THOSE FINDINGS.
I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF
THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THEY
MADE AS A RESULT OF THAT,
INCLUDING, YOU KNOW, ENDING THE
PREVALENCE OF SINGLE-FAMILY
ZONING WITHIN RACIALLY INCLOU
SIEVE -- WITH A RACIALLY
INCLUSIVE APPROACH CENTERING
HOUSING SECURITY AND
AFFORDABILITY AND HOMEOWNERSHIP
FOR BLACK AND BROWN NEIGHBORS,
EXPLORING THE BEST COMBINATION
OF FINANCIAL AND REGULATORY
INCENTIVES AND TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE NECESSARY TO
GENERATE ADDITIONAL HOUSING
OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOW-INCOME
HOUSEHOLDS, PARTICULARLY IN
NEIGHBORHOODS ZONED FOR
SINGLE-FAMILY, WHICH IS
EFFECTIVELY WHAT THE CONNECTED
COMMUNITIES LEGISLATION IS. BUT
THESE ARE SOME OF THE FINDINGS
THAT CAME OUT OF THAT, AND I'M
WONDERING IF YOU CAN TALK A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT WHAT WE
SHOULD EXPECT TO SEE IN A DRAFT
AS IT RELATES TO HOW THE RACIAL
EQUITY TOOL KIT SHOULD BE
INTEGRATED THROUGHOUT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENTS.
>> I THINK IT'S -- I VERY MUCH
APPRECIATE, AND I'M SURE MANY
PEOPLE DO, THE 60-DAY COMMENT
PERIOD ON THE PLAN. AS YOU
NOTE, IT'S NOT JUST READING
THE 200-PAGE PLAN, IT IS
READING THE PLAN IN LIGHT OF
RECOMMENDATIONS AND ANALYSES
AND DATA THAT HAS BEEN PRODUCED
SUCH AS THE RET THAT YOU
REFERENCED. WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN
TO THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL OF
BEING ABLE TO LOOK AT THE PLAN
IN THE CONTEXT OF PAST WORK
THAT HAS BEEN DONE BY THE CITY,
BY OH, BY THE OFFICE OF
HOUSING, BY THE OFFICE OF
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT, AND THAT IS
SOMETHING THAT WE WILL BE
LOOKING FORWARD TO AS WE WORK
THROUGH THE PLAN AND THE
ANCILLARY DOCUMENTS THAT HAVE
BEEN PRODUCED OVER THE LAST
COUPLE OF YEARS.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU.
>> I WANTED TO ADD THAT WHILE
WE HAVEN'T REVIEWED THE DRAFT
PLAN FOR IT, AN APPROACH TO
EVALUATING THE DRAFT PLAN COULD
BE TO LOOK AT THE
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE IN
THOSE -- THAT ARE IN THE CODE
AND CHECKING TO SEE WHETHER
THERE'S POLICY SUPPORT FOR
SOME OF THOSE INVESTMENTS OR
CHANGES IN THE DRAFT PLAN AND
WHERE WE MIGHT SEE IT OR IF WE
DON'T SEE IT, THEN WE WOULD
SAY THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE
POLICY SUPPORT.
>> YEAH, I THINK IT'S JUST
GOING TO BE REALLY IMPORTANT TO
REVIEW IT THROUGH THE LENS OF
THE RACIAL EQUITY TOOL KIT, THE
ANTIDISPLACEMENT STRATEGIES
THAT WE ARE TRYING TO UPHOLD.
THE RACE AND SOCIAL JUSTICE
PRINCIPLES THAT AS A CITY WE
HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR A
LONG TIME. SO THANK YOU FOR
THAT. I SEE A QUESTION FROM
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA AND THEN
IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER
QUESTION, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE
NEXT AGENDA ITEM.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES. I ACTUALLY WANT TO
THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SERVICE,
BECAUSE YOU ARE VOLUNTEER
POSITIONS. AND I ALSO
UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ALL HAVE
YOUR OWN AREAS OF EXPERTISE
THAT AREN'T NECESSARILY THIS
BUT YOU LEND ALL OF IT TOGETHER
AND YOU WORK TOGETHER TO COME
UP WITH A THOUGHTFUL ANALYSIS,
AND SO I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE
THAT. I ACTUALLY, VANESSA, I
VERY MUCH APPRECIATED YOUR
STATEMENT ABOUT SHORING UP DATA
TO THE POLICY, BECAUSE I DO
THINK THAT'S WHAT IS MISSING
HERE IS THE DATA TO REALLY
SUPPORT APPROACHES THAT WE TAKE
TO MANAGE THE AFFORD -- WELL,
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, NOTED THAT
THERE IS SOME -- THERE ISN'T A
CLEAR AGREEMENT AROUND WHAT
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS BECAUSE
IT REALLY DOES DEPEND ON WHERE
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, JUST
SEATTLE VERSUS THE REGION IS
ONE WAY. AND THEN FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT, HOW THEY THINK OF
AMI VERSUS THE REGION AND THE
CITY. SO I THINK THE DATA IS
REALLY IMPORTANT. I'M JUST
GOING TO ECHO ETHE SENTIMENTS
OF MY COLLEAGUES COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE AND COUNCILMEMBER WOO IN
THAT WE KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW,
FOLKS THAT ARE MAKING LESS
MONEY HAVE LESS OPPORTUNITY
AND, YOU KNOW, TO COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES' POINT, WE DO NEED TO
TAKE RACE AND SOCIAL JUSTICE
INTO ACCOUNT AS WE'RE
DEVELOPING THE COMP PLAN. AND
SO THAT MEANS THAT I THINK, YOU
KNOW, IT'S EVEN MORE IMPORTANT
TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE'RE
LOOKING AT AMI WE'RE REALLY
LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, IT REALLY
IS IN MY MIND THE ZERO TO 30%
THAT IS WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED
IN TERMS OF LIFTING FOLKS UP.
ESPECIALLY THE FOLKS THAT WERE
TESTIFYING HERE TODAY AND WHAT
THE NEEDS ARE IN COMMUNITIES.
SO I UNDERSTAND THIS COMMUNITY
ACROSS THE BOARD IN TERMS OF
HOUSING. THERE JUST ISN'T
ENOUGH HOUSING PERIOD. AND THEN
IT IS LAYERED BY OUR FOLKS WHO
ARE MAKING LESS MONEY ARE IN A
MORE DIFFICULT FINANCIAL
SITUATION. AND AS A PERSON WHO
GREW UP VERY LOW INCOME, I
UNDERSTAND THAT. AND -- BUT I
-- AND I THINK THAT THE DATA IS
REALLY HELPFUL TO FURTHER PAINT
THE PICTURE. AND THAT IS
SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, I
APPRECIATE THE EFFORTS HERE.
AND WE'VE ALREADY NOTED THIS
ISN'T, YOU KNOW, YOU ALL ARE
VOLUNTEERS TOO. YOU'RE DOING
THE BEST YOU CAN. BUT THERE ARE
THINGS MISSING HERE TO REALLY
ADEQUATELY PAINT THE FULL
PICTURE. AND I THINK A LOT OF
THAT IS WHAT COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE AND COUNCILMEMBER WOO
WERE ALSO GETTING AT AS I WAS
LISTENING TO THEM, AND I AGREE.
SO I DO THANK YOU FOR YOUR
SERVICE, AND THEN I'M GOING TO
CAUTION US ALL AS WE ARE TAKING
IN ALL THIS INFORMATION TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE'RE REALLY LOOKING
AT THE DATA THAT ARE REALLY
GOING TO SUPPORT WHAT
STRATEGIES WE TAKE. AND THE
LAST THING I WANT TO SAY,
ACTUALLY, IS ON DISPLACEMENT,
BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF TALK
ABOUT DISPLACEMENT, BUT I
DIDN'T SEE IN HERE -- AND I
HAVE TO SAY, THE THINGS THAT I
HAVE SEEN ARE A LITTLE LIGHT ON
IDEAS FOR HOW WE MANAGE
ANTIDISPLACEMENT AS WE ARE
THINKING ABOUT DOING
DEVELOPMENT. IT'S A CHALLENGE,
BUT I ALSO HAVEN'T SEEN THIS
ROBUST CONVERSATION. HOW ARE
YOU GOING TO MANAGE THAT AS WE
ARE -- WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT
HOW MANY UNITS WE NEED, AND
THEN WE'RE NOT HAVING, IN MY
MIND, AT LEAST I DON'T HAVE
THAT INFORMATION. IF SOMEONE
HAS IT, WOULD LOVE TO SEE IT ON
THE ANTIDISPLACEMENT TOOLS THAT
WE'RE REALLY GOING TO BE
USING. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE.
>> OKAY. THE LAST COMMENT ON
HERE I WILL REMIND FOLKS THAT
WE ARE IN A 60-DAY PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD RE LATED TO THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, DRAFT EIS.
SO YOU HAVE UNTIL MAY 6th TO GO
TO ENGAGE.ONESEATTLEPLAN.COM
AND MAKE SURE YOUR COMMENTS ARE
INCLUDED. VANESSA, RADICA,
McCAELA, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
BEING HERE. REALLY APPRECIATE
YOUR TIME AND ALL THE WORK THAT
YOU PUT INTO THIS. AND WE WILL
FOLLOW UP WITH YOU. THANKS SO
MUCH.
>> THANK YOU.
>> HAVE A GOOD DAY. OKAY. WILL
YOU PLEASE READ ITEM TWO INTO
THE RECORD?
>> DISCUSSION OF THE EDZ
CONNECT TO COMMUNITIES
LEGISLATION, COUNCIL BILL
120750 IS AN ORDINANCE RELATING
TO LAND USE AND ZONING
ESTABLISHING THE CONNECTED
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PARTNERSHIP BONUS PILOT PROGRAM
BY LISH WHITSON FROM COUNCIL
CENTRAL STAFF FOR BRIEFING AND
DISCUSSION.
>> GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
WELCOME, LISH WHITSON FROM
COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF. BEFORE I
HAND IT OVER TO LISH, I JUST
WANTED TO REVIEW SOME OF THE
THINGS THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED.
THIS IS OUR FOURTH MEETING TO
DISCUSS THE CONNECTED
COMMUNITIES LEGISLATION. I'VE
ASKED LISH TO COME WALK US
THROUGH THE MEMO THAT HE
CIRCULATED ON MARCH 6th, WHICH
DID IDENTIFY SEVERAL ISSUES FOR
CONSIDERATION. AT OUR FIRST
COMMITTEE MEETING ON FEBRUARY
7th, OPCD PRESENTED THEIR WORK
PLAN FOR 2024. SLIDES FIVE AND
TEN INCLUDED THE EQUITABLE
DEVELOPMENT ZONING PHASE TWO
LEGISLATION, WHICH BECAME
CONNECTED COMMUNITIES, AS ONE
OF THEIR 2024 PRIORITIES FOR
THEIR STRATEGIC INITIATIVES
WORK PROGRAM. ONE THING I'VE
HEARD IN THE LAST SEVERAL WEEKS
IS A CONCERN ABOUT OPCD BEING
STRETCHED TOO THIN GIVEN THE
COMP PLAN THAT IS UNDERWAY. SO
THIS IS JUST A REMINDER THAT
THIS LEGISLATION IS ALREADY IN
OPCD'S WORK PLAN PRIORITY LIST
FOR 2024. MUCH OF THE LANGUAGE
AROUND ACCESS TO ESSENTIAL
GOODS AND SERVICES, VIBRANT
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL AREAS,
FOR EXAMPLE, IS INCLUDED IN
THIS LANGUAGE AND IN THE COMP
PLAN DRAFT. THIS BILL IS
EFFECTIVELY PILOTING THE COMP
PLAN IDEAS RELATED TO MIXED USE
COMMUNITY-LED DEVELOPMENT IN
MORE PARTS OF THE CITY. AFTER
OUR FIRST COMMITTEE MEETING,
THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT
HOW THIS MIGHT ACTUALLY WORK,
SO OUR SECOND COMMITTEE MEETING
I INVITED SOME PRACTITIONERS TO
TALK US THROUGH SOME PIECES AND
TO DISCUSS HOW THIS WORK
RELATES TO GENERATIONAL WEALTH
BUILDING, AS WELL AS WHY THIS
PILOT PROVIDES SOME USEFUL
FLEXIBILITY IN INCENTIVIZING
THE KIND OF PARTNERSHIPS WE'D
LIKE TO SEE. IN MARCH WE HEARD
FROM THE TEAM ABOUT HOW THEY
SUPPORT COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS
THAT MAY NOT BE DEVELOPERS PER
SE BUT WHO HAVE PROJECTS THAT
THEY'D LIKE TO SEE COMPLETED.
AND TO YOUR EARLIER POINT,
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA, THE
SOLUTION TO THE ANTIDISPLACEMEN
T CHALLENGE IS THE EQUITABLE
DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE. IT IS
AN ANTIDISPLACEMENT STRATEGY
THAT THE CITY'S BEEN DOING FOR
THE LAST TEN YEARS OR SO AND
HAS PROVEN VERY EFFECTIVE AT
MEETING THIS GOAL OF HAVING
COMMUNITY-LED, COMMUNITY-DRIVEN
PROJECTS SUPPORTING THEIR
ABILITY TO DO THAT. SO I'VE
SPOKEN TO MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES
AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO HEAR
THEIR CONCERNS. AT THIS POINT,
I DON'T KNOW OF ANY AMENDMENTS
THAT HAVE BEEN DRAFTED FOR
CONSIDERATION. BUT I HAVE ASKED
LISH HERE TO WALK US THROUGH
THE MEMO THAT HE DRAFTED SO
THAT COMMITTEE MEMBERS CAN HAVE
ADDITIONAL TIME TO ASK
QUESTIONS TO CLARIFY WHERE OUR
SHARED INTERESTS LIE AND TO
CLARIFY WHAT ELEMENTS COMMITTEE
MEMBERS MIGHT LIKE TO SEE
CHANGED. SO I DO HAVE SEVERAL
QUESTIONS MYSELF FOR LISH, BUT
I WILL HAND IT OVER TO YOU AND
LET YOU WALK US THROUGH THE
MEMO. NO.
>> IS YOUR LIGHT ON? BUTTON
THERE.
>> LET'S SEE. CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> THAT'S BETTER. THANKS,
LISH.
>> OKAY. SO I WILL TRY AND
ANSWER ALL OF YOUR QUESTIONS.
MY COLLEAGUE FREEMAN, WHO
HELPED TO DRAFT THIS
LEGISLATION, IS OUT OF THE
OFFICE THIS WEEK, SO I'LL TRY
MY BEST.
>> THANK YOU, LISH.
>> JUST BRIEFLY I'M GOING TO
SUMMARIZE THE MEMO THAT I SENT
OUT ON MARCH 6th. TRY TO TEASE
OUT ISSUES THAT THE PILOT
RAISES AND ANSWER QUESTIONS
THAT YOU MAY HAVE. THE PURPOSE
OF THE BILL AS IT STATES IS TO
DEMONSTRATE THE BENEFITS OF
EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT THAT
INCLUDES BOTH COMMUNITY SERVING
USES AND HOUSING AFFORDABLE TO
A SPECTRUM OF INCOMES THROUGH
INCENTIVES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF
HOUSING AND EQUITABLE
DEVELOPMENT USING PARTNERSHIPS
BETWEEN PUBLIC, PRIVATE, AND
COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS.
THE IDEA HERE IS TO SEE IF
THERE ARE WAYS THAT MIX OF
DIFFERENT PARTIES, PUBLIC,
NONPROFIT, AND PRIVATE CAN COME
TOGETHER TO BUILD PROJECTS THAT
SUPPORT EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT.
POTENTIALLY EVEN MIXED INCOME
HOUSING THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE
PUBLIC SUBSIDIES. SO TRYING TO
REACH THAT SORT OF 80% INCOME
LEVEL WITHOUT THE NEED FOR
PRIVATE SUBSIDIES THROUGH A MIX
OF DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT
PARTNERS. AS I DISCUSSED THIS
PILOT PROGRAM, I'M ALSO GOING
TO TALK ABOUT SOME OTHER ZONING
PROGRAMS THE CITY HAS IN PLACE
SO THAT YOU CAN COMPARE THIS
PROGRAM TO OTHER PROGRAMS THAT
THE CITY USES. YOU HEARD A
LITTLE BIT AT THE MEETING WITH
THE EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT
PARTNERS ABOUT THE RELIGIOUS
ORGANIZATION PROPERTY BILL. AND
I WILL ALSO TALK BRIEFLY ABOUT
TWO GREEN BUILDING INCENTIVE
PILOT PROGRAMS THAT THE CITY
HAS HAD IN PLACE FOR A LITTLE
WHILE. THE PROGRAM WOULD BE
AVAILABLE TO QUALIFY
DEVELOPMENT AS DEFINED IN THE
BILL AND WOULD NEED TO BE
PROPOSED BY A QUALIFIED
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ORGANIZATION OR QCDO. GENERALLY
A QUALIFIED COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION WOULD
SERVE POPULATIONS LIKE
REFUGEES, PEOPLE EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS, AND PEOPLE AT
RISK OF THE ECONOMIC
DISPLACEMENT. UNDER THE BILL,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ORGANIZATIONS MUST HAVE A
LEGALLY ESTABLISHED AND ONGOING
PROPERTY-RELATED INTEREST IN A
SITE. SO THERE MUST BE A
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ORGANIZATION AS A PARTNER OR A
SOCIAL HOUSING ORGANIZATION AS
ONE OF THE PARTNERS,
POTENTIALLY IF MANY IN A
PROJECT. THE PROPERTY-RELATED
INTERESTS THAT THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION IS
REQUIRED TO HAVE TO QUALIFY
INCLUDE A RANGE OF DIFFERENT
OPTIONS. THEY'RE INTENDED TO
PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY FOR
DIFFERENT TYPES OF
PARTNERSHIPS. THE CLEANEST IS
OWNING MORE THAN 50% OF THE
PROJECT. IF THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION IS
COMING IN TO A PROJECT WHERE
THEY ARE NOT PROVIDING LAND,
THE LEGISLATION ALLOWS 10% OF
THE OWNERSHIP OF THE PROJECT TO
BE ALLOWS FOR A COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION OWNING
10% OF THE TOTAL PROJECT VALUE
TO BE A QUALIFYING COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION. OTHER
WAYS THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ORGANIZATION COULD QUALIFY ARE
TO HAVE A CONTROLLING AND
ACTIVE MANAGEMENT ROLE IN A
CORPORATION OR PARTNERSHIP THAT
OWNS A PROPERTY OR HAVE ANOTHER
BENEFICIAL INTEREST. AND THESE
PROPERTY-RELATED INTERESTS
WOULD BE FURTHER DEFINED
THROUGH RULE MAKING BY THE
OFFICE OF PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, OFFICE
OF HOUSING AND SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTION AND
INSPECTIONS, EACH OF WHICH HAS
EXPERTISE IN AN AREA RELATED TO
THIS BILL. COUNCIL, IF YOU WANT
TO TARGET THE PROGRAM OR ARE
CONCERNED ABOUT HOW THIS WOULD
POTENTIALLY LEVERAGE THE
INTEREST -- OR LEVERAGE A
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ORGANIZATION TOO HEAVILY FOR
THE INTEREST OF A PRIVATE
DEVELOPER COULD REMOVE OR ADD
CRITERIA HERE TO SUPPORT THE
KINDS OF PARTNERSHIPS AND
PROJECTS THAT YOU ARE
INTERESTED IN. IN TERMS OF
AFFORDABILITY, A PROJECT MUST
MAINTAIN AT LEAST 30% OF THE
DWELLING UNITS AND 33% OF ANY
CONGREGATE RESIDENT SLEEPING
ROOMS AS MODERATE INCOME UNITS
FOR 75 YEARS OR ELSE QUALIFY AS
A SOCIAL HOUSING DEVELOPER.
MODERATE INCOME HOUSING IS
REASON TAL HOUSING AT 80% OF
THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME. THE
AREA MEDIAN INCOME IS A
STANDARD THAT THE CITY AND ALL
CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES USE
AS -- TO IDENTIFY AFFORDABLE
HOUSING LEVELS. PARTLY WE USE
THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME WHICH
INCLUDES BELLEVUE AND TACOMA.
SO KING AND PIERCE COUNTIES. IN
ORDER THAT OUR PROGRAMS ARE
CONSISTENT WITH FEDERAL
PROGRAMS BECAUSE MOST
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPERS
ARE TAKING MULTIPLE SOURCES OF
SUBSIDY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
PROJECT AND IT'S IMPORTANT
THAT THOSE DIFFERENT PROGRAMS
BE IN LINE SO THAT PEOPLE CAN
ACTUALLY GET ENOUGH SUBSIDIES,
DEVELOP THE PROJECT, AND BE
SUCCESSFUL. MODERATE INCOME
ALSO WOULD INCLUDE OWNERSHIP
UNITS AFFORDABLE AT UP TO 100%
OF THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME.
USING THESE INCOME LEVELS AT
THIS HIGHER THAN LOW INCOME
RATE IS INTENDED TO, AGAIN,
ALLOW FOR A MIX IN INCOME
PROJECTS THAT DON'T REQUIRE
PUBLIC SUBSIDIES. BUT YOU COULD
CERTAINLY ADDRESS THESE
THRESHOLDS. REDUCING THE INCOME
LEVEL WOULD FORCE THE PROJECTS
TO SEEK AFFORDABLE HOUSING
SUBSIDIES, EITHER FEDERAL,
STATE, OR LOCAL. OTHER CITY
PROGRAMS EITHER REQUIRE MORE
UNITS OR REQUIRE DEEPER
AFFORDABILITY LEVEL FOR THE
MOST PART. THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING ON RELIGIOUS-OWNED
PROPERTIES LEGISLATION REQUIRED
100% OF THE UNITS TO BE
AFFORDABLE AND AT THAT 80% OF
AMI LEVEL. THE MANDATORY
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY PROGRAM
FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
REQUIRES BETWEEN 2% AND 11% OF
UNITS DEPENDING ON WHERE
THEY'RE LOCATED TO BE
AFFORDABLE BUT GENERALLY AT A
LOWER INCOME LEVEL AT 60% OF
THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME OR
LOW-INCOME HOUSING. AN OLDER
PROGRAM, THE DOWNTOWN INCENTIVE
ZONING PROGRAM, DOES REQUIRE --
DOES ALLOW FOR HOUSING AT 80%
AMI, 100% FOR OWNERSHIP. AND
THAT PROGRAM REQUIRES BETWEEN
8% AND 14% OF FLOOR AREA IN THE
PROJECT. SO, WELL, ASK ME LATER
IF YOU WANT TO GET INTO THE
WEEDS OF THE DOWNTOWN ZONING
PROGRAM, BUT IT'S PROBABLY,
YEAH. NOT AS RELEVANT TODAY.
THERE'S ANOTHER WAY THAT A
PROJECT CAN QUALIFY FOR
ADDITIONAL DENSITY UNDER THE
LEGISLATION. IT'S -- THE
PROGRAM ALLOWS FOR LARGER
BUILDINGS IF HOMEOWNER WHO HAS
SOLD THEIR PROPERTY TO THE --
TO HELP FACILITATE THE PROJECT
IS GUARANTEED A HOUSING UNIT
WITHIN THE PROJECT IN THE
FUTURE. THE HOMEOWNER WOULD
HAVE TO HAVE AN INCOME AT OR
BELOW 120% OF AREA MEDIAN
INCOME, AND THEN THERE WOULD BE
RESTRICTIONS ON NOT RESELLING
OR SUBLETTING THE PROPERTY. THE
INTENT OF THIS OWNER INCENTIVE
IS TO HELP TO ADDRESS
DISPLACEMENT DIRECTLY BY MAKING
SURE THAT PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT
TO RETURN TO THE AREA WHERE
THEY SOLD THE -- SOLD THEIR
HOUSE.
>> SORRY, LISH, CAN YOU SAY A
LITTLE MORE ABOUT THAT?
>> YEAH, SO, THE IDEA IS A
HOMEOWNER, FOR EXAMPLE, A
LEGACY HOME OWNER IN THE
CENTRAL DISTRICT HAS A -- IS
APPROACHED BY AFRICA TOWN AND
AFRICA TOWN IS ACQUIRING
PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THEIR
HOUSES FOR A PROJECT THAT
INCLUDES SPACE FOR AN AFRICAN
AMERICAN LEGACY COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS AND
AFRICAN AMERICAN BUSINESS --
AFRICAN AMERICAN-RUN BUSINESSES
AND MIXED INCOME HOUSING ABOVE
IT. IF THAT HOMEOWNER IS
GUARANTEED A UNIT IN THAT
FUTURE BUILDING, THE BUILDING
WOULD GET TO BE LARGER. AND THE
LEGACY HOMEOWNER WOULD THEN
HAVE A SORT OF PERMANENT RIGHT
TO LIVE IN THAT BUILDING. THERE
ARE SOME DETAILS THAT NEED TO
BE WORKED OUT THROUGH THE RULE
MAKING PROCESS, SO WE DON'T
REALLY KNOW WHAT THAT PERMANENT
RIGHT WOULD LOOK LIKE EXACTLY,
BUTS THAT THE GENERAL IDEA.
>> BUT YOU'RE SAYING THEY
WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SUBLET IT
OR RESELL IT. THEY'RE LOCKED
IN.
>> FOR TEN YEARS, YES.
>> SO THEY'RE REALLY LOSING
THEIR RIGHTS TO THEIR LAND,
BECAUSE THEY'RE SELLING THEIR
LAND TO GET THE CONDO AND
THEY'RE VERY RESTRICTED FOR
HOW THEY USE THEIR CONDO.
>> YEAH, THEY COULD -- YEAH.
AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO
NEGOTIATE THAT AGREEMENT WITH
THE DEVELOPER.
>> YEAH, I WILL SAY THERE ARE
-- THERE ARE -- THIS IS --
THANK YOU, LISH, THERE'S
QUESTIONS AROUND THE OWNERSHIP
PIECE AND THE ABILITY OF A
PROPERTY OWNER TO NEGOTIATE,
HOW THEY WOULD NEGOTIATE THAT
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT WITH THE
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION, AND
THIS IS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS
THAT WE ARE -- THERE'S NOT A
LEGISLATIVE SOLUTION TO THIS,
BECAUSE THE CITY IS NOT IN THE
BUSINESS OF NEGOTIATING
AGREEMENTS ON BEHALF OF
PARTNERS, BUT THIS IS A CONCERN
THAT WE'VE HEARD, AND SO WE
ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT
THE REMEDY MIGHT BE. IT IS NOT
A LEGISLATIVE REMEDY, WHICH IS
WHY IT'S NOT PART OF THIS
LEGISLATION, SO.
>> CHAIR, I JUST WANT TO POINT
OUT COUNCILMEMBER MOORE HAD A
QUESTION. SHE DOES NEED TO
LEAVE, SO.
>> I'M SORRY, YES, PLEASE GO
AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> THANK YOU BOTH VERY MUCH.
YES, JUST TO BRING HOME THAT
POINT THAT AT THIS POINT THERE
IS NO WAY TO GUARANTEE THAT
THERE'S ACTUALLY -- THE
INDIVIDUAL WHO'S SELLING THEIR
HOME IS GETTING FAIR MARKET
VALUE FOR THE PROPERTY AND THAT
IT'S A COMPARABLE VALUE TO THE
UNIT. I MEAN, AS YOU NOTE, LIKE
THAT'S -- WE DON'T HAVE
NECESSARILY, AS IT'S WRITTEN
NOW, ANY ENFORCEMENT POWERS OR
ANY WAY TO PROVE THAT THAT HAS
HAPPENED. SO I JUST -- IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> YEAH, AS I'VE SAID, THIS IS
AN ISSUE THAT WE ARE STILL
TRYING TO FIND THE REMEDY FOR,
BECAUSE THIS IS NOT A
LEGISLATIVE THING WE CAN DO.
BUT WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE
POSSIBLE CITY RESOURCES THAT WE
CAN POINT PEOPLE TO. IT'S NOT
THE CITY'S -- THE CITY ISN'T
IN THE BUSINESS OF PUTTING
PARAMETERS IN PLACE OR
STRUCTURING A DEAL,
PARTICULARLY FOR A PROJECT LIKE
THIS WHERE WE AREN'T PROVIDING
ANY FINANCING. SO THIS IS ONE
OF THE QUESTIONS THAT IS STILL
ON THE TABLE.
>> ALL RIGHT, BUT IF I MAY,
CHAIR, THIS IS A CRITICAL AND
FUNDAMENTAL FLAW OF THIS
PARTICULAR LEGISLATION, WHICH
IS THAT IT IS -- IT SEEKS TO
MAINTAIN AND ADVANCE
INTERGENERATIONAL WEALTH, AND
THIS PARTICULAR PROVISION WE
ARE NOT ABLE TO ENSURE THAT
INTERGENERATIONAL WEALTH IS
MAINTAINED OR TRANSFERRED OR
CONTINUED TO BE DEVELOPED. SO I
DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S ANY
WAY AROUND IT. IT'S WORTH,
OBVIOUSLY, LOOKING AT, BUT I
THINK THAT THERE ISN'T ANY WAY
THAT WE CAN GUARANTEE IN ANY
SORT OF SCENARIO THAT THAT
EXCHANGE IS ACTUALLY GOING TO
DO WHAT IT PURPORTS TO DO. AND
THAT REMAINS ONE OF MY MAIN
CONCERNS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU. LISH, PLEASE GO
AHEAD.
>> YEAH. THE -- THIS WOULD
REQUIRE THAT THE HOMEOWNER HAVE
A UNIT IN PERPETUITY IN THE
BUILDING. WHAT IT DOESN'T
ALLOW FOR IS MULTIPLE ADJACENT
HOMEOWNERS TO BE -- TO ALSO
COME BACK. SO THE INCENTIVE
ONLY APPLIES IF THERE IS -- TO
THE FIRST HOMEOWNER. AND FOR
EXAMPLE, ON THIS LITTLE MAP
THERE'S FOUR DIFFERENT LOTS,
FOUR DIFFERENT HOMEOWNERS, AND
ONLY ONE OF THOSE HOMEOWNERS
WOULD NEED TO BE PART OF THE
FUTURE BUILDING IN ORDER FOR
THE INCENTIVE TO APPLY. I THINK
THERE ARE WAYS TO WORK AROUND
THAT, AND I'M HAPPY TO TALK
ABOUT THAT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> MORE DETAIL.
>> OKAY.
>> THANK YOU, LISH.
>> SO THE BASIS OF THE BILL IS
TO PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY UNDER
THE ZONING CODE IN ORDER TO
SUPPORT THESE TYPES OF
PROJECTS. IT WOULD ALLOW TALLER
BUILDINGS, LARGER BUILDINGS,
AND IN NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL
ZONES WOULD ALLOW BUILDINGS
THAT COVER MORE OF THE LOT
AREA, SMALLER YARDS, HIGHER
RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES, AND
EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT AND
MULTIFAMILY USES THERE
OTHERWISE NOT ALLOWED IN
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
PROBABLY THE SIMPLEST OF THESE
IS HEIGHT. PROJECTS THAT COMPLY
WOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE TALLER.
BETWEEN ONE AND SIX STORIES,
DEPENDING ON THE UNDERLYING
ZONE TYPE. AND THAT'S ROUGHLY
COMPARABLE TO THE INCREASED
HEIGHT PROVIDED THROUGH THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON
RELIGIOUS-OWNED PROPERTY
LEGISLATION. THE NEXT AREA
WHERE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT
CAPACITY IS PROVIDED IS THROUGH
INCREASES IN THE FLOOR AREA
RATIO. AND AS A QUICK REFRESHER
OR FOR THOSE MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC WHO ARE NEW TO THE
WONDERFUL WORLD OF LAND USE,
FLOOR AREA RATIO IS THE MEASURE
OF THE SIDES OF A BUILDING
COMPARED TO THE SIZE OF THE
PROPERTY THAT IT SITS ON. SO IF
YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE MIDDLE
ROW OF THIS DIAGRAM, ONE FLOOR
AREA RATIO BUILDING HAS AS MUCH
FLOOR SPACE WITHIN THE BUILDING
AS THE LOT IT SITS ON. SO A
10,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING ON
A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT IS ONE
FAR. 1,000 DIVIDED BY 10,000 IS
ONE. WHAT FAR DOESN'T DO IS
DICTATE A PARTICULAR
CONFIGURATION FOR THIS SPACE.
SO ONE FAR BUILDING CAN COVER
THE ENTIRE LOT OR BE A
TWO-STORY BUILDING, COVERS HALF
THE LOT, OR A FOUR-STORY
BUILDING THAT COVERS A QUARTER
OF THE LOT. THE INTENT IS TO
REGULATE THE AMOUNT OF
DEVELOPMENT THAT HAPPENS IN AN
AREA WITHOUT DICTATING THE FORM
THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT TAKES.
>> CHAIR?
>> YES, COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> I JUST WANTED TO NOTE THIS
IS ONE OF MY FAVORITE SLIDES
EVER.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS.
>> YES.
>> I'M NOT GOING TO BORE YOU
WITH THESE NEXT TWO TABLES AND
GOING THROUGH ALL OF THESE
NUMBERS. I JUST WANT TO NOTE
THAT THE CONNECTED COMMUNITIES
PILOT GENERALLY WOULD ALLOW
HIGHER FLOOR AREA RATIOS THAN
THE OTHER PROGRAMS THAT WE
HAVE. IN ADDITION TO THE
INCREASED FLOOR AREA RATIO
LIMITS, THE PILOT WOULD EXEMPT
SOME SPACE FROM THE FLOOR AREA
RATIO LIMIT ALL TOGETHER. IN
OTHER WORDS, THAT SPACE WOULD
BE IGNORED IN DETERMINING THE
RATIO BETWEEN FLOOR AREA AND
LOT AREA. THREE EXEMPTIONS
WOULD BE PROVIDED, FIRST FOR
LARGER UNITS IN A BUILDING, THE
SECOND FOR ANY EQUITABLE
DEVELOPMENT USES IN THE
BUILDING, AND THE THIRD FOR
BUILDINGS NEAR FREQUENT TRANSIT
STOPS OR LIGHT RAIL. IF THE
FIRST TWO OF THESE ARE
IMPORTANT, YOU MIGHT CONSIDER
REMOVING THE FINAL ONE. WE
ALREADY ALLOW HIGHER DENSITIES
YENLY NEAR EACH OF OUR FREQUENT
TRANSIT STOPS. AND SO THERE IS
ALREADY SORT OF A ZONING BONUS
IN THOSE AREAS. WE HAVE BIGGER
BUILDINGS NEAR FREQUENT TRANSIT
GENERALLY UNDER ZONING. SO
IT'S JUST SOMETHING TO
CONSIDER. IN NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL ZONES, WHICH ARE
AREAS THAT ARE HISTORICALLY
DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE-FAMILY
ZONES, FORMERLY CALLED
SINGLE-FAMILY ZONES,
FLEXIBILITY IS PROVIDED FOR LOT
COVERAGE AND YARD REQUIREMENTS.
LAND USE INCLUDES A LOT OF
RATIOS. THIS IS A RATIO OF THE
AMOUNT OF SPACE OF A -- ON A
LOT THAT BUILDINGS COVER TO THE
LOT AREA. SO IN THIS EXAMPLE,
WE HAVE A GARAGE AND A HOUSE
WHICH TOGETHER ARE COVERING 34%
OF THE LOT. THE MAXIMUM LIMIT
UNDER NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL
ZONING GENERALLY IS 35%. UNDER
THE PILOT, THAT WOULD BE
INCREASED TO 50%. ANOTHER
CONSTRAINT ON DEVELOPMENT IN
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONES
IS YARDS. WE REQUIRE FRONT
YARDS, REAR YARDS, AND SIDE
YARDS. THESE ARE REQUIRED TO BE
OPEN. THERE MAY BE LIKE A SHED
OR SOMETHING ALLOWED, FENCES
ARE ALLOWED, AND DRIVEWAYS,
DECKS, LOW DECKS, PATIOS, ARE
ALLOWED. BUT GENERALLY THEY ARE
UNDEVELOPED PORTIONS OF
PROPERTY. EXCEPT FOR THE REAR
YARD WHERE WE DO ALLOW GARAGES
AND DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNITS. THE PROPOSED PILOT
ALLOWS FOR MUCH SMALLER YARDS
WHICH WOULD PROVIDE FOR
FLEXIBILITY ON THE SITE. IT
WOULD ALLOW BUILDINGS TO BE
LOCATED CLOSER TO LOT LINES
THAN ARE OTHERWISE ALLOWED.
THAT CAN ACTUALLY PROVIDE
FLEXIBILITY FOR PRESERVING
TREES ON A SITE IF THERE'S A
SIGNIFICANT TREE ON THE SITE,
ALLOWING FOR SMALLER YARDS
ALLOWS FOR A SHIFTING OF THE
BUILDING AWAY FROM THAT TREE.
BUT REDUCED YARDS ALSO REDUCE
PRIVACY, ONE OF THE REASONS WHY
WE HAVE YARDS IS TO PROVIDE
FOREST SEPARATION BETWEEN
STRUCTURES AND A REDUCED YARD
WILL REDUCE PRIVACY FOR FUTURE
RESIDENTS POTENTIALLY. MY
APOLOGY, SLIDE 15 IS A
DUPLICATE. GOING ON TO SLIDE
16, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL ZONES, THE NUMBER
OF UNITS ON A LOT IS GENERALLY
DETERMINED BY THE MINIMUM LOT
SIZE. WE ALLOW A SINGLE
PRINCIPLE UNIT ON EACH LOT AND
UP TO TWO ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNITS. IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL ONE ZONE, THAT'S A
PRINCIPLE UNIT FOR EVERY 9,600
SQUARE FEET, GIVE OR TAKE. AND
FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL THREE ZONE, THAT'S
A PRINCIPLE UNIT FOR EVERY
5,000 SQUARE FEET. UNDER THE
PILOT, THE DENSITY AND
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONES
WOULD BE TRIPLED OR QUINTUPLED
OR D. THE BILL WOULD ALSO ALLOW
FOR SOME USES AND SOME
MULTIFAMILY HOUSING TYPES THAT
ARE TIPLY NOT ALLOWED IN
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONES
TODAY. FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW OF THE PROPOSAL, THE
COUNCIL CONTRACTED WITH A
WORKSHOP TO SEE WHAT A PROJECT
IN A MULTIRISE THREE-FAMILY
ZONE WOULD LOOK LIKE. THE
YELLOW BUILDING IS IN A LOW
RISE THREE ZONE AND IS TAKING
ADVANTAGE OF ALL THE FLOOR AREA
BONUSES AND HEIGHT INCREASES
ALLOWED UNDER THE ZONING, UNDER
THE PROGRAM. JUST PAST THAT
BUILDING IS A GRAY BUILDING
THAT IS BUILT TO THE CURRENT
STANDARDS. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT
THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE
IN THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT
THAT CAN OCCUR UNDER THE
PROPOSAL. AND JUST WANT TO NOTE
THAT THE GROUND FLOOR AND THE
PROJECT IS SPACE FOR AN
EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT USE, SO
THAT SPACE WOULD BE EXEMPT FROM
THE FLOOR AREA RATIO LIMITS. IN
TERMS OF WHERE THE PROPOSAL
APPLIES, IT'S BASICALLY IN ALL
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL,
ALMOST ALL MULTIFAMILY ZONES
EXCEPT FOR HIGH-RISE ZONES, ALL
COMMERCIAL ZONE, AND SEATTLE
MIXED ZONES. EXCLUDED ARE
DOWNTOWN AND INDUSTRIAL ZONES.
AND THIS IS A MAP OF THE ZONES
WHERE IT WOULD APPLY. THE
PROPOSAL ALLOWS FOR HIGHER
DENSITIES IN A COUPLE OF KEY
AREAS. AREAS IDENTIFIED BY THE
OFFICE OF HOUSING FOR COMMUNITY
PREFERENCES. THESE ARE
TYPICALLY AREAS WITH A HIGHER
RISK OF DISPLACEMENT AND AREAS
WITH RACIALLY RESTRICTIVE
COVENANTS THAT HAVE BEEN PLACED
ON THE -- ON PROPERTY THAT
HISTORICALLY EXCLUDED PEOPLE OF
COLOR OR JEWISH PEOPLE FROM
LIVING IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS
-- OR THOSE PARTICULAR
PROPERTIES. THE BILL WOULD
EXEMPT PROJECTS THAT
PARTICIPATE FROM DESIGN REVIEW
FROM PARKING REQUIREMENTS, FROM
INCENTIVE ZONING, AND FROM THE
MANDATORY HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
PROGRAM. WANT TO NOTE THAT THE
INCENTIVE PROGRAM ONLY APPLIES
IN AREAS WHERE HEIGHT AND
DENSITY INCREASES HAVE BEEN
ALLOWED. WHEN THE UNIVERSITY
DISTRICT WAS REZONED IN 2017,
AN INCENTIVE ZONING PROGRAM WAS
PUT IN PLACE AS PART OF THAT
REZONE. IF THAT, AS YOU
PROBABLY HAVE SEEN IF YOU'VE
BEEN ANYWHERE NEAR THE U
DISTRICT, WE NOW ALLOW TOWERS
IN THE U DISTRICT THAT WERE NOT
ALLOWED PREVIOUSLY. AND ONE OF
THE CONDITIONS OF BUILDING
THOSE TOWERS IS TO PARTICIPATE
IN THE INCENTIVE ZONING
PROGRAM. IT REQUIRES PROVISION
OF PUBLIC BENEFITS LIKE OPEN
SPACE AND SCHOOL, HISTORIC
PRESERVATION THROUGH BLOCK
PASSAGES AND OTHER COMMUNITY
BENEFITS IDENTIFIED THROUGH A
COMMUNITY PLANNING PROCESS. AND
AS YOU ARE CONSIDERING THIS
BILL, YOU SHOULD CONSIDER
WHETHER OR NOT THE TRADEOFFS --
THE BENEFITS PROVIDED BY THE
PILOT ARE COMMENSURATE WITH THE
BENEFITS FROM THE ZONING
PROGRAM OR ELSE POTENTIALLY
MAINTAIN THE ZONING. FINALLY
THE BILL FOR -- ASKS FOR
ADDITIONAL RULE MAKING. THE
RULE MAKING WOULD PROVIDE MORE
INFORMATION AND DEFINITIONS OF
QUALIFYING COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS. IT
WOULD PROVIDE FOR A PROCESS AND
CRITERIA IN DETERMINING THAT
THE BONUS WOULD COMPLY WITH THE
PILOT PROVISIONS, AND IT WOULD
DEFINE EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT
USE. CURRENTLY, THE BILL HAS A
DELAYED IMPLEMENTATION DATE OF
JUNE 30th. GIVEN THE BILL WILL
NOT BE ADOPTED UNTIL APRIL AT
THE EARLIEST, YOU SHOULD
CONSIDER PUSHING THAT DATE BACK
IN ORDER TO PROVIDE MORE TIME
FOR THIS RULE MAKING. AND THAT
IT IS.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COLLEAGUES, COUNCILMEMBER WOO?
>> I HAVE A FEW QUESTION, I'LL
TRY TO BE BRIEF. SO THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS RELEASED
A COUPLE WEEKS AGO.
>> MM-HMM.
>> FROM MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, I HAVE NOT
READ IT, I HAVE KIND OF JUST
SKIMMED IT, HOW DOES -- FOR MY
KNOWLEDGE, IT DOESN'T FEEL
LIKE THIS FITS WITH THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT FEELS
LIKE IT KIND OF BUTS HEADS. BUT
FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, HOW DOES
CONNECTING COMMUNITIES FIT WITH
THE MAYOR'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN?
>> SO I THINK THAT THIS --
>> ESPECIALLY IN TERMS OF
GENTRIFICATION DISPLACEMENT, I
THINK THAT'S WHERE THE
DIFFERENCES LIE.
>> I MEAN, BECAUSE THERE IS
THAT PARTNERSHIP REQUIRED WITH
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ORGANIZATION ADDRESSING
PARTICULARLY COMMUNITY AT HIGH
RISK OF DISPLACEMENT, YOU KNOW,
I THINK THAT THERE IS THE
OPPORTUNITY FOR PROJECTS UNDER
THIS PILOT TO CRAFT STRATEGIES
TO ASSESS THIS AND PROJECTS
THAT ARE TARGETED AT ADDRESSING
DISPLACEMENT. THIS PROPOSAL
ALLOWS NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL
ZONES ABOUT THE SAME AMOUNT OF
DEVELOPMENT. I HAVEN'T
COMPARED THEM DIRECTLY, BUT
ABOUT THE SAME AMOUNT OF
DEVELOPMENT AS IS CONTAINED
UNDER THE GENERAL IDEAS FOR
WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT THIS
WOULD ALLOW FOR THOSE EQUITABLE
DEVELOPMENT USES TO ALSO BE
LOCATED IN NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL ZONES. MOVING
OUTSIDE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL ZONES, THIS IS
CONSISTENT WITH POLICIES THAT
CALL FOR INCENTIVES FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PROJECTS
THAT ADDRESS DISPLACEMENT.
>> I AGREE WITH YOU. I FEEL
LIKE READING COMPREHENSIVE --
FROM -- SO FAR, THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, I FEEL LIKE
THE SPIRIT IS THE SAME, BUT I
FEEL LIKE THE APPROACH IS
DIFFERENT. AND I DON'T FEEL
LIKE THEY'RE ALIGNED, BUT I
WOULD LIKE FOR US TO DIG IN
MORE TO THAT AND BE ABLE TO
UNDERSTAND IT. BECAUSE I FEEL
LIKE WE -- THIS MAY NOT BE IN
LINE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN IN A WAY. SO WE'LL HAVE
TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THAT.
ANOTHER THING I WANTED TO
ADDRESS WAS I KNOW THIS IS A
WILDLY HARD QUESTION, BUT HOW
MANY UNITS DO YOU THINK THE
CITY COULD GAIN FROM THIS PILOT
PROJECT, IF WE WERE JUST TO
ESTIMATE BASED ON POSSIBLE, YOU
KNOW, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.
LIKE HOW MANY WOULD BE ABLE TO
FIT? HOW MANY ADDITIONAL HAVE
BEEN BUILT MINUS WHAT COULD BE
BUILT. I KNOW IT'S GOING TO BE
A HUGE RANGE, BUT I'M JUST
CURIOUS. LIKE HOW MUCH MORE?
AND YOU MAY NOT KNOW THE ANSWER
NOW. SO ANOTHER QUESTION -- OH
--
>> IT ALLOWS ABOUT 35 PROJECTS
OVER THE COURSE OF FIVE YEARS.
IF ALL OF THOSE WERE BUILT, YOU
KNOW, AN AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT IS ABOUT 60 UNITS, GIVE
OR TAKE FOR AN APARTMENT
BUILDING. SO IT'S ABOUT 2,000
UNITS. I DON'T KNOW. LET'S
SAY THAT'S 2,000 UNITS UNDER
TODAY'S ZONING, MAYBE ADD
ANOTHER 50% ON TOP OF THAT.
I'M JUST GUESSTIMATING AT THIS
POINT, SO MAYBE 1,000
ADDITIONAL UNITS UNDER THE
PROPOSAL.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU. AND THEN I
HAD A QUESTION OF, YOU KNOW,
CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME HOW
GENERATIONAL WEALTH IS GAINED
THROUGH THIS PLAN, BUT I THINK
THAT QUESTION WAS ANSWERED. A
NEW QUESTION AROSE FROM THAT.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO GO, LIKE,
ISSUE BY ISSUE, LINE BY LINE,
AND TALK ABOUT WHAT IS
RECOMMENDED BUT NOT ENFORCEABLE
BUT WHAT'S IN OUR PURVIEW,
WHAT'S NOT IN OUR PURVIEW. WE
WERE TALKING ABOUT GENERATIONAL
WEALTH, AND WHILE WE WOULD LIKE
TO HAVE THE PERSON WHO SOLD THE
LAND HAVE IT ON THERE, BUT IS
THAT ENFORCEABLE? IT SOUNDS
LIKE IT'S MORE LIKE A
RECOMMENDATION THAN SOMETHING
WE CAN ACTUALLY DO. SO I DON'T
WANT TO RAISE EXPECTATIONS AND
NOT BE ABLE TO DELIVER. SO I
MEAN, WITH BEING ABLE TO ALLOW
FOR THE NONPROFIT TO BE IN THE
GROUND FLOOR SPACE, I MEAN,
THEY CAN OWN THE PROJECT, BUT
WILL THEY BE ABLE TO OPEN THAT
SPACE. I WAS JUST CURIOUS WHAT
CAN WE LEGALLY DO AND NOT DO,
AND WHAT THE IS RECOMMENDATION
AND WHAT IS REQUIREMENTS. BUT I
THINK THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING
YOU'D LIKE --
>> LET ME ATTEMPT TO BREAK THAT
DOWN. BECAUSE I HAVE SIMILAR
QUESTIONS BECAUSE I ASSUMED
THAT THESE QUESTIONS WOULD COME
UP. SO IN THE LAST SEVERAL
WEEKS, I'VE SPOKEN TO
COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO HAVE MADE
SUGGESTIONS ABOUT HOW THIS
OWNERSHIP ELEMENT MIGHT WORK.
SO AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, THE
BILL CONTEMPLATES TWO DIFFERENT
KINDS OF SCENARIOS. ONE WHERE
WE HAVE THE COMMUNITY-BASED
ORGANIZATION, THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION, AND A
DEVELOPER. SO FOR EXAMPLE, EL
CENTRO IS A COMMUNITY
ORGANIZATION BEACON DEVELOPMENT
GROUP IS A DEVELOPER. THAT'S
ONE KIND OF SCENARIO. OR WE
HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNER OR
PROPERTY OWNER AND A NONPROFIT
DEVELOPER OR PDA. SO MRS.
JONES, INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNER,
AND HOMESITE. SO THOSE ARE THE
TWO DIFFERENT KINDS OF
SITUATIONS. IN EITHER CASE, THE
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT IS
NEGOTIATED BETWEEN THOSE
ENTITIES AND THEIR OWN
ATTORNEYS. SO THE CITY DOESN'T
PLAY A ROLE IN THAT. BUT I
THINK A BIG QUESTION, AND I
AGREE, I HAVE THE QUESTION TOO,
IS WHAT ROLE CAN THE CITY PLAY
IN PUTTING SOME GUARDRAILS IN
PLACE FOR WHAT THOSE
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS DO TO
ENSURE THE PROTECTION OF IT IN
SCENARIO TWO SPECIFICALLY THE
CASE OF THE INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY
OWNER.
>> THERE'S A DOED RESTRICTION
OR SOMETHING ON THE PROPERTY
THAT INDICATES THAT HOMEOWNER
HAS A FUTURE INTEREST IN
DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE. WHAT
IT DOESN'T DO IS SAY WHAT THAT
AGREEMENT LOOKS LIKE. PART OF
WHAT THE RULE MAKING REQUEST IS
IS TO ASK THE CITY DEPARTMENT
TO HELP TO FRAME THAT UP.
>> OKAY.
>> LISH --
>> HOLD ON JUST A MOMENT,
PLEASE. LET ME GET THROUGH MY
QUESTION, AND THEN WE'LL COME
BACK. BECAUSE I THINK THE THING
THAT WE'RE TRYING TO
UNDERSTAND IS IF MRS. JONES IN
THIS CASE, DOES SHE NEED TO
BECOME A COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION
TO QUALIFY OR CAN HOMESITE BE
THE QUALIFYING COMMUNITY
ORGANIZATION? AND IN EITHER
CASE, THEY WOULD STILL NEED
THEIR OWN REPRESENTATION TO GET
THAT AGREEMENT DONE.
>> THEY WOULD EACH NEED THEIR
OWN REPRESENTATION. I THINK THE
HOMESITE WOULD -- IS A
NONPROFIT AND WOULD QUALIFY,
PROBABLY, AS A QUALIFYING
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ORGANIZATION. BUT THE HOMEOWNER
ON THEIR OWN WOULD NOT QUALIFY.
>> RIGHT. AND SO IF SHE WANTS
TO OWN MORE THAN ONE UNIT IN
THE PROJECT OR LET'S SAY SHE
WANTS TO HAVE THAT AS A SMALL
BUSINESS INSTEAD OF AS A
DWELLING, ARE THOSE POSSIBLE?
>> I DON'T THINK IN TERMS OF
THE SMALL BUSINESS PORTION. YOU
KNOW, SHE COULD NEGOTIATE
WHATEVER DEAL SHE WANTED TO
THAT WAS AGREEABLE TO HOMESITE
IN TERMS OF ONE, TWO, THREE
UNITS, HOW LARGE THOSE UNITS
ARE, WHERE THEY'RE LOCATED IN
THE STRUCTURE, ET CETERA.
>> AND SO THE WAY -- SO I THINK
A BIG QUESTION IS, YOU KNOW,
WHAT DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANT
RESOURCES ARE AVAILABLE TO A
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION OR TO AN
INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNER THAT COULD
HELP PROVIDE THE KIND OF
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE,
UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROCESS SO
THAT THEY CAN GO INTO THIS
NEGOTIATION WITH SOMEBODY ON
THEIR SIDE AND UNDERSTANDING.
SO YOU KNOW, KIND OF STEP ONE
IS MAKING THE DECISION THAT YOU
WANT TO TRY TO SELL AND
FIGURING OUT WHAT THE
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS IS OF THE
PROJECT IDEA THAT YOU HAVE.
STEP TWO IS FIGURING OUT THE
FINANCING FOR THAT. STEP THREE
IS MAYBE DESIGN AND THEN
GETTING THE PERMITS AND
BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION IN EACH
OF THOSE PHASES THERE IS AN OPT
OUT, THEORETICALLY, RIGHT,
YOU'VE NEGOTIATED A DEAL SO
THAT AT ANY POINT ALONG THE
PATH, IF IT STARTS TO LOOK LIKE
IT'S NOT GOING TO WORK OUT,
YOU CAN -- YOU CAN HAVE AN OUT
FROM THE PROJECT. BUT AGAIN,
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT GETS
NEGOTIATED IN THAT DEAL. SO I
THINK WHAT I'M SAYING IS THIS
IS CLEARLY AN AREA WHERE THERE
IS SOME WORK TO DO TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHAT'S
POSSIBLE, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE
THAT WE'RE PROTECTING PEOPLE
WHO ARE INTERESTED IN GETTING
INTO THIS KIND OF NEGOTIATION,
AND/OR DECIDING THAT THERE'S A
DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVE TO THIS
PART OF THE BILL. LORE SO
BEFORE YOU CUT ME OFF, I WAS
ATTEMPTING, ACTUALLY, TO ANSWER
YOUR QUESTION, WHICH IS THAT
THERE ARE SOME LEGAL ISSUES
HERE THAT LISH IS NOT GOING TO
BE ABLE TO ANSWER FOR YOU ON
THE QUESTION THAT YOU ASKED,
AND THE CITY IS GOING TO HAVE
SOME CHALLENGES IN SETTING
SOMETHING UP BY WHEREBY WE HAVE
ANY CONTROL IF WHAT YOU'RE
DISCUSSING IS GIVING FOLKS
MONEY SO THEY CAN HIRE A
LAWYER, I MEAN THAT ALSO HAS
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS. SO IT IS A
VERY DIFFICULT THING FOR THE
CITY TO DO BROADLY FOR -- TO
GET INVOLVED IN A NEGOTIATION.
THAT WOULD BE VERY --
>> I WASN'T SUGGESTING THAT WE
GIVE THEM RESOURCES TO HIRE
THEIR OWN ATTORNEY, BUT IF
THERE ARE, FOR EXAMPLE, A LIST
OF DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS WHO
COULD PROVIDE -- THAT COULD
ENGAGE ON THEIR OWN, THAT'S
SOMETHING WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO
DO, SO --
>> BUT IT STILL GOES TO THE
ABILITY TO ACTUALLY HELP THE
HOMEOWNER LEGALLY ENSURE THAT
THEY HAVE A DEAL NEGOTIATED
WITH THE --
>> RIGHT.
>> -- WITH THE PARTNER THAT'S
GOING TO BE TO THEIR BENEFIT
WHEREBY THEY'RE PRESERVING
THEIR GENERATIONAL WEALTH ASSET
IN THEIR NEGOTIATION. AND
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE
NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO CONTROL
NO MATTER HOW MUCH TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE WE PROVIDE TO THE
LANDOWNER.
>> YES, AS I'VE BEEN SAYING,
THIS IS NOT A PIECE OF THE --
THAT IS NOT A ROLE FOR THE CITY
TO NEGOTIATE THAT AGREEMENT OR
TO PROVIDE THE TECHNICAL OR
LEGAL ASSISTANCE TO DO THAT. SO
I THINK WE'RE SAYING THE SAME
THING.
>> I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION.
>> COUNCILMEMBER WOO?
>> I PROMISE TO BE -- I THINK
MY VERY SPECIFIC QUESTION IS
WHAT -- IS LEFT, MAYBE, AND
WHAT'S A RECOMMENDATION AND
WHAT CAN WE DO? AND WHAT'S THE
LIMIT OF GOVERNMENT IN THESE
DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF THIS
PIECE? SO I THINK THAT'S
PROBABLY A DIFFERENT
CONVERSATION.
>> THIS BILL IS INTENDED TO
HELP SERVE FOLKS AT RANGE OF
INCOME AND TO ENSURE THAT WE
ARE PROVIDING TOOLS FOR PEOPLE
WHO WANT TO DO MIXED INCOME
PROJECTS, MIXED-USE PROJECTS
AND TO CONSERVE COMMERCIAL
AFFORDABILITY SO WE HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO PUT SOME
COMMUNITY NEEDED USES ON THE
GROUND FLOOR. THIS BILL IS NOT
INTENDED TO BE A HOMELESSNESS
SOLUTION. THAT IS OBVIOUSLY A
BIG PROBLEM FOR THE CITY, BUT
THAT IS NOT THE PROBLEM THIS
BILL IS TRYING TO SOLVE. WHAT I
THOUGHT SOMEONE SAID THIS WAS
SUPPOSED TO HELP HOMELESS, BUT
MAYBE I MISHEARD.
>> AFFORDABILITY, IT IS
SOMETHING THAT THE BILL IS
INTENDED TO ADDRESS. WHILE IT
MAY NOT ADDRESS HOMELESSNESS,
THE AFFORDABILITY PIECE IS AT
PLAY HERE.
>> WE HAD A VERY IN-DEPTH
DISCUSSION SO, I WOULD LIKE TO
SEE IT APPLIED HERE, AS WELL.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION, IF I MAY.
I APPRECIATE THAT. IN TERMS OF
THE DISPLACEMENT PLEASE AND THE
EDI, I DISAGREE THAT EDI HAS
BEEN A PROGRAM THAT HAS REALLY
ROBUSTLY ADDRESSED HOUSING
DISPLACEMENT. I AM NOT TALKING
ABOUT THE MERITS OF THE
PROJECTS UNDER THE EDI, BUT I
AM LOOKING AT OVER 40 PROJECTS
HERE AND THERE ARE 76 TOTAL. I
KNOW OF A 40 WHERE THERE ARE
TWO ACTUAL PROJECTS THAT ARE
DEVELOPING AFFORDABLE HOUSING
UNDER 60% AMI AS ADDRESSED BY
THESE STANDARDS THERE IS ONE
PROJECT, THAT IS TWO OUT OF THE
40. I DON'T THINK THAT IS THE
TYPE OF HOUSING DISPLACEMENT WE
WERE THINKING ABOUT WHEN WE
WERE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION
ABOUT DISPLACEMENT. AGAIN, AND
TITUS BASEMENT GOING THE WAY OF
THE AMI CONVERSATION BUT I
DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS AN
AGREEMENT FOR WHAT THE
DEFINITION OF AMI IS IN TERMS
OF AFFORDABILITY AS WELL AS
WHAT WE MEAN WHEN WE SAY
ANTI-DISPLACEMENT, BUT I WANT
TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT I AM
TALKING ABOUT HOUSING AND I
DISPLACEMENT, BECAUSE THAT IS
WHAT THIS BILL IS ATTEMPTING TO
ADDRESS. HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
AND THAT GENERATIONAL WEALTH
BUILDING PEACE. SO, I DID WANT
TO RAISE THAT. THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. WHEN WE
FIRST MET AND TALKED ABOUT THIS
BILL, I HAD A LOT OF CONCERNS.
I THINK YOU REMEMBER THAT
CONVERSATION. BUBBLY PRETTY
VIVIDLY. INS THEN, I HAVE COME
TO THE UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT
THIS SERVES. SO, THOSE CONCERNS
THAT I HAD FOR YOU AT THAT
TIME, REALLY, WE JUST PASSED
THE RELIGIOUS BILL. WHAT WAS
THIS TO DO DIFFERENTLY? I NOW
UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS LOOKING
AT THOSE COMMUNITY
ORGANIZATIONS TO DO SOMETHING
SIMILAR AS RELIGIOUS
INSTITUTIONS, AS WELL AS THE
HOMEOWNER ASPECT WHICH IS
INTRIGUING FOR ME, TO ME.
WHATEVER THE RIGHT WORD IS
THERE. LONG STORY SHORT, I
UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE NOW
BETWEEN RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS
BILL AND THIS BILL. AND I
SUPPORT THAT INTENT. I HAVE A
NUMBER OF AMENDMENTS THAT I
WOULD LIKE TO WALK THROUGH WITH
YOU. THEY ARE REALLY COMING
FROM A PLACE OF HIDDEN CLARITY,
CONSISTENCY THROUGHOUT THE LAND
USE CODE. SOMETHING THAT I HAVE
FOUND IS THE FORMER CHAIR OF
THE LAND USE COMMITTEE,
ESPECIALLY WITH THE BUS, WHEN
WE ARE OVER LEAPERS WITH CODE,
IT MEANS THAT WE THEN HAVE TO
GO BACK AND CLEAN IT UP LATER
TO CREATE CONSISTENCY
THROUGHOUT THE CHAPTERS. I
WOULD LOVE TO MEET WITH YOU AND
WALK SOME OF THOSE IDEAS. BUT I
WILL HAVE A COUPLE OF
AMENDMENTS. FROM WHAT I
APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE ALL
OF YOUR WORK ON THE MEMO AND
WALKING US THROUGH THAT.
COLLEAGUES, I DO WANT TO SAY I
APPRECIATE HEARING THE CONFIRMS
-- CONCERNS. WE WILL NOT BE
VOTING ON THIS TODAY. I DO WANT
TO MAKE SURE I'M CONNECTING
WITH COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND
WORKING ON REVISING WITH THE
THINGS THAT WE HEARD TODAY. IT
IS IMPORTANT TO ME THAT WE
ENSURE THE BILL IS CONSISTENT
WITH COMMUNITY NEEDS, COMMUNITY
CONCERNS. THAT IS WHERE WE GOT
THE IDEA TO DRAFT THIS BILL.
SO I WANT TO BE RESPONSIVE TO
THAT. KNOW THAT WE NEED TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE HAVE A TOOL THAT
ALIGNS WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE
PLANNING EFFORTS. ULTIMATELY,
THIS IS ABOUT SUPPORTING
COMMUNITY NEEDS SO THEY CAN
NAVIGATE EQUITABLE, KENNEDY
WEALTH BUILDING OPPORTUNITIES
THAT WE HAVE CREATED AS A CITY
WITH THE OFFICE OF HOUSING,
DOM, THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT, I WAS PROUD TO
SUPPORT THE BUILDING OWNERSHIP
FUND PILOT WHICH IS ALSO PART
OF THIS CONVERSATION WHEN IT
COMES TO MAKING SURE OUR
NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE PLACES WHERE
HOURS SMALL BUSINESSES CAN
LOCATE AFFORDABLY. SO, THIS
PILOT IS ALSO PART OF THAT
EFFORT TO HELP OUR DEPARTMENTS
DO THEIR WORK BETTER. SO, I
WILL ASK AGAIN. IT SOUNDS LIKE
WE HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS,
STILL. PLEASE LET ME KNOW.
FOLLOW-UP ABOUT PARTICULAR
QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE AN
AMENDMENT. THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS FOR
LETTING ME KNOW. WE ARE
AVAILABLE TO WORK WITH YOU TO
ADDRESS YOUR CONCERNS SO WE CAN
MOVE THIS LEGISLATION TO A
VOTE. OKAY. IT IS FOR: 06. IF
THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS
FROM THE COMMITTEE, WE ARE
ADJOURNED. THANK YOU, EVERYON