>>> GOOD EVENING, THE SYSTEM OR
NINTH, 2019 MEETING OF THE
SEATTLE PLANNING, LAND USE, AND
ZONING COMMITTEE WILL COME TO
ORDER, 5:32 PM, ABEL PACHECO,
CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE, ONE
AGENDA ITEM TODAY, A PUBLIC
HEARING ON COUNCIL BILL 119600,
UPDATING THE CITY ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW POLICIES.
THE NEXT MEETING IS WEDNESDAY,
SEPTEMBER 11, AT NOON, IN
COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
BEFORE WE BEGIN, TODAY'S AGENDA
WILL BE ADOPTED, HEARING NO
OBJECTION.
IT IS ADOPTED.
PLEASE READ THE ABBREVIATED
TITLE INTO THE RECORD?
>>> COUNCIL BILL 119600 , AN
ORDINANCE RELATING TO
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW; AMENDING
SECTIONS 3.02.110, 25.05.035,
25.05.055, 25.05.070,
25.05.100, 25.05.440,
25.05.448, 25.05.545,
25.05.680, 25.05.800,
25.05.900, AND 25.05.914 OF THE
SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE TO
CLARIFY TIMELINES AND THE
CONTENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE
APPEALS, TO AUTHORIZE THE
DEVELOPMENT OF DIRECTOR
TO CLARIFY THE CONTENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS, AND TO
MAKE CORRECTIONS AND TECHNICAL
AMENDMENTS.
>>> BEFORE WE BEGIN, LISH
WHITSON, COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF
FROM COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF WILL
JOIN US, I WANTED TO SEE IF YOU
WANTED TO GET STARTED ON A
BRIEF OVERVIEW.
>>> THIS LEGISLATION UPDATES
THE CITIES REGULATIONS, STATE
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
REGULATIONS, INCORPORATING NEW
STATE REGULATIONS, AND BEST
PRACTICES FROM OTHER
JURISDICTIONS, AND MAKES
CHANGES TO CLARIFY THE CITY'S
INTENT.
THERE ARE THREE TYPES OF
EXEMPTIONS AND WAIVERS THAT ARE
INCORPORATED AND RECENTLY
ADOPTED IN STATE LAW.
THE FIRST IS HOUSING RELATED
WAIVERS OF APPEAL, THE
LEGISLATION INCORPORATES
PROVISIONS FROM HOSPITAL 1923,
ADOPTED THIS PAST SPRING.
PART OF THE STATE'S RESPONSE TO
THE STATEWIDE HOUSING CRISIS.
IT CONTINUES TO REQUIRE
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, STATING
THAT SOME REVIEWS ARE NOT
SUBJECT TO IT, IF ADOPTED, THE
CITY CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH
ACTIONS LIKE ADOPTING SUBAREA
PLANS, REZONING NEAR FREQUENT
TRANSIT SERVICE OR CHANGING
SINGLE-FAMILY ZONES TO ALLOW A
WIDER RANGE OF HOUSING, GOING
THROUGH THE ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW PROCESS, BUT IF IT WAS
DEFICIENT, IT WOULD NOT BE ABLE
TO APPEAL THE DECISION.
THIS PROVISION WOULD SUNSET ON
APRIL 1, 2021.
>>> THE SECOND PIECE OF STATE
LAW THAT IS BEING ADOPTED AS
PART OF THIS LEGISLATION ARE
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS ADOPTED
INTO STATE LAW, THESE TYPES OF
ACTIONS ARE LIMITED TO A SET OF
CHANGES THAT WOULD PROVIDE
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OR
CHANGES THAT WERE STUDIED UNDER
OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENTS, IN PARTICULAR
CHANGES TO IMPLEMENT THE PLAN
OR THE SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM
MAY BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT,
WHICH MEANS THEY DON'T HAVE TO
GO THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
ON THEIR OWN.
BUT THAT IS ONLY IF THE CHANGE
IMPLEMENTS THE PLAN OR THE
SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM,
AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND
THE MANAGER PROGRAM HAD ALREADY
BEEN THE SUBJECT OF AN
AFFIRMATIVE IMPACT STATEMENT,
SO BASICALLY THE SICK -- THIS
SECTION SAYS YOU DON'T NEED TO
DO ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW TWICE.
>>> AND WHO BROUGHT IN THE
CITIES APPLICATION OF STATE IN
FIELDING -- IN THE FIELD
DEVELOPMENT EXEMPTIONS, THEY
ALLOW FOR SMALLER INFIELD
DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS,
CONSISTENT WITH THE CITIES
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ALREADY IN
PLACE IN THE URBAN CENTERS,
FIRST OF ALL, CAPITOL HILL,
SOUTH LAKE UNION, AND UPTOWN,
AND THESE AREAS, ESSENTIAL
PRODUCTS WITH UP TO 200 UNITS
ARE SMALL COMMERCIAL THINGS ARE
AVAILABLE, 40 OR MORE, THEY
NEED TO PREPARE THE CHECKLIST.
SOUTH LAKE UNION, ARE GENERALLY
BIGGER, AND SUBJECT TO REVIEW.
IN ADDITION, THE EXEMPTIONS ARE
TIED TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,
ONCE THE AREA MEETS THE AMOUNT
OF GROWTH EXPECTED, THEN IT IS
REQUIRED.
THE LEGISLATION WILL APPLY THE
SAME RULES TO URBAN VILLAGES,
LESS THAN 40 PARKING SPACES,
AND AREAS WHERE THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAS NOT BEEN
ACHIEVED, THEY ARE EXEMPT,
OTHER PRODUCTS WILL BE STILL
SUBJECT.
>>> OTHER JURISDICTIONS AND
BEST PRACTICES, WE HAVE TWO OF
THEM, OTHER LARGE JURISDICTIONS
IN WASHINGTON STATE, WHERE
THERE ARE CURRENTLY TIME LIMITS
ON HOW LONG A HEARING
EXAMINER'S REVIEW OF A SEPA
CAN TAKE PLACE, IN KING COUNTY,
A LIMIT OF 90 DAYS, TACOMA HAS
A 120 DAY LIMIT, AND THE
PROPOSAL FOR SEATTLE IS TO USE
A 120 DAY LIMIT, EXPAND THAT BY
30 DAYS IF APPROPRIATE,
ALLOWING LONGER APPEALS, AND
PROCESSES, IF ALL PARTIES AGREE.
>>> THE SECOND SET OF CHANGES
THAT ARE INCORPORATED AS PART OF
LOOKING AT OTHER JURISDICTIONS'
BEST PRACTICES, ARE ALLOWING
THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTION
TO DEVELOP GUIDELINES THAT
APPLY AND GUIDE ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW.
LARGE JURISDICTIONS WITH
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
REGULATIONS LIKE NEW YORK AND
SAN FRANCISCO HAVE GUIDELINES
THAT GIVE A CONSISTENT LEVEL OF
ANALYSIS UNDER THEIR VERSIONS
OF SEPA.
IN SEATTLE, CURRENTLY EACH
CONSULTANT HAS ITS OWN APPROACH
TO ADAPT -- ADOPTING
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS, THIS
CAN MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO
COMPARE DOCUMENTS UNDERSTAND
WHETHER A SEPA ANALYSIS HAS
BEEN DONE APPROPRIATELY.
THE LEGISLATION WOULD ALLOW THE
DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTION AND
INSPECTIONS TO ADOPT
INSPECTIONS AND HOW IT WILL BE
DONE.>>> THREE, FINAL CHANGES,
FALLING INTO THE BUCKET OF
THINGS THAT HAVE COME UP IN
RECENT SEPA APPEAL HEARINGS,
THE FIRST IS RELATED TO
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS.
STATE REGULATIONS ARE CLEAR THAT
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS IS NOT PART
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
REQUIRED UNDER SEPA, HOWEVER
STATE LAW ALLOWS IT ALONGSIDE
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS, THEY HAVE
VOLUNTARILY CHOSEN TO -- THE
ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF DECISIONS,
UNDER STATE LAW, IT SHOULD NOT
BE SUBJECT TO APPEAL.
THE LEGISLATION CLARIFIES THE
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS THAT IS
REQUIRED, BUT NOT SUBJECT TO
APPEAL UNDER SEPA.
>>> SIMILARLY, A CLARIFIES THAT
THE ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS ON
INDIVIDUAL BUSINESSES IS NOT
REQUIRED.
THERE ARE LIMITS ON THE PHYSICAL
DATA THAT THE CITY CAN RELEASE
REGARDING INDIVIDUAL BUSINESSES,
STUDYING IMPACTS ON SPECIFIC
BUSINESSES, A CLARIFIES THAT
THE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS DOES NOT
APPLY TO INDIVIDUAL
BUSINESSES.>>> THE LEGISLATION
REMOVES A SECTION IN THE SEPA
CODE RELATED TO PERMITTING,
THAT CONFLICTS WITH THE LAND
USE CODE, IT HAS RELATIVELY
CLEAR REQUIREMENTS FOR
PERMITTING WHEN THERE IS A SEPA
APPEAL, STATING THAT PERMITS
ARE ISSUED AFTER THE LAST DATE
THAT IS AVAILABLE TO APPEAL AN
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.
SO THERE IS A DECISION PUBLISHED
, AN APPEAL., IF NO ONE FILES
AN APPEAL, A PERMIT IS ISSUED,
úIF IT IS APPEALED, PERMITS ARE
ISSUED AFTER THE APPEAL HAS
BEEN HEARD, OR AFTER IT HAS
BEEN DISMISSED.
THIS IS MUCH CLEARER THAN THE
SEPA SECTION, WHICH HAS
DIFFERENT TIMELINES, AND
FRANKLY IS HARD TO INTERPRET.
>>> THE FINAL SET OF CHANGES
ARE RELATED TO THE LEAD AGENCY,
THE LEGISLATION CLARIFIES THAT
THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT MAY
BE THE LEAD DEPARTMENT ON SEPA
ANALYSES.
THE CURRENT CODE HAS A SECTION
SAYS EXCEPT FOR THAT, IT IS THE
LEAD THAT -- THE ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW, IT IS NOT CLEAR WHAT
THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT'S
ROLE IS.
THEY WILL CLARIFY THE WAS THAT
OF DEPARTMENT CAN CHOOSE TO BE
THE LEAD AGENCY, OR DELEGATE
THAT RULE TO A CITY DEPARTMENT.
AND THAT IS IT.
>> THANK YOU, LISH, DO YOU
WANT TO WALK THROUGH THE
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS?
>> I DON'T HAVE THEM IN FRONT
OF ME, BUT VERY BRIEFLY, THERE
ARE 2 FROM COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD AND 2 FROM THE CHAIR,
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD HAS ONE
AMENDMENT THAT RELATES TO THE
APPEALS OF ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATIONS FOR CHANGES TO
SINGLE-FAMILY AREAS, IF THE
CHANGE WOULD ALLOW DUPLEX,
IF THOSE CHANGES ARE TAKING NT,
PLACE IN AN AREA WITH BOTH --
WITH EITHER A HIGH RISK OF
DISPLACEMENT OR LOW RISK OF
AXIS II OPPORTUNITY, THEN THERE
IS A SEPA APPEAL THAT THEN --
THAT TYPE OF ACTION IN THOSE
AREAS, THERE WOULD BE THE
POSSIBILITY OF A SEPA APPEAL.
>>> THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS
RELATED TO THE SDCI DIRECTORS
RULES, THIS IS SIMPLER, AND
DRAFTING THE DIRECTORS RULES,
THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTION
AND INSPECTIONS SHOULD CONSULT
WITH DEPARTMENTS WITH RELATIVE
EXPERTISE, AND ISSUE JOINT
DIRECTORS RULES WITH DIRECTORS
OF THOSE DEPARTMENTS IS
APPROPRIATE.
>>> COUNCILMEMBER PACHECO'S
AMENDMENT STASH
>> IT IS A POP QUIZ.
>> I AM SORRY, THEY ARE SLIPPING
MY MIND TOOK
>> THE TWO AMENDMENTS THAT I
BROUGHT FORTH, ONE WOULD PROVIDE
-- THE SECOND ONE, WE SEE WITH
THAT IS.
I'M DRAWING A BLANK MYSELF.
>> THE SECOND ONE, ASKING TO
REWORK BACK -- REPORT BACK ON
STREAMLINING OR PROCESSES ON
THE FRONT END.
>> YES .
>>> I HAVE BEEN JOINED BY
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD AND
COUNCILMEMBER O'BRIEN, THINK
YOU FOR JOINING ME FOR THE
PUBLIC HEARING, ARE THERE ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
OKAY.
SEEING THAT THERE ARE NO
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, I'M
GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC
HEARING ON COUNCIL BILL
119600, SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO
TWO MINUTES OF PUBLIC COMMENT,
IF IT EXCEEDS TWO MINUTES, THE
MICROPHONE WILL BE TURNED OFF,
IF GROUPS OF THREE OR MORE
PEOPLE SIGNED UP TOGETHER, YOU
CAN GET FIVE MINUTES OF PUBLIC
COMMENT.
AND 1st ON OUR LIST.
IS DAVID WARD.
FOLLOWED BY MEGAN CRUZ.
>>> I AM DAVID WARD, THE
PRESIDENT OF SCALE,
REPRESENTING OVER 25 DIFFERENT
NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS
TRYING TO PROTECT SEATTLE AS AN
ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY CITY,
SKILL STRONGLY OPPOSES ALL
ELEMENTS OF 119600, IT SAYS
THAT ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF
INDIVIDUAL BUSINESSES ARE NOT
REQUIRED, WHICH MEANS THAT
AMAZON, WITH OVER 53,000
EMPLOYEES HERE, WITH THE
EMPLOYEES MAKING AN AVERAGE OF
$179,000 PER YEAR, IS NOT
REQUIRED TO HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS, AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS,
ANOTHER IS TRUE FOR THEM, AND
THEY ARE NOT SUBJECT TO APPEAL,
THE ECONOMIC ISSUES REGARDING
DISPLACEMENT THAT AFFECT -- AND
OTHER ISSUES THAT AFFECT PEOPLE
OF COLOR, LOW INCOME PEOPLE,
SENIORS, PEOPLE PAYING MORE THAN
30% OR 50% OF INCOME ON RENT,
JUST WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO
APPEAL BECAUSE OF THE ECONOMIC
IMPLICATIONS. AND ALSO THE
ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF
INCREASED TRAFFIC CONGESTION,
POLICE AND FIRE SERVICES, COST
OF SCHOOLS, AND REPLACING MOST
OF OUR WASTE WATER AND SEWER
PIPES WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO
APPEAL.
AND CERTAINLY WOULD NOT
POSITIVELY AFFECT AFFORDABLE
HOUSING IF WE CANNOT EXAMINE
THE ECONOMIC ISSUES.
PUTTING DEVELOPMENT, SPECIFIC
PROJECTS UNDER NON-PROJECT EIS
IS NOT GOOD, BECAUSE THAT
WEEKENDS -- WEAKENS WHAT WOULD
BE REQUIRED, WE SHOULD NOT BE
LIMITING THE TIME FOR APPEALS,
AND COUNCIL SHOULD NOT BE THE
LEAD ON THE LEGISLATIVE
DEPARTMENT, AND WE CERTAINLY
SHOULD NOT BE USING SDCI TO
CREATE THE RULES, IT'S LIKE THE
FOX GUARDING THE HEN HOUSE, MORE
HENS ARE THERE TO BE BY THE
FOXES, THERE ARE NO MORE PLACES
FOR THE HENS TO HIDE.
DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN FOR
DEVELOPERS AT THE EXPENSE OF
THE PUBLIC.
>> THANK YOU DAVID.>> MEGAN
CRUZ, FOLLOWED BY MICHELLE
CLAES.
>> THANK YOU.
THIS LEGISLATION WAS PROPOSED
BY CONFLATING ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION WITH THE LACK OF
AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
THAT IS A FALSE NARRATIVE AND A
TERRIBLE IDEA, IT DIVIDES
PEOPLE AND SAYS WE CAN'T
ACHIEVE BOTH AFFORDABLE HOUSING
AND SUSTAINABLE DENSITY.
LABELING TACTICS AS OBSTRUCTIVE
IS MORE OF THE SAME DOGMA FOR
APPEALS.
THE FACT IS, DESIGN REVIEW HAVE
LARGE GAPS IN COVERAGE, THEY
PROVIDE MINIMAL CITIZEN INPUT.
IF AT THE END OF THE PROCESS,
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS GO
UNADDRESSED, THE SYSTEMS' ONLY
OPTIONS FOR MITIGATION IS
THROUGH THE HEARING EXAMINER,
THEY ARE BEING CHALLENGED FOR
HARMFUL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS,
THE SOLUTION ISN'T TO WEAKEN
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, IT'S TO
FIGURE OUT WHAT IS WRONG WITH
THE SYSTEM, AND FIX IT, THIS
BILL WAS TO GREENLIGHT PERMIT
APPEALS, AND IT LEAVES OUT
CRITICAL DETAILS, IT ASSIGNS
NEW RULEMAKING AUTHORITY TO THE
DEPARTMENT THAT CONSIDERS
DEVELOPERS ITS PRIMARY
CONSTITUENTS.
THIS DEPARTMENTS DECISIONS HAVE
SHOWN INCONSISTENCY AND OFFER
NO EXPLANATIONS.
IT IS NOT SURPRISING THEN THAT
THEY HAVE LED TO CHALLENGES.
THE SYSTEM NEEDS A BIG DOSE OF
EQUITY.
THE CITY COULD START BY GETTING
INPUT FROM ALL GOVERNMENT,
PRIVATE AND PUBLIC STAKEHOLDERS
TO DEFINE AREAS NOT PREVIOUSLY
ADDRESSED AND HAMMER OUT
EQUITABLE RULES THAT DON'T
FAVOR ANY ONE PARTY.
PUT SEPA UP FRONT, AND
ENVIRONMENTAL EXPERTS TO THE
DESIGN REVIEW, IF YOU DO THAT,
YOU WILL SEE A DECREASE IN
CHALLENGES.
PLEASE TABLE THIS RUST, FLAWED
AND INCOMPLETE BILL, SEATTLE
WANTS TO ADOPT A GREEN NEW
DEAL, AND THIS DOESN'T IT --
THIS JUST AS NED, PLEASE DON'T
WEAKEN ENVIRONMENTAL
RELATIONS, THERE IS SOMETHING
WRONG WITH A SYSTEM THAT CAN
DELIVER BOTH OF THESE THINGS.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MICHELLE CLAES,
PLEASE.>> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO
SAY THAT I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP
THE EPA AND SEPA WORKING BETTER
THAN IT DOES, BECAUSE ON SOME
OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS, THEY
HAVE NOT TAKEN INTO THE NEW
FORMS OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE
WAY THE PUBLIC USES THE STREETS
AND SIDEWALKS, FOR INSTANCE ON
SECOND AND 3rd AVENUE, AND PIKE
AND PINE CORE DOORS, AND SOME
OF THE ACTUAL WORK.
THE PAPERS SHOW IMAGES THAT ARE
NOT THERE, OR DON'T SHOW SOME
OF THE IMAGES THAT SHOULD BE
THERE, LIKE THE NEW TRANSIT
SYSTEM.
SO THERE WILL BE CONSEQUENCES IF
THE BUILDINGS GO THROUGH AS
THEY ARE SHOWN ON THE PAPER.
AND THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO
BE SUFFERING ARE GOING TO BE
PEDESTRIANS, TRANSIENTS, PEOPLE
IN THEIR CARS, PEOPLE ON BUSES,
AND THE PEOPLE THEN YOU ARE
GOING TO BE AFFECTED BY IT ARE
GOING TO BE THE CITY, BECAUSE
THEY ARE GOING TO BE LIABLE FOR
A LOT OF SUITS AND
REPERCUSSIONS FROM UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES FROM NOT REALLY
HAVING A PROPER ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STATEMENT ON THESE
BUILDINGS.>> THANK YOU.
NEXT IS TARAN MARTIN FOLLOWED BY
RYAN PAUL.
>>> I AM WITH FUTURE -WISE, WE
ARE PLEASED TO VOICE OUR
SUPPORT FOR TRENT BEFORE, IT
WILL LAY THE PROCEDURAL
GROUNDWORK FOR THE CITY TO
ADOPT NEW LAND-USE POLICIES IN
ACCORDANCE WITH WASHINGTON
HOUSE BUILT 23, AND WE LOOK
FORWARD TO HAVING MORE
DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT AT FUTURE
COMMITTEE MEETINGS.
THE AMENDMENT INTRODUCED BY
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD COPPER
-- PERTAINING TO THE APPEAL OF
SEPA DECISIONS IN THE
DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE-FAMILY
ZONING, IN EITHER HIGH
DISPLACEMENT ZONES OR LOW AREAS
OF OPPORTUNITY IS PRETTY
COMPLICATED.
AND UNFORTUNATELY, WE CAN'T
SUPPORT IT.
WE APPRECIATE THE AMENDMENTS
INTENT, BUT WE HAVE CONCERNS
ABOUT THE APPROACH SUGGESTED IN
THE PROPOSAL.
WE DON'T SUPPORT THE CREATION
OF A COMPLEX NEIGHBORHOOD
SPECIFIC SYSTEM OF SEPA APPEAL
EXEMPTION RULES, ESPECIALLY
GIVEN THE INHERENT INEQUITY OF
A SYSTEM THAT ALLOWS WEALTHY
GROUPS TO STRATEGICALLY MISUSE
THE APPEAL PROCESS.
TO PRESENT MORE TYPES OF HOUSE
-- TO PREVENT MORE TYPES OF
HOUSING TO BE BUILT IN THEIR
NEIGHBORHOODS.
AS WE STATED IN THE COMMENT
LETTER, WE ENCOURAGE COUNCIL TO
PASS IT AND THEN FOCUS ON LAND-
USE CHANGES THAT WOULD GO IN
AREAS OF THE CITY THAT HAVE
HIGH AXIS OF OPPORTUNITY AND
LOW DISPLACEMENT RISK.
HOUSE BILL 1923 GIVES A UNIQUE
OPPORTUNITY TO CHANGE THE
HIGHLY INEQUITABLE PATTERNS OF
EXCLUSION THAT EXIST IN SOME
NEIGHBORHOODS, AND MORE HOMES
TO BE BUILT BY TRANSIT AND
REDUCING GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS THAT ARE DRIVING THE
CLIMATE CRISIS, WE WANT TO
THINK THIS COMMITTEE FORCE
LEADERSHIP ON TACKLING THE
INTERNET COULD ISSUES OF RACIAL
EQUITY, CLIMATE RESILIENCE AND
URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO SUPPORTING
YOU IN THE PASSAGE OF THIS
EXCITING NEW BILL, AND OTHERS
THAT WE HOPE WILL FOLLOW.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> [ APPLAUSE ]
>>> NEXT IS RYAN PAUL.
FOLLOWED BY MELISSA HALL.
>> HELLO, MY NAME IS RYAN PAUL,
I AM A RENTER AND DESSERTS OF
VOTER AND A GRAPHIC DESIGNER
WHO LIVES IN SEATTLE, I SUPPORT
THESE REFORMS TO HELP US MEET
OUR GOALS WITH THE SEATTLE
GREEN NEW DEAL AND MEET
AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEEDS.
I SUPPORT THIS REFORM, I
REMEMBER WHEN SEATTLE WAS A
PLACE WHERE PEOPLE COULD MOVE
TO AND AFFORD TO LIVE AND WORK
HERE, I BELIEVE THIS
LEGISLATION IS A PIECE OF THE
PUZZLE TO BRING THAT BACK, I
WOULD URGE YOU TO VOTE IN FAVOR
OF THE LEGISLATION AND THE
AMENDMENT.>> [ APPLAUSE ]>>
ALYSSA HALL?
WEAKER SEPA -- >> SEPA WAS A
PRODUCT OF THE PASTORAL
ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT, IT HAS
AS AN UNDERLYING NOTION THAT
BUILDING -- NOT BUILDING IS
BETTER THAN BUILDING, THIS IS
NOT BORNE OUT BY A CURRENT
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY, IN ORDER
TO REFLECT THE URBANIST DESIGN,
THERE IS NO HARM IN ALLOWING
CURRENT PATTERNS TO CONTINUE OR
DELAYING DEVELOPMENT.
THANK YOU.
>> [ APPLAUSE ]
>> ELISE LOCKHART, FOLLOWED BY
CALVIN JONES.
>> I AM ALICE LOCKHART WITH 350
SEATTLE, A RECENT SEATTLE TIMES
EDITORIAL, SEPA, WHICH MANAGED
TO IN THE SAME BREATH IMPUGN
THE COUNCIL, BRAND
ORGANIZATIONS LIKE 350, WHO
DISAGREE WITH THEIR OPINION AS
SPECIAL INTERESTS, AND MOST
IMPORTANTLY TO IMPLY THAT IT IS
ANTITHETICAL TO THE GREEN NEW
DEAL, THAT COULD NOT BE FURTHER
FROM THE TRUTH.
WITH THE CLIMATE CLOCK TICKING
EVER FASTER, THE SEATTLE GREEN
NEW DEAL AS WRITTEN ABSOLUTELY
MUST INCLUDE RAPIDLY BUILDING
THOUSANDS OF UNITS OF
AFFORDABLE INFIELD HOUSING TO
COMBAT CLIMATE DESTROYING
SPRAWL.
CONTINUED MISUSE OF SEPA,
INTENDED TO OBSTRUCT AND DELAY
AFFORDABLE HOUSING LEGISLATION,
AND WE KNOW IT WOULD BE COMING,
IS ABSOLUTELY ANTITHETICAL TO
THE GREEN NEW DEAL.
PAST USES OF SEPA APPEAL TO
COMBAT BIKE LANES AND TINY
HOMES TO SHELTER OR HOMELESS
ARE ALSO ANTITHETICAL TO THE
SPIRIT OF THE GREEN NEW DEAL.
SEPA WAS INTENDED TO PROVIDE
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF THINGS
LIKE CHEMICAL PLANTS, NOT
BACKYARD COTTAGES, AND NOT TINY
HOMES.
OUR STATE LEGISLATORS KNEW WHEN
THEY CRAFTED 1923 TO CLOSE THE
LOOPHOLES THAT -- THEY KNEW
THIS, WHEN IT CRAFTED HOUSE
BILL 1923 TO CLOSE SEPA
LOOPHOLES THAT ALLOWED IT TO BE
MISUSED, SEATTLE SHOULD
PROCEED WITH THIS GOOD
LEGISLATION TO BRING OUR
MUNICIPAL CODE IN HARMONY WITH
CURRENT STATE LAW.
THANK YOU.
AND TO SUPPORT THE GREEN NEW
DEAL.
>> CALVIN JONES, FOLLOWED BY
JOHN FOX.
>> MY NAME IS, JILL SCOTT EYMAN
OR DOES ISER -- MY NAME IS
CALVIN JONES, AND I OPPOSE THE
AMENDMENT THAT WOULD EXEMPT
CERTAIN LOW OPPORTUNITY
NEIGHBORHOODS FROM SOME CHANGES.
I HAVE AN EMAIL HEAR FROM MARTY
KAPLAN, WHO SUED THE CITY WITH
A SEPA OVER THE BACKYARD
COLLEGE LEGISLATION, MANY
THINGS TO HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE
WHO HAVE CONTRIBUTED OVER
$40,000 TODAY DURING THE BUDGET,
HELP COVER OUR LAST $10,000 OF
ANTICIPATED COSTS.
AND JUST YESTERDAY, CLAUDIA
NEWMAN OF LLC, PENDING AND
UPWARD, POSING CHANGES WITHOUT
DISCLOSING THAT IT IS ONE OF
THE MOST PROLIFIC LITIGATORS OF
SEPA APPEALS AS REPORTED ON
TWITTER.
WE HAVE TO ASK OURSELVES,
GETTING THESE EMAILS, AND
OPINION PAGES, WHETHER THIS IS
THE WAY WE WANT TO HAVE A
CONVERSATION ABOUT HOUSING
POLICY IN OUR SOCIETY.
THAT I THINK -- I THINK THE
CONVERSATION IS ONE OF THE MOST
IMPORTANT CONVERSATIONS WE CAN
HAVE, AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD FOR BEING
A TIRELESS CHAMPION, BUT
UNFORTUNATELY, SEPA AS IT
EXISTS TODAY IS ONLY ACCESSIBLE
TO HOMEOWNER GROUPS THAT CAN
RAISE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF
DOLLARS TO APPEAL, OR LAW
FIRMS THAT HAVE $200 PER HOUR
LAWYERS THAT CAN DO LITIGATION.
ANY LEVER OF POWER THAT IS
EXCLUSIVELY USED BY THE WE'LL
SEE, WILL BE USED FOR THEIR OWN
INTERESTS.
WHEN WE TALK ABOUT HOUSING
POLICY IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS,
CONSTRUCT THE POLICY BY TAKING
AS MUCH PUBLIC FEEDBACK AS
POSSIBLE FROM THE AFFECTED
COMMUNITIES, AND NOT RELY ON
WEALTHY HOMEOWNER GROUPS TO
PURPORTEDLY REPRESENT LOWER
INCOME COMMUNITIES ON THEIR
BEHALF.
THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBERS,
PLEASE ADOPT THE LEGISLATON
WITHOUT ANY AMENDMENTS TO
WEAKEN IT, AND LET'S HAVE A
ROBUST CONVERSATION ABOUT
HOUSING POLICY IN THE CITY
WHERE ALL VOICES ARE HEARD
EQUALLY AND NO VOICE STAMPS THE
OTHERS OUT.>> THANK YOU.
JOHN FOX, NEXT.
>> DISPLACEMENT COLLISION, I
WOULD LIKE TO CORRECT THE
RECORD ABOUT CLAUDIA NEWMAN, WE
OWE THEM A GREAT DEBT OF
GRATITUDE, WE HAVE A GROWTH
MANAGEMENT ACT, AND SEPA ,
PRECISELY BECAUSE OF THE ROLE
THEY PLAYED IN HELPING CRAFT
LEGISLATION, AND ONE OF US WHO
HAS BEEN AROUND FOR ANY LENGTH
OF TIME KNOW THAT, AND ALWAYS
USED TO PROTECT NOT JUST RURAL
FARMLANDS, SUBURBAN AREAS, BUT
ALSO URBAN AREAS.
WE WANT TO ECHO THEIR CONCERNS
FROM THE EDITORIAL, FROM
CLAUDIA NEWMAN, THIS IS --
THESE CHANGES EFFECTIVELY
DISMANTLE SEPA TO ADDRESS
IMPACTS OF GROWTH AND
REDEVELOPMENT IN OUR CITY,
INTRODUCED ONLY A FEW WEEKS
AGO, BEING RAMMED THROUGH
WITHOUT SOLID DATA AND WITHOUT
MULTIPLE PERSPECTIVES, AND NOT
WITH THE INPUT OF COMMUNITIES
SO DIRECTLY AFFECTED.
THERE IS AN IRONY HERE, BECAUSE
THIS IS PRECISELY, WE HAVE SEEN
THE NUMBER OF APPEALS BY
CITIZENS GO UP, BECAUSE OF THE
INCREASING TENDENCY ON THE PART
OF CITY OFFICIALS TO TREAT
SUBSTANCES -- SUBSTANTIVE
CONCERNS OF CITIZENS WITH
DISDAIN, WHEN CITIZENS DON'T
SEE ANYTHING DONE TO ADDRESS
THEIR VALID CONCERNS SUCH AS
IMPACTS ON LOW COST HOUSING,
SMALL BUSINESSES, TREAT CANOPY,
URBAN STREAMS, HISTORIC
BUILDINGS, WHEN THOSE THINGS
AREN'T ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED,
THAT IS WHEN WE SEE APPEALS,
AND IT IS AN INSULT TO
COMMUNITY GROUPS TO CALL THEM
FRIVOLOUS.
THEY REQUIRE HUNDREDS OF HOURS
OF VOLUNTEER TIME, TENS OF
THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO BRING
IN EXPERTS AND DO HONEST
RESEARCH THAT CITY PLANNERS
FAILED TO DO.
THEY ARE ONEROUS AND EGREGIOUS
AMENDMENTS THAT ATTACK DIRECTLY
AT THE HEART OF SEPA AND UNDER
CUP THE ABILITY -- UNDERCUTS
THE ABILITY TO CONTROL GROWTH
IN THE CITY, PLEASE SUSPEND
UNTIL THERE IS MORE INPUT AND
WE CAN DO THIS RIGHT.
THANK YOU.>> [ APPLAUSE ]>> I
WANT TO CLARIFY FOR THE RECORD,
FOR THE COMMITTEE, FIRST, MY
COLLEAGUES, MY COUNCIL
COLLEAGUES ARE COMMITTED TO
PUBLIC SERVICE, AND THIS
COMMITTEE, IN THIS I TRY TO
MAINTAIN LEVELS OF RESPECT, I
WOULD ASK EVERYONE TO DO THE
SAME, 2, THE AMENDMENTS THAT I
OFFERED HAVE COME DIRECTLY FROM
THE COMMUNITY COUNCIL, THEY
THOUGHT OF WAYS TO MAKE
IMPROVEMENTS TO BE PRODUCTIVE
IN TERMS OF THE CONVERSATION,
MOVING IT FORWARD, WITH RESPECT
TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, YOUR
TESTIMONY AND THE INPUT THAT
YOU PROVIDE, THE PERSPECTIVE
YOU PROVIDE, I KNOW MYSELF AND
COUNCIL COLLEAGUES SPEND
TIRELESS AMOUNT OF HOURS TO
MAKE SURE THEY HAVE VOICES
HEARD THROUGH THE PROCESS.
I ASK THAT RESPECT BE SHARED
BOTH WAYS.>>> NEXT IS LISA KUHN,
FOLLOWED BY JOHN -- PLEASE.
>> MY NAME IS LISA KUHN, I'M
HERE TO TELL YOU ABOUT A LITTLE
TOWN IN ITALY CALLED -- A
MEDIEVAL CITY, 300 RESIDENTS,
THE ECONOMY WAS BASED ON
CHESTNUTS HARVESTED FROM
SURROUNDING ORCHARDS.
THEN AN ENTREPRENEURIAL COUNT,
SHOWED UP IN 1962 WITH MONEY
AND AN IDEA TO CREATE AN
ITALIAN LAS VEGAS, HE ABOUT THE
BUILDINGS, FORCED THE RESIDENCE
OUT, AND BULLDOZED THE TOWN,
AND THE ORCHARDS, ONLY LEAVING
THE CHURCH IN THE GRAVEYARD.
QUOTING THE ARTICLE, AFTER THE
OLD CITY WAS DEMOLISHED, THE
NEW ONE COULD BE BUILT ON ITS
ASHES LIKE SOME MENTALLY ILL
PHOENIX.
SO LANDSLIDE STARTED HAPPENING,
LIKE LANDSLIDES ON LAKEVIEW
AVENUE, AND BEACH DRIVE,
PERKINS AVENUE, YES.
LANDSLIDES.
FINALLY IN 1976, THERE WAS A
LANDSLIDE THAT TOOK OUT THE
MAIN ACCESS ROAD AND THE
UTILITIES INFRASTRUCTURE, TERMS
OF -- IT TURNS OUT THE
BULLDOZED CHESTNUT TREES ARE
WHAT STABILIZED THE TOWN, NO
TREES, NO TOWN, IT IS NOW AN
ABANDONED TRASH HE.
THE LANDSLIDES WERE BAD ENOUGH
THAT THEY COULDN'T REESTABLISH
THE INFRASTRUCTURE, NO
INFRASTRUCTURE, NO TOWN.
AND WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN NICE IF
THERE HAD BEEN ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTIONS WHICH COULD HAVE
KEPT THIS DEVELOPER FROM DOING
THIS?
WELL, WE DO HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTIONS, BUT EVIDENTLY, YOU
WANT TO GOT THEM, ALL RIGHT,
FINE, GOOD LUCK WITH THAT.>>
THANK YOU.
>> NEXT IS JOHN KYLE FOLLOWED
BY MARK BRUNSON.
-- JOHN, -- I AM JOHN SNOSNOWIE
. A RESIDENT AND HIS SCHOLAR,
LIKE YOU, WE ARE SUPPORTERS OF
MORE DENSITY, LIVABILITY, WALK
ABILITY, AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING,
BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF OUR
HEALTH AND SAFETY, AND A
UNSUSTAINABLE FUTURE.
WITH PRUDENT DECISIONS, WE CAN
HAVE BOTH.
WHEN I READ THE RECENT ARTICLE
I HEARD REFERRED TO IN THE
TIMES ON THIS BILL, I WAS
FRANKLY APPALLED, COUNCILMEMBER
O'BRIEN, YOUR BLANKET
ACCUSATION AGAINST ANYONE THAT
FILES AN APPEAL AS QUOTE, A
NIMBY OBSTRUCTIONIST, WITH THE
MONEY TO HIRE A SPECIALIST
ATTORNEY, THAT ONLY IS FALSE
BUT OFFENDS ME AS MUCH AS SOME
OF OUR PRESENT STATEMENTS.
COUNCILMEMBER ABEL PACHECO, I
AGREE WITH YOUR STATEMENT THAT
IT SHOULD NOT PREVENT
ENVIRONMENTAL FRIENDLY
DEVELOPMENT, AND WALKABLE,
LIVABLE NEIGHBORHOODS, BUT WHAT
YOU SAY AND WHAT THE BILL DOES
ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS,
WATERING DOWN THE STATE
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT,
IS NOT VIOLENTLY FRIENDLY, NOR
HELPFUL IN ACHIEVING WALKABLE
AND LIVABLE NEIGHBORHOODS.
OUR EXPERIENCE DOWNTOWN IS THAT
THE ROOT CAUSE OF PROJECT
DELAYS IS NOT FRIVOLOUS
APPEALS, BUT THE NEED TO APPEAL
ILL-CONCEIVED, UNHEALTHY
DESIGNS, AND DCI DECISIONS, ONE
THING THE BILL GETS RIGHT IS
ADDRESSING SEPA ISSUES AT THE
BEGINNING OF A PROJECT.
BUT THAT IS NEGATED WHEN YOU
ALLOW DEVELOPERS TO IGNORE
ADVERSE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS,
INSTEAD OF WATERING DOWN SEPA,
YOU SHOULD STRENGTHEN THE DCI
APPROVALS PROCESS, THEY ARE
MEANT TO SERVE, ORGANICALLY,
NOT BY LEGAL MANEUVERING,
REDUCING THE NUMBER OF APPEALS,
AND LESSENING THE LOAD ON THE
HEARING EXAMINER'S OFFICE.
AND THAT EVERYBODY WINS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU.
MARK BRUNSON.
>> THANK YOU FOR HEARING FROM
US, MY NAME IS MARK BRUNSON, A
RETURN CAPITOL HILL, IN THE
TIME I HAVE LIVED HERE I HAVE
SEEN NUMEROUS DELAYS TO
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION
PROJECTS BECAUSE OF SEPA,
DESPITE THAT IT SHOULD PROTECT
OUR ENVIRONMENT, IT IS
CONSISTENTLY USED AS A VETO OF
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY BY ANYONE
WEALTHY ENOUGH TO AFFORD A TEAM
OF LAWYERS, WE HAVE MAJOR
CRISES AFFORD -- REGARDING THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND
GREENHOUSE GASES, BY
PRIORITIZING SUSTAINABLE
TRANSPORTATION AND BUILDING
HOUSING SO THAT MORE PEOPLE CAN
LIVE WITHOUT A CAR.
IT IS MADDENING THAT A POLICY
TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT
COUNTS AS A NEGATIVE, ANYTHING
THAT MILDLY INCONVENIENCES
DRIVERS AND PARKING, AT A TIME
WHEN WE NEED TO REDUCE CAR
DEPENDENCY TO MEET CLIMATE
GOALS.
I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR PASSING
THE GREEN NEW DEAL RESOLUTION,
AND URGE YOU TO PASS THIS
REFORM SO WE CAN PUT INTO
ACTION, I WANT SEPA TO PROTECT
ENVIRONMENT AND NOT
EXCLUSIONARY POLICIES, THANK
YOU.
>> CARL NELSON.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBERS, I
AM A 10 YEAR DISTRICT 4 RENTER,
TRANSIT RIDER, SMALL BUSINESS
OWNER, AND THE WAYS IN WHICH
SEPA APPEALS ARE BEING USED IN
A CRUEL EFFECT , HURTING
PEOPLE.
I SUPPORTED THE LEGISLATION
THAT WOULD ALLOW TO BUILD 40
INSTEAD OF THREE TINY HOUSE
VILLAGES, GETTING AN ESTIMATED
3700 PEOPLE OFF THE STREETS AND
IN DOORS, WE COULD HAVE IT IN
FRONT OF THE COUNCIL AS SOON AS
THIS MONTH IF IT WASN'T FOR A
FRIVOLOUS APPEAL ON
SIGNIFICANCE, THE 3700 PEOPLE
REMAIN ON THE STREET, EXPOSED
AND VULNERABLE.
SEPA REFORM WOULD STREAMLINE
THE PROCESS AND SAVE THE LIVES
OF PEOPLE WHO DESPERATELY NEED
THIS TO BE COMPASSIONATE, AND
MODERN IN THE CITY WE ASPIRE TO
BE, I WOULD URGE THE COUNCIL TO
PASS THE BILL WITHOUT
AMENDMENTS AND HELP THE FOLKS
OUT.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.>>
KELSIE HAMLIN FOLLOWED BY JANET
WAY.
>> I AM KELSIE HAMLIN, A
NONPARTISAN SUSTAINABILITY
THINK TANK FOR ALL OF CASCADIA.
AS MANY COUNCILMEMBERS KNOW,
SEPA IS A IMPORTANT PIECE OF
LEGISLATION FOR THE
ENVIRONMENT.
IT HAS ALSO BEEN USED AS A
LOOPHOLE FOR HOMEOWNERS TO
ADVANCE VENDETTAS AGAINST
HOUSING, ESPECIALLY NEAR THEM,
I WOULD CONFIDENTLY LABEL THESE
LAWSUITS AS PREDATORY DELAY,
THE CHANGES BEFORE YOU DO NOT
CUT SEPA, THEY STRENGTHEN IT BY
STREAMLINING THE PROCESS AND
SETTING A TIME LIMIT TO MAKE IT
MORE EFFICIENT.
THESE CHANGES WOULD LET CITY
STAFFERS SUSPEND -- SPEND LESS
TIME REPRODUCING MULTIPLE
ANALYSES AND CUT COSTS FOR
LENGTHY AND UNNECESSARY APPEALS
DESIGNED TO STEER THEM AWAY
FROM WEALTHY NEIGHBORHOODS.
IN A CITY LIKE SEATTLE, WITH
TREE CANOPY, MAINTAINED, AND
LOST TREE CANOPY IN SINGLE
FAMILY AREAS, IT IS FAR BETTER
TO CREATE HOUSING HERE NEAR JOB
CENTERS THEN PUSH PEOPLE OUT,
FORCING THEM TO PUMP CO2 INTO
THE AIR WITH VEHICLES, AND
BUILD HOUSES WHERE WHOLE
FORESTS ONCE WERE.
CAPPING THE LENGTH OF SEPA
APPEALS IS SIMPLY GOOD, DESPITE
WHAT SOME MAY HELP YOU BELIEVE,
THE ENVIRONMENT AND HOUSING
SHOULD NOT BE AT ODDS,
AFFORDABILITY AND
SUSTAINABILITY GO TOGETHER.
WE SUPPORT THE INTRODUCE
LEGISLATION, THE HIGHLY
INEVITABLE STATUS QUO IN WHICH
WEALTHY INDIVIDUALS CAN
STRATEGICALLY DELAY HOUSING
DIVERSITY NEEDS TO CHANGE,
HERBOLD'S WELL-INTENTIONED
AMENDMENT WOULD LIKELY
REINFORCE THIS.
IT WOULD BE APPLIED AT THE
SECOND STEP, WHEN HOSPITAL 1923
HAS A MENU OF OPTIONS THAT WE
CAN ALL LOOK AT.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.>> [
APPLAUSE ]>>> JANET WAY.
>>> GOOD EVENING, I AM A BOARD
MEMBER REPRESENTING SAVE THE
MARKET ENTRANCE GROUP, WE ASK
TO BE A PARTY OF RECORD WITH
LEGAL STANDING FOR CB 119600,
THE MATTER RELATING TO
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, AT THIS
TIME I WOULD LIKE TO PLACE
TODAY'S SEATTLE TIMES OP-ED BY
ATTORNEY CLAUDIA NEWMAN,
ENTITLED SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL
USES FALSE NARRATIVE TO GET THE
USE OF STATE ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT IN THE RECORD OF
THIS HEARING BY REFERENCE.
WE BELIEVE THAT SEPA IS AN ACT
THAT GIVES THE PUBLIC AN
IMPORTANT AND VITAL ROLE IN
POLICY PROCESS.
THE PUBLIC PROVIDES VALUABLE
INFORMATION AND DETAILS THAT
CAN ENHANCE DEVELOPMENT ON
SAFETY, AIR AND WATER QUALITY,
HISTORIC PROTECTION AND
PROTECTING THE GREATER GOOD.
THE RIGHT TO COME IN AND APPEAL
AS A SACRED TRUST THE STATE PUT
IN PLACE TO PROTECT THE
ENVIRONMENT AND THE PEOPLE'S
RIGHTS.
AND IN THIS TIME, OF AN ASSAULT
ON OUR ENVIRONMENT ON THE
NATIONAL FRONT, IT IS A
REMINDER OF ALL THE BATTLES IN
THE PAST, FOUGHT TO PROTECT OUR
ENVIRONMENT AND WE URGE YOU TO
REJECT THIS PROPOSAL.
AND WE ARE SUPPORTING AND
SUPPORTIVE OF HERBOLD'S
AMENDMENTS TO ADDRESS
DISPLACEMENT.
THANK YOU.
>> ROBERT SIEGMAN, FOLLOWED BY
PAUL NATHAN.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MY NAME IS
BOB SEIDMAN, A BOARD MEMBER OF
SAVE THE MARKET ENTRANCE, I'M
NOT WEALTHY, I'M SOMEBODY WHO
THINKS WE SHOULD PRESERVE THE
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS THAT
WE HAVE.
A CORNERSTONE AND PRACTICE OF
LAND-USE AND ENVIRONMENTAL LAW,
ONE THING THAT I DO WANT TO
ADDRESS IS THE COUNCIL BILL
119600 , THE ESTABLISHING OF
THE AVAILABILITY OF PRO TEM
EXAMINER'S.
THIS IS AN OUTSOURCING OF THE
JUDICIARY RESPONSIBILITY TO WHO?
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE COUNCIL
ENTERTAINED THE USUAL
ARBITRATION PROCESS, KNOWN AS
THE STRIKE LIST PROCEDURE, FOR
PRO TEM OFFICERS, IF THEY ARE
TO BE USED, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE
TO PARTICIPATE IN THE SELECTION
PROCESS, AND IMPARTIALITY IS TO
BE MAINTAINED.
I WANT TO GO BACK A LITTLE IN
HISTORY, THE BIG SPECULATIVE.
IN SEATTLE.
RIGHT AFTER THE KLONDIKE GOLD
RUSH, QUITE A BIT OF MONEY IN
SEATTLE, QUITE A BIT OF
SPECULATION, BUT IT DID NOT
PREVENT THE CITY FROM PUTTING
AWAY PROPERTY SO WE COULD HAVE
THE CITY PARKS THAT WE HAVE
RIGHT NOW.
WE WOULDN'T HAVE THE PATH
AROUND GREEN LAKE, WE WOULDN'T
HAVE THE DRIVE AROUND LAKE
WASHINGTON IF PEOPLE DIDN'T
EXPECT -- RESPECT THE
ENVIRONMENT.
>> [ APPLAUSE ]
>> PAUL NATHAN.
>> GOOD EVENING, THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS PAUL NATHAN, I'M A
DISTRICT 7 RESIDENT AND A
SOFTWARE ENGINEER.
I HAVE BEEN A RENTER AND A
HOMEOWNER.
I HAVE HAD TO TEST MY EARTH AND
WATER TO LEAD IN REGARDS TO MY
CHILD, ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
REALLY MATTER.
ONE OF THE KEY ISSUES
IDENTIIED IN THIS NATION IS
THE MISUSE OF ENVIRONMENTAL
ANALYSIS PROCESSES TO SLOW DOWN
NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS IN SOCIETY.
WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE NATION
HAS HAPPENED HERE.
THIS HAS SHRUNK THE AMOUNT OF
HOUSING, DRIVING UP THE COST OF
HOUSING FOR ALL OF OUR
WORKFORCE.
SO THE PROPOSED SEPA
LEGISLATION PRESERVES
REQUIREMENTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL
ANALYSIS, WHILE BUILDING MORE
HOUSING FOR THE MANY HOUSEHOLDS
AND OUR CHILDREN IN THIS, OUR
BELOVED CITY, NOW AND IN THE
FUTURE, OUR CHILDREN NEED TO BE
ABLE TO LIVE HERE, TOO.
I THEREFORE SUPPORT AND URGE
THE SUPPORT FOR THIS PROPOSED
LEGISLATION.
THANK YOU.
>> JEFFREY BAXTER.
FOLLOWED BY STEPHEN ROBERTS.
>>> HELLO, MY NAME IS JEFFREY,
I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR
HAVING A HEARING IN THE EVENING
TIME, WHEN IT IS POSSIBLE FOR
ME TO GET HERE.
AND I ALSO WANT TO THINK THE
COUNCILMEMBERS FOR PUTTING UP
WITH SO MUCH ABSE OVER VARIOUS
THINGS, THIS INCLUDED, BUT
OTHER THINGS AS WELL, I DID NOT
KNOW YOU ARE PRESIDENT TRUMP
TODAY, THAT'S NEWS TO ME.
I DON'T CONSIDER YOU THAT WAY,
COUNCILMEMBER O'BRIEN, I AM A
RESIDENT, AND I WILL BE
SUPPORTING LISA HERBOLD FOR HER
REELECTION, I SIMPLY URGE
SUPPORT OF THIS MEASURE, AND I
REALLY DON'T HAVE MUCH ELSE TO
SAY THAN THAT, I THINK IT IS
GREAT, IF WE DON'T DEVELOP
DENSITY IN OUR CITIES, THEN ALL
OF THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE ARE
SAYING ABOUT 300 PERSON TOWNS
IN THE RURAL AREAS IS GOING TO
COME TO PASS, BECAUSE THE
POPULATION IS NEEDED BY THE
DEMAND WE HAVE IN TERMS OF
JOBS, WE HAVE A LOT OF JOBS
HERE, AND IF WE DON'T BUILD
HOUSING HERE IN SEATTLE, IT'S
GOING TO GET BUILT OUT
SOMEWHERE ELSE, WHERE WAY MORE
TREES ARE GOING TO GET CUT
DOWN, I 100% SUPPORT WHAT
YOU'RE DOING, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> STEPHEN ROBERTS.
FOLLOWED BY ANDREW SAYING.
-- SANG.
>> I'M OPPOSED TO 119600, I
AM A RESIDENT IN DOWNTOWN
SEATTLE, I AS WELL AS EVERY
PERSON I KNOW WHO LIVES IN
DOWNTOWN SEATTLE, IS IN FAVOR
OF MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING,
ADDRESSING THE HOMELESS
SITUATION, AND IT'S A QUESTION
OF WHAT IS THE MOST RESPONSIBLE
WAY TO DO IT.
I THINK THIS BILL IS ILL
CONSIDERED.
OUR GOAL IS TO HAVE A LIVABLE
DOWNTOWN, THE PEOPLE WHO SEEM
TO BE SUPPORTING THIS, IN MY
UNDERSTANDING, DEVELOPERS SEEM
TO BE SUPPORTING THIS, AND
THEIR INTERESTS IS NOT
NECESSARILY IN A LIVABLE
SEATTLE DOWNTOWN, THEY ARE
CORPORATIONS WHOSE INTEREST IS
PROPHETESS -- PROFITS.
AND THEY ARE NOT LIVING HERE.
I'M OPPOSED TO ANYTHING THAT
WEAKENS THE ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION ACT, I THINK THAT IS
INCONSISTENT WITH A GREEN NEW
DEAL, I'M OPPOSED TO ANYTHING
THAT SAYS TRAFFIC
CONSIDERATIONS CANNOT BE
CONSIDERED A NEW DEVELOPMENTS,
I THINK THAT CREATES MORE
TRAFFIC PROBLEMS, MORE
POLLUTION IN THE AIR, AND
TOTALLY INCONSISTENT WITH THE
GREEN NEW DEAL.
ANYTHING THAT LIMITS OUR
APPEALS ABILITY FOR
IRRESPONSIBLE PROJECTS IS
SOMETHING I AM TOTALLY OPPOSED
TO.
THERE IS A PROJECT THAT AN
EXPERT HAS SAID, I WILL QUOTE
FROM THE HEARING EXAMINER, THE
FINDINGS INCLUDED AN INDICATION
THAT ON THE FIFTH FLOOR OF THE
BUILDING FACING THE ALLEY, THE
PROPOSED UNITS WOULD SEE
DAYLIGHT REDUCTIONS IN THE
RANGE OF 75% OR MORE, SOME
UNITS WOULD EXPERIENCE ADEQUATE
DAYLIGHT CONDITIONS FOR ONLY
12% OF DAYLIGHT HOURS, AND
WINTER HOURS THERE WOULD BE
LESS.
THE BUILDER IS NOT CONCERNED
ABOUT THAT.
AND ANYTHING THAT LIMITS OUR
ABILITY TO BRING THESE ISSUES
UP OR APPEAL THESE ISSUES IS
SOMETHING THAT I AM DEFINITELY
OPPOSED TO.
THANK YOU.>>> NEXT IS ANDREW
SANG.
>> GOOD EVENING, I AM A
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON URBAN
PLANNING STUDENT, GEOGRAPHY
STUDENT, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT,
I'M NOT A DEVELOPER, JUST A
STUDENT, I'M HERE TO DISCUSS
THE SEPA LEGISLATION, I CARE
DEEPLY ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
AND SUSTAINABILITY, THAT'S WHY
STUDY WHAT I DO, AND I
UNDERSTAND THE SEPA LEGISLATION
WAS CREATED ON A SET OF
PROGRESSIVE VALUES THAT WE AS A
STATE CREATED BECAUSE WE CARE
ABOUT PROTECTING COMMITTEES
FROM COAL PLANTS AND WHATEVER,
BUT AS OF NOW, THIS LEGISLATION
HAS BEEN CO-OPTED BY
COMMUNITIES WHO POSSESS THE
PRIVILEGE TO BE ABLE TO HIRE
LAWYERS THE COST HUNDREDS OF
DOLLARS PER HOUR THEY GO
THROUGH APPEALS THAT MAY COST
MULTIPLE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF
DOLLARS, AS IT RELATES TO
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, IS NOT
GOING TO BE USED BY THE PEOPLE
WHO DESPERATELY USE IT THE
MOST.
THIS LEGISLATION, THE IDEA OF
SEPA WAS CREATED DURING A TIME
WHERE WE CONFLATED THE IDEAS
OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONISM
WITH THE IDEA OF DEVELOPMENT
ITSELF.
MAYBE WHEN WE WERE BUILDING
SUBURBS AS FAR AS THE EYE CAN
SEE, THAT MIGHT'VE BEEN
SOMEWHAT OF THE CASE, BUT
CONTEMPORARY URBAN PLANNING
THOUGHT NO LONGER AGREES WITH
THIS KIND OF IDEA, AS A
PARADIGM SHIFT, THE CITY
COUNCIL MUST ALSO SHIFT HOW WE
ADMINISTRATIVELY HANDLE THE
DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECTS THROUGH
THE CITY, TO BETTER ALLOW FOLKS
TO LIVE CLOSE TO TRANSIT, CLOSE
TO WHERE THEY WERE, AS SUCH, WE
CAN FINALLY WORK TO ALLEVIATE
THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SHORTAGE
THAT OUR REGION FACES.
SEPA EXISTS ONLY AS A WEAPON AS
OF NOW FOR LARGELY PRIVILEGED
GROUPS IN ORDER TO REALLY
MUSCLE HOUSING AWAY FROM WHERE
THEY BELIEVE, WHERE THEY LIVE,
WITH ALL MY HEART, I THINK CITY
COUNCIL CAN SEE THIS DIOCESE
THROUGH THIS CASH -- I THINK
CITY COUNCIL CAN SEE THROUGH
THIS AND ADOPT THIS PROPOSAL.
>> THANK YOU.
>>> IAM LEGAIL SNOSNOWIE, I
LIVE DOWNTOWN, IT IS
UNBELIEVABLE TO ME THAT A
PROGRESSIVE CITY LIKE SEATTLE
WOULD CONSIDER TRAMPLING ON A
CITIZEN'S RIGHT TO APPEAL,
TRANSPORTATION OR WHATEVER, I
WANT EACH OF YOU TO KNOW THAT
THERE COULD BE BLOOD ON YOUR
HANDS IF THIS BILL IS PASSED,
UNLESS IT IS REVISED, WE ARE
NOT SAYING THROW IT OUT, JUST
CONSIDER SOME REVISIONS.
THAT WOULD MAKE IT WORK.
WHILE I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE
APPEALS OF OTHER AREAS OF THE
CITY, IN THIS CASE, ONE SIZE
DOES NOT FIT ALL.
YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT EACH AREA.
DOWNTOWN, I HAVE TO TELL YOU,
THE HIGH-RISE PROJECTS HAVE NOT
MISUSED SEPA , AS SOME HAVE
CLAIMED.
THEY HAVE BEEN, AND WILL
CONTINUE TO BE, THE RESULT OF
SERIOUS RESEARCH, SUBSTANTIATED
THREATS TO HER HEALTH, WELL-
BEING AND DELIVERABILITY.
THEY ARE CAUSED BY ILL-
CONCEIVED DESIGNS BY GREEDY OUT-
OF-STATE AND FOREIGN DEVELOPERS.
IF YOU TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT
OUR LEGITIMATE CONCERNS ABOUT
THE WATERING DOWN OF SEPA
REVIEW, AND THE INADEQUACY OF
THE DESIGN REVIEW PROCESSES,
AND THE POTENTIAL NEGATIVE
EFFECTS TO OUR CITY, AND ITS
RESIDENTS, AND NOT BE BLINDED
BY THE DEVELOPER $RHETORIC, I
BELIEVE YOU CAN CRAFT A BILL
THAT IS GOOD FOR EVERYONE.
AND REMEMBER, YOU DON'T HAVE TO
DO THIS TODAY.
YOU HAVE UNTIL APRIL 2021 TO
MAKE ANY DECISIONS WITH REGARD
TO HOUSE BILL 1123.
THANK YOU.
>> [ APPLAUSE ]>> HELLO, MY
NAME IS BROOKE BRAD, I LIVE IN
THE U DISTRICT, AND I'M HERE TO
SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS
LEGISLATION, AS YOU KNOW, THIS
IS NOT MY FIRST TIME
TESTIFYING, OVER THE YEARS I
HAVE ATTENDED ANY HEARINGS AND
MEETINGS, SO MUCH SO THAT MY
PARTNER AND I HALF JOKINGLY
REFERRED TO THESE MEETINGS AS
DATE NIGHT, AS MUCH AS I ENJOY
COMING HERE AND APPRECIATE ALL
YOU DO, THERE ARE OTHER THINGS
I COULD BE DOING WITH MY TIME.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE MISUSE AND
ABUSE OF SEPA HAS RESULTED TO
DECADES LONG DELAYS TO PASS
SENSIBLE LEGISLATION, THAT
KEEPS ME COMING BACK HERE OVER
AND OVER AGAIN, AND KEEPS US AS
A CITY FROM ADDRESSING OTHER
CRITICAL ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE
WORKED ON.
THESE ABUSES ARE NOT PROTECTING
OUR OPEN SPACES, WILDERNESS OR
FARMLANDS, THEY ARE PREVENTING
THE SPRAWL THAT RESULTS IN
GREATER GREENHOUSE EMISSIONS,
THEY ARE NOT SAVING SALMON OR
ORCA, JUST WORSENING THE
CLIMATE AND HOUSING CRISIS.
I SUPPORT LEGISLATION THAT
BRINGS SOME SANITY TO OUR
REALLY DRAWNOUT SEATTLE
PROCESS, THE LEGISLATION IS A
STEP FORWARD IN THAT DIRECTION,
I WHOLEHEARTEDLY SUPPORTED.
THANK YOU.>> MARK FOLTZ.
>> HELLO, I AM IN WALLINGFORD,
LIVING IN WALLINGFORD, I HAVE
TESTIFIED MANY TIMES IN SUPPORT
OF POLICIES AND PROJECTS LIKE
COMPLETING THE MISSING LINK,
BUILDING HOUSING FOR THE
HOMELESS, MANDATORY HOUSING
AFFORDABILITY, HOWEVER ONCE
THESE PROJECTS ENTERED THE SEPA
PROCESS, ESPECIALLY THE
APPEALS PROCESS, I ALONG WITH
THE REST OF THE PUBLIC WAS SHUT
OUT, I WROTE A 20 PAGE AMICUS
BRIEF WITH FRIENDS, DURING THE
APPEAL, BUT BECAUSE WE WERE
NABLE TO RAISE 5 OR 6 FIGURES
FOR LAWYERS, I WAS NOT ABLE TO
FILE IT, I WAS SHUT OUT.
IS IMPORTANT FOR THE CITY TO DO
ITS HOMEWORK, WE SHOULD NOT
ALLOW SMALL GROUPS OF WELL
RESOURCED PEOPLE SHOULD -- TO
STOP CHANGES, FOR
SUSTAINABILITY, DELIVERING MUCH-
NEEDED AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
I WANT TO THINK THE COMMITTEE,
ESPECIALLY COUNCILMEMBER ABEL
PACHECO, AND O'BRIEN, PLEASE
PASS IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
>>> MY NAME IS LESLIE BUCHER, I
AM A 11 YEAR RESIDENT OF
SEATTLE, I'M ASKING YOU TO
TABLE IT AS IT STANDS, IT IS A
SIGN THAT THE PUBLIC HAS
SOMETHING TO SAY, BUT WE ARE
NOT BEING HEARD.
SEPA STANDARDS ARE IMPERATIVE,
THEY SHOULD BE NONPOLITICAL AND
NONNEGOTIABLE, THEY ARE MEANT
TO PROTECT THE NATURAL
ENVIRONMENT AND THE CITY WE ARE
BUILDING AND LIVING IN TOGETHER.
WE NEED SUSTAINABLE DENSITY
THAT GIVES EQUAL ACCESS TO
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION.
DON'T WATER DOWN SEPA, PLEASE
DON'T TAKE OUR VOICE AWAY
LITTLE BY LITTLE, PLEASE TABLE
THIS BILL AS IT STANDS.
THANK YOU.
>> MY APOLOGIES OF
MISPRONUNCIATION OF YOUR LAST
NAME.
STEVE ROWE CELLO?
>> -- ROSELLO.
>> MOST OF THE ARGUMENT AGAINST
THIS IS A PARTICULAR OUTCOME,
THE PROBLEM IS, THERE IS NOT
JUST ONE THING THE CITY SHOULD
BE CARING ABOUT, IF YOU TEAR
DOWN THE PROTECTIONS TO MAKE
SOME THINGS EASIER, YOU MAKE A
WHOLE LOT OF THINGS EASIER.
I RECOMMEND THAT THIS BE TABLED
AND BE LOOKED AT MORE SERIOUSLY,
HOW ABOUT TAKING A LOOK AT THE
FRONT END OF THE LAND-USE
PROCESS?
DESIGN REVIEW USED TO COVER A
WIDE RANGE OF THINGS.
SITE-SPECIFIC, EVERY ONE OF
THEM WAS NOT USED ON EVERY
SITE, BUT NOW, YOU CAN'T DO
MUCH WITH THE CITY UNTIL THE
END, AND SO, YOU GET A LOT MORE
APPEALS.
AND THIS IDEA THAT AN APPEAL IS
A VERY SIMPLE THING, I DON'T
FIND THAT TO BE TRUE.
AN APPEAL IS SOMETHING FOR A
LOT OF US FOLKS, VERY HARD
THING TO DECIDE TO DO.
BECAUSE YES, IT IS A VERY BIG
COMMITMENT, THIS IS NOT A
SIMPLE ACT, OUT OF PURE
FRUSTRATION.
A COUPLE OF MINUTES TO SPEAK ON
THIS TONIGHT, THIS PROCESS IS
GOING VERY QUICKLY.
THE CITY HAS AND SHOULD BE
PERFECT, WITH YOUR NEW
PROPOSALS TO MAKE, HOUSING
APPEAR, BUT YOU KEEP TEARING
DOWN THE MORE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING FASTER THAN YOU ARE
BUILDING IT.
UNTIL WE START LOOKING AT THE
PROCESS, AND GIVING PEOPLE BACK
THE RIGHTS OF THE CITY TO BE
PART OF THE PROCESS, MAYBE
EVEN, HOW ABOUT THIS WORD,
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING, LET'S
LOOK AT THE WHOLE CITY, MAYBE
EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD DOESN'T HAVE
TO BE STAMPED BY THE SAME
COOKIE-CUTTER OVER AND OVER
AGAIN, MAYBE THE CITY OUGHT TO
CONSIDER NEIGHBORHOODS, NOT
JUST HOW EASY IT IS TO DO IT.
>> THANK YOU.
>>> MY NAME IS CARL HILTBRENNER
, I'M A SOFTWARE DEVELOPER,
I'M NOT A DEVELOPER ANYTHING,
SEPA HAS GONE HORRIBLY WRONG,
THEY DON'T USE IT TO PROTECT
THE ENVIRONMENT, BUT TO SLOW
DOWN HOUSING DURING THE
ENVIRONMENTAL CRISIS, RESIDENTS
ARE DEMANDING MORE PARKING AND
LESS DENSITY, THAT IS NOT WHAT
SEPA WAS MEANT FOR.
THE BULLET CENTER, ADVERTISED
AS THE GREENEST COMMERCIAL
BUILDING IN THE WORLD.
IT WAS SUBJECT TO A SEPA
APPEAL, THE REASONS WHY?
NOT ENOUGH PARKING.
NOT ENOUGH PARKING FOR THE
GREENEST COMMERCIAL BUILDING IN
THE WORLD?
ANOTHER WERE COMPLAINTS ABOUT
THE SHADOWS FROM THE ROOF
OVERHANGING PROJECTIONS, SOLAR
PANELS.
AT THIS POINT, SEPA HAS BEEN
USED NOT TO PROTECT THE
ENVIRONMENT, IT IS USED TO
PROTECT THE STATUS QUO.
WE NEED TO ADOPT THIS
LEGISLATION, AND SUPPORT UP
ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT, IT IS
HOW WE AS A CITY ARE GOING TO
REDUCE CARBON EMISSIONS.
AS LONG AS SEPA IS PROTECTING
THE STATUS QUO, WE ARE GOING
TO NEED TO FIND A WAY TO MAKE
NEW DENSITY AND TOD POSSIBLE.
WE CAN HELP SEATTLE LIVE UP TO
ITS NAME AS A GREEN AND
ENVIRONMENTAL CITY.
THANK YOU.>> DONNA MURPHY..
NO?
JESSE SIMPSON?
>> I AM JESSE SIMPSON, I
VOLUNTEER WITH THE CAPITOL HILL
RENTER INITIATIVE, I LIKE TO
SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS BILL TO
REFORM SEPA, SEATTLE FACES A
AFFORDABILITY CRISIS AND A
CLIMATE CRISIS, ALLOWING
DUPLEXES, TRIPLEX, AND MORE IS
CRITICAL TO ADDRESSING BOTH
PROBLEMS AT ONCE.
FOR THE SAKE OF OUR OWN FUTURE
AND THE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
FOR RENTERS IN THE CITY, WE
NEED TO ALLOW THE MANY PEOPLE
WHO WOULD LOVE TO LIVE IN
SEATTLE, A CULTURALLY VIBRANT
AND TRANSIT CONNECT COMMUNITIES
TO DO SO.
IT IS PERVERSE THAT SEPA AS IT
EXISTS IS BEING USED TO BLOCK
THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING WE NEED
THROUGHOUT THE CITY, DURING THE
TIME I PAID ATTENTION TO LOCAL
POLITICS, I'VE ONLY SEEN IT TWO
BE USED TO DELAY PROGRESSIVE
POLICIES AND MULTIFAMILY
HOUSING, LIKE MANDATORY HOUSING
AFFORDABILITY, THE MISSING
LINK, BEFORE LAWTON AFFORDABLE
HOUSING, ETC.
I COMMEND YOUR WORK ON THIS
ISSUE TO TRANSFORM SEPA.
THANK YOU.>>> THANK YOU, GOOD
EVENING, I AM A RENTER, ASKA
JACKS, I SPEAK FROM THE HEART,
EVERY TIME I COME HERE, I AM
POWERFUL, I CARE ABOUT HOUSING
AND ENVIRONMENT, WE NEED TO
SAVE AND BUILD SAFE,
AFFORDABLE, LOW INCOME HOUSING
THAT IS PERMANENT, AND PUBLICLY
OWNED, ESPECIALLY FOR US THAT
OUR -- WHO ARE ARE INTERSEXED,
WE NEED THIS PAST FOR US.
WERE NOT ALWAYS ACCEPTED.
>>> -- WHO ARE NOT ALWAYS
ACCEPTED.
>>> MY NAME IS MICHAEL CHOSEN,
IN A COMMUNITY OF 575
STAKEHOLDERS, THAT IS DENSITY.
I AM FEARFUL THAT WE ARE
CREATING A DYSFUNCTIONAL CITY.
I AM URGING YOU TO REJECT THIS
COUNCIL BILL, IT TAKES US IN
THE WRONG DIRECTION, YEARS AGO
I WAS STANDING IN THE 16 FOOT
WIDE 19TH-CENTURY ALLEY THAT BY
SIX THE LENGTH OF OUR BLOCK,
HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH A
UPS DRIVER WHO WAS BLOCKING IT.
HE DESCRIBED TO ME HIS
DIFFICULTIES, EXPLAINED HOW
THERE WERE CITY BLOCKS THAT
WERE SO HARD TAXES THAT HE HAD
TO DOUBLE PART TWO BLOCKS AWAY,
AND RUN HIS PACKAGES TO THEIR
DESTINATION, FREQUENTLY
RETURNING TO A TICKET ON HIS
TRUCK.
SEATTLE'S DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION, IN THEIR
COLLABORATION WITH THE
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON, ON A
STUDY ENTITLED THE FINAL 50
FEET, HAS CHRONICLED AND
ANALYZED THESE TYPES OF
PROBLEMS.
I LIVE ON A BLOCK THAT COULD
BECOME THE DENSEST AND MOST
DYSFUNCTIONAL BLOCK IN THE
CITY, IF DEVELOPERS ARE NOT
COMPELLED TO SOLVE THE RELATED
DESIGN ISSUES UNDER SEPA,
RAISED IN PROPOSALS ON 2 500
FOOT TOWERS, FOR NEARLY 5 YEARS
I HAVE BEEN OBSERVING AND
LENDING PUBLIC COMMENT AT THE
DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS FOR SDCI,
WOULD I INITIALLY INCLUDED WAS
ENCOMPASSED BY THE DESIGN
REVIEW PANEL, AND TRADE 27, I
CONCLUDED IT IS OUTRIGHT
CNTEMPT FOR THE PUBLIC
INTEREST IN STAKEHOLDERS.
SDCI HAS A PROCESS THAT
INVITES COMMENT AND THEN
IGNORES IT.
WHAT SENSE DOES THAT MAKE?
AFTER ADVANCING SEPA PERTINENT
RELATED TRAFFIC AND DAYLIGHTING
STUDIES AT THE COMMUNITY'S
EXPENSE, SDCI HAS IGNORED THE
COMMUNITY'S INPUT, I CAN
IMAGINE PROVIDING MORE
SUBSTANTIVE PUBLIC, THEN WE
HAVE.
WE HAVE PACKED THE DESIGN
REVIEW MEETINGS, EVERY
FRUSTRATED COMMUTER AND
RESIDENT, STAKEHOLDER INTEREST
IN THESE ISSUES, WE ARE
RAISING, HAS A STAKE.
>> THANK YOU MICHAEL.
ANGELA?
>> HELLO, THANK YOU FOR BEING
HERE TODAY.
MY NAME IS ANGELA COMPTON, A
RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 7, I'M
HERE TO SUPPORT SEPA REPORT --
REFORM.
I LIVE A LIFE THAT MOST PEOPLE
ONLY DREAM OF LIVING, I HAVE A
JOB THAT I LOVE WORKING AT A
HOUSING NONPROFIT, AND A 10
MINUTE WALK TO WORK.
I LIVE IN BELLTOWN, LOTS OF
SHOPS NEARBY, DIFFERENT STORES,
I CAN WALK TO THE MARKET, WHERE
I DO MY GROCERY SHOPPING, AND
THIS IS THE LIFE THAT MOST
PEOPLE LIVE.
MOST PEOPLE IN MY OFFICE, AT
THE RAYNOR TOWER, COMMUTE IN,
IT TAKES ONE OR TWO HOURS TO
GET TO WORK.
THEY DON'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY
TO LIVE THE KIND OF GREEN LIFE
THAT I LIVE.
A BIG PART OF THAT IS THAT
THERE ARE A LOT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL THINGS THAT ARE
BEING USED BY SEPA THAT
SHOULDN'T BE.
FOR EXAMPLE, PARKING, AS WE
JUST HEARD WITH THE GREENEST
BUILDING IN THE WORLD, THEY
EVEN WERE SUBJECT TO A SEPA
REFORM ON PARKING.
I ADVOCATED FOR THE MANDATORY
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY AT AND
HEARD TIME AND TIME AGAIN
RIDICULOUS THINGS ABOUT PARKING
AND OTHER THINGS THAT SHOULD
NOT BE RELATED TO THE
ENVIRONMENT.
WHICH SHOULD -- WHAT WE SHOULD
BE WORRIED ABOUT IS SPRAWL, AND
RELATED TO SPRAWL, IS A QUAL
WAS MOSTLY A FOREST, THERE ARE
SO MANY HOMES, AND THEIR
COMMUTING TO SEATTLE AND
BELLEVUE, WE NEED TO BE
BUILDING MORE I SUPPORT THE
SEPA REFORM, FOR MORE THERE IS
TO BE DEVELOPED, LIVING GREEN
LIVES, FOR MORE PEOPLE, AND
HAVE SHORT WALKS TO WORK OR A?
TRANSIT TRIP, SO THANK YOU.>>
CORY NATHAN?
NO?
PAM HELPRIN.
>> I'M GOING TO PASS.
>> LAST ON THE LIST IS MATT
HUTCHINS.
>> GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY,
LET'S SEE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR YOUR TIME ON THIS ISSUE, I
WOULD START OFF BY SAYING THAT
THE SEATTLE CHAPTER OF THE
AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
ARCHITECTS STRONGLY SUPPORTS
COUNCIL BILL 119600 TO ALIGN
THE SEPA REQUIREMENTS TO
RECENT CHANGES TO STATE LAW,
AND THERE IS A LETTER, I WILL
HAVE IT IN.
YOU HAVE PROBABLY ARE USING
THAT.
SEPA IS A POWERFUL TOOL, WE
DON'T WANT TO TAKE ANYTHING
FROM THAT, IT HAS SHAPED THIS
PLACE THAT WE LOVE, AND
PROTECTED THE ENVIRONMENT, IT
IS DOING A GREAT JOB FOR THE
MOST PART.
WE DON'T WANT THIS TO
COMPROMISE THE CURRENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS, IN
FACT, BECAUSE A LOT OF THE
PROTECTIONS ARE DUPLICATED WITH
FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT
DEVELOPMENT CODES FOR NOISE AND
POLLUTION ETC., HAVING THIS BE
RECOVERED BY SEPA IS REDUNDANT,
BUILDING MORE PLACES FOR PEOPLE
TO LIVE IN SEATTLE, AND LIVING
OUR ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES ARE
NOT AT ALL AT OZ, WE CAN PREVENT
THAT WE CAN PROTECT THE
ENVIRONMENT AND PROVIDE ACCESS
TO HOUSING AND ECONOMIC GROWTH,
VITALITY, THESE ARE NOT
MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE.
ALLOWING MORE HOUSING IN
EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS RESULTS
IN LESS GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS PER CAPITA, AND THE
DIVERSITY OF HOUSING OPTIONS
ENRICHES THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND
MAKES COMMUNITIES MORE RESILIENT
RECENTLY SEPA APPEALS HAVE BEEN
USED TO DELAY BIKE LANES, ETC.
ETC., AND YOU KNOW, AS WE FACE
MORE CLIMATE CHANGE AND
POTENTIAL INEQUITY FROM THE
BOOMING ECONOMY, IT IS MORE
IMPORTANT TO LIMIT SEPA
APPEALS, WE SUPPORT EXEMPTIONS
FOR OBSERVING RUN TRANSIT,
DUPLEXES AND TRIPLEX IS, IN
RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, AND
INCREASING INFILL DEVELOPMENT,
AND DIVISION OF LOTS IN SMALL
PARCELS, ALL OF THOSE THINGS
ARE GREAT, THEY HAVE HUGE AND
MASSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS,
WE SHOULD BE INTEGRATING THEM
INTO ZONING TO MAKING THEM MORE
GREEN.>> THANK YOU.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO DID NOT SET
UP TO SPEAK THAT WOULD LIKE TO
SPEAK?
SEEING THAT THERE IS NO ONE, WE
WILL BE CLOSING PUBLIC COMMENT.
I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE WHO
TOOK TIME FROM THEIR EVENING
TONIGHT TO JOIN US AND SHARE
THEIR FEEDBACK ON AN IMPORTANT
ISSUE, THE MEETING WILL BE
TAKING UP THE LEGISLATION AT
THE NEXT MEETING NEXT WEDNESDAY
AT NOON IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, WE
PLAN TO VOTE ON THAT AND ANY
AMENDMENTS, THE FINAL CITY
COUNCIL VOTE IS MONDAY, OCTOBER
7, THIS CONCLUDES THE OCTOBER 9
-- SEPTEMBER 9 2019 MEETING OF
THE PLANNING, LAND USE, AND
ZONING COMMITTEE, WE ARE
ADJOURNED.