>> GOOD AFTERNOON. THE SEPTEMBER
19th MEETING OF THE SELECT
COMMITTEE OF THE CONFERENCE
CONFERENCE PLAN WILL COME TO
ORDER. I AM JOY HOLLINGSWORTH,
LECLERC PLEASE CALL THE ROLE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA .
COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON ?
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS ?
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ? COUNCIL
MEMBER KETTLE LEXI COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON? CHAIR
HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> WE WILL NOW CONSIDER THE
AGENDA. IF THERE IS NO
OBJECTION, THE AGENDA WILL BE
ADOPTED. HEARING NO OBJECTION,
THE AGENDA IS ADOPTED.
COLLEAGUES, WE ARE HERE BECAUSE
WE KNOW ABOUT SOME LEGAL
CONCERNS, I PUT THOSE AMENDMENTS
IN THE RESOLUTION TO MITIGATE
SOME OF THOSE RISKS AND NOW WE
ARE GOING TO HAVE TO MOVE INTO
AN EXECUTIVE SESSION, BECAUSE OF
SOME OF THOSE AMENDMENTS ADOPTED
AND PASSED INTO THE LEGISLATION
. AS CHAIR, I'M GOING TO BE
ANNOUNCING THAT THE SEATTLE CITY
COUNCIL WILL NOW CONVENE INTO
THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. THE
PURPOSE OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION
IS TO DISCUSS PENDING,
POTENTIAL, OR ACTUAL LITIGATION.
COUNCILS EXECUTIVE SESSION IS
OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COUNCIL TO
DISCUSS CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL
MATTERS WITH CITY ATTORNEYS, AS
AUTHORIZED BY LAW. A LEGAL
MONITOR FROM THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS ALWAYS
PRESENT TO ENSURE THAT COUNCIL
RESERVES QUESTIONS FOR POLICY
FOR OPEN SESSIONS. I EXPECT THE
TIME OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION TO
END BY, I WILL SAY, 3:05 P.M.
THAT IS ONE HOUR. IF THE
EXECUTIVE SESSION IS GOING TO
EXTEND BEYOND THAT TIME, I WILL
ANNOUNCE AN EXTENSION AND THE
EXPECTED DURATION. AT THE
CONCLUSION OF THE EXECUTIVE
SESSION, THE SELECT COMMITTEE
WILL COME BACK TO ORDER TO
CONSIDER ARE ITEMS OF BUSINESS
ON TODAY'S AGENDA. FOR THE
RECORD, COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE HAS
JOINED US. THE COUNCIL WILL NOW
, FOR THE RECORD, COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE AND COUNCILMEMBER RINCK
ARE HERE. THE COUNCIL IS NOW
GOING TO MOVE TO EXECUTIVE
SESSION. COUNCILMEMBERS, PLEASE
LOG INTO THE EXECUTIVE SESSION
ZOOM MEETING . THANK YOU.
>> I APOLOGIZE, I WOULD MAKE
SURE THERE IS NOT ANYTHING ON
OUR END WE NEED TO DO TO HELP.
>> I WILL REPEAT THAT. AT
SEPTEMBER 18th MEETING, THE
SELECT COMMITTEE DISCUSSED
INDIVIDUAL AMENDMENTS AND
POSTPONE THE BILL TO CONTINUE
OUR DISCUSSION AT TODAY'S
MEETING. FOR TODAY'S MEETING WE
ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TODAY'S
LAST FEW AMENDMENT AND WE ARE
ALSO GOING TO DISCUSS THE
RESOLUTION AS WELL. DOES ANYONE
HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT
OUR NEXT STEPS ARE , SO FAR, FOR
TODAY? AWESOME. I KNOW IT HAS
BEEN A SLUGFEST, AND THE LIGHT
AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL,
COLLEAGUES, IS NOT A TRAIN. IT
IS THE LIGHT. SO, BEFORE WE
PROCEED, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD
AND RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK .
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I MOVED TO
RESEND AMENDMENTS 54, 56, AND 58
FROM COUNCIL BILL 120993 ADOPTED
AT THE SEPTEMBER 18th MEETING.
>> SECOND.
>> MOVED AND SECONDED FOR THE
RESCINDING OF AMENDMENTS 54, 56,
58. COUNCIL MEMBER RINCK, YOU
ARE RECOGNIZED TO ADDRESS THOSE
AMENDMENTS.
>> UPON ADDITIONAL LEGAL
ANALYSIS I DETERMINED IT IS IN
OUR BEST INTEREST TO KEEP THESE
AMENDMENTS IN THE DOCKET
RESOLUTION WHETHER THEN PASS
THEM IN THE RESOLUTION NOW. I
WILL MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC
UNDERSTANDS THIS IS NOT THE END
OF THESE PARTICULAR TOPICS. UPON
THE COMPLETION OF ADDITIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COUNCIL CAN
AND HOPEFULLY WILL ADD THESE TWO
ARE ADDITIONAL LAND-USE CODE. I
AM ABLE TO OUR COLLEAGUES IN THE
CITY OF SEATTLE FOR LOVING ADUS
AS MUCH AS I DO. ADUS FOR THE
CITY OF SEATTLE. I BELIEVE
DEFERRING ACTION UNTIL THE
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
CAN BE DONE WOULD BE IN OUR BEST
INTEREST.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER
RINCK. ANY COMMENTS ON THE
MOTION TO RESEND AMENDMENTS 54,
56, AND 58? SEEING NONE, THANK
YOU, COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. JUST A
REMINDER, THESE ARE ADDED TO THE
RESOLUTION, LOOKING FORWARD TO
THE STUDIES FOR THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDIES AND
FOR YOUR LOVE FOR ADUS. WILL THE
CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL TO
RESEND AMENDMENTS NUMBER 54, 56,
AND 58?
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK .
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA .
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON.
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ .
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON. CHAIR
HOLLINGSWORTH. NINE IN FAVOR,
AND THEN OPPOSED.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES AN
AMENDMENT 54, 56, AND 58 IS
RESCINDED. ARE THERE ANY OTHER
COMMENTS, ANY OTHER MOTIONS TO
BE ENTERTAINED AT THIS MOMENT IN
TIME?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I MOVED TO
AMEND COUNCIL BILL 120993 AS
PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT 76.
>> SECOND.
>> MOVED IN SECOND. FOR A MINUTE
NUMBER 76, COUNCILMEMBER RINCK,
YOU ARE , OH, EXCUSE ME. WE WILL
GO TO CENTRAL STAFF FIRST, THEN
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK, WE WILL GO
TO YOU.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. COUNCIL
CENTRAL STAFF . AMENDMENT 76
WOULD CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF
MAJOR TRANSIT SERVICE TO INCLUDE
FREQUENT TRANSIT SERVICE. AS YOU
MAY REMEMBER, WHEN WE FIRST
DISCUSSED THIS BILL, FREQUENT
TRANSIT SERVICE IS TRANSIT
SERVICE THAT HAS 15 MINUTE
HEADWAYS , SO REGULAR BUS ROUTES
THAT COME EVERY 15 MINUTES.
MAJOR TRANSIT SERVICE IS DEFINED
AS RAIL SERVICE OR OUR EXPRESS
BUS SERVICES. BY MERGING THE
TWO, PARKING REQUIREMENTS THAT
ARE WAIVED IN AREAS WITH ,
CURRENTLY WAIVED IN AREAS WITH
MAJOR TRANSIT SERVICE, WOULD
ALSO BE WAIVED IN AREAS WITH
FREQUENT TRANSIT SERVICE. SO
LONG ANY BUS ROUTE WITH 15
MINUTE HEADWAYS, WITHIN A
QUARTER-MILE WALKING DISTANCE OF
THOSE BUS STOPS. PARKING WOULD
NO LONGER BE REQUIRED.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. THIS
AMENDMENT WOULD CHANGE THE USE
OF MAJOR TRANSIT TO FREQUENT
TRANSIT IN PASSING THOSE AREAS
WITH A HALF-MILE OF TRANSIT
SERVICE STOPS ELIGIBLE FOR
BONUSES THAT WOULD BE PROVIDED
TO STACKED DWELLING UNITS, LOW
INCOME HOUSING, AND LOW INCOME
HOUSING PROPERTY . HOUSING ON
PROPERTY OWNED BY RELIGIOUS
INSTITUTIONS. USING THE FREQUENT
TRANSIT DEFINITION, EXCEPT THE
FACT THAT BUSES THE RUN AT HIGH
FREQUENCIES THAT ARE NOT
DESIGNATED AS RAPID RIDE ROUTES
STILL SERVE AS IMPORTANT
CONNECTORS IN SEATTLE, WHICH I
CAN PERSONALLY ATTEST TO, AS I
KNOW MANY TRANSIT RIDERS IN THE
CITY CAN. WITH THAT BEING SAID,
I WILL BE WITHDRAWING THIS
AMENDMENT FOR LATER
CONSIDERATION AFTER ADDITIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND THE
DOCKET RESOLUTION CAN BE
ADOPTED. CHAIR, DO I NEED TO
MAKE A MOTION TO DO THIS?
>> AMELIA?
>> AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE IT HAS
BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED, YOU CAN
REQUEST TO WITHDRAW THIS MOTION,
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK .
>> OKAY, I REQUEST TO WITHDRAW
THIS MOTION.
>> UNANIMOUS CONSENT?
>> LIVE AND SECONDED TO WITHDRAW
THE MOTION FOR AMENDMENT 76. ARE
THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
ANY CLOSING COMMENTS,
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK?
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION OF THIS. I HOPE WE
CAN CONTINUE DISCUSSIONS ON
CONNECTING ACCESS TO TRANSIT AND
HOUSING.
>> OFTEN. FOR THE RECORD, IT IS
IN THE RESOLUTION, AS WELL.
CLERK, WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL ? IF THERE'S NO OBJECTIONS
WE DON'T NEED TO DO THE ROLE. I
AM LEARNING ROBERTS RULES AS WE
GO, I WILL GET BETTER AND BETTER
EVERY SINGLE TIME. SO THERE IS
NO NEED TO CALL ROLE. THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK . NEXT,
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED TO MOVE YOUR
AMENDMENT NUMBER 85.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. COLLEAGUES,
AND THE NUMBER 85, I MOVED TO
AMEND COUNCIL BILL 120993 AS
PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT 85.
>> SECOND.
>> MOVED AND SECONDED TO AMEND
COUNCIL BILL 120933 FOR A
MINIMUM NUMBER 85 . CENTRAL
STAFF, PLEASE GIVE US AN
OVERVIEW.
>> YEAH, THE STATE LEGISLATURE
THIS YEAR ADOPTED A GROSS
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL 5184,
WHICH IS REQUIRED TO BE IN
EFFECT BY JANUARY OF 2027. IT
REQUIRES CITIES TO HAVE PARKING
REQUIREMENTS THAT DO NOT REQUIRE
PARKING FOR RESIDENTS OF LESS
THAN 1200 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE.
THE CITY MAY NOT HAVE PARKING
REQUIREMENTS FOR CHILD CARE
CENTERS , AND MAY NOT HAVE
PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR
BUSINESSES LESS THAN 3000 SQUARE
FEET IN SIZE OR AT THE GROUND
FLOOR OF A MIXED-USE BUILDING.
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD IMPLEMENT
THAT BILL.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED FOR
AMENDMENT NUMBER 85.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. COLLEAGUES,
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD BRING US
INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE
LAW THAT WAS PASSED EARLIER THIS
YEAR REGARDING PARKING MANDATES.
I SPOKE A LOT ABOUT PARKING
MANDATES IN YESTERDAY'S
MEETING, AND WHILE THOSE
AMENDMENT DID NOT PASS, I AM
HOPEFUL THAT THIS AMENDMENT
STRIKES THE RIGHT BALANCE.
PARKING MANDATES WILL NEED TO BE
UPDATED IN THE COMING COUPLE OF
YEARS BECAUSE OF THESE STATE LAW
CHANGES, SO RATHER THAN HAVING
TO GO THROUGH A COMPETENT
PROCESS A YEAR FROM NOW, WE CAN
TAKE ACTION TO ENACT THESE NOW.
SO, I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. I
THINK IT IS AN IMPORTANT STEP
FORWARD. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON
AMENDMENT NUMBER 85 WAXY ANY
COMMENTS? COUNCIL PRESIDENT
NELSON?
>> SO, CORRECT MY UNDERSTANDING.
WE HAVE TO COMPLY WITH SENATE
BILL 5184 BY 2027, CORRECT?
>> RIGHT.
>> SO, IF, IN THE STATE
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE PROVIDING
ITS GUIDANCE ON IMPLEMENTATION,
IS THAT CORRECT?
>> CORRECT.
>> DO YOU KNOW WHEN THAT MIGHT
BE PROVIDED?
>> IS SUPPOSED TO BE PROVIDED BY
THE END OF THIS YEAR.
>> OKAY. THERE ARE ALSO ELEMENTS
OF STATE LAW SUCH AS PARKING
MAXIMUMS, WHICH DIFFER FROM THE
AMENDMENTS PRESENTED, WHICH
WOULD REQUIRE US TO OPEN IT UP
AGAIN TO BE IN COMPLIANCE
REGARDLESS OF PASSAGE TODAY. IS
THAT ROUGHLY --
>> I'M NOT REMEMBERING WHICH
THOSE ARE, BUT THE STATE
LEGISLATURE HAS BEEN VERY ACTIVE
IN TERMS OF PROVIDING ADDITIONAL
MANDATES TO CITIES. SO YOU'RE
PROBABLY CORRECT.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THAT'S IT.
>> AWESOME, THANK YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON. ARE THERE ANY
MORE COMMENTS ON THE AMENDMENT
BEFORE US? AMENDMENT NUMBER 85?
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLE FOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 85?
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA .
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA .
COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON.
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS .
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE . COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON. AND CHAIR
HOLLINGSWORTH.
>> ABSTAIN.
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, TWO OPPOSED,
TWO ABSTENTIONS .
>> THE MOTION CARRIES AND THE
MMN IS ADOPTED. WE WILL NOW
CONSIDER THE NEXT AMENDMENT.
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE, YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED .
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR
HOLLINGSWORTH. WITH RESPECT TO
AMENDMENT 99, WHICH WAS THE
SHORT TITLE BEING ELIMINATE THE
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL AMENITY
AREAS, I SEEK TO WITHDRAW THIS
FROM CONSIDERATION .
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE. I THINK WE JUST NEEDED
TO VERBALLY STATE THAT, NO
MOTION IS NECESSARY. THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. AMENDMENT
NUMBER 99 IS WITHDRAWN. ARE
THERE ANY COMMENTS REGARDING
THAT MOTION? NOT THAT MOTION,
BUT THAT WITHDRAWAL? SEEING
NONE, COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE, YOU
ARE RECOGNIZED TO MOVE YOUR
AMENDMENT NUMBER 94.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. FOR THOSE
THAT KNEW, WE DID HAVE A VERSION
2 OF 94 IF WE HAD RECEDED WITH
99, BUT AS NOTED, THAT WAS
WITHDRAWN , WITH SIMILAR
CONSIDERATIONS AS COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK WITH AMENDMENT 76. FOR 94,
AS NOTED YESTERDAY, IN MY
REMARKS AS WE STARTED
ESSENTIALLY ARCHERY SECTION,
THIS IS ABOUT DOING WHAT WE CAN
DO TO PROTECT OUR TREES AS WE
DENSIFY. THAT IS THE SPIRIT
BEHIND AMENDMENT NUMBER 94.
WHICH DOES THAT. WE CAN HAVE
CENTRAL STAFF SPEAK TO IT. BUT
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THIS IS JUST
ABOUT PROVIDING SOME ADDITIONAL
BONUS IN ORDER TO PROTECT OUR
TIER TWO TREES, WHICH IS REALLY
IMPORTANT FOR ME AS WE MOVE
FORWARD, AS WE LOOK TO
ESSENTIALLY SQUARE THIS GROUP
BUT IDENTIFYING OUR CITY, BUT AT
THE SAME TIME, REALLY DETECTING
AS BEST WE CAN AS WE MOVE
FORWARD ON TREE CANOPY AND WHAT
WE ARE DOING. COLLEAGUES,
FOLLOWING, I GUESS, CENTRAL
STAFF INTRODUCTION, I ASK FOR
YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU. AND I
MOVE THAT AMENDMENT NUMBER NINE
AND FOUR FOR COUNCIL BILL
120993.
>> SECOND.
>> MOVED AND SECONDED TO AMEND
BILL FOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 94,
CENTRAL STAFF.
>> AMENDMENT NUMBER 94 SPONSORED
BY COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE WOULD
PROVIDE REGULATORY INCENTIVES
FOR EITHER OBTAINING A TIER TWO
TREE OR PLANTING OR PRESERVING
MEDIUM OR LARGE TREES THAT WOULD
RESULT IN A 2% CANOPY COVERAGE
FOR THE SITE AT PREMATURITY.
WORKING WITHIN THE POINT SYSTEM
THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED BY THE
MAYOR TO ACHIEVE THE SCORE
NECESSARY, BUT ALSO ACHIEVE A
TREE CANOPY COVERAGE .
ADDITIONAL HEIGHT OF THE 42
FEET, WAIVER OF AMENITY
STANDARDS AND ALSO PARKING
WAIVERS, AS WELL.
>> THANK YOU. THAT WAS A GREAT
LEAD UP INTO THE MOVING OF YOUR
BILL. DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS IT,
AS WELL? COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> I THINK I ADDRESSED IT ENOUGH
. IF I CAN CONTINUE ON, I WAS
GETTING SOME COMMENTS OUT THERE
IN THE CITY REGARDING MY LOVE OF
EVERGREEN, SO I WILL NOT SPEAK
ANY FURTHER ON THAT TOPIC. AND I
WILL JUST LEAVE WHAT I SAID
YESTERDAY AS MY APPROACH AND MY
POSITION. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS
ABOUT AMENDMENT NUMBER 94, TREE
RETENTION BONUS? ANY COMMENTS?
COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON?
>> BECAUSE I HAVE A CONFUSED
LOOK ON MY FACE. WE PASSED
AMENDMENT 87 IN THE CONSENT
PASSAGE AND I HAD AN IDENTICAL
NUMBER, 101, WHICH I REMOVED
BECAUSE IT WAS IDENTICAL TO 87.
SO I JUST WANTED TO , COULD YOU
IDENTIFY THE MAIN DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN THOSE TWO? THEY SEEM
DUPLICATIVE, BUT I COULD BE
MISUNDERSTOOD.
>> I WILL HAVE TO REMIND MYSELF
WHAT IS IN 87 HERE. PLEASE STAND
BY. OH, YEAH. OKAY. YEAH, 87 IS
SIMILAR TO COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE'S BONUS, IN THAT IT
ALLOWS THE DIRECTOR TO WAIVE THE
PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR TIER
TWO TREES, THE DISTINCTION
BETWEEN THEM AND THE 94 AND 87
IS THAT THE REGULATORY
INCENTIVES ALSO INCLUDE
ADDITIONAL HEIGHT AND WAIVER OF
AMENITY AREA STANDARDS.
>> THE ONE THAT'S BEFORE US
RIGHT NOW? THANK YOU.
>> AWESOME. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
REGARDING THE AMENDMENT BEFORE
US? ON AMENDMENT NUMBER 94?
CLERK , WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE
ROLE FOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 94?
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK?
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? COMES
MEMBER SAKA? COUNCILMEMBER
SOLOMON? COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS ?
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ?
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE ? COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON?
>> ABSTAIN.
>> CHAIR HOLLINGSWORTH.
>> YES.
>> SEVEN IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED,
ONE ABSTENTION.
>> PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS
ADOPTED, AND THAT IS ALL OF THE
AMENDMENTS, AS I CAN SEE,
COLLEAGUES. WE ARE GOING TO BE
EDDIE'S.
>> THANK YOU. I HAVE A LOT OF
PAPERS APPEAR. ARE THERE ANY
FINAL COMMENTS ON THE BILL
BEFORE US AS AMENDED? THIS IS
YOUR TIME TO MAKE ANY FINAL
COMMENTS ON THE BILL. AWESOME.
LET'S KNOCK IT OUT. SORRY. NO
FINAL BILLS. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON COUNCIL
BILL 120933 ?
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK ?
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA? COMES
MEMBER SAKA ? COUNCILMEMBER
SOLOMON? COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ ?
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE ? ALSO
PRESIDENT NELSON? CHAIR
HOLLINGSWORTH? NINE IN FAVOR,
AND UNOPPOSED.
>> MOTION CARRIES, COUNCIL BILL
120933 WILL BE SENT TO FULL
COUNCIL. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE
READ --
>> CENTRAL STAFF, WILL YOU LET
US KNOW WHEN COUNCIL BILL 120993
GOES TO FULL COUNCIL?
>> SURE. BOTH COUNCIL BILL
120985 AND COUNCIL BILL 120993
NEED ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT. SORT OF THE SCOPE OF
THAT REVIEW IS TO BE DETERMINED
, WE WILL HAVE A BETTER SENSE,
REALLY, NEXT WEEK. BUT WE ARE
ASSUMING , THIS IS NOT A
FOREGONE CONCLUSION, BUT CHANGES
TO THE MAYOR'S PROPOSAL FOR
COUNCIL TODAY AND YESTERDAY CAN
BE ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH AN
ADDENDUM TO AN ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STATEMENT ON ADDENDUM
PROCESS ACROSS STATUTORY COMMENT
PERIODS , AND ADDITIONALLY, IT
WILL TAKE SOME TIME FOR THE
CONSULTANTS TO PUT TOGETHER THE
ANALYSIS AND MAKE THAT AVAILABLE
FOR THE PUBLIC FOR THE REVIEW.
THE COUNCIL SHOULD ANTICIPATE
THAT BOTH BILLS WILL NOT BE BACK
IN FRONT OF COUNCIL UNTIL THAT
PROCESS HAS FINISHED COURSE , AT
THE EARLIEST I WILL BE LATE
OCTOBER OR POTENTIALLY NOVEMBER.
>> THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY
QUESTIONS REGARDING NEXT STEPS?
AWESOME. THANK YOU, WILL THE
CLERK PLEASE READ ITEM NUMBER
TWO INTO THE AGENDA?
>> AGENDA ITEM TWO, ONE SEATTLE
PLAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE,
CALLING FOR ADDITIONAL MEASURES
BY CITY DEPARTMENTS TO FURTHER
ADVANCE THE GOALS OF THE ONE
SEATTLE PLAN AND REQUESTING THAT
THE OFFICE OF LANDING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND OTHER
CITY DEPARTMENTS DEVELOP
ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS TO THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN 2026. FOR
BRIEFING DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE
VOTE.
>> COLLEAGUES, THIS IS OUR LAST
PIECE OF LEGISLATION TODAY. WE
MADE IT TO A RESOLUTION. AS I
PREVIOUSLY EXPLAINED, I PLACED
INTO THE RESOLUTION SOME OF THE
THINGS THAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT
THAT COULD HAVE POTENTIALLY
ENVIRONMENTAL OR LEGAL RISKS.
THIS GIVES US A CHANCE TO STUDY
THESE AMENDMENTS SEPARATELY ,
OUTSIDE OF THIS PROCESS, SO THAT
SOME OF THE BOLDEST IDEAS WHICH
I REALLY APPRECIATE AS PUSHING
THE ENVELOPE, BOLD IDEAS CAN BE
CONSIDERED NEXT TIME WE HAVE AN
UPDATE TO THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND
, WHICH WE WILL BE GOING THROUGH
NEXT YEAR. WITH THAT, PHASE TWO,
WE ARE GOING TO GO INTO THE VOTE
OF THE RESOLUTION. I BELIEVE WE
HAVE FOUR AMENDMENTS TODAY AS
RESOLUTION. WE MIGHT HAVE MORE.
BUT RIGHT NOW WE HAVE FOUR
AMENDMENTS TODAY AT THE
RESOLUTION. SO I'M GOING TO GO
AHEAD AND MOVE THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDS ADOPTION OF
RESOLUTION 32183 . IS THERE A
SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> MOVED AND SECONDED TO ADOPT
THE RESOLUTION . CENTRAL STAFF,
WILL YOU PLEASE PROVIDE US WITH
AN INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF
RESOLUTION?
>> THANK YOU, AND I AM PLAYING
JASMINE TODAY. I WANT TO THANK
YOU FOR ALL OF HER WORK.
FOCUSING ON THIS WHILE WE ARE
FOCUSING ON THE OTHER
LEGISLATION. AS BACKGROUND, THE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT ALLOWS THE
CITY TO AMEND THE CONFERENCE OF
PLAN ONCE A YEAR. IN MOST YEARS
THE COUNCIL ADOPTS THE DOCKET OF
ITEMS, AND ANTICIPATES LOOKING
AT IN TERMS OF AMENDMENTS TO THE
COMP PLAN . WE HAVE HELD THAT
PROCESS FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF
YEARS BECAUSE WE HAD THE GIANT
BILLS THAT YOU CONSIDERED THIS
WEEK. NEXT YEAR WE ANTICIPATE A
MORE NORMAL COMP PLAN YEAR WITH
MORE TARGETED AMENDMENTS , AND
THIS RESOLUTION WOULD ADOPT A
DOCKET OF ITEMS THAT COUNCIL MAY
CONSIDER IN 2026 FOR AMENDMENTS
TO THE CONFERENCE OF PLAN. THE
RESOLUTION DOES THREE THINGS. IT
REAFFIRMS AND REASSERTS THE
GOALS OF THE CONFERENCE OF LAND.
IT RECOMMENDS FURTHER CHANGES TO
CODE TO FURTHER AND FOMENT THE
GOALS STATED IN THE RESOLUTION.
AND REQUESTING THAT OTHER
DEPARTMENTS DEVELOP AMENDMENTS
TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN .
SECTION 1 OF THE RESOLUTION
INCLUDES GOALS FOR WELCOMING
INCLUSIVE SEATTLE AFFORDABLE,
ACCESSIBLE, LIVABLE, AND SAFE.
SECTION 2 SETS OUT A
DEPARTMENTAL WORK PROGRAM FOR
2026 TO ANALYZE MANY OF THE
ISSUES YOU'VE BEEN DISCUSSING.
TODAY AND YESTERDAY. INCLUDING
CONSIDERATION OF CHANGES TO
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT
REGULATIONS , REGULATIONS
RELATED TO ENVIRONMENTALLY
CRITICAL AREAS, FREQUENT TRANSIT
SERVICE REGULATIONS ,
CONSIDERATIONS FOR CHANGES TO
PARKING REQUIREMENTS ,
ADDITIONAL WORK ON TREE
PROTECTION , INCENTIVES FOR
MANDATORY HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
PROJECTS , INCENTIVES TO DEVELOP
VACANT SITES DOWNTOWN,
PARTICULARLY THE BLOCK ACROSS
THE STREET , AND FURTHER WORK ON
DEVELOPING ANTI-DISPLACEMENT
STRATEGIES. SECTION 3 IS
SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT REQUESTS
TO ANALYZE AND MAKE
RECOMMENDATIONS ON CONSIDERATION
OF HIGHER BUILDING-NEIGHBORHOOD
CENTERS, NOT JUST LIGHT RAIL
STATION AREAS, BUT OTHER
NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS. CONSIDER
ADDITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS
AS WAS PROPOSED UNDER AMENDMENT
34, WHICH WE DISCUSSED YESTERDAY
. FURTHER MODIFIED BOUNDARIES
FOR CERTAIN NEIGHBORHOOD
CENTERS, PARTICULARLY IN
DISTRICT SIX , AND ANALYZE AND
MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COMPLY
WITH NEW STATE REQUIREMENTS SUCH
AS AREA PLANS FOR REGIONALLY
DESIGNATED CENTERS. I THINK MANY
OF YOU ARE AWARE THAT OP CD IS
CURRENTLY WORKING ON DEVELOPING
LANDS FOR REGIONAL AREAS LIKE
DOWNTOWN AND NORTHGATE, FIRST
CAPITOL HILL. SO YOU CAN
ANTICIPATE SEEING NEW PLANS FOR
THOSE AREAS, STARTING TO COME IN
NEXT YEAR. ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE
WE MOVED TO AMENDMENTS?
>> AWESOME, THANK YOU. ARE THERE
ANY QUESTIONS, COLLEAGUES, ABOUT
THE RESOLUTION BEFORE WE JUMP
INTO AMENDMENTS? AWESOME.
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED TO MOVE AMENDMENT
NUMBER ONE.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I MOVED TO
AMEND THE RESOLUTION WITH
AMENDMENT ONE, DELETING FROM
SECTION 3.B.NUMBER ONE.
>> SECOND. IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO AMEND THE RESOLUTION
AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT NUMBER
ONE, CENTRAL STAFF, PLEASE GIVE
US AN OVERVIEW OF THIS
AMENDMENT.
>> AS YOU REMEMBER, YOU
DISCUSSED POTENTIALLY ADDING A
NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER TO THE
FUTURE LAND USE MAP , INCLUDED
AMONG THOSE LISTS , NEIGHBORHOOD
CENTER IN ALKI, THIS WOULD
REMOVE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER
FOR FUTURE STUDY.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED TO ADDRESS YOUR
MADMAN.
>> THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES, I AM
ASKING YOU TO SUPPORT THIS
AMENDMENT THAT WOULD MAKE A
MINOR ADJUSTMENT AND
SPECIFICALLY REMOVE THE PROPOSED
ALKI NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER AND,
FOR CLARITY, I AM IN FULL
SUPPORT OF THE 13 NET NEW
NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS AND FOUR
URBAN CENTERS PROPOSED IN MY OWN
DISTRICT. FOR EVERYONE LAST ONE.
I MADE A NUMBER OF BOUNDARY
CHANGES AND TWEAKS BASED ON
THEIR UNIQUE ENVIRONMENTAL AND
PHYSICAL FACTORS . IN ONE CASE I
ACTUALLY EXPANDED THE
BOUNDARIES. THESE ADJUSTMENTS
WERE NOT MADE LIGHTLY. THEY WERE
BASED ON MY FIRST-HAND KNOWLEDGE
OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE
SPECIFIC CHALLENGES AND
OPPORTUNITIES. ALSO WORKING
ALONGSIDE THE DIRECTLY IMPACTED
COMMUNITIES. I THINK THAT MANY
OF US UNDERTOOK WHEN WE CONSIDER
OUR OWN AMENDMENT APPROACH. A
PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER IN
ALKI DOES NOT MAKE SENSE AT THIS
TIME, FOR REALLY THREE MAIN
REASONS. FIRST, IT DOES NOT MEET
OP CD OWN DEFINITION OF
NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER. SECOND, THE
GEOGRAPHIC ISOLATION AND TRAFFIC
CONSTRAINTS IN THE AREA MAKE IT
IMPRACTICAL . FINALLY, THERE ARE
SEVERE ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS.
CENTRAL STAFF, IF YOU DON'T
MIND SHOWING THE MAP OF WHERE
THE PROPOSED CENTER IS,
SPECIFICALLY IN ALKI, WHILE I
SPEAK, THAT WOULD BE GREATLY
APPRECIATED. FIRST, OKAY DOES
NOT MEET OP CD'S OWN DEFINITION
OF NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER. NOR DOES
IT MEET THE DEPARTMENT'S OWN
OBJECTIVE EVALUATION CRITERIA
FOR SELECTING AREAS FOR
POTENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER
DESIGNATION. PER OP CD,
NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS ARE
SPECIFICALLY DEFINED AS AREAS
NEAR TRANSIT, WITH GROWING
BUSINESS CENTERS, AMENITIES, AND
ADDED HOUSING CAPACITY. DIVING A
LITTLE BIT DEEPER INTO THE
POLICY WEEDS, IF YOU LOOK AT
SPECIFIC POLICIES, PERTAINING TO
NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS, MORE
SPECIFICALLY, GS 5.1 , IT IS
CONTAINED IN MANY PLACES IN THIS
OVERALL LEGISLATION. BUT FOR
THOSE FOLLOWING ALONG, ONLINE,
IT IS ON PAGE 26 OF THE
EXECUTIVES ONE SEATTLE
CONFERENCE OF PLAN. SPECIFICALLY
STATES, AND I QUOTE, THE CITY
SHALL ENDEAVOR TO DESIGNATE AS
NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS AREAS WITH
A LOCALLY FOCUSED, COMMERCIAL
CORE, AND/OR ACCESS TO FREQUENT
TRANSIT WHERE DIVERSE HOUSING
OPTIONS COULD ALLOW MORE PEOPLE
TO LIVE WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE
OF SHOPS, SERVICES , TRANSIT ,
AND AMENITIES. ". TAKEN TOGETHER
WE CAN CALL TOGETHER ABOUT FOUR
BASIC REQUIREMENTS FOR
NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS. ACCESS TO
TRANSIT, AVAILABILITY OF SOCIAL
AND COMMUNITY SERVICES,
GOVERNMENT SERVICES, CLINICS,
HEALTHCARE FACILITIES, COMMUNITY
SUPPORT SERVICES, ET CETERA.
THIRD, ROBUST AMENITIES. GROCERY
STORES, PHARMACIES, LIBRARIES .
FOURTH AND FINALLY, COMMERCIAL
CORE BUSINESS DISTRICT. WHEN YOU
RUN THAT FRAMEWORK AGAINST THE
UNIQUE SITUATION IN ALKI, ONLY
ONE OF THOSE CONDITIONS IS
CURRENTLY MET. ONE OF THOSE
FOUR. AND THAT IS THE COMMERCIAL
CORE , THERE IS A GROWING
BUSINESS DISTRICT. A LOT OF
GREAT RESTAURANTS AND COFFEE
SHOPS ALONG THERE, SMALL
BUSINESSES THAT YOU ALSO CHECK
OUT, COLLEAGUES. BUT AGAIN,
ACCESS TO TRANSIT, VERY, VERY
LIMITED IN THAT PART OF THE WEST
SEATTLE PENINSULA. IF YOU LOOK
ON THE MAP THERE, IT IS BOUNDED
BY WATER TO THE NORTH , WEST ,
AND SOUTH . ACCESS TO TRANSIT IN
THAT AREA, AGAIN, VERY LIMITED.
NOT A TON OF AVAILABILITY OF
SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICES,
EITHER. HARDLY ANY AMENITIES.
CERTAINLY NO GROCERY STORES,
PHARMACIES, AND THE LIKE. THE
ONLY CONDITION THAT IS CURRENTLY
MET IS THE COMMERCIAL CORE . THE
GROWING BUSINESS DISTRICT.
SIMPLY PUT, IT DOES NOT MEET THE
OBJECTIVE CRITERIA THAT HAS
GUIDED THIS ENTIRE APPROACH . IF
WE ARE GOING TO ADD ALKI , I
WOULD SUBMIT THAT WHY NOT LET'S
JUST CHANGE THE OBJECTIVE
EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR MAKING
NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS
DESIGNATIONS TO SPECIFICALLY FIT
IN ACCOMMODATE ALKI. UNDER THE
CURRENT STANDARD, IT DOES NOT
FIT. AND WE HAVE DONE THAT
BEFORE, COLLEAGUES. AS PART OF
THE 100+ MINUTES. WE HAVE MADE
MODIFICATIONS AND AMENDED THE
POLICIES THAT GOVERN AND
IMPLEMENT THE VARIOUS PROVISIONS
OF THE COMP PLAN. IF, AS A
POLICY MATTER, WE THINK IT MAKES
SENSE AT THIS TIME TO ADD ALKI
AS A NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER, WHICH
I DO NOT THINK IT DOES MAKE
SENSE AT THIS TIME, THEN LET'S
CHANGE THE OBJECTIVE EVALUATION
CRITERIA TO MAKE IT WORK. THE
SECOND REASON IS UNWORKABLE AT
THIS TIME IS AGAIN, LOOK AT THE
MAP. IT'S A VERY REMOTE
GEOGRAPHIC, ISOLATED AREA. IT
HAS SEVERE TRAFFIC CONSTRAINTS.
ACCESS DEPENDS ON A VERY FEW
FINITE AMOUNT OF CONSTRAINED
CORE DOORS . REALLY, JUST HARBOR
AVENUE SOUTHWEST AND ADMIRAL WAY
SOUTHWEST. INCREASED GROWTH
WOULD WORSEN CONGESTION . IMPACT
EMERGENCY RESPONSE TIMES, AND
HEARD AN EXISTING RESIDENCE.
OTHER POTENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD
CENTER LOCATIONS OFFER STRONGER
MULTIMODAL CONNECTIVITY. THIRD
AND FINALLY, COLLEAGUES, I
MENTIONED EARLIER, CLIMATE
RESILIENCE AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL
RISK PRESENTED. ALKI SITS
DIRECTLY ON PUGET SOUND
SHORELINE. MAKING IT ONE OF THE
CITY'S MOST VULNERABLE AREAS TO
SEA LEVEL RISE . STORM SURGE AND
EROSION. ENCOURAGING NEW GROWTH
IN THIS HIGH RISK AREA CONFLICTS
DIRECTLY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN CLIMATE RESILIENCE
PRINCIPLES . PROTECTING ALKI 'S
ROLE AS A RECREATIONAL AND
CULTURAL WATERFRONT IS MORE
SUSTAINABLE THAN INTENSIFYING
URBAN GROWTH IN THIS AREA AT
THIS TIME. ALSO NOTE, THE STRONG
COMMUNITY OPPOSITION AGAINST THE
PROPOSED ALKI NEIGHBORHOOD
CENTER BY THOSE THAT ARE MOST
DIRECTLY IMPACTED SINCE LAST
NIGHT, UP UNTIL 2:30, ALONE ,
ALL OF US HAD RECEIVED
APPROXIMATELY 71 EMAILS FROM
DIRECTLY IMPACTED RESIDENCE
AGAINST THE PROPOSAL. 71. ZERO
IN FAVOR . AND PROCEEDING THAT
WAS HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF
OTHER COLUMNS THAT WE HAVE
RECEIVED OPPOSING SPECIFICALLY
THE ALKI NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER.
AND I UNDERSTAND WHY PEOPLE FEEL
PASSIONATE ABOUT THESE ISSUES,
EITHER FOR OR AGAINST . AT ITS
CORE THESE REFLECT LONG-TERM
POLICY DECISIONS AND THEY IMPACT
PEOPLE'S EVERYDAY LIVES. AS
PART OF SOME OF THESE
CONVERSATIONS, WE KNOW THERE'S
BINARY LABELING , WE'VE HEARD
THE TERM NOT IN MY BACKYARD. YES
IN MY BACKYARD. I THINK AS PART
OF THESE SPECIFIC CONVERSATIONS
THERE IS A NEW TERM, MAYBE. YES
IN THEIR BACKYARD. IT'S EASY
FOR SOME PEOPLE , NOT FROM THE
COMMUNITY, TO SAY SOMETHING IS
BEST FOR THEM . AND IF THAT
THING IS AND LAMENTED, THEY ARE
COMPLETELY UNACCOUNTABLE AND
THEY DON'T HAVE TO MANAGE THE
DAY-TO-DAY AS A DIRECT RESULT OF
THAT. THERE'S A LOT GOING ON,
AS WELL. THE ALKI COMMUNITY
COUNCIL AND HUNDREDS OF DIRECTLY
IMPACTED RESIDENCE HAVE VOICED
THEIR STRONG CONCERNS. AND WE
ALL KNOW THERE IS A LACK OF FAIR
PROCESS AND EXTENSIVE VETTING
FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER
COMPARED TO OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD
CENTERS. LACK OF NOTICE AND
OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD. EACH OF
THE CURRENT NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER
DESIGNATIONS WAS SHAPED BY A
ROBUST MULTIYEAR STAKEHOLDER AND
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROCESS.
AND I BELIEVE ALKI DESERVES THE
SAME TRANSPARENCY AND DIALOGUE
AS EVERY OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD
IMPACTED BY THE COMP PLAN. IN
ALL, COLLEAGUES, I JUST WANT TO
EMPHASIZE THAT I DO STRONGLY
SUPPORT ALL THE NEW CENTERS IN
MY DISTRICT, AND ALL THE ONES WE
HAVE APPROVED THUS FAR IN THE
COMP PLAN LEGISLATION. EACH WAS
SHAPED BY COMMUNITY INPUT
THROUGH MULTIPLE ROUNDS OF
OUTREACH, PASTOR REVIEWS,
INCLUDING THE REQUIRED
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS.
ALL OF WHICH WAS EXPLORED
THROUGH AN EXTENSIVE, AGAIN,
MULTIYEAR PROCESS. IT WOULD BE
AN OVERREACH ON MY PART FOR ME
TO ADDRESS THE OTHER EIGHT AREAS
BEING PROPOSED FOR STUDY IN THIS
RESOLUTION, SO MY AMENDMENT IS
TO NARROWLY DELETE ALKI ONLY
FROM THE STUDY. MY AMENDMENT,
AGAIN, REMOVES ONLY ALKI.
BECAUSE HE CLEARLY DOES NOT MEET
OUR CURRENTLY AGREED-UPON
DEFINITION OF NEIGHBORHOOD
CENTER. THAT IS VERY CLEAR. FOR
THOSE REASONS, COLLEAGUES, I ASK
FOR YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS
AMENDMENT TODAY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS
REGARDING AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE,
RIGHT NOW, THAT IS ON THE TABLE?
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK, YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. COLLEAGUES,
WHILE I WANT TO NOTE THAT WHILE
ALKI IS INCLUDED IN THIS
RESOLUTION, A REMINDER THAT THIS
RESOLUTION SIMPLY TRIGGERS A
STUDY. IT DOES NOT BIND US TO
ENACTING HIS CENTER. BY REMOVING
IT FROM ADDITIONAL STUDY IT
ENSURES WE CANNOT EVEN CONSIDER
THIS MOVING FORWARD, AND I
DON'T BELIEVE THAT IS IN OUR
BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY. ONE
OF THE ISSUES WE'VE EXPERIENCED
IN TRYING TO MOVE FORWARD IN OUR
OWN POLICY GOALS IN THIS WHOLE
ENTIRE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING
PROCESS, IS THE FACT THAT WE
HAVE ALSO BEEN CONSTRAINED BY
WHAT WAS STUDIED IN THE F EIS.
THAT IS WHY THIS DOCUMENT
RESOLUTION IS SO IMPORTANT. IT
GIVES US OPTIONS. THIS AMENDMENT
TAKES AWAY THAT OPTION TO EVEN
BE CONSIDERED FOR THIS. I WILL
POINT TO THE LETTER SIGNED BY
ALL OF OUR SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS
IN SUPPORT OF WHAT WAS A MINUTE
34, WHICH ALSO INCLUDED THIS AS
A PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER.
BECAUSE THEY WANT MORE
OPPORTUNITIES FOR FAMILIES TO BE
ABLE TO STAY IN THE CITY TO ALSO
ADDRESS OUR ROMAN ISSUES, AND I
UNDERSTAND THE SPONSOR THIS
MINUTE IS CITING ENVIRONMENTAL
CONCERNS. I WILL NOT NEGATE THE
POSSIBILITY OF THAT, BUT WE
WON'T KNOW UNTIL WE STUDY IT. I
ALSO WANT TO NOTE, THIS IS A
PLAN THAT WE KNOW WILL BE FOR
THE NEXT 20 YEARS, AND , IN 20
YEARS, I BELIEVE ALKI COULD VERY
WELL HAVE A GROCERY STORE, AND
INCREDIBLE TRANSIT ACCESS, MORE
AMENITIES AND SERVICES. AM I
MAKING THIS AREA AND SETTING IT
AS A NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER, WE ARE
SETTING IT UP FOR GROWTH THAT
WOULD CREATE BETTER DEMAND TO BE
ABLE TO AFFORD THESE IMPORTANT
NEEDS. SO I WILL NOT BE
SUPPORTIVE OF THIS AND THE
TODAY, BUT I REMAIN COMMITTED TO
CONTINUED ENGAGING WITH THE ALKI
COMMUNITY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK. ANY OTHER COMMENTS
REGARDING AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE
BEFORE WE TAKE IT TO A VOTE ?
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL-ON AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE?
I'M SORRY, BEFORE WE CALL THE
ROLL, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, ANY
FINAL CLOSING WORDS? I
APOLOGIZE.
>> NO, THANK YOU, CHAIR.
COLLEAGUES, AGAIN, I JUST ASK
YOUR SUPPORT. HOW I APPROACH
THIS, I TRY TO CENTER THE VOICES
OF THOSE MOST DIRECTLY IMPACTED,
STARTING WITH THE FOLKS IN ALKI
AND THE ALKI AREA. AND THEN THE
NEXT LAYER OUTSIDE OF THAT WOULD
ALL OF WEST SEATTLE, AND SORT OF
THE REST OF THE CITY. BECAUSE IT
DOES NOT MEET THE OBJECTIVE
EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR WHAT
CONSTITUTES A NEIGHBORHOOD
CENTER, OUT OF ALL THE
NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS, I THINK
THIS IS A WORTHY CANDIDATE FOR
REMOVAL AT THIS TIME. GROWTH IS
GOING TO HAPPEN, EVERYONE, AND
WE ARE IMPLEMENTING THE
PROVISIONS OF THE STATE MENTAL
HOUSING BILL, AND AS PART OF
THAT DESIGNATING CERTAIN
NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS. EVEN IF WE
DID NOT DESIGNATE CERTAIN
NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS, THERE
WOULD BE MORE GROWTH AND DENSITY
IN ALL AREAS OF THE CITY AS A
DIRECT RESULT. WE NEED GROWTH,
WE NEED DENSITY. MY WHOLE
APPROACH IS MAKING SURE THAT WE
DO IT AND RESPONSIBLE,
THOUGHTFUL MANNER. THAT IS
MINDFUL OF THOSE MOST DIRECTLY
IMPACTED. FOR THOSE REASONS I
ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT .
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL-ON AMENDMENT NUMBER
ONE?
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. COUNCIL
MEMBER SAKA . COUNCIL MEMBER
SOLOMON.
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON. CHAIR
HOLLINGSWORTH.
>> NO.
>> FOUR IN FAVOR, FOR THE POST,
ONE ABSTENTION.
>> MOTION FAILS AND THE
AMENDMENT IS NOT ADOPTED. WE
WILL NOW CONSIDER THE NEXT
MINUTE. COUNCILMEMBER RINCK ,
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED TO MOVE YOUR
AMENDMENT.
>> ONE MOMENT.
>> I AM MORE THAN HAPPY TO MOVE
FOR YOU. YOU ARE ALL GOOD.
>> COLLEAGUES, I MOVED TO AMEND
, COULD YOU PLEASE MOVE IT FOR
ME, CHAIR? I APOLOGIZE.
>> I MOVED TO AMEND RESOLUTION
32183 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT
NUMBER TWO. IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> MOVED AND SECONDED TO AMEND
THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED ON
AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO, CENTRAL
STAFF.
>> YOU MIGHT REMEMBER THAT THERE
WERE TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF
FUTURE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER, THAT
WERE INCLUDED IN AMENDMENTS FOR
CONSIDERATION YESTERDAY.
AMENDMENT 34, I HAD ONE BOUNDARY
FOR THAT AREA. AMENDMENT 50 HAD
ANOTHER BOUNDARY FOR THAT AREA .
THE MAP IN THE RESOLUTION
CURRENTLY SHOWS THE BOUNDARY IS
PROPOSED UNDER AMENDMENT 50.
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD , INSTEAD,
REPLACE THAT MAP WITH ONE THAT
SHOWS BOTH BOUNDARIES , TO
PROVIDE OPTIONS FOR FUTURE
STUDY.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK, YOUR
RECOGNIZE.
>> THANK YOU FOR MOVING MY
AMENDMENT. ALWAYS, MY OFFICE
WORKED WITH COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE'S OFFICE TO ENSURE BOTH
OF OUR PREFERRED VISIONS FOR THE
BORDERS OF THE NICKERSON SOUTH
CANAL NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER COULD
BE STUDIED. I'M HAPPY THAT WE
HAVE COME TO THIS WELCOME
COMPROMISE. LOOKING FORWARD TO
THIS ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW. SO WE CAN HOPEFULLY SEE
A FULLY REALIZED NICKERSON
NEIGHBORHOOD.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER
RINCK. OTHER COMMENTS?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR
HOLLINGSWORTH, AND THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK TO INCLUDE
THE COORDINATIONS , STAFF TO
STAFF DISCUSSIONS. WE HAVE QUITE
A FEW STAFF TO STAFF
DISCUSSIONS. OBVIOUSLY I BELIEVE
THE BOUNDARIES OF THE AMENDMENT
THAT WE LOOK FOR, ACTUALLY PART
OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER WE
HAD PUT FORWARD REFLECT WHAT'S
BEST FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD
CENTER. AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, I'VE
BEEN IN EACH OF THESE AREAS, FOR
LITTLE KID BIRTHDAY, SO I KNOW
THE AREA VERY WELL. THE ISSUES
WITH SOME OF THE TRANSPORTATION
CHALLENGES. OF COURSE I PREFER
MY BOUNDARIES, BUT YES, I
SUPPORT HAVING A DOUBLE STUDY
REGARDING THE TWO AREAS , AND,
COLLEAGUES, THIS ALSO GOES TO
THE IDEA OF NEIGHBORHOOD VILLAGE
, WHICH WE WILL USE IN PHASE
TWO. NO NEED FOR A PHASE TWO ,
WE'VE GOT IT. BUT WE ARE GOING
TO DO THE NEIGHBORHOOD VILLAGE.
AND IT KIND OF GOES TO THE IDEA,
I JUST WANT TO STAY REALLY
QUICKLY, THAT WE SHOULD BE
LOOKING AT OPPORTUNITIES TO UP
ZONE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT AREAS
AND SEE WHICH ONES ORGANICALLY
KIND OF TAKE OFF. WHICH
ORGANICALLY HAVE THAT KIND OF
BEHIND THEM IN TERMS OF
DESTINATION, FROM THE COMMERCIAL
BEES, THE TRANSIT FEES, THE
HOUSING PIECE, HOW THESE THINGS
COME TOGETHER. I REALLY LOOK AT
THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS A
STEP-BY-STEP PROCESS. WE TALK
ABOUT 20 YEARS, BUT, IN REALITY,
IT'S 10 YEARS. ACTUALLY, IN
REALITY, THIS IS TURNING INTO
TEXAS AND THEIR SENSES, AND
REDISTRICTING. WE ARE GOING TO
BE LOOKING AT THIS EVERY YEAR IN
A MAJOR WAY. WE KIND OF SET
OURSELVES UP FOR THAT. SO I'M
NOT CONCERNED, YOU KNOW, IN
TERMS OF WE'VE GOT TO DO THIS
BECAUSE 20 YEARS FROM NOW.
BECAUSE THERE'S ALL THESE STEPS
IN BETWEEN. AND NOTHING
NEIGHBORHOOD VILLAGE IS THE ONE
TO DO IT. WE ARE GOING TO START
WITH THIS AS NEIGHBORHOOD
VILLAGE THROUGH PHASE TWO, AND
THROUGH THE STUDY, AND MAKING
SURE WE ARE NOT FALLING IN
VIOLATION OF ANY LAWS. WHICH WE
HAVE BEEN LEARNING ABOUT TODAY.
POTENTIALLY GOING AHEAD WITH THE
NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER IN THE
FUTURE. PREFERABLY, OF COURSE,
WITH MY OPTION. I AM FINE WITH
HAVING THE DOUBLE STUDY, AND I
WELCOME IT, ACTUALLY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS
BEFORE US REGARDING AMENDMENT
NUMBER TWO? SEEING NONE, AS THE
SPONSOR OF THE BILL, I KEEP
SAYING BILL AND AMENDMENT. AS
SPONSOR OF THE AMENDMENT, WE
RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER RINCK TO
ADDRESS.
>> I WANT TO EXPRESS MY
APPRECIATION TO COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE FOR HIS COLLABORATION ON
THIS, AND WITH THIS WELCOME
COMPROMISE IT JUST GIVES US
OPTIONS. SO I ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT.
>> AWESOME, WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL-ON ADOPTION
OF AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO?
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON.
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON. CHAIR
HOLLINGSWORTH. NINE IN FAVOR,
NOT OPPOSED.
>> MOTION CARRIES, AMENDMENT IS
ADOPTED. COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS,
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED TO MOVE YOUR
AMENDMENT.
>> MOVING AMENDMENT THREE TO
RESOLUTION 32183.
>> MOVED AND SECONDED TO AMEND
RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED ON
AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE, CENTRAL
STAFF.
>> YESTERDAY YOU ADOPTED
AMENDMENT 42 , WHICH ADDED A NEW
NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER IN EAST
BALLARD AND REMOVED THE PHINNEY
RIDGE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER. THE
RESOLUTION WAS DRAFTED FOR YOU
MADE THOSE , THAT DECISION, SO
IT ASKS FOR A NEW NEIGHBORHOOD
CENTER IN EAST BALLARD TO BE
STUDIED , AND ASKS FOR A STUDY
OF EXPANSION OF THE PHINNEY
RIDGE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER. THIS
AMENDMENT REVERSES THAT. SO IT
ASKS FOR STUDY OF EXPANSION OF
EAST BALLARD, AND ADDITION OF
BENNING RIDGE, TO REFLECT THE
VOTE YOU MADE YESTERDAY.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, YOUR
RECOGNIZE TO ADDRESS YOUR
AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. OF
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE IS OVER
SHARING, I WILL OVERSTEER LITTLE
BIT, AS WELL. WHICH IS THAT
RECEIVING LEGAL ADVICE , HAD WE
KEPT BOTH NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS,
THAT MIGHT BE A CHALLENGE FOR
US. SO WE MADE THE DECISION TO
MOVE THE PHINNEY NEIGHBORHOOD
CENTER TO EAST BALLARD , AND
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT ON
THAT. THIS AMENDMENT BEFORE US
RIGHT NOW MAKES THAT TECHNICAL
CORRECTION AND ALSO DOCKETS
SPACE IN BOTH EAST BALLARD AND
PHINNEY TO BE STUDIED FOR FUTURE
DECISIONS. AND THAT IS JUST WHAT
THIS IS. I URGE YOUR SUPPORT,
AND YES, PLEASE SUPPORT THIS,
OTHERWISE WE ARE GOING TO HAVE
TO, IT UPSETS EVERYTHING WE DID
YESTERDAY.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS. ANY COMMENTS ON
AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE? ANY
COMMENTS? SEEING NONE, WILL THE
CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLE FOR
AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE?
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. COUNCIL
MEMBER SAKA. COUNCIL MEMBER
SOLOMON. COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
ALSO MEMBER JUAREZ.
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON. CHAIR
HOLLINGSWORTH. EIGHT IN FAVOR,
NOT OPPOSED, ONE ABSTENTION.
>> AMENDMENT ADOPTED. WE WILL
NOW CONSIDER THE NEXT AMENDMENT.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON, YOU
ARE RECOGNIZED TO MOVE YOUR
AMENDMENT.
>> COLLEGE, I MOVE AMENDMENT
FOUR , PLEASE. TO THE COUNCIL.
>> 21209 AND THREE.
>> YEAH, I MOVE AMENDMENT FOUR
TO THE RESOLUTION.
>> SECOND. IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO AMEND THE RESOLUTION
AS PRESENTED FOR AMENDMENT FOUR
CENTRAL STAFF.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON HAD
AMENDMENT 74 TO INCREASE HEIGHT
LIMITS IN NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND LOWRISE
ONE ZONES . IF THAT AMENDMENT
WAS NOT MOVED AND, INSTEAD,
ADMITTED TO RESOLUTION WOULD ASK
TO STUDY THOSE.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON, YOU
ARE RECOGNIZED.
>> THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES, I
WITHDREW A MINUTE 74 WHICH WOULD
INCREASE HEIGHT LIMITS FROM 32
FEET TO 35 FEET, DUE TO THE
CONCERN ABOUT IT CREATING
ADDITIONAL ZONE CAPACITY THAT
WAS NOT STUDIED IN THE FINAL
EIS. WE ARE ALREADY A YEAR LATE
UPDATING OUR PUMP PLAN AND WE
DESPERATELY NEED MORE HOUSING,
SO IT IS CRITICAL TO PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY
AND, IF ADDITIONAL STUDY IS
TRIGGERED, THAT WILL SLOW DOWN
THE HOUSING CONSTRUCTION IN
ZONES WHERE WE REALLY NEED IT.
SO THIS IS AN IDEA THAT I HAD,
AND IT WAS OBVIOUSLY NOT IN THE
MAYOR 'S ONE SEATTLE PLAN. IT
WAS SUPPORTED BY HABITAT FOR
HUMANITY. AND, UNFORTUNATELY, I
AM JUST ASKING THAT IT BE
REMOVED FOR FURTHER STUDY. IT
WOULD BE, IT IS STILL A VALUABLE
CONCEPT, BECAUSE FLATS REQUIRE
UTILITIES AND INSULATION IN THE
FOREST BETWEEN UNITS, AND,
WITHOUT ALLOWING FOR HIGHER
HEIGHTS, WE COULD BE CUTTING IN
THE PROFICIENT TO PROJECT
FEASIBILITY. BELLEVUE, FOR
INSTANCE, HAS A 40 FOOT HEIGHT
LIMIT IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
AGAIN, THE AMENDMENT AS DRAFTED,
COULD HAVE CREATED A LOOPHOLE
THAT CREATED MORE ZONE CAPACITY
THAN WAS STUDIED. AND BY ASKING
OP CD TO STUDY THIS, THEY CAN
COME BACK WITH LANGUAGE THAT
RECOGNIZES THE NEED FOR MODEST
HEIGHT INCREASES IN MODERN HOMES
WITHOUT CAUSING CONCERN ABOUT
DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY OR SLOWING
DOWN THE HOUSING CONSTRUCTION
THAT WE VERY MUCH NEED.
BASICALLY I'M TAKING ONE FOR
THE TEAM HERE AND TAKING MINE
OUT. ANYWAY, THAT'S IT.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT
NELSON. ANY COMMENTS REGARDING
AMENDMENT NUMBER FOUR?
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE, IS THAT AN
OLD HAND? YOU ARE A YOUNG GUY
WITH AN OLD HAND. ANY FURTHER
COMMENTS ON AMENDMENT NUMBER
FOUR? AWESOME. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLE FOR
ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT NUMBER
FOUR?
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. COUNCIL
MEMBER SAKA. COUNCILMEMBER
SOLOMON. COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE . COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON. CHAIR
HOLLINGSWORTH. NINE IN FAVOR,
NOT OPPOSED.
>> MOTION CARRIES, AMENDMENT IS
ADOPTED AND WE WILL NOW CONSIDER
THE NEXT AMENDMENT.
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE, YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED TO MOVE YOUR
AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR
HOLLINGSWORTH. COLLEAGUES, I
MOVE AMENDMENT FIVE TO
RESOLUTION 32183.
>> SECOND. IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. AMEND THE RESOLUTION
AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT NUMBER
FIVE, CENTRAL STAFF.
>> COLLEAGUES, AMENDMENT FIVE IS
BASICALLY AMENDMENT NUMBER 99.
>> IF WE COULD TAKE ONE SECOND,
I APOLOGIZE. WE ARE GOING TO
BRING IT BACK.
>> THIS IS REPRESENTED IN
AMENDMENT NUMBER 99 THERE WAS IN
COUNT NUMBER 120933.
>> SO AMENDMENT NUMBER 99, IN
COUNCIL BILL 120933 WAS
WITHDRAWN , AND HE IS MOVING IT
TO THE RESOLUTION. MY APOLOGIES.
SO AMENDMENT NUMBER 99 FROM
COUNCIL BILL 120933 HAS BEEN
WITHDRAWN AND BEEN MOVED TO THE
RESOLUTION. I AM REALIZING NOW
THAT I HAVE A DIFFERENT PAPER
THAN EVERYONE ELSE, I APOLOGIZE.
>> SECOND ON THAT IF A SECOND IS
NEEDED.
>> I THINK YOU SECOND THAT I
HAVE A DIFFERENT PAPER THEN
EVERYONE ELSE.
>> TRYING THE SECOND AMENDMENT
FIVE.
>> ONE SECOND. LET'S REWIND
HERE. I KNOW IT HAS BEEN MOVED
AND SECONDED, BUT IS EVERYONE
OKAY WITH THAT MOTION?
>> WE'LL HAVE AMENDMENT FIVE.
SO IF THERE IS SPECIFIC LANGUAGE
TO PROPOSE, WE CAN DRAFT
SOMETHING ON THE FLY. YOU MAY
HAVE SOME ALREADY IN FRONT OF
YOU.
>> BEFORE WE CAN WORK WITH
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE TO PREPARE
AN AMENDMENT FOR FULL COUNCIL.
>> YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, YES.
>> CHAIR, AMENDMENT 99, WHICH I
WITHDREW, IS REALLY SIMPLE. IT
BASICALLY ELIMINATES THE AMENITY
AREA REQUIREMENTS FOR
DEVELOPMENT IN OUR ZONES. SO
BASICALLY IT WAS JUST STRIPPED
THAT SECTION NOW.
>> ONE SECOND, I APOLOGIZE. HOLD
ON ONE SECOND, COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE. THE QUESTION RIGHT NOW
IS CENTRAL STAFF DOES NOT HAVE
THAT AMENDMENT, SO WE EITHER ,
THE COUPLE OPTIONS NEED TO
HAPPEN, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THOSE
FOR US?
>> WE CAN. WE KNOW THE CONTENT
OF AMENDMENT 99, THAT IS FROM
COUNCIL BILL 120993, WHICH WOULD
ELIMINATE AMENITY AREAS , WOULD
NOT NECESSARILY CHANGE ANY OTHER
STANDARDS, IT WOULD JUST
PROVIDES MORE FLEXIBILITY FOR
DEVELOPING HER OR PROPERTY OWNER
TO DO WITH THEIR SITE. THEY
WOULD NOT HAVE TO HAVE A
SPECIFIED AMENITY AREA FOR EACH
UNIT. THAT, IN COMBINATION WITH
OTHER AMENDMENTS, MAY REQUIRE
SOME ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW. SO, TO THE EXTENT THAT
THERE IS A PLACE WE WOULD PUT IT
IN A RESOLUTION, IT WOULD BE IN
SECTION 2. SUBSECTION TWO IS A
SECTION THAT DEALS WITH FUTURE
COMPLINE COMMITMENTS. WE LIKELY
DON'T NEED A COMP PLAN
AMENDMENT FOR THIS, JUST
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY.
SO WE WOULD PUT THAT IN SECTION
2 WHICH SORT OF SPELLS OUT THE
THINGS OF THE COUNCIL IS
REQUESTING THAT OBESITY STUDY
FOR FUTURE COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION. SO, IT WOULD
PROBABLY BE , IT WOULD GO
TOWARDS THE END, IT WOULD BE J ,
AND I THINK THE LANGUAGE WOULD
BE SOMETHING LIKE, YOU CAN
IMPROVISE HERE BUT YOU MAY
BENEFIT FROM SEEING SOMETHING.
>> IS THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE
COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THAT
AMENDMENT TODAY, AND I BELIEVE
IT IS ALSO ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY
WHEN IT GETS TO THE CITY
COUNCIL, CORRECT?
>> CORRECT.
>> SO, RIGHT NOW THIS AMENDMENT
WOULD BE, I'M ASSUMING THIS
WOULD BE A VERBAL AMENDMENT TO
THE RESOLUTION? OR THIS COULD BE
AN AMENDMENT THAT WOULD BE
BROUGHT TO FULL COUNCIL? SO THAT
IS WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US,
COLLEAGUES. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY
>> AT THIS POINT IT HAS BEEN
MOVED AND SECONDED. IF THE
MEMBER WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS
THEM, AND FROM THERE WE CAN
DETERMINE IF YOU WANT TO
WITHDRAW IT FROM THE CITY
COUNCIL, AND IF NOT, WE CAN BE
AT EASE. IS CENTRAL STAFF FEELS
WE CAN DEVELOP IT AT THIS POINT.
AGAIN, I WOULD LEAVE THAT THE
CENTRAL STAFF TO SEE IF THAT'S
POSSIBLE. WE STILL NEED MORE
REVIEW ON THAT, AS WELL.
>> UNDERSTOOD. IF I COULD JUST
SAY SOMETHING, MY THING IS TO
MAKE SURE THAT CENTRAL STAFF HAS
ALL THE TOOLS THAT THEY NEED TO
MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS EXECUTED
PROPERLY, AND ALSO MY COLLEAGUES
FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE WITH IT, AS
WELL. SO WHAT WE WILL DO IS WE
WILL HAVE COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE
ADDRESS THE AMENDMENT, AND THEN
WE WILL GET INSIGHT FROM CENTRAL
STAFF. IS THAT OKAY?
>> YES, CHAIR.
>> IT IS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE,
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED TO ADDRESS
YOUR AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU. JUST A FOLLOW-UP
ON MR. FREEMAN'S POINTS ABOUT
FORMERLY KNOWN AS AMENDMENT 99,
NOW KNOWN AS AMENDMENT FIVE TO
RESOLUTION 32183, IT GOES TO THE
AMENITY AREA REQUIREMENTS, AS HE
NOTED. THE INTENTION BEHIND THIS
WAS REALLY BECAUSE THERE'S
REALLY HARD SCAPE AMENITIES
AREAS, TO OPEN UP THE
POSSIBILITIES FOR AMENITIES
AREAS AS CURRENTLY DESIGNATED
FOR TREES. THAT WAS THE INTENT,
THAT IS BASED ON EXPERIENCE AND
INPUT THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED, BUT
I DO RECOGNIZE THAT OTHERS DO
NOT AGREE WITH THIS, SO, IN A
LOT OF WAYS, THIS FEELS LIKE A
GREAT EXAMPLE TO GO TO
RESOLUTION, TO GET FURTHER
STUDY. AND CHAIR, I WILL DEFER
TO THE COMBINATION OF OUR GREAT
CLERK AND OUR GREAT CENTRAL
STAFF MEMBERS IN TERMS OF BEST.
MORE THAN HAPPY TO DO SOMETHING
HERE RIGHT NOW, OR TO PLACE IT
IN FULL COUNCIL. WHATEVER THE
CONSENSUS IS.
>> I WILL TURN TO COLLEAGUES.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY OBJECTION
IF , POTENTIALLY, THIS WAS ADDED
TO THE RESOLUTION TODAY
REGARDING THIS AMENDMENT? I'M
SEEING KNOW, SEEING NO, OKAY. IS
THERE OBJECTION FROM CENTRAL
STAFF? I'M NOT TRYING TO PUT
ANY PRESSURE ON YOU ALL.
>> IF YOU LIKE, WE CAN SUGGEST
WHAT THE LANGUAGE MAY LOOK LIKE
FOR THE RESOLUTION AND HAVE THAT
AS AN ORAL AMENDMENT.
>> I'M OKAY WITH THAT.
>> YEAH, AND AGAIN, IF IT IS
ADOPTED, IT WOULD STILL NEED TO
GO THROUGH ALL REVIEW AND THEY
CAN ALWAYS BE FURTHER CHANGES AT
THE CITY COUNCIL LEVEL TO
RECTIFY ANY OF THE CHANGES THAT
NEED TO OCCUR.
>> ALL RIGHT, IS THAT SOMETHING
YOU ARE OKAY WITH DOING OFF THE
FLY?
>> YES, I THINK SOMETHING LIKE
THIS, NEW SUBSECTION J, WHICH
WOULD BE AMENITY AREAS, PERIOD.
AND THE DIRECTIONS WOULD BE
DEVELOP PROPOSALS TO REDUCE OR
ELIMINATE AMENITY AREAS IN
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL AND LOW
RISE ZONES TO FACILITATE DESIGN
FLEXIBILITY AND TREAT REJECTION.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> I SUPPORT THAT, CHAIR.
>> SAID HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO
MOVE, IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION,
THAT AMENDMENT WILL BE ADOPTED
INTO THE RESOLUTION. AND WE
STILL HAVE TO CALL THE ROLL.
>> ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE DID IS WE
JUST AMENDED THE MOTION TO
REFLECT CENTRAL STAFF, AND THEN
WE CAN DISCUSS THE AMENDMENT AS
THEY JUST PROPOSED IT. AFTER
THAT WE CAN TO THE LOCAL.
>> UNDERSTOOD. RIGHT NOW WE WILL
ENTERTAIN QUESTIONS.
COUNCILMEMBER, YOU HAVE, ONE
SECOND, COUNCIL MEMBER RIVERA,
GO AHEAD.
>> WE CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS WHILE
HE IS TYPING.
>> SO JUST INCLUDING IT IN THE
RESOLUTION IS ASKING OPC DEED TO
STUDY THE IMPACTS OF SAID
PROPOSAL. IS THAT CORRECT? I
JUST NEED TO BE CLEAR ON WHAT
I'M VOTING ON HERE.
>> CORRECT. THE COUNCIL WOULD BE
ASKING OPC DEED TO ANALYZE THE
IMPACTS AND MAKE A
RECOMMENDATION ON WHETHER AND
HOW TO REMOVE AMENITY AREA
REQUIREMENTS IN NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
>> AND THEN IT WOULD COME BACK
TO US ? THE WAY THE OTHER ONES
ARE? OKAY. THANK YOU, APPRECIATE
THAT. THANK YOU, CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA. JUST TO CLARIFY, CLAIRE,
WE DO NOT HAVE TO TAKE A VOTE ,
WE DO HAVE TO TAKE A VOTE ON
THIS? ON THE AMENDMENT? THANK
YOU. BUT NOT ADDING IT TO THE
RESOLUTION. WE ARE GOING TO BE
AT EASE .
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA, WAIT
UNTIL WE COME BACK. ONE SECOND.
>> SO, THE AMENDMENT WOULD ADD A
NEW SECTION J, SUBSECTION J TO
SECTION 2 OF THE RESOLUTION.
STATING AMENITY AREAS TO
PROPOSALS TO REDUCE OR ELIMINATE
AREAS TO FACILITATE DESIGN
FLEXIBILITY .
>> COULD YOU ZOOM IN TO THAT ,
PLEASE? I'M GETTING OLD. SORRY,
I CAN'T READ THAT. OKAY,
PERFECT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO
MUCH. NOW WE ARE GOING TO ENGAGE
COMMENTS REGARDING AMENDMENT
NUMBER FIVE, THAT HAS BEEN ADDED
TO THE RESOLUTION. COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. SORRY, FOR
THE RECORD, YOU KNOW I WANT TO
SAY THE REASON I AM NOT IN
CHAMBERS IS BECAUSE I ATTENDED
THE ASSOCIATION OF WASHINGTON
CITY RETREAT , OF WHICH I SIT ON
THE BOARD, SO I WISH I COULD'VE
BEEN THERE IN PERSON, BUT I AM
HAPPY THAT I AM PARTICIPATING
ONLINE. THAT'S WHY I'M NOT
THERE. OKAY, THAT SAID, I AM
CLARIFYING, AGAIN, THE WAY I
READ THIS IS NOT THAT WE ARE
GOING TO STUDY IT. IT SAYS OC PD
SEND US PROPOSALS. SO IT SEEMS
DIFFERENT FOR SOME OF THE OTHER
THINGS. AND I'M SORRY, I NEED
TO GO TO THE LANGUAGE OF THE
RESOLUTION. CAN YOU CLARIFY , IS
IT THAT WE ARE PROPOSING THEY
BRING US PROPOSALS? OR IS IT
THAT THEY ARE INCLUDING IT TO
THE ADDITIONAL EIS WORK IN THE
RESOLUTION? WE ARE INCLUDING
THIS IN THE RESOLUTION FOR
ADDITIONAL EIS WORK?
>> YEAH, THE SECTION THIS IS IN,
SECTION 2 , SO THIS IS SECTION
2. A DEPARTMENTAL PROGRAM
SECTION. SO THE WORK PROGRAM FOR
THE DEPARTMENT WOULD TO BE TO
DEVELOP THE PROPOSALS FOR 2026,
AND THE PROPOSAL WOULD INCLUDE
ASSOCIATED ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.
SO IT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH
ANALYSIS ON THE ADUS, CONDUCT
SEPA , CONDUCT SEPA, WE COULD
SAY CONDUCT SEPA. WE COULD ADD
CONDUCT SEPA AND DEVELOP
PROPOSALS. THAT WOULD BE AN ORAL
AMENDMENT BY COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE, HAS OFFERED.
>> CHAIR, IF I MAY, THE REASON
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE WITHDREW
THE AMENDMENT IS BECAUSE OF THE
EIS CONCERNS, SO THAT IS WHY I
AM ASKING FOR THE CLARITY ON
THIS. STILL NEEDS TO GET EIS
REVIEW BEFORE THE PROPOSALS
WOULD COME TO US. I AM JUST
TRYING TO GET THE CLARITY ON
THAT.
>> THANK YOU, WE ARE JUST
GETTING CLARITY ON YOUR VERBAL
AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT.
>> IT CLARIFIES THE TYPE OF
PROPOSAL, NOT INCLUDING SEPA. MY
RECOMMENDATION, IF THERE IS NO
OBJECTIONS INCLUDING THE SEPA
LANGUAGE, WE CAN CONTINUE WITH
THE DISCUSSION WITH THE
AMENDMENT AS AMENDED.
>> AWESOME, ANY OBJECTION TO
THAT? NEXT, COUNCILMEMBER --
>> WE HAVE JUST GOTTEN
CONFIRMATION THAT THERE ARE NO
LEGAL ISSUES.
>> GREAT. SO, IN CLOSING,
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE, YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED TO ADDRESS YOUR
AMENDMENT IN THE RESOLUTION.
AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE AS
AMENDED.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR
HOLLINGSWORTH AND COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA . I APPRECIATE THE INPUT,
I APPRECIATE THE ORAL AMENDMENT
TO ADJUST THIS, AND I THINK IT
GOES TO WHAT WE WERE LOOKING TO
DO, AS I EXPRESS. SO I AM IN
SUPPORT OF THIS, AND COLLEAGUES,
I ASKED FOR YOUR SUPPORT, TOO.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE. WILL THE CLERK CALL THE
ROLL ON AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE AS
AMENDED IN AMENDED AND AMENDED?
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON.
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
COUNCILMEMBER FOUR IS.
COUNCILMEMBER CADDELL. COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON. CHAIR
HOLLINGSWORTH.
>> MOTION CARRIES, AND THEN IS
ADOPTED. THANK YOU, MOTION
CARRIES, JIMENEZ ADOPTED. THANK
YOU, LEGAL, FOR THAT.
>> CHAIR, NO FURTHER COMMENTS.
>> ALSO WANT TO SAY IS THIS. IT
DOES MY HEART HAPPY.
>> WILL YOU PLEASE TALK TO THE
MICROPHONE?
>> I AM HAPPY WHEN I SEE ARE
CITYWIDE REPRESENTED IS WORKING
WITH OUR DISTRICT THAT IT IS.
BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT WE
ENVISIONED IN 2014 WE MOVED TO
STRIP REPRESENTATION. I
APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER SAKA IS
PASSIONATE SPEECH, BECAUSE THAT
IS WHAT WE NEED TO HEAR. I KNOW
I DON'T AGREE WITH YOU,
WHATEVER YOU DID TODAY AND
WHATEVER YOU SAID TODAY STUCK
WITH ME, AND I WILL STILL COME
BACK TO YOU AS THE WELL OF
INFORMATION REPRESENTING THE
ONE. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. I
THINK WE ARE SHOWING THE PUBLIC
THAT WE CAN ACT AS A BODY THAT
SPEAKS TO EACH OTHER. I THINK
WE'VE LEARNED, I KNOW WE KNOW,
AND I JUST LIKE IT WHEN WE SHOW
IT. THAT WHEN WE DO HAVE
ATTENTION THAT IT CAN ACTUALLY
LEAD TO COMPROMISE. SO I WANT TO
THANK YOU, CHAIR, FOR YOUR
LEADERSHIP. I WANT TO THANK MY
COLLEAGUES WERE NOT ONLY
LISTENING TO ME, BUT INVITING ME
BACK THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR, AND I SAID
THIS. BUT SINCE WE ARE TAKING UP
THIS LAST PIECE, INTO WE GET TO
FULL COUNCIL ANYWAY. AGAIN,
THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP,
FOR YOUR TRANSPARENCY, FOR YOUR
PARTNERSHIP, AND YOUR STAFF.
THIS HAS BEEN A VERY LONG
PROCESS. I AM VERY APPRECIATIVE
THAT YOU AGREE TO TAKE THIS ON.
IT'S A LOT OF WORK . SOMETIMES
OUR CONSTITUENT'S DON'T ALWAYS
FEEL THE THINGS THAT GO INTO IT.
BUT I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK
THAT YOUR TEAM HAS DONE AND THAT
YOU HAVE DONE, AND ALSO THE
PARTNERSHIP WITH CONSTITUENTS. I
AM HERE THAT I AM HERE, AND I
MONITOR D4. SILLY CONSTITUENTS
ALSO WERE VERY ACTIVE IN THIS
PROCESS AND I VERY MUCH
APPRECIATED THAT, TOO. SO I
WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, AS
WELL. THANK YOU, AND I WOULD TO
TAKING THIS VOTE
>> COUNCIL MEMBER SOLOMON.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, I
WANT TO ECHO MY ADMIRATION FOR
HOW YOU HAVE SHEPHERDED THIS
PROCESS. HOW YOU HAVE HANDLED
THE INCREDIBLE NUMBER OF HOURS
OF PUBLIC COMMENTARY, BOTH IN
PERSON AND ONLINE, HOW YOU MAJOR
THAT THOSE WHO WANTED THE CHANCE
TO SPEAK GOT A CHANCE TO SPEAK,
THE WAY THAT YOU CONTROLLED THE
CHAMBER. WHEN IT COULD'VE
GOTTEN SPICY. AND YOUR
LEADERSHIP, OVERALL, HAS JUST
BEEN MIND BLOWING. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU FOR SHOPPING IN TO
SHEPHERD THIS PROCESS AND
STICKING WITH IT, SEEING IT
THROUGH.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
SOLOMON. ANY OTHER COMMENTS
BEFORE I JUMP IN THE MIND REAL
QUICK, AS WE BRING THIS TO A
CLOSE? OKAY, AWESOME. WE HAVE
NOT TAKEN A VOTE ON THE FINAL,
SO YES, PERFECT. THANK YOU ALL,
COLLEAGUES. WE WILL GO AHEAD AND
TAKE THIS VOTE, AND I WILL GET
MY COMMENTS. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE
ADOPTION AS AMENDED?
>> COUNCIL MEMBER SAWANT.
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. COUNCIL
NEVER SAKA. COUNCIL MEMBER
SOLOMON. COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
COUNCIL MEMBER JUAREZ.
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON. AND CHAIR
HOLLINGSWORTH. NINE IN FAVOR,
NOT OPPOSE.
>> MOTION CARRIES, AND THE
COMMUNITY RECOMMENDATION THAT
THE RESOLUTION BE ADOPTED BE
SENT TO CITY COUNCIL, AND MY
ASSUMPTION IS THAT IT WILL BE
SENT WITH ALL THE OTHER STUFF WE
HAVE PASSED OUT OF THIS
COMMITTEE. COLLEAGUES, THANK YOU
FOR YOUR KIND WORDS, IT I
APPRECIATE IT. IT IS REALLY
PHENOMENAL TO WORK WITH YOU ALL,
AND ALSO WITH THAT, THERE'S NO
OTHER ITEMS ON THE AGENDA TODAY.
THIS IS THE LAST MEETING
SCHEDULED FOR THE SELECT
CONFERENCE OF PLAN COMMITTEE.
AND YES, IT'S ON A FRIDAY. I
THINK THAT'S A GREAT DATA IN
THE WEEK. WE WILL SEE THESE
PIECES OF LEGISLATION AT ALL
COUNCIL. I WANT TO MENTION THAT
I AM REALLY PROUD OF THE WORK WE
DID SINCE JANUARY FOR THIS
COMMITTEE. WE HAD A LOT OF
OBSTACLES, BUT WE PIVOTED FROM
PRESENTATIONS TO INTERIM
LEGISLATION TO FINAL LEGISLATION
VERY GRACEFULLY, AND I FEEL VERY
CONFIDENT ABOUT THE AMENDED
REGISTRATION WE PASSED TODAY,
AND THE VALUES REFLECTED IN THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. I HAVE TRIED
TO BECOME TRANSPARENT, HONEST,
COLLABORATIVE, THOUGHTFUL, A
GOOD TEAM MEMBER, AND YOU HAVE
SHOWN THAT THAT, AS WELL. I WANT
TO THANK EACH AND EVERYONE OF
YOU FOR BEING GREAT PEOPLE AND
PARTNERS. YOU HAVE TESTED ME
MANY TIMES, ALL OF YOU TEST TO
ME, EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU.
THANK YOU. I SEE YOUR LOVING
FACES. AND IF YOU GIVE ME A
SECOND, I WANT TO READ THE
BEGINNING OF THE RESOLUTION
REALLY QUICK. BECAUSE I THINK
IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. I KNOW
IT'S 5:05. I WILL BE
SUPERQUICK. I LISTENED ALL OF
YOU ON THIS MIKE, SO GIVE ME TWO
MINUTES. IS THAT OKAY? GIVE ME
TWO MINUTES. SO THE RESOLUTION,
WHICH I THINK IS ONE OF THE MOST
IMPORTANT PIECES, IS WELCOMING
AND INCLUSIVE. NEW GROWTH SHOULD
WELCOME NEWCOMERS WHILE
PREVENTING DISPLACEMENT OF, I
DID NOT USE BIPOC, BUT BLACK
INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF COLOR
COMMUNITIES, MEMBERS OF THE
LGBTQ IA COMMUNITY, AND UNDER
RESOURCED HOUSEHOLDS. NOT
UNDERSERVICED, UNDER RESOURCED.
THE PLAN IS INTENDED TO HELP
COMMUNITIES THRIVE IN A PLACE
AND PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR
RESIDENTS WHO HAVE BEEN
MISPLACED AND NEWCOMERS.
AFFORDABILITY. CITY GROWTH
STRATEGY SUPPORTS HOUSING
OPTIONS THAT WILL WORK FOR ALL
FAMILIES AND INCREASE HOUSING
SUPPLY INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, DEVELOPMENT OF
DUPLEXES, TRY PLEXUS, STACKED
FLATS, ADUS, AND MIXED UNITS.
MAKING IT EASIER FOR
MULTIGENERATIONAL HOUSEHOLDS TO
STAY ROOTED IN COMMUNITY.
FURTHERMORE, THE COUNCIL
ENCOURAGES ADDITIONAL HOUSING
SUPPLY IN AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN
HISTORICALLY EXCLUSIONARY IN
THEIR ZONING TO REDUCE MARKET
PRESSURE RESULTING IN
DISPLACEMENT. ACCESSIBLE. CITY
COUNCIL CREATING CHILD FRIENDLY
ENVIRONMENT, NEW GROWTH, AND
BUILDING WITH DEPENDENTS IN MIND
SO THAT EVERYONE, REGARDLESS OF
ABILITY OR AGE, CAN NAVIGATE
THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD AND LIVE
COMFORTABLY. LIVABLE. THE PLAN
ADVANCES CLIMATE GOALS, REDUCING
INDEPENDENCE ON CARS, FOSTERING
VIBRANT COMMUNITIES WHERE
WALKING IS EASY, ENJOYABLE, AND
PART OF DAILY LIFE WITH ACCESS
TO RESTAURANTS, GROCERY STORES,
AND EVERYDAY ESSENTIALS. COUNCIL
INTENDS TO CONTINUE TO INVEST IN
OUTDOOR AREAS, PARKS, AND SHARED
SPACES TO MAKE NEIGHBORHOODS
FEEL WELCOME AND RESILIENT. LAST
BUT NOT LEAST, SAFE. THE PLAN
PRIORITIZES SAFETY THROUGH A NEW
PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT AND
SUPPORTS WELL IN STREETS,
SIDEWALKS, ACTIVE SPACES, AND
COMMUNITY DRIVEN PLANNING. THAT
IS IMPORTANT, BECAUSE THAT
STARTS THE RESOLUTION TO THE
KICKOFF OF WHAT THE COUNCIL WILL
CONTINUE TO WORK ON, BECAUSE THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS NOT OVER.
IT IS A WORKING, BREATHING
DOCUMENT THAT WILL CONTINUE TO
GUIDE US FOR OUR CITY. SO, DO MY
COLLEAGUES HAVE ANY MORE ITEMS
OF BUSINESS BEFORE WE COMPLETE?
LOOKING LEFT AND RIGHT, HEARING
NONE, THIS CONCLUDES SEPTEMBER
19th MEETING OF THE SELECT
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MEETING. IT
IS 5:07, COLLEAGUES, IF