>> GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE.
TODAY IS DECEMBER 15th, 2025,
AND THE COUNCIL BRIEFING MEETING
WILL COME TO ORDER. THE TIME IS
2:20. COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ IS
EXCUSED.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LIN?
>> HERE.
>> MERCEDES RINCK?
>> PRESENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> PRESENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE? HA
HERE.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON?
>> PRESENT.
>> SEVEN PRESENT.
>> THANK YOU. IF THERE'S NO
OBJECTION, THE MINUTE OF
DECEMBER 8th, 2025, WILL BE
ADOPTED. HEARING NO OBJECTION,
THE MINUTES ARE ADOPTED. ALL
RIGHT. WE HAVE WYNN PRESENTATION
TODAY FROM CENTRAL STAFF ON THE
SUBSTITUTE BILL AND AMENDMENTS
TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND HB
1110. ON TOMORROW'S CITY
COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA THERE'S
ONE ITEM ON THE INTRODUCTION IN
REFERRAL CALENDAR, THE PAY. OF
THE BILLS, AND THERE ARE 83
ITEMS ON TOMORROW'S CONSENT
CALENDAR, ALL OF WHICH ARE
APPOINTMENTS. ON TOMORROW'S
AGENDA THERE ARE 13 SUBSTANTIVE
ITEMS, WHICH IS WHY WE WILL BE
STARTING THE MEETING AT 1:00 AND
NOTICE OF THAT HAS GONE OUT. FOR
FULL COUNCIL WE HAVE COUNCIL
BILL 121126, AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING 127156 WHICH ADOPTED
THE BUDGET AND MADE
APPROPRIATIONS FROM THE GENERAL
FUND. FROM THE LIBRARY'S
EDUCATION AND NEIGHBORHOODS
COMMITTEE, WE HAVE THREE PIECES
OF LEGISLATION, THE
REAPPOINTMENT OF DWANE CHAPPELLE
AS DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION AND EARLY LEARNING,
COUNCIL BILL 121139 AND COUNCIL
BILL 121140 BOTH PERTAINING TO
LANDMARK DESIGNATIONS. FROM MY
COMMITTEE THE GOVERNANCE
ACCOUNTABILITY AND GOVERNMENT
COMMITTEE FOUR ITEMS, 121073
RELATING TO THE SODO BUSINESS
AND PARKING IMPROVEMENT AREA,
COUNCIL BILL 121130, MY
CONSULTANT ETHICS LEGISLATION,
COUNCIL BILL 121141 AND 121142
BOTH RELATING TO CITY DEPARTMENT
COMING TO US FROM THE SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
AND FROM THE SELECT COMMITTEE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN ADDITION
TO RESOLUTION 32183 WHICH IS THE
ACTUAL COMP PLAN AND HOUSE BILL
FROM 1110. FROM PARKS, UTILITIES
AND TECHNOLOGY, COUNCIL BILL
121137 AMENDING THE AMENDED
LANDSCAPE CONSERVATION
INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM FUNDING
PLAN FOR SOUTH LAKE UNION AND
DOWNTOWN, COUNCIL BILL 121138
RELATING TO SEATTLE PUBLIC
UTILITIES AND AUTHORIZING ITS
CEO TO ACQUIRE A PARCEL OF LAND
FOR UTILITY PURPOSES. SO THERE,
IT'S GOING TO BE A LONG MEETING
AND I THINK THE AGENDA IS ABOUT
27 PAGES LONG. IN ANY CASE,
THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS AT THE END
OF THE YEAR. WE TRY TO WRAP
EVERYTHING UP. MOVING ON TO OUR
FIRST PRESENTATION ON THE
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHY DON'T
OUR ANALYSTS COME ON UP AND
YOU'RE WELCOME TO INTRODUCE
YOURSELVES AND BEGIN YOUR
PRESENTATION AND I SHOULD NOTE
THAT DUE TO REQUEST BY
COUNCILMEMBERS BECAUSE THIS IS
LIKELY TO GO LONG, THE BLUE SKY
PORTION OF OUR MEETING TODAY
WILL BE CANCELED AND JEREMY WENT
TO OFFICES AND LET FOLKS KNOW.
ALL RIGHT. PLEASE BEGIN.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. LISH WHITSON,
COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF.
>> JASMINE MARAHA, COUNCIL
CENTRAL STAFF.
>> THERE WILL BE THREE PIECES OF
LEGISLATION ON THE AGENDA
TOMORROW RELATED TO THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. COUNCIL BILL
120985 WOULD ADOPT THE NEW
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, PLANNING FOR
THE NEXT 20 YEARS OF GROWTH IN
THE CITY. COUNCIL BILL 120993
WOULD ADOPT NEW ZONING
REGULATIONS FOR THE CITY'S
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONES
AND MAKE OTHER CHANGES TO THE
LAND USE CODE TO IMPLEMENT STATE
LAWS, PARTICULARLY HOUSE BILL
1110 AND RESOLUTION NUMBER --
>> 32183.
>> WOULD SET THE CITY COUNCIL'S
DOCKET FOR FUTURE ITEMS RELATED
TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING IN
THE CITY. WE HAVE TWO AMENDMENTS
FOR COUNCIL BILL 120985, THE
COMP PLAN BILL, ONE AMENDMENT
FOR 120993, THE LAND USE CODE
AMENDMENTS AND ONE FOR THE
RESOLUTION. I'LL WALK THROUGH
THEM BRIEFLY AND MAINLY HERE TO
ANSWER QUESTIONS BEFORE YOUR
VOTE TOMORROW. SO LET ME SHARE .
SO AMENDMENT A TO COUNCIL BILL
120985 WOULD TAKE AN AREA OF THE
CENTRAL DISTRICT THAT WAS
PROPOSED TO BE ADDED TO THE
FIRST HILL CAPITOL HILL REGIONAL
CENTER AND REMOVE THAT REGIONAL
CENTER DESIGNATION FROM THE
AREA. YOU CAN SEE IT HERE. IT IS
GENERALLY VETTED BY EAST PIKE
STREET ON THE NORTH, EAST ALDER
STREET ON THE SOUTH, 14th
AVENUE ON THE WEST AND 18th
AVENUE ON THE EAST. THE
AMENDMENT TO THE RESOLUTION
TALKS TO THIS AREA AND FUTURE
PLANNING AND DECISION MAKING FOR
THE AREA. ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT
THAT? I'M SORRY, THIS IS
SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH.
>> I SHOULD INVITE COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH TO SPEAK TO HER
AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I DIDN'T KNOW IF THIS WAS THE
PROPER TIME. YES, I SEE HEAD
NODS AND A THUMBS UP.
COLLEAGUES, I'LL MAKE MY
REMARKS A LITTLE BRIEF. IN
SEPTEMBER WHEN THE BILLS PASS ON
THE SELECT COMMITTEE, I FIRST
PROPOSED AND THEN WITHDREW
AMENDMENT 111. THIS AMENDMENT
WAS MEANT TO PROTECT SOME OF THE
BOUNDARIES OF THE HISTORIC
CENTRAL DISTRICT, THE AREA IN
CENTRAL DISTRICT BETWEEN 14th
AVENUE AND 21st AVENUE WEST TO
EAST AND EAST PIKE AND EAST
ALDER NORTH TO SOUTH. IN EARLIER
DRAFTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
THIS AREA WAS KEPT AS A
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL AND THE
MAYOR'S FINAL DRAFT THE LAND
WEST OF 18th AVENUE EAST WAS
MADE PART OF THE CAPITOL HILL
REGIONAL CENTER AND THE LAND
EAST OF 18th AVENUE EAST WAS
MADE PART OF THE CENTRAL
DISTRICT URBAN CENTER. MY
EARLIER AMENDMENT TRIED TO
RESTORE BACK SOME OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL. WE
REALIZED WE NEEDED TO HAVE MORE
CONVERSATION WITH RESIDENTS AND
OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS BEFORE
MAKING SUCH BIG CHANGES TO THE
FUTURE LAND USE MAP. I WITHDREW
THIS AMENDMENT TO HAVE MORE
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT,
CONVERSATION, ANALYSIS, AND TO
FURTHER UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT AS
WELL. THIS CURRENT AMENDMENT
KEEPS THE AREA OF 18th AVENUE
EAST AND THE CENTRAL DISTRICT
THE URBAN CENTER. THAT WAS
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL. NOW
IT'S URBAN CENTER. THE RETURN
OF THE WEST 18th AVENUE TO
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL, WHICH
IS THE FIRST STEP FOR US TO
CHANGE THE AREA TO THE CENTRAL
DISTRICT URBAN CENTER. MY NEXT
STEPS TO THIS PROCESS ARE TO
MAKE THE WEST PART OF MY FULL
INTENTIONS WHICH YOU WILL ALL
SEE IN THE RESOLUTION IS TO MAKE
THE WEST PART OF THE URBAN
CENTER, TOO. THAT WOULD REQUIRE
PUBLIC NOTICE OF LAND USE CHANGE
AND WE DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH TIME
TO DO THAT BEFORE THE END OF
YEAR AND I WANT TO TAKE INTO
ACCOUNT OPCD'S EFFORT TO STUDY
THIS AREA. I DID HAVE AN
AMENDMENT THAT WOULD HAVE TURNED
THIS AREA ALL INTO THE CENTRAL
DISTRICT URBAN CENTER, BUT THIS
WOULD HAVE POTENTIALLY
JEOPARDIZED -- DIDN'T WANT TO
JEOPARDIZE THE ENTIRE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. I'M NOT
WILLING TO DO THAT. SO WE FEEL
THIS IS THE BEST PATHWAY FORWARD
TO PROTECT THE CENTRAL
BOUNDARIES. WE STRONGLY BELIEVE
THIS ALIGNMENT IS EQUITY IN
MOTION AND FINDS A GOOD BALANCE
BETWEEN CURRENT NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL AND FUTURE
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS. IT'S
STILL GOING TO GET UP ZONED FROM
A NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL AND I
ALSO HAVE AN ACCOMPANYING
AMENDMENT THAT I KNOW CENTRAL
STAFF WILL TALK ABOUT IT AND FOR
THE RECORD AND I SAID THIS TO MY
COLLEAGUES, I DO NOT LIVE IN
THESE PROPOSED BOUNDARIES. THERE
WAS SOME COMMENTS MADE ONLINE
AND THERE'S ALWAYS
MISINFORMATION ABOUT THAT I
LIVED IN THIS AREA AND I WAS
DOING THIS ESPECIALLY FOR ME AND
THAT IS FALSE. I DO NOT LIVE
THERE. PEOPLE KNOW WHERE I LIVE,
ESPECIALLY THOSE PEOPLE WHO MADE
THOSE COMMENTS BECAUSE THEY HAVE
VISITED MY HOUSE OFTEN. SO I DO
NOT LIVE IN THAT BOUNDARIES.
THANK YOU.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. I
UNDERSTAND I CAN READ THE
AMENDMENT THAT IT SAYS FOR OPCD
TO CONDUCT OUTREACH TO FIND OUT
WHAT DOES THE NEIGHBORHOOD
REALLY WANT LONG TERM. DOES THIS
ESSENTIALLY PUT IT BACK TO THE
PROPOSED ONE SEATTLE PLAN THAT
THE MAYOR SENT DOWN? THIS.
>> SO WHAT THIS DOES AND, LISH,
IF YOU COULD HELP US OUT WITH
THAT, PLEASE.
>> YEAH. THE 1 SEATTLE PLAN
WOULD HAVE THIS AREA YOU SEE IN
THE MIDDLE HERE, THIS SORT OF
WESTERN PORTION OF THE CENTRAL
DISTRICT. IT WOULD HAVE THAT
BECOME PART OF THE FIRST HILL
CAPITOL HILL REGIONAL CENTER.
UNDER THE AMENDMENT IT WOULD NOT
BE PART OF THE FIRST HILL
CAPITOL HILL REGIONAL CENTER.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ALSO, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, IF I
MAY.
>> YES, GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. I ALSO
HAVE AN ACCOMPANYING RESOLUTION
TO THIS SO PEOPLE CAN KNOW MY
INTENTIONS AND ALSO DIRECTIVE
FOR OPCD AS WELL. I WILL TALK
ABOUT THAT ONCE THAT AMENDMENT
COMES UP, BUT THAT IS AN
ACCOMPANYING AMENDMENT TO THIS
AMENDMENT. THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. I'M NOT SEEING ANY
FURTHER QUESTIONS, I DON'T
THINK. GO AHEAD, PLEASE.
>> AMENDMENTB, WE ARE NOW ON
VERSION TWO WHICH IS JUST
REDISTRIBUTED TO COUNCILMEMBERS.
IT WOULD AMEND TWO POLICIES
RELATED TO PAVEMENT CONDITION
AND BRIDGE RATINGS TO SET A
GOAL, A DATE BY WHICH THE CITY
IS SEEKING TO REACH THESE GOALS
OF PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX 80
AND FEDERAL HIGHWAY BRIDGE
RATING OF GOOD AND FAIR FOR 60%
OF VEHICLE BRIDGES.
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH IS
THE SPONSOR.
>> GO AHEAD, PLEASE.
>> I WAS LOOKING FOR THE NAME ON
HERE.
>> NO WORRIES. THANK YOU,
COUNCIL PRESIDENT. COLLEAGUES, I
WILL BE BRINGING A REVISED
VERSION OF THIS AMENDMENT TO
FULL COUNCIL TOMORROW. I WANT TO
THANK COUNCILMEMBER SAKA AND HIS
TEAM FOR ALL HIS HARD WORK
DURING THIS PROCESS, ESPECIALLY
ON ALL THE TRANSPORTATION
AMENDMENTS. HIS OFFICE WORKED
DIJONLY ON CRAFTING DILIGENTLY
ON CRAFTING AMENDMENTS. THIS
AMENDMENT IS A MATTER OF FRAMING
AND LANGUAGE AND WE ARE WORKING
THROUGH THAT AND I BELIEVE WE
HAVE COME TO A SOLUTION AND
THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES. THIS IS
CURRENTLY BEING CIRCULATED AS
YOU ALL HAVE SEEN ON THE SCREEN.
SO WE SETTLED ON A DATE TO
CONTINUE THE INTENT OF THE
LANGUAGE, BUT ALSO HAVING A DATE
HERE AS WELL. SO I THINK WE CAME
UP WITH THE SOLUTION AND THANK
YOU AGAIN, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. THE T9.5
SAYS MAINTAIN 80 AT MINIMUM BY
2050 OR SOONER. I HATE TO ASK
THIS QUESTION, BUT WHAT IS IT
RIGHT NOW?
>> CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. SO
RIGHT NOW WE HAD ADDED THE DATE.
IT DID NOT HAVE IT. THE LANGUAGE
WAS TRY TO ACHIEVE AND, LISH, IF
YOU COULD HELP ME SAY WHAT IT
WAS BEFORE AND THEN WHERE WE
SETTLED ON AND I DON'T WANT TO
TAKE OVER THE MEETING, BUT MAYBE
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA HAS SOME
CLARIFYING INFORMATION AS WELL.
>> PREVIOUS VERSION OF THIS
AMENDMENT SAID SEEK TO ACHIEVE
AND MAINTAIN AN AVERAGE PAVEMENT
CONDITION INDEX OF 80 AS FUNDING
ALLOWS. THIS IS A LITTLE BIT
STRONGER IN TERMS OF SETTING A
FIRM DATE BY WHICH THE CITY IS
INTENDING TO MEET THE GOAL. IF
YOUR QUESTION IS ABOUT HOW DO
SEATTLE'S STREETS RATE IN TERMS
OF --
>> YEAH. WHAT EXACTLY WHERE ARE
WE RIGHT NOW? THIS IS WHAT THE
STATUS QUO?
>> WE'VE GOT ABOUT 23% OF OUR
BLOCKS MEETING THIS GOAL. SO
IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME WORK TO
ACHIEVE IT. IT'S A RATING OF
ZERO TO 100 IN TERMS OF PAVING
CONDITION. IF YOU'RE BELOW 40,
THE STREET IS BASICALLY
UNPASSABLE. 80 IS FIRMLY IN
SOLID, GOOD -- I THINK IT'S NOT
GOOD, BUT IT'S THE NEXT
CATEGORY UNDER GOOD.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, YOU'RE
FREE TO CHIME IN HERE. I
UNDERSTAND IT GOES UP TO 100.
THE GOAL IS 80. WHAT ARE WE AT
RIGHT NOW OR HAVE WE BEEN
GRADED?
>> YEAH.
>> I JUST WANT TO KNOW HOW BIG
OF A LIFT THIS IS. I COMPLETELY
DO BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD ALWAYS
BE STRIVING TO MAKE SURE THAT
WEIR KEEPING UP WITH MAINTENANCE
AND REPAIRS.
>> YEAH. SO I WAS ABLE TO FIND A
REPORT FROM 2010 WHERE OVER HALF
OF OUR STREETS WERE IN THE 70 TO
100 RANGE AND HALF WERE BELOW
THAT.
>> THANKS. THAT GIVES ME AN
IDEA. ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS?
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA?
>> THANK YOU. I WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH FOR
WORKING SO DILIGENTLY WITH ME
AND MY OFFICE TO ARRIVE AT A
MUTUALLY ACCEPTABLE COMPROMISE
SOLUTION TO ULTIMATELY STILL
MEET THE SPIRIT AND INTENT AND
GOAL OF THE ORIGINAL
TRANSPORTATION AMENDMENT THAT I
BROUGHT FORTH WHILE STILL BEING
MINDFUL OF SOME, YOU KNOW,
POTENTIAL LEGAL RISK, BECAUSE AS
ORIGINALLY CONSTRUCTED, THERE
WAS NO DATE, NOTHING AROUND
THERE. SO EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY
THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE
STANDARD AND SO THEREFORE WOULD
HAVE POTENTIALLY EXPOSED US TO
SOME LEGAL RISKS. SO I THINK
THIS GET US THERE, STILL MEETS
THE SPIRIT, INTENT AND GOALS AND
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, AT LEAST FROM MY
PERSPECTIVE THE ULTIMATE SOURCE
OF THESE TWO THINGS, BOTH THE
PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX AND THE
BRIDGE RATING LANGUAGE IN TERMS
OF WHICH ONES SHOULD BE RATED
FAIR VERSUS GOOD, THE ULTIMATE
SOURCE OF THAT WAS FROM THE
COMPANION LEGISLATION FOR THE
LEVY THAT WE PASSED IN 2024.
THOSE SPECIFIC GOALS AND TARGETS
WERE SET FORTH DIRECTLY IN THAT
COMPANION LEGISLATION AND IT
SERVED AS A BASIS FOR WHICH THE
FUTURE TRANSPORTATION FINANCIAL
FUNDING TASK FORCE SHOULD DO
THEIR WORK AND THE BASIS FOR
WHICH THEY SHOULD MAKE THEIR
RECOMMENDATIONS TO HELP US
ACHIEVE THESE TARGETS OR HIGHER
AND SO -- AND JUST FOR SOME
ADDITIONAL CONTEXT, A COUPLE
YEARS AGO THE CITY OF SAN
FRANCISCO HELD A BIG PRESSER,
THE MAYOR THERE -- THE THEN
MAYOR THERE HELD A BIG PRESSER
BECAUSE THEY ANNOUNCED THAT
THEIR ROADS AT LEAST WITH
RESPECT TO THE PAVEMENT
CONDITION INDEX, THEY ACHIEVED
AN 80 OR HIGHER ON ALL THEIR
ROADS. SO IT WAS THIS BIG SORT
OF MILESTONE MOMENT FOR THEM AND
THE DATA THAT WE HAVE ISN'T UP
TO DATE. AT LEAST THE LATEST
THAT I HAVE SEEN DIRECTLY FROM
THE DEPARTMENT, BUT BOTTOM LINE
IS WE NEED TO DO BETTER AND THIS
PUTS US ON A PATH TO DOING SO
WITHOUT WATERING IT DOWN,
WITHOUT WATERING DOWN THE
UNDERLYING POLICY RATIONALE AND
GOAL AND DILUTING THE POLICY
RATIONALE AND GOAL BEHIND THIS,
WHICH IS WE NEED TO DO BETTER
MORE QUICKLY AND EVEN THIS BY
2050 OR SOONER, DON'T
PERSONALLY LOVE IT, BUT I THINK
IT IS THE RIGHT APPROACH,
MINDFUL OF ALL THE VARIOUS
FACTORS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT,
BUT ULTIMATELY THIS IS A POLICY
DECISION AND I THINK THIS HELPS
BALANCE THE VARIOUS COMPETING
NEEDS HERE. SO I WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH
AGAIN FOR HER PARTNERSHIP AND
COLLABORATION SO CLOSELY WITH ME
AND MY OFFICE. WE WERE LITERALLY
ITERATING ON IT FOR WEEKS AND UP
UNTIL INCLUDING THIS MORNING. SO
THANK YOU.
>> SEEING NO COMMENTS, PLEASE
PROCEED.
>> THOSE ARE THE TWO AMENDMENTS
WE HAVE FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN BILL. FOR COUNCIL BILL
120993 WHICH IS THE HOUSE BILL
1110 LEGISLATION, WE HAVE ONE
GIANT SUBSTITUTE BILL SPONSORED
BY COUNCIL LOCAL THAT REALLY
JUST ATTEMPTS TO CLEAN UP THE
LANGUAGE. AS YOU KNOW, YOU
ADOPTED OVER 50 AMENDMENTS TO
THE BILL. MANY OF THEM FOCUSED
ON THE SAME CODE SECTIONS. FOR
EXAMPLE, I THINK THERE WERE FIVE
OR SIX AMENDMENTS THAT TOUCHED
THE FLOOR AREA RATIO LIMITS FOR
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING CLOSELY WITH
THE LAW DEPARTMENT, THE OFFICE
OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY
DEPARTMENT, AND THE SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTION
INSPECTIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT
THE LEGISLATION THAT PASSES OUT
OF COUNCIL IS READABLE, THAT
COUNCIL'S INTENT IS CLEAR AND
THAT COUNCIL'S INTENT WILL BE
IMPLEMENTED. IT DOES INCLUDE A
FEW MORE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES
THAT ARE LISTED ON THE COVER
SHEET HERE THAT AS WE WERE
WORKING THROUGH THE BILL, WE
REALIZED THAT MAYBE THE
COUNCIL'S INTENT WASN'T FULLY
REALIZED OR COUNCILMEMBERS WERE
MAKING CHANGES, UNINTENDED
CHANGES, SO I'LL WALK THROUGH
THOSE. FIRST IS RELATED TO A NEW
FAMILY HOUSING BONUS. AS YOU MAY
REMEMBER, WE HAVE A BUNCH OF
DIFFERENT FLOOR AREA RATIO
LIMITS THAT WE'VE APPLIED. THE
END RESULT OF THOSE WAS THAT
THEY WEREN'T ALL CONSISTENT AND
IN PARTICULAR, THE BONUS THAT
WAS SUPPOSED TO APPLY TO
FAMILY-SIZED UNITS ENDED UP
BEING LOWER THAN THE FLOOR AREA
RATIO THAT WOULD APPLY TO OTHER
TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT. SO THIS
VERSION OF THE BILL BRINGS THE
FAMILY SIZE UNIT BONUS UP TO BE
CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER
BONUSES. HEIGHT LIMITS WERE
INCREASED TO 42 FEET FOR CERTAIN
TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT. FOR
EXAMPLE, THE FAMILY SIZE
HOUSING. THE WAY THAT THAT WAS
WRITTEN, IT DID NOT ALLOW FOR
ADDITIONAL FEATURES ABOVE THE
ROOFTOP. FOR EXAMPLE, A CHIMNEY
WE ALLOW ABOVE A NORMAL HEIGHT
LIMIT. THE WAY THE BILL WAS
DRAFTED DIDN'T ALLOW FOR THAT.
SO THERE'S AN AMENDMENT IN HERE
TO ALLOW FOR ROOFTOP FEATURES
LIKE ROOF DECKS OR CHIMNEYS OR
ELEVATOR BANKS TO BE ABOVE THE
HEIGHT LIMIT OF 42 FEET. THERE
IS AN AMENDMENT THAT WAS ADDED
TO PROVIDE INCENTIVE FOR THE
INCLUSION OF TYPE A ACCESSIBLE
RESIDENTIAL UNITS. THOSE ARE
ACCESSIBLE UNDER THE AMERICANS
WITH DISABILITIES ACT AND ARE
THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF
ACCESSIBILITY. THAT AMENDMENT IS
BEING FOLK IT USED ON PROJECTS
WITH TEN OR MORE UNITS BECAUSE
PROJECTS WITH MORE THAN TEN
UNITS ARE ALREADY REQUIRED TO
PROVIDE THOSE TYPES OF
ACCESSIBLE UNITS. WE
INADVERTENTLY DID NOT INCLUDE
SETBACK UNITS FOR NEIGHBORHOOD
STRUCTURES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
SO THIS SUBSTITUTE BILL APPLIES
SETBACK LIMITS THAT ARE CURRENT
WITH RESIDENTIAL SETBACK LIMITS
TO NONRESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES
LIKE CHURCHES AND SCHOOLS. AND
WE ALSO INADVERTENTLY DELETED A
PROVISION THAT ALLOWS FOR
BACKYARD COTTAGES. SO THE
AMENDMENT WOULD ALLOW FOR A
DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT
WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE REAR LOT
LINE TO AGAIN ALLOW BACKYARD
COTTAGES. AND FINALLY, THE BILL,
AS YOU KNOW, WOULD ALLOW CORNER
STORES, THE COUNCIL AMENDED IT
FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL
ZONES FOR CORNER STORES TO BE
LOCATED ON ANY LOT, SO NOT JUST
ON CORNERS, AND THE SUBSTITUTE
BILL WOULD APPLY THAT TO
LOW-RISE ZONES AS WELL AS THE
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONES
TO BE CONSISTENT. AND I'M HAPPY
TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND
HOPEFULLY I WILL REMEMBER
EVERYTHING THAT'S IN THE
SUBSTITUTE BILL.
>> I'M NOT SEEING ANY
QUESTIONS. GO AHEAD, PLEASE.
>> I'LL HAND IT OVER TO
JASMINE.
>> HELLO. I'M HERE TO PRESENT
THE AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTIONS
32183, BUT JUST TO REALLY
BRIEFLY JUST SET THE STAGE, IN
GENERAL THE RESOLUTION IS
INTENDED TO BE A COMPANION TO
THE ONE SEATTLE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN UPDATE, HAS THREE SECTIONS.
THE FIRST SECTION OUTLINES GOALS
AND OUTCOMES OF THE COMP PLAN,
THE SECOND SECTION REQUESTS THAT
DEPARTMENTS ADD ITEMS TO THEIR
2026 WORK PROGRAM TO ADVANCE THE
GOALS OF THE COMP PLAN, AND THEN
THE THIRD SECTION REQUESTS OPCD
AND OTHER RELEVANT DEPARTMENTS
TO DEVELOP PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR
2026. AMENDMENT A AS NOTED
EARLIER RELATES TO THAT THIRD
SECTION. IT ADDS TO THE LIST OF
COMP PLAN ANNUAL AMENDMENTS FOR
OPCD TO DEVELOP AND REQUESTS
THAT OPCD CONDUCT ENHANCED
ENGAGEMENT WITH THE CENTRAL
DISTRICT COMMUNITY TO IDENTIFY
OPTIONS AND POTENTIAL
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL TO
ADDRESS GROWTH AND DISPLACEMENT,
INCLUDING DESIGNATING WHAT'S
COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE
DONUT HOLE BETWEEN 14th AVENUE
AND 18th AVENUE AS PART OF THE
CENTRAL DISTRICT URBAN CENTER.
IN MAKING ITS RECOMMENDATIONS,
OPCD HAS REQUESTED TO TAKE INTO
CONSIDERATION A NUMBER OF
FACTORS, INCLUDING THE AREA'S
HISTORY OF RED LINING AND
DISPLACEMENT, COMMUNITY
IDENTITY, HOUSING NEEDS BOTH
CITY-WIDE AND WITHIN THE CENTRAL
DISTRICT, AND APPROACHES TO
PLANNING THAT ARE REQUIRED BY
STATE LAW. THIS AMENDMENT IS
SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH.
>> PLEASE ADDRESS THE AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT
AND CENTRAL STAFF AND JASMINE
AND LISH FOR ALL OF YOUR HELP.
IT ADDS TO 2026 PLAN UPDATES
JUST ASKING OPCD TO STUDY AND
BRING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE
COUNCIL IN 2026. WHAT I HEARD
FROM PEOPLE IS THEY WANTED
STRONGER ENGAGEMENT AND OUTREACH
WITH CENTRAL DISTRICT RESIDENTS.
THE GOAL IS TO HEAR FROM THE
COMMUNITY ABOUT GROWTH, HOUSING,
AND DISPLACEMENT, ESPECIALLY THE
DISPLACEMENT IN HOUSING TOOLS
OPCD SUGGESTS WAYS TO REDUCE
DISPLACEMENT PRESSURES, SPECIAL
FOCUS ON HELPING LEGACY AND
RED-LINED BLACK HOMEOWNERS STAY
AND INVEST IN THEIR HOMES AND
THE KEY CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE
TOOK INTO ACCOUNT WAS THE
HISTORY OF RED LINING AND
ONGOING DISPLACEMENTS, THE
IMPORTANCE OF COMMUNITY IDENTITY
AND CULTURAL ANCHORS, HOUSING
NEEDS BOTH CITY-WIDE AND WITHIN
DISTRICT 3 AND CENTRAL DISTRICT
AND TRANSIT ACCESS, RAIL, BUS,
RAPID TRANSIT, FREQUENT ROUTES,
AND PLANNING FOR
TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT AND
THIS IS IN THE RESOLUTION AND
LOOKING FORWARD TO WORKING WITH
OPCD ON THOSE ISSUES AS WELL.
THANK YOU.
>> ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
NO. CONTINUE, PLEASE.
>> THAT IS IT.
>> ALL RIGHT. I DO HAVE A
QUESTION. I DO SUPPORT THE
AMENDMENT TO I THINK IT WAS THE
BUDGET THAT FACILITATES BLACK
HOMEOWNERSHIP AND THIS IS ONLY
PART OF THE RESOLUTION. IS THERE
ANY MENTION OF THAT IN THE REST
OF THE RESOLUTION OR IN -- GO
AHEAD.
>> YEAH. GREAT QUESTION.
THERE'S NO MENTION OF THAT IN
THE RESOLUTION. I CONSIDER THAT
ONE OF OUR ANTI-DISPLACEMENT
POLICIES WHEN WE'RE PUTTING
MONEY INTO THOSE COMMUNITY
GROUPS OR HELPING PEOPLE
NAVIGATE SOME OF THE HOUSING
ISSUES HAPPENING IN OUR
DISTRICT. SO IT DOESN'T
SPECIFICALLY SAY THAT BESIDES AN
ANTI-DISPLACEMENT POLICY AND
OUTREACH.
>> UNDERSTOOD. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? LET
ME SEE IF ANYBODY'S HAND IS
RAISED. NOT SEEING ANY OTHER
HANDS.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA IT LOOKS
LIKE MAYBE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA, ALL
RIGHT, GO AHEAD, PLEASE.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I REALLY JUST WANTED FOR THE
RECORD TO STAY I'VE BEEN HERE
SINCE THE PRESENTATIONS HAVE
STARTED JUST SO THE RECORD
ACCURATELY REFLECTS THAT I'M
HERE. THANK YOU.
>> I APPRECIATE THAT. YOU MIGHT
HAVE TRIED TO GET THAT MESSAGE
TO ME, BUT I DIDN'T SEE IT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. PLEASE MAKE
THAT KNOWN IN THE RECORD. OKAY.
I'M NOT SEEING ANY OTHER
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM MY
COLLEAGUES AND THAT'S ALL WE'VE
GOT TO CONSIDER TOMORROW.
>> YES.
>> ALL RIGHT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ONE QUESTION, PLEASE.
REMEMBER, IMENT THAT WE WERE
TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE WE DID ADD
DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY AND WE
DIDN'T -- WAS THERE ALREADY --
I KNOW THERE WAS NO SUPPLEMENTAL
PERFORMED, BUT WAS THERE
ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS WHATSOEVER?
CAN YOU PLEASE ADDRESS THAT?
>> YEAH. WE DID ISSUE AN
ADDENDUM TO THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN EIS. IT WAS RELEASED THE
MONDAY BEFORE THANKSGIVING AND
IT'S BEEN OUT THERE FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT FOR A COUPLE WEEKS. IT
IDENTIFIED THAT THE CHANGES
COUNCIL MADE WOULD NOT RESULT IN
A SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT
OUTCOME THAN THE PLAN THAT WAS
ORIGINALLY ANALYZED.
>> THANK YOU. WHEN DOES THAT
COMMENT PERIOD END?
>> I THINK TOMORROW AT NOON.
>> EXCELLENT. THANK YOU. ALL
RIGHT. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH FOR WALKING US THROUGH
TOMORROW'S AMENDMENTS.
>> THANK YOU.
>> LOOKING AT OUR AGENDA HERE.
THERE ARE NO LETTERS OR
PROCLAMATIONS TODAY. AT
COUNCILMEMBERS' REQUEST, WE ARE
SKIPPING THE ROUND ROBIN
CONVERSATION TODAY. IS THERE AN
OBJECTION TO THAT? SEEING NONE,
THAT'S BECAUSE FOR THE
LISTENING PUBLIC, WE DON'T HAVE
COUNCIL MEETINGS THIS WEEK. ALL
RIGHT. HEARING NONE, WE'LL WRAP
UP OUR MEETING HERE. IS THERE
ANY FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME
BEFORE THE COUNCIL? OKAY. SEEING
NONE, THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED
AND IT IS 2:33. THANK YOU VERY