>> OKAY. THE FEBRUARY 4th, 2026,
LAND-USE COMMITTEE MEETING WILL
COME TO ORDER. IT IS 9:32 A.M. I
AM EDDIE LIN, CHAIR OF THE
COMMITTEE. WITH THE COMMITTEE
CLERK PLEASE CALL ROLE.
>> [ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
>> CHAIR, THERE ARE, I BELIEVE,
FIVE MEMBERS PRESENT WITH THE
ADDITION OF COUNCIL MEMBER.
>> IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION, THE
AGENDA WILL BE ADOPTED. HEARING
NO AGENDA -- OBJECTION, THE
AGENDA IS ADOPTED. GOOD MORNING,
EVERYONE. THANK YOU FOR BEING
HERE. AGAIN, EDDIE LIN, THE LAND
USE AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE
CHAIR. THANKS FOR HELPING US
PREPARE FOR THIS MEETING. WE
WILL NOW OPEN THE HYBRID PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD. PUBLIC COMMENT
SHOULD RELATE TO ITEMS ON
TODAY'S AGENDA AND WITHIN THE
PURVIEW OF THE COMMITTEE. CLERK,
HOW MANY SPEAKERS ARE SIGNED UP
TODAY?
>> WE HAVE SIX IN PERSON AND
FIVE REMOTE SPEAKERS.
>> WONDERFUL. EACH SPEAKER WILL
HAVE TWO MINUTES. WE WILL START
WITH IN PERSON SPEAKERS FIRST.
CLERK, CAN YOU PLEASE READ THE
INSTRUCTIONS.
>> UP TO 60 MINUTES. WILL BE
CALLED FIRST. SPEAKERS WILL HEAR
CHIME WHEN 10 SECONDS HER LEFT.
ALLOWS TO CALL ON THE NEXT
SPEAKER. NOW OPEN. WE WILL BEGIN
WITH THE FIRST SPEAKER ON THE
LIST. PATRICK FOLEY.
>> GOOD MORNING, I AM PATRICK
FOLEY . WE ARE A SEATTLE-BASED
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE
DEVELOPER. DEVELOP MOSTLY URBAN
INFIELD APARTMENT BUILDING
XANDER -- PRESERVATION PRODUCTS.
I AM HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT THE
PERMANENT REMOVAL OF SEPA. AS
SOMEONE WHO BUILDS A LOT OF
HOUSING IN THIS CITY, THAT IS
JUST ONE STEP WE CAN REMOVE TO
REDUCE THE TIME. IF WE WANT TO
PRODUCE MORE HOUSING, I THINK IT
IS A HIGHLY EFFECTIVE TOOL WE
CAN USE IN THE LEGISLATIVE
PROCESS SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU
TO PASS THAT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT WE HAVE LOGAN SCHMIDT.
>> GOOD MORNING, COMMITTEE.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SPEAK TODAY. MY NAME IS LOGAN
SCHMIDT ON BEHALF OF THE MASTER
BUILDERS ASSOCIATION. SUPPORTS
ORDINANCE 102193 AND THE CITY'S
PROPOSAL TO STREAMLINE SEPA
REVIEW. THIS ORDINANCE PROVIDES
A CLEAR, PREDICTABLE FRAMEWORK
TO ADVANCE HOUSING PRODUCTION
WHILE STILL MEETING SEATTLE'S
LONG-STANDING GROWTH AND
ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS.
IMPORTANTLY, THIS PROPOSAL
REFLECTS A REALITY WE HAVE
ALREADY SEEN IN PRACTICE.
PROJECT LEVEL REVIEW IS LARGELY
REDUNDANT. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
ARE ALREADY ADDRESSED THROUGH
SEATTLE'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT. AND
THROUGH AN EXTENSIVE CODE
REQUIREMENTS. SHORELINE
REGULATIONS. AND INFRASTRUCTURE
AND DESIGN RULES. STREAMLINING
SEPA IS NOT A ROLLBACK OF
ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS. IT IS
AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT THOSE
STANDARDS ARE ALREADY EMBEDDED
THROUGHOUT THE CITY'S PLANNING
AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK. WE ARE
HERE TO SUPPORT TO MOVE THIS
ORDINANCE FORWARD. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE NORIS
COOPER.
>> HELLO. I AM NORIS COOPER. AND
I AM ON THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM AT
HOLLAND, WHERE I OVERSEE THE
DEVELOPMENT OF APPROXIMATELY
1000 APARTMENT MULTIPLE UNITS.
WE HAVE USED THE SEPA EXEMPTION
TWICE ON TWO PROJECTS. AND IN
TODAY'S CHALLENGING INVESTMENT
AND REAL ESTATE MARKET, THE RISK
REDUCTION AND TIME SAVINGS
REALLY IS SOMETHING IMPORTANT TO
EQUITY AND TO ATTRACT CAPITAL TO
GET THESE PROJECTS ACROSS THE
BOARD. BOTH OF THESE PROJECTS
COLLECTIVELY AT 422 UNITS TO THE
SEATTLE HOUSING CRISIS. AND BOTH
PERFORM -- BOTH PARTICIPATE IN
MFTE AND MHA IS BEING PERFORMED
ON THE FREMONT DEAL. WE PAID $3
MILLION INTO THE MHA FUND ON THE
BALLARD DEAL. SO WE URGE YOUR
SUPPORT. IT ELIMINATES RISK FOR
EQUITY. AND WE ARE, YOU KNOW,
TRYING TO PITCH TO GET
FINANCING. AND, YEAH.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE LORI.
>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL
MEMBERS. THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT TODAY. MY
NAME IS LORI McKEEUN. I AM HERE
TODAY TO EXPRESS MY STRONG
SUPPORT FOR THE PROPOSED SEPA
EXEMPTION LEGISLATION. OVER THE
PAST FIVE YEARS, MY TEAM HAS
PERMITTED JUST OVER 1000 HOUSING
UNITS IN SEATTLE. IN 2023, WE
HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO OPT OUT
OF THE SEPA REVIEW FOR OUR MOST
RECENT 200 UNIT APARTMENT
BUILDING AND THAT EXPERIENCE
CLEARLY DEMONSTRATED THE VALUE
OF THIS APPROACH. ELIMINATING
THE SEPA REQUIREMENT SAVES
VALUABLE TIME AT THE BEGINNING
OF A PROJECT, AS WELL AS
SUBSTANTIAL COST ASSOCIATED WITH
PREPARING THE CHECKLIST IN THE
SPECIALIZED TECHNICAL REPORTS
THAT ACCOMPANY IT. THOSE MONTHS
MATTER. JUST AS IMPORTANTLY, THE
ISSUES ADDRESSED IN THE SEPA
CHECKLIST ARE ALREADY THOROUGHLY
REVIEWED ELSEWHERE IN THE
PERMITTING PROCESS. THE 15 OR SO
ELEMENTS, THINGS LIKE CRITICAL
AREAS, CONSTRUCTION NOISE,
TRAFFIC, HISTORIC PRESERVATION,
ARE ALL EVALUATED THROUGH
EXISTING ENTITLEMENT AND PERMIT
REVIEWS. FROM A PRACTITIONER'S
PERSPECTIVE, SEPA HAS BECOME
LARGELY REDUNDANT, WHILE STILL
ADDING DELAY AND EXPENSE. TODAY,
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IS
CHALLENGED FROM EVERY DIRECTION.
RISING CONSTRUCTION COSTS, LABOR
SHORTAGES, TARIFFS, MATERIAL
AVAILABILITY. IN THIS
ENVIRONMENT EVERY NECESSARY
MATTERS. ELIMINATING SEPA WILL
NOT BY ITSELF MAKE A PROJECT
FEASIBLE BUT IT IS A MEANINGFUL
PART OF THE TOOLKIT AND IT
PROVIDES REAL VALUE TO THOSE OF
US WHO ARE BUILDING HOUSING IN
THE CITY. I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE
YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE STEVE.
>> CHRISTMAS IS A LITTLE LATE
THIS YEAR. HANUKKAH FOR SOME.
FESTIVUS FOR OTHERS. MANY OTHER
CHOICES, ALSO. SEPA IS THE NET.
IT CATCHES THE ODD THING. TO
REMOVE IT IS , ITSELF, ON THE
PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF SEATTLE .
LIKE MANY OTHER THINGS WHICH
HAVE HAPPENED IN LAND-USE. YOU
KNOW? THERE WAS NO LAWS AGAINST
OWNING NUCLEAR WEAPONS WHEN
THERE WERE NO NUCLEAR WEAPONS.
SEPA TAKES CARE OF THOSE
UNANTICIPATED ABSOLUTELY
HORRIFYING THINGS WHICH CAN
HAPPEN BECAUSE YOU AND THE
DEPARTMENTS ARE NOT ALL KNOWING.
AND THE CITIZENS OF SEATTLE HAVE
GOT ASSAULT AFTER ASSAULT ON
LAND-USE. THE OTHER THING I
WOULD LIKE TO BRING OUT IS THE
IDEA THAT LOWERING THE COST OF
DEVELOPERS LOWERS THE COST OF
HOUSING. THAT IS A PURE LIE IN
SEATTLE. IT ONLY INCREASES THE
MARGIN. BECAUSE THEY AIN'T
GOING TO -- YOU GIVE THEM A
MILLION DOLLARS SUBSIDY AND THEY
AIN'T CUTTING THE COST A
MILLION DOLLARS. THEY ARE
PUTTING IT RIGHT IN THEIR POCKET
WHERE THEY BELIEVE IT BELONGS.
SO IF YOU BELIEVE WHAT YOU HAVE
BEEN HEARING ABOUT HOW THIS IS
GOING TO HELP SEATTLE HOUSING,
YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE DEFINITIONS
OF INSANITY IS KEEP DOING THE
SAME THING AND EXPECT A
DIFFERENT RESULT. WE HAVE BEEN
GIVING AND GIVING AND GIVING AND
HAVE NOT SEEN THAT REAL
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THERE IS A
LOT OF REASONS FOR THE PROBLEMS
WE HAVE WITH HOUSING. WHAT WE
HAVE RIGHT HERE IS NOT A
SOLUTION. WHAT YOU MIGHT
CONSIDER IS RAISING THE MHA FEES
BECAUSE THAT WOULD ACTUALLY
PROVIDE.
>> THANK YOU, STEVE. NEXT UP WE
HAVE CINDY SHETLER. DOCTOR
THANKS. IS THIS THING ON? SUPER.
I AM THE SANDY SHETLER WITH TREE
ACTION SEATTLE. AND I AM ASKING
THAT YOU PLEASE RECOGNIZE THAT
THIS BILL REMOVES ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW THAT IS NOT REPLACED BY
THE GMA. IN THE PLACE OF OUR
HOUSING CRISIS, THE STATE CALLED
CITIES THEY COULD ALLOW LIMITED
SEPA EXEMPTION TO HELP SPUR
HOUSING PRODUCTION. BUT WHEN THE
HOUSING EXEMPTION DROPS FROM 50%
OF THE FAR TO JUST ONE UNIT, A
TOKEN AD YOU -- ADU EXEMPTS AN
ENTIRE 30,000 FOOT PROJECT FROM
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. THAT IS
NOT HOUSING POLICY. THAT IS A
LOOPHOLE. I WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK FOR
RECOGNIZING THIS AND PROPOSING
AN AMENDMENT TO LOWER THE
EXEMPTION TO 20 SPACES INSTEAD
OF THE PROPOSED 90. THAT
AMENDMENT MOVES US IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION. BUT IT DOES NOT FIX
THE CORE ISSUE. SEPA EXISTS TO
ENSURE THIS CITY UNDERSTANDS
CLIMATE AND COMMUNITY IMPACTS
BEFORE MAKING REVERSIBLE
LAND-USE DECISIONS, ESPECIALLY
IN OVERBURDENED COMMUNITIES.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, SANDY.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE JENNIFER
GODFREY.
>> HI. THANK YOU.
SO AS A CONSTITUENT OF THIS CITY
MY VOICE SHOULD CARRY THE SAME
WEIGHT AS ANYONE WHO WORKS FOR A
DEVELOPER AND THE CITY. YOU HAVE
LIKELY SEEN THE NEW STUDY BY
UCLA SHOWING THAT THE REGULATION
DOES NOT INCREASE AFFORDABILITY.
BLESS YOU. WHY DO PEOPLE WANT TO
LIVE IN THE EMERALD CITY? NOBODY
WANTS TO LIVE NEAR A WATERFRONT
WHERE EVERYTHING IS DONE. 121093
IS THE INADEQUATE FINAL TO
DEREGULATE MOST DEVELOPMENT FOR
10 OR MORE YEARS. IN MY VIEW,
COLONIZATION IS THE FOR-PROFIT
EROSION OF INDIGENOUS TRIBAL
RIGHTS. WE CAN'T PROTECT THE
ENVIRONMENT DUE TO YOUR AMERICAN
COLONIZATION DAMAGE. DOES THAT
MAKE IT RIGHT TO CONTINUE? I
CAN'T WAIT FOR SEATTLE TO STAND
UP TO DESTRUCTIVE SPECIAL
INTEREST. I WILL COME A SEATTLE
THAT RESPECTS INDIGENOUS RIGHTS
BY PROTECTING CLEAN WATER, FISH,
FISH HABITAT AND THE AIR THE
KEEPS ARE WATERCOOLED AUDITS
WATERSHED. I'M EXCITED TO
SUPPORT THE WORK OF ALEXIS ON
AMENDMENT 1. I PROPOSE REMOVING
THE WORDS FLEXIBLE AND PRINCIPAL
FROM THE LANGUAGE AND THE
DOCTOR'S OPEN DOOR.
ADDITIONALLY, I PROPOSE TAKING
BOLD ACTION WITH AN AMENDMENT TO
REWORK THE REST OF THIS BILL AND
INSTEAD ADD LANGUAGE MAKING IT
EASIER FOR BUILDERS TO RENOVATE
EXISTING STRUCTURES LIKE MD
OFFICE BUILDINGS TO PROVIDE
HOUSING WHILE ELEVATING
DOWNTOWN. RAPIDLY INCREASING
SUPPLY AND AFFORDABILITY. THE
INTERSECTION AFFORDABILITY AND
ECOSYSTEM IS RENOVATING EXISTING
BUILDINGS. AS IS, THIS BILL
REDUCES THE INCENTIVES FOR
HOUSING AND INCREASES THE
INCENTIVES FOR PARKING LOTS,
WHICH WILL HEAT POLLUTED WATER
INTO OUR WATERWAYS UNCHECKED.
YOU MAY HAVE SEEN THE SOUND
DEEPER. A RECENT STUDY SHOWS
THAT MORE HALF OF SALMON DIED
RETURNING TO LONGFELLOW CREEK
THIS YEAR. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, JENNIFER.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE ALEX
TSIMERMAN.
>> YEP. MY NAME ALEX TSIMERMAN.
EACH TIME I SEE MORE ZONING . A
LITTLE BIT CONFUSING. WHAT DOES
THIS MEAN? ZONING? CONCENTRATION
CAMPS ZONING? ANOTHER ZONING?
TOO MANY ZONING. MY QUESTION
VERY SIMPLE RIGHT NOW. SEATTLE
TIME PRINT APPROXIMATELY FIVE
APARTMENT AMENITY. FOUR OR FIVE
TIMES. TALKING AND TALKING ABOUT
ZONING. 30, 35 APARTMENT EMPTY.
I AM TALKING ABOUT THIS FOR MANY
YEARS. THIS IS SOMETHING TO
THINK ABOUT. THIS EMPTY
APARTMENT. HOMELESS GUY. YOU
HAVE RICH PEOPLE. TRUMP
ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. HE IS RIGHT.
WAIT FOR HIM FOR FOUR YEARS. THE
LIST. IT IS VERY SIMPLE. MAKE A
EMPTY APARTMENTS PAY. STAY
EMPTY. PAY PENALTY. FIX IT VERY
FAST. VIVA TRUMP. YOUR AMERICAN
REVOLUTION. I'M NOT TALKING
ABOUT CITIZEN LIKE ME.
>> THANK YOU, MR. TSIMERMAN.
NEXT UP, WE HAVE SUSAN .
>> THANK YOU. POSITIVE STEP
FORWARD. BUT SEVERAL CASE
STUDIES OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS
HAVE DEBUNKED THE MYTH THAT IF
WE SIMPLY INCREASE HOUSING
DENSITY IT WILL SOLVE THE ISSUE
OF AFFORDABILITY. THE ISSUE IS
NOT AS SIMPLE AS SUPPLY-SIDE
ECONOMICS. FOR EXAMPLE,
VANCOUVER BC SAW COSTS TRIPLE.
HOME PRICES ARE NOT THE HIGHEST
IN NORTH AMERICA BECAUSE THE
ADDITIONAL VALUE IS CAPTURED BY
THE LANDOWNER. SMART DEVELOPERS
KNOW THIS AND MAKE MOST OF THEIR
MONEY BY BECOMING THE LANDOWNERS
DURING THE REZONING PROCESS. THE
LAND VALUE IMMEDIATELY INFLATES
AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO. I
GOT SEVERAL CASE STUDIES LISTED
HERE. TO EFFECTIVELY ADDRESS THE
AFFORDABILITY ISSUE AND
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS, PLEASE
CONSIDER LEGISLATION THAT
INCENTIVIZES RENOVATIONS TO
EXISTING BUILDINGS. STRUCTURALLY
SOUND 100+-YEAR-OLD HOMES MAY TO
ENDURE ALL CLIMATE THAT ARE
BEING DEMOLISHED AND REPLACED BY
MORE EXPENSIVE HOUSING.
DISPLACING RENTERS, AS WELL. BY
INSTEAD PRESERVING SEATTLE'S
HISTORICAL HOMES TO CREATE A
DUPLEX, MAYBE ADDING A ATTACHED
UNIT, IT AVOIDS ALL THAT DEBRIS
FROM GETTING DUMPED INTO OUR
LANDFILLS. AND AFTER
EXPERIENCING BACK-TO-BACK
EXTREME WEATHER EVENTS, A SEVERE
STATEWIDE DROUGHT LAST SUMMER,
FOLLOWED BY CATASTROPHIC
FLOODING, AND NOW DIMINISH
SNOWPACK THAT WILL AFFECT OUR
WATER SUPPLY DURING THE SUMMER
MONTHS, WE NEED THE GUIDANCE OF
SEPA AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS
MORE THAN EVER BEFORE. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THAT IS OUR LAST IN PERSON
SPEAKER. WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO
OUR REMOTE SPEAKERS, BEGINNING
WITH JUNE.
>> HELLO. THANK YOU. HUNDREDS OF
SEATTLE RESIDENTS AND YET IT IS
NOW IN FRONT OF YOU VIRTUALLY
UNCHANGED. I URGE YOU TO VOTE
NO. IF YOU DO PASS IT, PLEASE
PASS AMENDMENT 1 WHICH WOULD
DECREASE THE NUMBER OF PARKING
SPACES THAT WOULD TRIGGER SEPA
FOR 90, THAT IS APPROXIMATELY
36,000 SQUARE FEET OF PAVEMENT ,
TO A MUCH MORE REASONABLE 20.
THANK YOU FOR THE, COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK. BESIDES THAT, THE BILL
MAKES IT SIGNIFICANTLY EASIER
FOR VOTERS TO SKIP ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW. RELY ON THE CITY'S EIS.
SUFFICIENT TO REDUCE AND
ELIMINATE ALMOST ALL SEPA
REVIEWS FOR THE NEXT 10+ YEARS.
THIS EIS WAS DEEPLY UNDER
APPEAL. IT FAILS TO ASSESS THE
HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
OF CONTINUED RAPID LOSS OF LARGE
TREES AND TREE CANOPY, INCLUDING
INCREASED POLLUTED STORM WATER
RUNNING INTO THE HEAT ISLANDS.
THE EIS HAS WRITTEN TO APPLY A
NUMBER OF NEW HOUSING UNITS THAT
WERE EVENTUALLY INCLUDED IN THE
PLAN. OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL
REGULATIONS ARE IN FLUX. DO NOT
FILL IN THE GAPS. PLEASE REMOVE
THE BILLS' EXEMPTIONS FOR
PROTECTION FROM CULTURAL
RESOURCES. BUILDINGS LESS THAN
65,000 SQUARE FEET DOUBLE THE
AMOUNT OF DIRT EXCAVATED AND
INCLUSION OF ONLY ONE UNIT OF
HOUSING. HERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE
THAT OTHERS HAVE REFERENCED.
REDUCE PERMITTING COST FOR
RENOVATIONS TO EXISTING
BUILDINGS. SEATTLE ALREADY HAS
MANY EMPTY OFFICE BUILDINGS
DOWNTOWN THAT ARE CLOSEST TO THE
MOST FREQUENT TRANSIT IN THE
CITY. A RECENT STUDY SHOW THAT
THE REGULATION DOES NOT INCREASE
AFFORDABILITY AND MAY INCREASE
DISPLACEMENT. WE DO NOT HAVE TO
SACRIFICE PUBLIC HEALTH AND
ENVIRONMENTAL BALANCE TO HAVE
ENOUGH AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN
SEATTLE. THERE IS A BETTER WAY.
YOU NEED TO LEAD THE WAY. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE SARAH CLERK
.
-- CLARK. SARAH? PLEASE PRESS
STAR SIX IF YOU ARE HERE. OH.
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> YES. WE CAN HEAR YOU. THANK
YOU.
>> GOOD MORNING. MEMBERS OF THE
LAND USE AND SUSTAINABILITY
COMMITTEE. THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY. FOR
THE RECORD I AM SARAH CLARK AND
I'M HERE SPEAKING ON THE OVER
2600 MEMBERS OF THE SEATTLE
METRO CHAMBER URGING YOUR
SUPPORT FOR COUNCIL BILL 12093
AND 121135. SEATTLE FACES A
SEVERE HOUSING SHORTAGE AND ONE
OF THE MOST CONSISTENT BARRIERS
TO NEW HOMES IS THE TIME, COST,
AND UNCERTAINTY CREATED BY FEES.
THESE TWO BILLS ARE CRITICAL
STEP TOWARDS ADDRESSING THE
CHALLENGE BY STREAMLINING THE
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS. IT
IS IMPORTANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT
WHAT THESE BILLS DO AND DO NOT
DO. THEY DO NOT ELIMINATE
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION OR
REVIEW WHERE IT IS LEGALLY
REQUIRED. THEY PRESERVE ROBUST
REQUIREMENTS FOR CRITICAL AREA,
SHORELINE, STORM WATER, TREE
PROTECTION, HISTORIC AND
CULTURAL RESOURCES, AND
TRANSPORTATION . PROJECT AND
SENSITIVE AREAS ARE
CHARACTERISTIC FOR REQUIRING
REVIEW STILL UNDER ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW AND ENFORCEABLE
MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS REMAIN
IN PLACE. FROM THE CHAMBER'S
PERSPECTIVE, TIMELY PERMITTING
IS ESSENTIAL NOT JUST FOR
HOUSING DEVELOPERS, BUT FOR
WORKERS, SMALL BUSINESSES, AND
FAMILIES THAT ARE BEING PRICED
OUT OF OUR CITY. STREAMLINING
THESE PROCESSES WILL HELP
WAREHOUSING, SUPPORT
TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT,
AND STRENGTHEN SEATTLE'S
ECONOMIC VITALITY. FOR THESE
REASONS, THE SEATTLE METRO
CHAMBER AND ARE MEMBERS FAMILY
SUPPORT CONSTABLE 12093 AND
121395 AND RESPECTFULLY URGE THE
COMMITTEE TO ADVANCE THOSE
BILLS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, SARAH.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE DAVE GLOVER.
>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL. MY
NAME IS DAVE GLOVER. I LIVE IN
DISTRICT 5 AND I'M HERE TO
COMMENT ABOUT COUNCIL BILL
121093. IT SEEMS LIKE EVERY YEAR
THE DEVELOPERS COME OUT AND THEY
SAY THEY NEED TO GET RID OF THIS
REGULATION REQUIREMENT BECAUSE
THEN WE WILL PRODUCE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING AND WE WILL HAVE THE
SOLUTION TO THE HOUSING CRISIS
BUT IT NEVER SEEMS TO WORK. IN
2023, THEY ASKED US TO GET RID
OF PROTECTIONS FOR TREES ON
PROPERTIES SO THEY COULD MAKE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THAT DIDN'T
DO IT . JUST PRODUCED CLEARCUTS
ON PROPERTY. ALLOWED THEM TO CUT
DOWN TREES FOR DRIVEWAYS AND
OTHER THINGS THAT REALLY DIDN'T
AFFECT THE DEVELOPMENT. AND
THEN, IN 2025, THE CITY
IMPLEMENTED HP-1110 INTO THE
CODE ALLOWING FOUR TO SIX HOUSES
ON EACH PROPERTY. DID THAT
PRODUCE AFFORDABLE HOUSING? NO.
IT JUST PRODUCED FOUR TO SIX
MILLION DOLLAR HOUSES ON THE
PROPERTY. NOW THEY WANT YOU TO
GET RID OF SEPA REVIEWS. BECAUSE
THAT WILL DRIVE DOWN THE COSTS.
WELL, I DON'T THINK THAT IS
GOING TO HAPPEN. IT IS JUST
GOING TO AFFECT OUR ENVIRONMENT.
THE ONLY WAY TO REALLY REDUCE
HOUSING PRICES AND MAKE THINGS
AFFORDABLE IS THROUGH GOVERNMENT
MANDATES AND PROGRAMS LIKE ROOTS
TO ROOF WHICH WAS PASSED LAST
YEAR WHICH HAS GOVERNMENT
FUNDING. GETTING RID OF
REGULATION DOES NOT PRODUCE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. IT JUST PUTS
MORE MONEY IN THE DEVELOPER'S
POCKET . BUT I DO ASK YOU TO
SUPPORT COUNCIL MEMBER'S 1.
THAT IS THE ONE GOOD THING IN
THIS MEETING. REALLY A LEGACY.
WE SHOULD SEE WHAT THE NEW
ADMINISTRATION WANTS YOU AND ASK
MAYOR WILSON WHAT SHE WANTS.
>> THANK YOU, DAVID.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE RYAN
McKINSTRY OR. -- McKINSTER.
>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR LIN AND
MEMBERS. RYAN McKINSTER. AM ALSO
A RENTER IN SEATTLE DISTRICT 6.
FOR 40 YEARS HABITAT HAS BUILT
HOMES FOR OVER 2600 FAMILIES.
PLUS DRIVERS AND SOCIAL WORKERS
WHO KEEP OUR COMMUNITIES
RUNNING. WE STRONGLY SUPPORT
121093. THIS ORDINANCE
RECOGNIZES WHAT AN SPRING SHOWS.
WE NEED FULL ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW TO HAPPEN AT THE PLANNING
LEVEL, NOT NECESSARILY ON
INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS. SEATTLE
ALREADY MAINTAINS CRITICAL
REGULATIONS, STORMWATER
STANDARDS, AND EXTENSIVE DESIGN
REQUIREMENTS. EXISTING STANDARDS
EFFECTIVELY IMPROVE
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES WITHOUT
ANALYSIS. FOR FAMILIES LIKE OURS
WHO WAITED A YEAR TO CLOSE THEIR
HOME IN SEATTLE, EVERY MONTH OF
DELAY MEANS ANOTHER MONTH OF
INSTABILITY. OUR PIPELINE
INCLUDES 204 PROUDLY AFFORDABLE
HOMES, 75% OF THOSE IN SEATTLE.
THESE SERVE ESSENTIAL WORKERS
AND 60% OF OUR MEDIAN INCOME.
STREAMLINED PERMIT MEANS WE
SERVE MORE FAMILIES SOONER WITH
THE SAME LIMITED PUBLIC
RESOURCES. ADVANCE ORDINANCE
121093 AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME TODAY.
>> THANK YOU.
>> LAST, WE HAVE RUTH WILLIAMS.
>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS RUTH
WILLIAMS, AND I'M SPEAKING ON
BEHALF OF THE THORNTON CREEK
ALLIANCE. THE THORNTON CREEK
WATERSHED IS THE LARGEST ONE IN
SEATTLE AND THE LARGEST ONE IN
SHORELINE. WE ARE VERY CONCERNED
ABOUT THE WELFARE OF THIS
WATERSHED AND OUR WATERSHEDS AS
THEY ARE ALL SUPPORTED AND
HARMED BY URBAN ACTIVITIES. MORE
THAN 10 YEARS AGO DUE TO MASSIVE
MORTALITY IT WAS FORBIDDEN TO
RELEASE SALMON SMOLTS INTO
THORNTON CREEK. THAT SITUATION
CONTINUES. WITH LEGISLATION LIKE
THIS BEFORE US TODAY,
IMPROVEMENT SEEMS A LONG WAY
OFF. YOU CANNOT CALL IT POSITIVE
ENVIRONMENTAL OUTCOME WHEN THE
POLICY IS BLOCKING TREE CANOPY
GOALS AND RESULTS IN HEAT ISLAND
EFFECTS, HOT, DIRTY AIR AND MORE
CONTAMINATED RUNOFF. YOU CANNOT
CALL IT A POSITIVE ENVIRONMENTAL
OUTCOME WHEN INCREASED PERVIOUS
CAUSE MORE WARMER CONTAMINATED
RUNOFF AND THERE IS NO
CALCULATION OF HOW MUCH THERE
MIGHT BE IN THE FUTURE AND HOW
IT WOULD BE MITIGATED. AND YOU
CERTAINLY CANNOT HONESTLY QUOTE
THE FINAL EIS AND SAY SOMEONE OR
CONTAMINANTS THAT ENTER OTHER
MARINE AREAS ARE ALMOST
IMMEDIATELY DILUTED TO
CONCENTRATIONS TOO LOW TO HAVE
ANY DISCERNIBLE EFFECTS ON
SPECIES IN THAT ENVIRONMENT.
PLEASE VOTE NO. WE NEED MORE
SUSTAINABLE POLICIES. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
>> THANK YOU, RUTH.
>> CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC
COMMENT.
>> THANK YOU, CLERC. NO
ADDITIONAL REGISTERED SPEAKERS?
WE WILL NOW PROCEED TO OUR ITEMS
OF BUSINESS. BUT BEFORE WE DO SO
I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR
YOUR COMMENTS. I KNOW THERE ARE
DIFFERENCES OF OPINION ABOUT HOW
TO GROW AND HOW TO PROTECT OUR
ENVIRONMENT AND HOW TO PROTECT
OUR TREES AND OUR SALMON AND OUR
ORCHIDS. I DO BELIEVE THAT WE
ARE ALL IN ALIGNMENT ABOUT HOW
CRITICAL IT IS TO PROTECT OUR
ENVIRONMENT. TO MAKE -- TO KEEP
THIS AN EVERGREEN CITY. THANK
YOU ALL FOR YOUR ADVOCACY AND
FOR BEING HERE TODAY. WE WILL
NOW MOVE ON TO OUR FIRST ITEMS
OF BUSINESS. WITH THE CLERK
PLEASE READ ITEMS ONE AND TWO
INTO THE RECORD.
>> AGENDA ITEMS ONE AND TWO.
COUNCIL BILL 121135 .
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS.
TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT PLANS.
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLANS.
121093, LAND-USE AND ZONING.
REVIEW THRESHOLDS.
TRANSPORTATION-RELATED
REQUIREMENTS AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL
RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU TO OUR
PRESENTERS FOR JOINING US. AND,
DO WE HAVE A PRESENTATION?
>> YEAH.
>> ONCE -- CAN YOU INTRODUCE
YOURSELF FOR THE RECORD?
>> I AM DAVE VANSKIKE. I'M HERE
WITH MY COLLEAGUE, GORDON
CLOWER'S. SO THANK YOU MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE. I LOOK
FORWARD.
>> CENTRAL STAFF. I THINK WE
WERE ANTICIPATING SORT OF DOING
A HIGH-LEVEL OVERVIEW. WE HAVE
THE PRESENTATION FROM OCTOBER
21st OF 2025, WHICH WAS WHEN ONE
OF THE PUBLIC HEARINGS WAS HELD
ON THESE BILLS. WE CAN PULL IT
UP AT THAT IS TO REFRESH THE
COMMITTEE'S MEMORY ABOUT THESE
BILLS.
>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE
HELPFUL. I KNOW THIS HAS GONE --
SIMILAR BILL HAS COME TO
COMMITTEE BEFORE DISCUSSION. WE
DO HAVE A NEW COUNCIL MEMBER AND
PERHAPS FOR SOME OF THE MEMBERS
OF THE PUBLIC WHO MAY BE HAVE
NOT HEARD THAT DISCUSSION
BEFORE. JUST IN TERMS OF, FOR MY
COLLEAGUES, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO
CHIME IN. ASK QUESTIONS. GIVEN A
RELATIVELY SHORT AGENDA I THINK
IT WOULD BE BETTER TO HAVE AN
INTERACTIVE DIALOGUE IF WE HAVE
QUESTIONS. SO WITHOUT FURTHER
ADO, YEAH, IF YOU COULD PROCEED.
THANK YOU.
>> TELL ME WHEN. I'M JUST GOING
TO START WITH ADDRESSING KIND OF
A HIGH-LEVEL SCOPE OF THIS FOR
MEMBERS WHO ARE NEW. THE HISTORY
AND PURPOSE OF SEPA ACTUALLY
GOES BACK TO THE NIXON
ADMINISTRATION. THINK ABOUT WHAT
SEPA WAS BUILT FOR AND WHERE IT
HAS GROWN OVER TIME. WE HAVE
HAD 50 YEARS OF SEPA ACTING AS
PEOPLE CAPTURED CORRECTLY AS A
BACKSTOP. IT IS A NET TO CATCH
THE THINGS WE DID NOT
ANTICIPATE. THAT IS A GOOD WAY
TO FRAME IT. OVER 50 YEARS WE
HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO REFINE OUR
LAND-USE CODES SIGNIFICANTLY.
ALL OF OUR LAND-USE CONTROL
ORDINANCES. YOU HEARD A NUMBER
OF THOSE MENTIONED. THANK YOU
FOR COMING. SO OVER TIME, SEPA
HAS BECOME LESS AND LESS OF A
TOOL THAT WE USE. WE HAVE THAT
EXPERIENCE NOT JUST IN TERMS OF
SEEING THE GROWTH OF
REGULATIONS, WHICH AT HAS BEEN
EXTENSIVE OVER THAT TIME, BUT
ALSO HOW LITTLE SEPA HAS BEEN
USED. THAT IS SORT OF THE BASIC
STARTING POINT OF HOW WE GOT
HERE. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO
NOTE RIGHT OFF THE BAT THERE IS
A MISAPPREHENSION'S ABOUT WHAT
SEPA HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DO AND
WHAT IT ACTUALLY DOES. WE ARE
NOT GETTING RID OF SEPA. NOT BY
ANY STRETCH. I THINK THE PURPOSE
OF THIS LEGISLATION, WHICH IS
REALLY DRIVEN BY A STATE EFFORT
TO SAY CITIES AND COUNTIES, TO
THE GROWTH YOU HAVE ALREADY
ANTICIPATED, THAT IS ESSENTIALLY
WHAT THEY ARE ALLOWING
JURISDICTIONS TO DO. SO IT IS
LOWERING, RAISING THRESHOLDS IN
AREAS WHERE WE RECOGNIZE SEPA IS
NOT PARTICULARLY USEFUL AND OVER
TIME HAS NOT RESULTED IN THE
THINGS YOU MIGHT HAVE NEEDED
SEPA FOR IN THE PAST. IT IS NOT
CATCHING THOSE THINGS BECAUSE WE
HAVE THOSE REGULATIONS. AND WE
ARE NOT IMPOSING. WE ARE NOT
ENDING UP TO IMPOSE CONDITIONS
ON PROJECT LEVELS AS LOW AS THE
SEPA THRESHOLDS HAVE BEEN SET.
SO THAT IS THE REASON TO RAISE
THEM . ONE OF THE BENEFITS THIS
COMMITTEE HAS IS BEING ABLE TO
OBSERVE WHAT HAS HAPPENED DURING
THE PANDEMIC WHEN WE LIVED UNDER
A VERSION OF THESE RULES, AND
DURING THAT TIMEFRAME THIS
COMMITTEE AND OTHERS DID
SIGNIFICANT WORK ON THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OTHER --
OTHER REGULATORY REFORMS, WITH
SEPA LARGELY ABSENT. THE
THRESHOLDS THAT ARE BEING
PROPOSED HERE ARE ACTUALLY MORE
STRINGENT THAN THE THRESHOLDS WE
HAVE BEEN LIVING UNDER, UNDER
SENATE BILL 5412 DURING THAT
TIMEFRAME. SO WE HAVE THIS BIG
BODY OF EXPERIENCE THAT INFORMS
THIS IS HOW SEPA CAN AND SHOULD
WORK. AGAIN, WE ARE NOT
ELIMINATING THAT AUTHORITY AT
ALL. WE ARE ALIGNING IT WITH THE
DECISIONS THAT THIS COUNCIL HAS
ALREADY MADE AND I THINK IT IS
IMPORTANT TO COME AT IT FROM
THAT PERSPECTIVE. I KNOW YOU
WANTED TO RESERVE TIME FOR
QUESTIONS. I AM HAPPY TO RUN
THROUGH THE SLIDE DECK OR I
THINK I KNOW COUNCIL MEMBER
RIVERA HAD A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER
OF QUESTIONS INITIALLY THAT WE
WORKED THROUGH AND I'M HAPPY TO
ENTERTAIN ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU
HAVE GOT.
>> COLLEAGUES, ANY QUESTIONS?
>> FIRST OF ALL, CHAIR LIN,
THANK YOU SO MUCH AND APOLOGIES.
I DIDN'T TELL YOU AHEAD OF TIME
I WAS GOING TO DROP BY TODAY. I
DIDN'T REALIZE AHEAD OF TIME
THE AGENDA ITEMS. NORMALLY I
GIVE YOU NOTICE. THANK YOU FOR
THE GRACE AND THANK YOU FOR
WELCOMING.
>> THANK YOU FOR JOINING.
>> THANK YOU. JUST TO SAY THAT I
DID HAVE AN EXTENSIVE BRIEFING
FROM STCI WHO ANSWERED MY
QUESTIONS ABOUT CONSTITUENT
CONCERNS RELATED TO SEPA REVIEW
AND WHAT THIS MEANS AND STCI, I
KNOW THAT YOU ALL DO -- HAVE
THINGS IN PLACE THAT GO BEYOND
SOME OF THE STATE SEPA REVIEW
REQUIREMENTS . AND SO I DON'T
KNOW, AND MY APOLOGIES OF THOSE
HAVE ALREADY BEEN REVIEWED
BEFORE TODAY, BUT IN LIGHT OF --
I WAS LISTENING TO PUBLIC
COMMENT , IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO
TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT. TO
PUT CONSTITUENTS' MINDS AT
EASE. TO YOUR POINT, WE ARE NOT
ELIMINATING SEPA ALTOGETHER.
SDCI ALREADY HAS THINGS IN
PLACE. IF YOU CAN TALK A LITTLE
BIT ABOUT THAT AND ADDRESS SOME
CONSTITUENT CONCERNS. I HAD
EQUAL CONCERNS THAT WOULD BE
VERY HELPFUL. BECAUSE WE DO WANT
TO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT. WE
WANT TO DO THINGS THAT ARE
THOUGHTFUL AND MAKE SENSE. AND I
UNDERSTAND FOLKS FEELING LIKE,
AND I HAVE SEEN PROJECTS THAT,
DURING COVID, DIDN'T GET -- I
DON'T THINK IT WAS NECESSARILY
PROPER SEPA REVIEW. THIS WAS ON
THE SDCI END. BUT THERE ARE
THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED. EVEN
IN MY DISTRICT, LIKE, YOU KNOW,
SEWAGE ISSUES POST FACT , AND
THAT WE HAVE TO ADDRESS. SO I
KNOW WHERE THIS IS COMING FROM.
I WANT TO SAY THAT CONSTITUENTS
FEEL COMFORTABLE AND I
UNDERSTAND THAT DISTRUST WITH
GOVERNMENT AS WELL. I WANT THEM
TO FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT THIS IS
NOT FOR GOING ANYTHING THAT IS
REALLY NECESSARY OR REQUIRED .
SO IF YOU CAN TALK A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT WHAT SDCI DOES THAT GOES
BEYOND THE STATE, THAT MIGHT BE
HELPFUL. AND APOLOGIES, AGAIN,
CHAIR, IF YOU HAVE ALREADY
ADDRESSED THIS AT A PRIOR
MEETING.
>> NO. WE HAVEN'T.
>> THANK YOU.
>> I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER THAT.
BACK TO SOME OF THE BRIEFINGS.
TO GET A PERMIT IN SEATTLE,
THERE IS 39 DIFFERENT PERMITTING
STEPS OR PERMITTING TYPES THAT A
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL GO
THROUGH. THROUGHOUT THOSE 39
DIFFERENT TYPES OF PERMITS OR
APPROVALS, THERE ARE LITERALLY
HUNDREDS OF CODES THAT APPLY TO
THOSE. WHEN IT COMES TO THE
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS THAT ARE
OFTEN TIMES WHAT WE LOOK TO SEPA
. GOT THE WORD ENVIRONMENTAL IN
THE TITLE. WHEN WE THINK OF
THOSE SORTS OF CODES, THERE ARE
EXTENSIVE AUTHORITIES. SOME
GRANTED UNDER THE WATER ACT.
THOSE ARE VERY SPECIFIC AND VERY
THOROUGH. THE SAME, I WOULD SAY,
OF TREES. WE HAVE A TREE
ORDINANCE, WHICH WAS IN MY MIND
SORTA RECENTLY ADOPTED BUT WE
HAVE HAD IT FOR YEARS. THAT IS A
SET OF REGULATIONS THAT ARE BOTH
SPECIFIC AND COMPREHENSIVE. NOW,
WHETHER OR NOT WE GET INDIVIDUAL
REGULATIONS EXACTLY RIGHT,
INDIVIDUAL MINDS CAN DIFFER. I
SYMPATHIZE WITH MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC THAT SAY JUST BECAUSE IT
IS WRITTEN DOWN IN THIS ONE
PLACE DOESN'T MEAN THE OUTCOME
IS WHAT WE EXPECT. ACROSS THOSE
DIFFERENT TYPES OF CODES THOUGH,
I THINK IT IS INSTRUCTIVE TO
NOTE WHAT THE RELATIONSHIP OF
SEPA IS TO THE ECA CODE OR THE
STORMWATER CODE OR THE STRONG
LINE MASTER PROGRAM.
ESSENTIALLY, SEPA IS STANDING AS
A BACKSTOP IF THERE ISN'T
SOMETHING THAT IS ANTICIPATED OR
SPECIFIC. THERE IS A POLICY .
LAST COMMITTEE MEETING WE TALKED
ABOUT SOMETHING THAT ONLY REAL
SEPA NERDS UNDERSTAND, WHICH IS
THE OVERVIEW POLICY. AND IT IS
THIS OVERARCHING POLICY THAT
SAYS IF THERE IS ANOTHER CODE
BOTH MORE SPECIFIC AND MORE
EFFECTIVE, YOU DEFER TO THAT
CODE. THE BENEFIT OF DOING THAT
IS TWOFOLD. ONE IS IT CREATES
SOME CONSISTENCY. IT IS MORE
EASILY UNDERSTOOD. YOU HAVE
HEARD FOLKS IN THE AUDIENCE OR
IN THE PUBLIC COMMENT REFLECT
UNPREDICTABILITY. WELL, IF IT IS
WRITTEN DOWN AND SPECIFIC IT IS
PREDICTABLE. SEPA IS
DISCRETIONARY. IT IS UP TO THE
INDIVIDUAL DEPARTMENT TO FIGURE
OUT, WHAT IS THE RIGHT FIT HERE.
SO , IN MANY WAYS, IT IS BETTER
TO HAVE IT SPECIFIC AND NESTED
IN A SET OF REGULATIONS. AS A
MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, YOU WANT
THAT. YOU DON'T WANT THE
UNPREDICTABILITY ANY MORE THAN A
DEVELOPER WANTS THE
UNPREDICTABILITY. SECOND THING.
IT IS NOT DIRECTLY APPEALABLE
THE WAY THAT A SEPA CONDITION
WOULD BE. UNDER SEPA REVIEW IF
WE THOUGHT THERE IS A GAP IN THE
REGULATIONS OR THERE IS A
POPULARLY OF A GAP, WE ARE GOING
TO IMPOSE A CONDITION TO MAKE
SURE THAT GAP IS COVERED. WELL,
THAT IS STILL APPEALABLE TO THE
HEARING EXAMINER AND WE HAVE
BEEN OVERTURNED MANY TIMES.
IMPOSING A CONDITION WE THOUGHT
WAS REASONABLE AND THEN UNDER
THE LIGHT OF THAT ADDITIONAL
SCRUTINY THE HEARING EXAMINER
FOUND NO. THERE IS NO QUICK
APPEAL PATH TO, LET'S SAY, A
STORM WATER REGULATION. YOU
CANNOT JUST CHALLENGE THAT.
THERE ARE APPEAL PATHWAYS, BUT
IT IS A MUCH TOUGHER ROUTE AND A
MUCH HIGHER STANDARD. IT WOULD
BE TAKING IT TO COURT. SO I
THINK THE COMMENTS ARE WELL
PLACED IN THEIR INTENT. THE
THING THAT MAYBE IS MISSING IS
THE BREATH OF THE UNDERLYING
REGULATIONS AND HOW MUCH WORK
THIS COUNCIL SPECIFICALLY AND
OVER 50 YEARS HAS PUT INTO
PUTTING THOSE RIGHT. AND, I
THINK, TO OTHER COMMENTS THAT WE
HEAR, HOW FREQUENTLY THAT IS
REVISITED BY THIS COMMITTEE. ARE
WE GETTING IT RIGHT? THE NOTION
IN MY MIND, WE'RE NOT GETTING
RID OF SEPA. WE ARE PUTTING THE
EFFORT WHERE IT IS MORE
EFFECTIVE, MORE PREDICTABLE, AND
MORE UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE
LEGISLATIVE BODY SAYING THESE
ARE THE RIGHT RULES FOR THE JOB.
THAT IS THE WAY THAT I COME AT
THAT PROBLEM SET. DOES THAT
HELP?
>> YES. IF I MAY, CHAIR, A
FOLLOW-UP. JUST FOR -- AND NO
ONE -- WHEN WE MET TOGETHER, I
AM A NERD. SO I WAS NOTING OUT
ON SOME OF THIS STUFF WITH YOU.
JUST AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE
CITY HAS A NUMBER OF CODES BOTH
IMPOSED BY THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT AND THE CITY ITSELF.
THAT REALLY LEAD ON SOME OF ALL
LOT OF THE PERMITTING THAT WE
APPROVE. I WILL SAY IT THAT WAY.
AND THOSE CODES ARE MORE
SPECIFIC THAN SEPA. AND SO THE
REASON YOU ARE SAYING WE ARE NOT
DESPITE THIS LEGISLATION -- WE
ARE NOT GETTING RID OF THE
REVIEW THAT WE DO BECAUSE WE
HAVE A NUMBER OF CODES THAT
OTHER CITIES ACTUALLY MAY NOT
HAVE BUT SEATTLE DOES HAVE THAT
GOVERN AND LEAD WHETHER OR NOT
SEPA SPEAKS ABOUT IT BECAUSE
SEPA IS BROADER , MORE GENERAL,
AND THE CODES ARE MORE SPECIFIC
AND THE CITY COUNCIL COULD AT
ANY TIME IMPOSE MORE CODES OR
TWEAK THE CODES TO FIT WHAT IS
NEEDED IN THE CITY. AM I
REMEMBERING RIGHT FROM OUR
MEETING AND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING
NOW?
>> I BELIEVE YOU CAPTURED AT
WELL.
>> THANK YOU. IT IS NOT THAT WE
DON'T CARE ABOUT SEPA. WE HAVE
A NUMBER OF CODES AT THIS CITY
THAT REALLY TAKE UP THE WORK
WHERE PERHAPS OTHER CITIES
DON'T. AND SO SEPA IS A STATE
REGULATION THAT ALL CITIES HAVE
TO ABIDE BY. AND OUR CITY HAS
CHOSEN TO DO THESE CODES. IS IT
OKAY, CHAIR, IF I ASK KETIL IF
HE HAS ANYTHING TO WEIGH IN?
THANK YOU, CHAIR.
>> YEAH. JUST TO ELABORATE A
LITTLE BIT, THERE ARE -- WHEN
PEOPLE TALK ABOUT SEPA THEY TALK
ABOUT SUBSTANTIVE SEPA AND
PROCEDURAL SEPA. WHAT YOU HEARD
IN COMMON TODAY WAS ABOUT
PROCEDURAL SEPA. ONE THING SEPA
SORT OF PROVIDES IS DISCLOSURES
IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. BY
RAISING LEVELS, WHICH IS
PROPOSED TO BE DONE HERE, THERE
WOULD BE FEWER OF THOSE
DISCLOSURES. DAVE MENTIONED THE
OVERVIEW POLICY AND THE CITY
SEPA POLICIES. HERE'S RIGHT
ABOUT THOSE. AS A MATTER POLICY
THE CITY HAS GENERALLY SAID, IF
IT IS MITIGATED BY ANOTHER CODE
THEN WE CANNOT APPLY ANY OTHER
SEPA CONDITIONING AS PART OF
PERMIT APPROVAL. WHERE THERE IS
MAYBE AN EXCEPTION TO THAT IS IN
CASES OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENTS. SO IF A CITY ACTION,
A PERMIT APPROVAL, IS LIKELY TO
HAVE PROBABLE SIGNIFICANT AND
ADVERSE IMPACTS, THAT IS THE
JARGON FROM SEPA. THEN THERE HAS
TO BE MORE DISCLOSURES THAT IS
DONE THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT, WHICH IS VERY COSTLY AND
VERY TIME-CONSUMING. MAY TAKE A
YEAR OR MORE, AT LEAST. THE CITY
DOES HAVE AUTHORITY THROUGH
EISS. BECAUSE THOSE EISS MAY
IMPACT THAT NEED TO BE
MITIGATED. EXAMPLE ARE LARGE
PROJECTS. THAT WAS A PLANNED
ACTION ORDINANCE. THE CITY
IMPOSED SEPA MITIGATION THAT
ACTUALLY SHA WAS SORT OF THE
LEAD AGENCY THERE BUT THE CITY
USED ITS AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE
MITIGATION AS PART OF THE CITY
SUBSTANTIVE SEPA REVIEW. SO, BY
RAISING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS,
BIG PROJECTS MAY NOT BE SUBJECT
TO SEPA ANYMORE SO THAT
OPPORTUNITY WOULD BE GONE . THAT
IS SORT OF THE THEORY HERE
BEHIND 5412. UNTIL WE REACH OUR
TARGETS FOR RESIDENTIAL AND
EMPLOYMENT GROWTH, THE EIS THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS
EFFECTIVELY DISCLOSED WHAT THOSE
IMPACTS MIGHT BE AND IDENTIFY
CHOICES OF MITIGATION.
>> THANK YOU, KETIL. AND WHAT I
HEAR SDCI SAYING IS WE STILL
HAVE THE CODES IN PLACE THAT
LEAD ON A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE
WOULD HAVE TO REVIEW BEFORE WE
PERMIT. SO THERE IS KIND OF A --
SO CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG -- A
BACKSTOP, EVEN IF THIS
LEGISLATION MOVES FORWARD TODAY
BY THE WAY OF ALL THE CODES WE
HAVE AND THE REQUIREMENTS THAT
WE ARE ALLOWED OR THE CONDITIONS
WE ARE ALLOWED TO PUT ON THE
APPROVALS. AM I MISUNDERSTANDING
?
>> RIGHT. THERE IS A BACKSTOP.
THAT BACKSTOP DOESN'T APPLY
PROSPECTIVELY. IF THERE ARE
UNFORESEEN THINGS, THEY ARE NOT
NECESSARILY GOING TO CATCH THAT.
REVISIT EITHER THE CATEGORICAL
EXEMPTION LEVELS. OR TO
ESTABLISH NEW REGULATIONS THAT
ADDRESS.
>> SO, SO, THE BOTTOM LINE,
KETIL, SO I AM HEARING YOU SING
THIS IS A PROCEDURAL SEPA. THIS
GOES TO PROCEDURAL. NOT
SUBSTANTIVE.
>> IT IS A LITTLE BIT OF BOTH. A
FEW PROJECTS WOULD BE SUBJECT TO
SEPA REVIEW. SUBSTANTIVE SEPA
CONDITIONING THROUGH A EIS, FOR
EXAMPLE, THAT WOULD BE FOREGONE
OF THOSE PROJECTS ARE
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT.
>> BUT ONLY SOME OF THOSE
PROJECTS. I JUST WANT TO
UNDERSTAND THAT.
>> EXCEEDING SEPA THRESHOLD AND
IS ALSO TRIGGERING. IT WOULD
HAVE PROBABLE SIGNIFICANT
ADVERSE IMPACTS. THEN THAT
PROJECT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO SEPA
REVIEW. THAT DETERMINATION IF
THOSE IMPACTS WERE MADE.
>> AND, WHAT HAPPENS, KETIL, IF
THERE WAS A PROJECT THAT WAS
EXEMPT AND ON THE BACKEND IT
GETS BUILT AND THERE IS AN
ISSUE?
>> THEY ARE INVESTED. THEY ARE
TITLED. POSTDOC ACTION THE CITY
COULD TAKE.
>> SO THEN WHAT HAPPENS TO THOSE
PROJECTS? YOU KNOW? LET'S SAY
THERE IS, I DON'T KNOW, BACK TO
MY SEWAGE EXAMPLE. THERE WAS A
ISSUE WITH THE WAY DEVELOPMENT
WAS DONE.
>> PROBABLY REVISIT THE CODES.
HERE IS SOMETHING THAT WE
MISSED. DO WE NEED TO CHANGE OUR
STORMWATER GRADING CONTROL CODE?
DO WE NEED TO CHANGE SEPA CODES
SO THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN?
>> I DON'T DISAGREE WITH ANY OF
WHAT KETIL IS DESCRIBING. I
THINK THAT IS RIGHT. IN TERMS OF
THE SITUATION YOU DESCRIBED
THERE, THERE IS SOME SORT OF A
CHALLENGE WITH THE SEWER. THE
FIRST PLACE THAT WE REVISIT IS
ACTUALLY ARE WE IN COMPLIANCE
WITH THE CODES? THAT IS THE
FIRST PLACE. THERE IS AN
ENFORCEMENT LEG OF THE LAND USE
CODE IN ALL OF OUR ENVIRONMENTAL
AND TECHNICAL CODES. THAT IS THE
FIRST PLACE WE WOULD GO. WAS
THIS MISSED OR WAS THIS
CONSTRUCTED WRONG OR ANY NUMBER
OF THINGS? THOSE SITUATIONS ARE
FAIRLY RARE. IN FACT, I CANNOT
RECALL A CASE WERE SOMETHING
COMPLETELY COMPLIED WITH THE
CODE, WAS INSPECTED PER CODE,
AND THEN THERE WAS A RADICALLY
UNANTICIPATED IMPACT. USUALLY
WHAT HAPPENS IS THERE IS SOME
SORT OF AN IMPLEMENTATION PIECE
THAT WENT WRONG. SOMETHING GOT
MISSED IN AN INSPECTION. THOSE
PROJECTS ARE APPROVED. BUT THERE
IS STILL THE ENFORCEMENT LEG TO
MAKE SURE THEY'RE COMPLYING
WITH WHATEVER THE STANDARDS OF
THE PERMIT ARE. THEN SITUATIONS
THAT ARE OUTSIDE THAT. KETIL IS
EXACTLY RIGHT. THAT IS PART OF
THE WORK OF THIS COMMITTEE. DID
WE GET THE LENS RIGHT? IN FACT,
THAT WHEN'S METAPHOR OF ARE WE
LOOKING AT THE RIGHT THINGS IS
REALLY WHAT THIS LEGISLATION IS
ABOUT. IT IS NOT THAT EISs GO
AWAY. AND IT IS NOT THAT SEPA
REVIEW GOES AWAY. WHAT LENS ARE
WE USING TO SAY TO KNOW IF THIS
PROJECT NEEDS A EIS. WHICH
PROJECTS DO WE WANT TO PUT UNDER
THE SCRUTINY OF, IS THIS LIKELY
TO HAVE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE
IMPACTS? YES OR NO? AND
THRESHOLDS CHANGING FROM A LEVEL
WE HAVE FOUND OVER TIME, WE ARE
NOT DOING EISs ON THE SOURCE OF
PROJECTS THAT THE COMP PLAN
ALREADY ANTICIPATED. BUT WE
STILL HAVE AUTHORITY TO DO, TO
TAKE PROJECTS THROUGH SEPA
REVIEW AND SAY, THIS ENTRY DOES
NEED AN EIS. THIS PROJECT IS SO
OUTSIDE OF THE REALM OF WHAT WAS
ANTICIPATED BY THE CODE THAT WE
NEED TO DO AN EIS. THOSE ARE
RARE, BUT WE CERTAINLY DO THEM.
THAT IS PART OF THE WORK OF SDCI
PERMITTING.
>> ARE THERE ANY CODES THAT YOU,
IN LIGHT OF THIS LEGISLATION,
THAT YOU WOULD RECOMMEND
STRENGTHENING THAT WOULD BE
HELPFUL, KETIL?
>> YEAH. SO THIS BILL IS ABOUT
STRENGTHENING CODES. IN ORDER TO
INVOKE THIS AUTHORITY AND HAVE
HIGHER SEPA , THE CITY HAS TO
COME UP WITH WAYS TO DO
SOMETHING SEPA-LIKE TO CATCH
WHERE THERE MAY BE IMPACTS. TWO
ELEMENTS IN THE ENVIRONMENT. YOU
SEE THE JARGON. THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE. THAT
IS IN TRANSPORTATION AND ALSO IN
PRESERVATION CULTURAL RESOURCES.
SO THE PROPOSAL WE WILL HEAR
FROM SDCI LARGELY IN 121135, BUT
IN BOTH BILLS, IS TO FILL IN
THOSE GAPS. REFRESH MEMORY.
>> YEAH. I CAN SPEAK TO THAT.
SO, ALSO, IN PAST TIMES, THE
SIMILAR BILL HAS BEEN AT THE
COUNCIL. WE DETERMINED THAT A
TRANSPORTATION STUDY THAT IS
NON-SEPA BASED SHOULD BE PUTTING
OUR CODE FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS.
SO THAT IS A REQUIREMENT THAT
HAS TO BE PROVIDED TO GET AT
POTENTIAL, YOU KNOW, MISSED
IMPACTS THAT WOULD BE
SIGNIFICANT FOR TRANSPORTATION
AND THE MITIGATION MEASURES THAT
COULD BE REQUIRED OF THE
DEVELOPMENT FOR THAT. AND WE ARE
PROPOSING TO REFOCUS THAT TO
MAKE SURE THAT SOME OF THE
MEDIUM-SIZE STANDALONE
COMMERCIAL PROJECTS, LIKE A
DRUGSTORE OR WHAT HAVE YOU,
COULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE THIS
KIND OF TRAFFIC STUDY. THAT IS
MAINLY IN THE LOWER DENSITY
OUTLYING PORTIONS OF THE CITY.
AND, WITHIN THE GROWTH CENTERS,
REGIONAL CENTERS, OR WHAT WE
USED TO CALL URBAN VILLAGES, MAY
BE EXEMPT FROM THOSE. AND IF
THEY ARE NEAR MAJOR TRANSIT
SERVICE AREAS. JUST TO SORT OF
UNDERSCORE THE EMPHASIS ON
GROWING WITH HOUSING AND JOBS IN
THOSE REGIONAL CENTERS. SO IT
TIES BACK TO OUR LARGE PLAN
GROWTH STRATEGY AS WELL. WE ALSO
ARE PROPOSING TO ADD A LITTLE
MORE COVERAGE FOR OUR HISTORIC
AND CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEWS
TO COVER AREAS THAT WERE
FORMALLY ALONG SHORELINES, SUCH
AS ALONG THE RIVER WHERE THERE
IS INCREASED POTENTIAL FOR
RESOURCES TO BE FOUND AND
COVERED IN DEVELOPMENT. WE HAVE
ADDED SOMETHING TO THE GRADING
CODE THAT WOULD REQUIRE. WHAT WE
ALREADY DO IN OTHER AREAS IS IF
THERE IS A POTENTIAL, WE WOULD
REQUIRE AN EARLY SITE VISIT
MONITORING WELL EXCAVATION IS
DONE AND SO ON. SO WE ARE JUST
EXTENDING THAT GEOGRAPHICALLY
AND ALSO UPDATING IT TO FIT WITH
WHAT THE CITY OF WASHINGTON HAS
ASKED US TO DO AS WELL TO BRING
THAT UP TO A CURRENT POLICY AND
REGULATORY STANCE. IN THE .. AND
UNDERSCORING A PLAN REQUIREMENT
ENSURES THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT
PROVIDES FOR SUPPORT OF
COMMUTING OPTIONS AND SO ON BY
THE USERS OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND
THE OWNER. SO.
>> I WAS GOING TO ADD TO THAT.
THERE IS ONE OTHER ELEMENT THAT
CAME UP DURING THE ADDENDUM TO
THE COMP PLAN THAT GOES TO
TRIBAL NOTIFICATION, WHICH
DOESN'T REQUIRE A CODE UPDATE,
BUT WE HAVE SORT OF OUTLINED A
PROCESS IN COORDINATION WITH OIR
BY THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND
STATEWIDE ATTENTION ON GETTING
TRIBAL NOTIFICATION RIGHT.
GETTING IT IN THE FORMAT THAT
WORKS WITH OUR TRIBAL PARTNERS
RATHER THAN SORT OF A TOP-DOWN
WE SEND YOU A NOTICE TO TRIBES
TO SET UP A RELATIONSHIP WITH
INDIVIDUAL TRIBAL PARTNERS TO
GET ANY INFORMATION THAT THEY
ARE FOCUSED ON WHEN IT COMES TO
WHERE DEVELOPMENT IS HAPPENING
IN THE CITY, AND I'M HAPPY TO
TALK ABOUT THAT.
>> I AM REMINDED OF ONE OTHER
THING WE ARE PROPOSING. TO
INSTALL IN THE CODE A
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN
REQUIREMENT. IT IS SOMETHING
THAT S.ALREADY HAS A UNIT. THAT
MANAGES THE CONSTRUCTION SITES,
AREAS, AND THEIR TRAFFIC FLOW,
PROTECTIONS, AND FACILITATES THE
DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING SAFELY.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS BETTER
TO ADD TO THE CODE TO GIVE IT A
LITTLE MORE BASIS AND KEEP IT
GOING AT A CERTAIN SIZE AND
DEVELOPMENT, SO THAT IS A NEW
THING AS WELL.
>> THANK YOU. I KNOW WE TALKED
ABOUT MANY OF THOSE THINGS. I
THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE
PUBLIC TO HEAR BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY
THEY WERE NOT THERE AND THESE
WERE THE QUESTIONS I ASKED.
THESE WERE THE ANSWERS YOU
PROVIDED AND IT IS HELPFUL FOR
THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THE
STRENGTHENING CODES PIECE OF
THIS AND ALSO THANK YOU . WE
TALKED ABOUT THIS, TOO. IT IS
IMPORTANT TO DO THE ROBUST
ENGAGEMENT WITH OUR TRIBAL
PARTNERS INSTEAD OF, IT IS NOT A
CHECKBOX. IT IS AN ACTUAL, WE
NEED TO BE IN ROBUST
RELATIONSHIP WITH AS THESE
PROJECTS ARE MOVING FORWARD AND
AS WE ARE DOING THIS WORK. SO
THANK YOU FOR THAT. THANK YOU,
CHAIR. REALLY APPRECIATE YOU
INDULGING ALL MY QUESTIONS,
CONSIDERING I'M NOT ON THE
COMMITTEE. I REALLY APPRECIATE
IT.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER FOSTER.
>> EXCUSE ME. THANK YOU SO MUCH,
CHAIR. THAT WAS A GREAT PLACE TO
END THAT PART OF THE
CONVERSATION BECAUSE IT CARRIES
OVER INTO ONE OF MY QUESTIONS.
IF YOU COULD SPEAK IN A LITTLE
MORE DETAIL ABOUT THE TRIBAL
NOTIFICATION AND WHAT THAT
PROCESS LOOKS LIKE.
>> YEAH. HAPPY TO. THIS IS AN
IDEA THAT CAME OUT OF OUR
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS ON THE
ADDENDA. IT SORT OF LIVES IN
PARALLEL TO THIS BUT IT IS
ITSELF ITS OWN EFFORT THAT WE
ARE STANDING UP IN COORDINATION
WITH OIR. SO THE FIRST SORT OF
MEASURE WE ARE PROPOSING -- NOT
PROPOSING, WE ARE GOING TO DO IT
BECAUSE WE HAVE AUTHORITY IN OUR
EXISTING CODES -- IS A CHANGE TO
OUR STANDARD GRADING PLAN
LANGUAGE. IT IS ACTUALLY
SIGNIFICANT IN THAT WE WANT TO
PUT ON NOTICE ANYONE WHO PULLS A
GRATING PERMIT IN THE CITY, THEY
HAVE A STANDARD PLAN THEY
SUBMIT. THAT STANDARD PLAN WILL
INCLUDE ESSENTIALLY THE STATE
AUTHORITY THAT WE WOULD POINT TO
IN SEPA, WHICH IS THERE ARE
EXTENSIVE STATE REGULATIONS
ABOUT WHAT TO DO IN CASE YOU
ENCOUNTER CULTURAL RESOURCES.
AND THERE IS AN ENTIRE PROTOCOL.
WE WANT TO EMBED THAT SO THAT
ALL CONTRACTORS AND
SUBCONTRACTORS WHO HAVE THOSE
PLANS ARE ON NOTICE OF HOW THE
STATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
WORKS. THAT IS SORT OF THE FIRST
MEASURE AND SOMETHING WE CAN
JUST DO IN AN UPDATE TO OUR
PLANS. THE SECOND GOES TO, I
THINK, COUNCIL MEMBER RIVERA USE
THE TERM RELATIONSHIP. IT GOES
TO OUR RELATIONSHIPS WITH TRIBAL
PARTNERS. ONE OF THE THINGS WE
HAVE BEEN WORKING ON IN PARALLEL
TO THIS WITH OIR IS IMPROVE
ISSUES WE KNOW THEY ARE
INTERESTED IN, BUT MAYBE
DIFFERENT TRIBAL PARTNERS HAVE
DIFFERENT FOCUSED INTERESTS IN
DIFFERENT PARTS OF OUR CODE OR
DIFFERENT PARTS OF OUR CITY. SO,
THE FIRST THING IS TO DESIGNATE
WITHIN DPD -- OLD NAME. SORRY.
FDFI. THAT WOULD BE THE POINT OF
CONTACT FOR INDIVIDUAL TRIBAL
PARTNERS WHO WANT INFORMATION
ABOUT ACTIVITY THAT IS GOING ON
IN THE CITY. SO WHERE'S THE
WORK TAKING PLACE? THAT
ENGAGEMENT LIAISON WILL HAVE
ACCESS TO WHAT WE ARE CREATING
AS ESSENTIALLY A SET OF SEARCH
QUERIES THAT PULL FROM ALL OF
THE DATA WE HAVE IN OUR
PERMITTING RECORD SO THAT
INDIVIDUAL TRIBAL PARTNERS CAN
SAY I AM INTERESTED IN THIS
PARTICULAR AREA. I WANT TO KNOW
ALL THE ACTIVITY THAT IS GOING
ON. SO WE CAN TAILOR THOSE
REPORTS THROUGH RELATIONSHIP
WITH THOSE PARTNERS ON WHAT IT
IS THEY ARE FOCUSED ON. AGAIN,
DIFFERENT TRIBAL PARTNERS HAVE
DIFFERENT INTERESTS AND
DIFFERENT AREAS OF FOCUS THAT
THEY WANT TO KNOW. IT IS NOT
JUST THE PROJECTS THAT WOULD
HAVE GONE THROUGH SEPA. THERE
OFTEN INTERESTED IN PROJECTS
THAT WOULD NOT HAVE COME UP ON
OUR RADAR AT ALL. SO, BY LETTING
THE TRIBAL PARTNER IDENTIFY THE
INFORMATION THAT THEY WANT TO
SORT OF A REPORT RATHER THAN A
PUSH REPORT, WHERE YOU ARE NOT
JUST DUMPING INFORMATION ON
TRIBES GENERALLY. GIVING THEM
ACCESS TO DATA THAT IS SPECIFIC
TO AN AREA WITHIN WHICHEVER
SEARCH PARAMETERS WE HAVE WITHIN
OUR SYSTEM. OUR HOPE IS WE WILL
SET UP MORE OF AN INTERACTIVE
RELATIONSHIP WITH THE TRIBES
DON'T FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE TO
RELY ON THIS KIND OF PERFUNCTORY
SEPA NOTICE BUT CAN ACTUALLY
HAVE A LENS INTO WHAT IS GOING
ON IN REAL TIME. THESE DATA SETS
UPDATE EVERY 24 HOURS. THAT IS
THE PROGRAM WE ARE STANDING UP
AS PART OF THIS OVERALL WORK.
>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU, CHAIR.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER STRAUSS?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. THANK YOU,
COUNCIL MEMBER FOSTER, FOR
ASKING THE QUESTION. COUNCIL
MEMBER RIVERA, AS WELL. THANK
YOU, COLLEAGUES. I AM STILL
FEELING A LITTLE SICK SO WORKING
FROM HOME TODAY TO KEEP EVERYONE
HEALTHY. FOLLOWING UP, I
UNDERSTAND, AND I APPRECIATE,
THE WORK THAT SDCI IS DOING TO
INCLUDE A TRIBAL LIAISON, SO ,
IF THERE IS ONE POINT OF CONTACT
-- THE STATEMENT I MADE TO
EVERYONE IN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE
AS WELL, THE BENEFIT OF SEPA IN
THIS MOMENT FOR TRIBAL PARTNERS
IS THAT OUTGOING CONTACT THAT
THERE WILL BE ACTIVITY OCCURRING
IN A PLACE OF LAND THAT THEY MAY
HAVE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDS FOR
THAT WE DO NOT. AND SO, DAVID,
DOES NOT PERFUNCTORY. IT IS
IMPORTANT. IT IS ALSO MY DESIRE
THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT IN THE
LAST FEW YEARS AS WELL OF
DESIGNING A PROGRAM AND A
PROCESS WHICH GIVES OUR TRIBAL
PARTNERS THEIR PROPER NOTICE OF
WHETHER IT IS DIGGING ACTIVITY
OR EVEN ABOVEGROUND. BUT YOU ARE
CORRECT THAT BELOWGROUND IS THE
MOST IMPORTANT. WE STILL NEED TO
BE GIVING THE MODIFICATION AND
EVEN WITH THESE SEPA EXEMPTIONS
TO OUR GROWTH TARGET, WHICH IS
NOT A FULL EXEMPTION. JUST A
EXEMPTION TO THE GROWTH TARGET.
WE STILL NEED TO FIND A WAY THAT
REQUIRES A NOTIFICATION TO OUR
TRIBAL PARTNERS WITHOUT THEM
HAVING TO COME AND ASK US FOR
INFORMATION. SO SEEING AS I'M
NOT IN CHAMBERS RIGHT NOW, I
DON'T NEED A RESPONSE. IT IS
SOMETHING I HAVE TALKED TO SDCI
AND DAVID BEFORE. AND I LOOK
FORWARD TO CONTINUE WORKING ON.
AND THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER
FOSTER, FOR DIVING RIGHT INTO
THAT IMPORTANT ISSUE.
>> THANK YOU. I HAVE SOME BIG
PICTURE QUESTIONS AND I THINK WE
MAY HAVE TOUCHED ON SOME OF
THESE LAST TIME. YOU KNOW? TODAY
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SEPA
THRESHOLD EXEMPTIONS. RELATIVELY
SMALLER PROJECTS. WE STILL DO
SEPA REVIEW FOR LARGER PROJECTS
FOR THINGS LIKE OUR
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN . BUT ONE
THING I JUST WANTED TO HAVE A
DISCUSSION ABOUT IS SEPA COMES
UP WHEN WE ARE TAKING GOVERNMENT
ACTION . CORRECT?
>> YEAH.
>> BUT IF WE -- GOVERNMENT IN
ACTION. IS THERE'S -- THERE
SEPA REVIEW FOR GOVERNMENT IN
ACTION?
>> SO THE SEPA ACTION THAT WE
ARE REALLY TALKING ABOUT HERE IS
THE ACTION OF ISSUING A PERMIT.
RIGHT? IF THERE IS GOVERNMENT IN
ACTION, IF SOME OF THE
CONSTRUCTS SOMETHING WHERE THEY
DID NOT GET A PERMIT THEY SHOULD
HAVE SOUGHT, PART OF THE REMEDY
FOR THEM AND LEGALIZING THEIR
ACTION, SO PERMITTING THEIR
ACTION COULD INCLUDE DOING SEPA
REVIEW. HAPPENS AFTER THE FACT.
>> THANK YOU. RIGHT. SO WE ARE
ISSUING A PERMIT. THAT IS THE
GOVERNMENT ACTION THAT IS
TRIGGERING SEPA REVIEW. JUST
SORT OF MY BIGGER QUESTION WOULD
BE, I THINK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, AS
A PARENT, DEEPLY CONCERNED ABOUT
THE ENVIRONMENT. ABOUT THE
CLIMATE CRISIS THAT WE ARE ALL
FACING. AND I THINK ABOUT SO
MUCH OF THIS WHEN WE LOOK. I'M
GLAD THAT THIS COMMITTEE IS NOW
GOING TO INCLUDE THE OFFICE OF
SUSTAINABILITY AND ENVIRONMENT
THAT WE ARE WORKING. WE WILL BE
GETTING AN UPDATE ON OUR CLIMATE
ACTION PLAN LATER THIS YEAR . I
DO ENCOURAGE MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC TO ENGAGE IN THAT. THERE
WILL BE SOME PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
OPPORTUNITIES AS WE UPDATE OUR
CLIMATE ACTION PLAN. IT HAS BEEN
ABOUT A DECADE. BUT I THINK
ABOUT, YOU KNOW, BOTH LOCALLY,
INTERNATIONALLY, LOCALLY, AS WE
LOOK AT CLIMATE CHANGE AND THAT
BEING A RESULT OF PRIOR ACTIONS,
INACTIONS, BY THE GOVERNMENT.
JUST LOCALLY I THINK ABOUT
TRANSPORTATION AS A NUMBER ONE
CONTRIBUTOR TO EMISSIONS. OUR
TRANSPORTATION SECTOR. AND
EXISTING BUILDINGS BEING NUMBER
TWO. AS I THINK ABOUT SEPA, AND
AS WE ARE IN ON THIS PATH
TOWARDS CLIMATE, A REAL --
ALREADY WELL ON OUR WAY TOWARDS
CLIMATE CRISIS, IF WE DON'T DO
ANYTHING WE SIT ON OUR LAURELS
AND TAKE ZERO ACTION. SEPA
DOESN'T EVEN DO ANYTHING
BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE NO ACTION
FOR US TO REVIEW. IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> NOT AN ACTION UNDER SEPA.
>> US TAKING NO ACTION TO
ADDRESS SEPA UNDER CLIMATE
CRISIS. IF WE WANT TO TAKE
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION TO ADDRESS
THE CLIMATE CRISIS. AGAIN, I AM
SPEAKING HYPOTHETICALLY. KIND OF
BIG PICTURE HERE. BUT , WHEN WE
TAKE ACTION TO CHANGE COURSE, TO
ADDRESS, YOU KNOW, CONCERNS THAT
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ARE
RAISING, THAT IS POSSIBLY, AND I
KNOW POSSIBLY WHEN SEPA WOULD
COME INTO PLAY BECAUSE THEN WE
ARE TAKING ACTION. WOULD THAT
BE?
>> THERE IS NO EXEMPTION IN HERE
THAT WOULD APPLY TO LEGISLATION,
FOR EXAMPLE. IF THERE IS A
CHANGE TO A DEVELOPMENT
REGULATION, THAT IS SOMETHING
THAT IS ALSO SUBJECT TO SEPA
REVIEW, WHICH ITSELF HAS SOME
PROS AND CONS. SOME THINGS THE
COUNCIL MAY WANT TO DO TO IMPOSE
REGULATION THAT IMPROVES, THAT
PROVIDES SOME ENVIRONMENTAL
BENEFIT. COUNCIL ACTION COULD BE
FORESTALLED BY SEPA PROCEDURAL
STUFF, LIKE APPEALS OF THE
THRESHOLD OF DETERMINATION.
>> AND THAT COULD BE EVEN IF WE
ARE TAKING ACTION TO ADDRESS AN
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN THAT NOW
THIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROCEDURAL
PROCESS COULD SLOW DOWN US FROM
TAKING ACTION TO ADDRESS SOME
CONCERN THAT WE ARE HEARING FROM
THE PUBLIC.
>> YEAH. CORRECT.
>> I CAN GIVE A REAL EXAMPLE
WHAT WERE TALKING ABOUT. I
WORKED WITH OSE ON BUILDING,
MONITORING CODE ACTION THAT WAS
ADOPTED. AND THE OVERALL EFFECT
OF THAT IS GOING TO BE TO REDUCE
GREENHOUSE GASES IN THE CITY BY
24%, WHICH IS AN AMAZING
REDUCTION JUST BY SORT OF
MONITORING AND LEADING TO
IMPROVEMENTS OF ENERGY SYSTEMS
OVER TIME FOR THE MOST PART. SO
THAT IS WHEN YOU TAKE A POSITIVE
ACTION AS A CITY, THEN THAT IS
REALLY GOING TO MAKE THE MOST
DIFFERENCE AND I HAPPEN TO DO A
SEPA FOR THAT .
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT EXAMPLE.
BUT IF WE HAD NOT TAKEN THAT
ACTION TO INCREASE -- TO ADDRESS
THAT CONCERN, THERE WOULD HAVE
BEEN NO SEPA REVIEW. WE COULD'VE
HAD THOSE LOWER STANDARDS JUST
CONTINUE ON AND NO SEPA REVIEW.
THANK YOU. PARTIALLY THE REASON
I WANT TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION
IS I DO THINK IT IS CRITICALLY
IMPORTANT WE HEAR FROM THE
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO CARE
DEEPLY ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT. TO
MY OTHER COMMENTS, WE ALL CARE
DEEPLY. AND I DO THINK THERE ARE
IMPORTANT PLACES WHERE WE NEED
TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES. WHETHER
IT IS IN OUR ZONING. OUR
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WHETHER IT
IS IN OUR STORMWATER CODES.
WHETHER IT IS IN OUR BUILDING
STANDARDS. THESE ARE CRITICAL
AREAS WHERE WE CAN MAKE REAL
IMPROVEMENTS. WHETHER IT IS
THINKING ABOUT OUR RIGHT-OF-WAY
AND WHETHER WE CAN INCREASE TREE
CANOPY IN PUBLIC SPACES. I THINK
ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HOW WE FUND OUR
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM AND OUR
BUSES AND LIGHT RAIL SO THAT
PEOPLE CAN GET AROUND IN WAYS
OTHER THAN SINGLE-OCCUPANCY
VEHICLES. I THINK ABOUT THE
TOXIC CHEMICALS IN TIRES THAT
ARE HARMING OUR SALMON AND
WHETHER WE CAN TAKE ACTION AT
THE STATE LEVEL TO TRANSITION TO
BAN THOSE HARMFUL CHEMICALS OR
DO SOMETHING WITH OUR STORMWATER
SYSTEM TO BETTER, YOU KNOW,
FILTER THOSE CHEMICALS. SO THERE
ARE A NUMBER OF PLACES WHERE I
THINK WE ABSOLUTELY CAN AND HAVE
TO TAKE ACTION. AND SEPA PLAYS ,
I BELIEVE, SOME ROLE IN THESE
LARGER DECISIONS THAT WE ARE
MAKING TO MAKE SURE WE ARE NOT
MISSING CRITICAL PIECES OF
INFORMATION. BUT I DO WANT THE
PUBLIC TO KNOW THERE ARE MANY
OTHER PLACES WHERE, OR PERHAPS
MORE EFFECTIVE WAYS FOR US TO
MAKE REAL PROGRESS ON THESE
CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
THAT I BELIEVE WE ALL HAVE.
THANK YOU. IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER
COMMENTS ON THAT TOPIC
GENERALLY, PLEASE.
>> I MEAN, I'LL JUST OFFER
THIS. YOU KNOW? ONE -- ONE OF
THE THINGS THESE BILLS DO IS DUE
SORT OF PLUG SOME GAPS THAT HAVE
BEEN IDENTIFIED IN THE FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT.
THE CITY HAS SOME TOOLS,
REGULATORY TOOLS, FOR MITIGATING
SOME OF THOSE IMPACTS. SOME FROM
A BROADER POLICY STANDPOINT. ONE
THING THAT IS BEING PROPOSED
HERE IS TO SHIFT SOME OF THOSE
REGULATORY EGGS INTO THE TMP
BASKET. THAT IS TO ACHIEVE THE
SINGLE OCCUPANCY VEHICLE
REDUCTION GOAL THAT IS IN THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. REGULATION
IS NOT THE ONLY WAY THE CITY
ACHIEVES THAT REDUCTION GOAL.
THERE ARE OTHER WAYS THAT ARE
NOT SUBJECT TO SEPA THAT COUNCIL
WILL BE CONSIDERING. SALES TAX
INCREASES OR RENEWAL FOR THE
BENEFIT DISTRICT THIS YEAR. THAT
FUNDS TRANSIT OPERATIONS. THAT
IS ANOTHER WAY THE CITY TRIES TO
ACHIEVE THOSE REDUCTION GOALS.
REGULATION HERE IS NOT ACHIEVING
EVERYTHING IN THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN. TO THE EXTENT THAT THESE
BILLS REFLECT ONE ACTION THAT
THE CITY IS TAKING TO ACHIEVE
THE REDUCTION GOALS, THAT IS IN
THE SHIFT TO TMPs.
>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OKAY.
THINK YOU SO MUCH FOR
PRESENTING, AGAIN, AND ANSWERING
OUR WIDE-RANGING QUESTIONS. SO
WE HAVE DISCUSSED BOTH BILLS.
AND WE WILL NOW MOVE AND AMEND
EACH BILL SEPARATELY STARTING
WITH ITEM ONE. I MOVE THE
COMMITTEE RECOMMEND PASSAGE OF
COUNCIL 121093 . IS THERE A
SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT IS MOVED AND SECONDED.
PANEL, I THINK YOU ARE EXCUSED
FROM FURTHER QUESTIONS, UNLESS
DID YOU -- YEAH. GO AHEAD.
>> CHAIR, MOVED TORMENTS OF THE
TWO COUNCIL BILL 121093 ON THE
RECENTLY DISTRIBUTED AMENDMENT
ONE , VERSION 3.
>> IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> OKAY. IT IS MOVED AND
SECONDED. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS
ON THE SUBSTITUTE?
>> CHAIR, IF I MAY.
>> YES. PLEASE.
>> I WOULD LOVE IF WE COULD HEAR
FIRST DIRECTLY FROM KETIL ON THE
NATURE OF THE AMENDMENT, AND
THEN I WOULD ADD MY REMARKS.
>> SORRY. CONFUSED. THERE IS A
SUBSTITUTE TO 121093 AND THEN
THERE IS A SUBSTANTIVE AMENDMENT
THAT COUNCIL MEMBER RINCK WILL
OFFER AS WELL. YOU WANTED ME TO
DESCRIBE THE SUBSTITUTE BILL. IS
THAT CORRECT?
>> LET'S DESCRIBE THE
SUBSTITUTE BILL FIRST AND THEN
GO OVER THE AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU. SINCE THESE BILLS
WERE INTRODUCED, THERE HAVE BEEN
THREE BILLS THAT THE COUNCIL HAS
PASSED THAT HAVE CHANGED THE
CODE. THE SUBSTITUTE DOES FIVE
THINGS. IT UPDATES THE BASE.
THIS IS GOING TO BE THE
SUBSTITUTE FOR THE NEXT BILL AS
WELL, SO STANDBY. IT UPDATES THE
BASE CODE. MAPS AND TABLES
REFLECT ORDINANCE 127375. AMONG
OTHER THINGS, IT CHANGED THE
NAMES OF SOME GEOGRAPHIES IN THE
CITIES FROM THINGS LIKE URBAN
CENTER TO REGIONAL CENTER, SO A
LOT OF THE CHANGES YOU WILL SEE
IN THE SUBSTITUTE ARE THINGS
THAT REFLECT THAT. IT UPDATES
RECITAL TO UPDATE THAT ORDINANCE
PASSED. CLARIFIES LANGUAGE IN
SECTION 5 RELATED TO SINGLE
OCCUPANCY VEHICLE GOALS, WHICH
WE WERE JUST DISCUSSING. IT
MAKES A FEW OTHER EDITS FOR
CONSISTENCY WITH AUTHORIZING
STATE LEGISLATION HERE. WE HAVE
BEEN REFERRING TO IT AS SENATE
BILL 5412. IS CODIFIED IN 229.
IT OF COURSE UPDATES THE
SIGNATURE BLOCKS BECAUSE WE HAVE
A NEW MAYOR. THAT IS WHAT 121093
WOULD DO.
>> OKAY. WELL -- WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL ROLE?
>> [ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
>> CHAIR, THERE ARE FOUR VOTES
IN FAVOR. ZERO AGAINST.
>> ARE THERE ANY FURTHER
COMMENTS ON THE BILL AS AMENDED?
>> CHAIR?
>> YES. PLEASE .
>> NOW THAT WE HAVE TAKEN ACTION
ON THE SUBSTITUTE AND GO TO MOVE
MY AMENDMENT TO THE UNDERLYING
BILL.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER
RINCK . I UNDERSTAND THE
PUBLISHED AGENDA INCLUDES THE
NEW VERSION FOR CONSIDERATION A
DAY WHICH IS AMENDMENT ONE,
VERSION 3. SO THE RULES WILL
NEED TO BE SUSPENDED BEFORE WE
CAN CONSIDER THE NEW VERSION
BECAUSE WHILE THE ORIGINAL
VERSION WAS PROBABLY
DISTRIBUTIVE MORE THAN 24 HOURS
IN ADVANCE OF THIS MEETING, THE
UPDATER WAS FINALIZED YESTERDAY
AFTERNOON WITHIN THE 24-HOUR
PERIOD. SO, IF THERE IS NO
OBJECTION FROM THE COUNCIL RULES
WILL BE SUSPENDED TO CONSIDER
AMENDMENT ONE, VERSION 3. OKAY.
HEARING NO OBJECTION, THE RULES
ARE SUSPENDED. WE WILL PROCEED
WITH AMENDMENT ONE, VERSION 3.
COUNCIL MEMBER RINCK, YOU MAY
PROCEED.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I MOVED TO
MOVE 121093. RECENTLY THREE.
>> SECOND.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER, YOU RECOGNIZE
TO ADDRESS THE AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I WOULD
LIKE TO FIRST ASK KETIL.
>> AMENDMENT ONE, VERSION 3.
THIS WAS THE VERSION THAT WAS
DISTRIBUTED YESTERDAY, YESTERDAY
EVENING. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD
REDUCE THE THRESHOLD FOR SEPA
REVIEW FOR NON-ACCESSORY
FLEXIBLE USE PARKING TO 20
SPACES FROM THE PROPOSED 90
SPACES IN ALL ZONES, EXCEPT FOR
INDUSTRIAL AND MARITIME ZONES
WHERE A 90 THRESHOLD PARKING
STYLE WOULD REMAIN. IT WILL
ESTABLISH A SEPARATE THRESHOLD
OF 90 STALLS, WHICH WOULD BE
APPLICABLE IN INDUSTRIAL
MARITIME ZONES. AND WOULD UPDATE
PROPOSED LANGUAGE TO DESCRIBE
PARKING, SPECIFICALLY REPLACING
PRINCIPAL USE PARKING WITH
FLEXIBLE USE PARKING AND ALSO
ELIMINATING THE TERM "LOT,"
LARGELY FOR CLARITY. SURFACE
PARKING OR STRUCTURE PARKING.
>> THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY
COMMENTS ON AMENDMENT ONE,
VERSION 3?
>> CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE
MY REMARKS AT THIS TIME.
COLLEAGUES, THIS AMENDMENT MAKES
SOME CHANGES IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE
A SINGULAR GOAL OF NOT ACCEPTING
UNNECESSARY PARKING FROM SEPA
REVIEW. FIRSTLY, CHANGE OF THE
TYPE OF PARKING IN THIS
LEGISLATION FROM PRIMARY USED TO
FLEXIBLE USE PARKING. FLEXIBLE
USE PARKING IS PAID PARKING TO
THE PUBLIC. IT IS NOT ACCESSORY
TO A PRINCIPAL USE OR EMPLOYEE
PARKING. AN EXAMPLE INCLUDES A
PAID PARKING GARAGE THAT MAKES
MONEY THROUGH DAILY PUBLIC USE.
SECONDLY, THE NUMBER OF PARKING
STALLS THAT ARE EXEMPT FROM
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS CHANGED
TO 20 STALLS. FINALLY, A
WAREHOUSE CLAUSE IS ADDED TO
CLARITY IN CASES TO ENSURE THE
INTENT OF THIS AMENDMENT IS MET.
EXEMPTION FOR INDUSTRIAL LANDS,
WHICH IS IN LINE WITH THE INTENT
OF THIS AMENDMENT. NOT HAVING TO
DO WITH THOSE TYPE OF PROJECTS.
AND THE REASON I AM BRINGING
THIS AMENDMENT FORWARDS TO
ENSURE OUR BIMETAL GOALS ARE
BEING PUT ASIDE TO PROMOTE MORE
PARKING WITHOUT PROPER REVIEW.
OUR CITY'S BIGGEST SOURCE OF
EMISSIONS COMES FROM
TRANSPORTATION AND
SINGLE-OCCUPANCY VEHICLES ARE A
LARGE SHARE THAT. THEY ARE THE
CORPORATE. I WANT TO BE CLEAR
THAT I SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION
HOLISTICALLY BECAUSE SIMPLY
MAKES SENSE. THAT IS BECAUSE WE
KNOW WHEN WE BUILD MORE HOUSING
AND WE ARE BUILDING IN SEATTLE
THE ENVIRONMENT IS BETTER OFF
BECAUSE WE ARE REDUCING SPRAWL
AND RELIANCE ON CARS. DON'T
BELIEVE WE SHOULD BE CLEARING
THE WAY FOR MORE PARKING,
ESPECIALLY FLEXIBLE USE, FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. AS WE GO
INTO DISCUSSION ON THIS
AMENDMENT, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK
KETIL IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN ON
THE RECORD THE DIFFERENCES
BETWEEN FLEXIBLE USE AND
PRINCIPAL USE PARKING.
>> HAPPY TO DO IT. I MAY ASK
SDCI TO CHIME IN HERE. THAT IS
GETTING SOMEWHAT INTO THE WEEDS.
THEY'RE BOTH DEFINED CODE .
PRINCIPAL USE PARKING IS PARKING
THAT WAS PRINCIPAL USE. SO PAID
PARKING. MAYBE AN ACCESSORY. SO
IF YOU HAVE, SAY FOR EXAMPLE, A
WALGREENS AND YOU HAVE PARKING
FOR YOUR CUSTOMERS, THAT PARKING
IS NOT PRINCIPAL USE PARKING.
PRINCIPAL USE PARKING SORT OF
WENT AWAY AS A TERM IN ALMOST
ALL AREAS OF THE CITY. A FEW
YEARS AGO WHEN THE COUNCIL
UPDATED ITS PARKING REGULATIONS
AND IT IS NOW FLEXIBLE USE
PARKING. FLEXIBLE USE IS NOW THE
TERM USED TO DESCRIBE PRINCIPAL
USE PARKING. IT APPLIES LARGELY
IN OUR SHORELINE DISTRICTS. IT
IS STILL A TERM THAT APPLIES
THERE. AND THIS IS WHERE IT GETS
MAYBE A LITTLE BIT WEEDY HERE.
THERE ARE LAND-USE CODE TERMS
BUT THIS IS NOT ACTUALLY THE
LAND USE CODE. THE SEPA CODE.
THERE IS NOT NECESSARILY ONE
CORRESPONDENCE AND DEFINITIONS.
FLEXIBLE USE PARKING IS ARGUABLY
SORT OF THE TERM THAT SHOULD BE
USED HERE BECAUSE IT IS THE
CLOSEST THING TO WHAT PRINCIPAL
USE PARKING USED TO BE BUT THAT
IS THE DISTINCTION. YEAH.
>> I AGREE WITH THAT ASSESSMENT
AND PRINCIPAL USE PARKING IN THE
CODE SHOULD ONLY BE APPLICABLE
TO SHORELINE AREAS AT THIS POINT
AND BACK IN 2018, WE MADE THE
INTENDED FULL SWAP FROM
PRINCIPAL USED TO FLEXIBLE USE
PARKING IN THE LAND-USE CODE.
AND, YEAH , THIS MAY BE A LEFT
OVER PHRASE THAT CAN BE AMENDED.
>> THANK YOU, ALL. COLLEAGUES, I
ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS
AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OKAY.
WHILE THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL ON AMENDMENT ONE, VERSION
3.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER STRAUSS?
SORRY. WE DID NOT CATCH THAT. [
ROLL BEING CALLED ]
>> CHAIR, THERE ARE FOUR IN
FAVOR. ZERO OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU. AMENDMENT ONE,
VERSION 3, IS ADOPTED. ANY OTHER
COMMENTS ON THE BILL AS AMENDED?
OKAY. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL ON THE RECOMMENDATION
TO PASS COUNCIL BILL 121093 AS
AMENDED?
>> [ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
>>
>> CHAIR, THERE ARE FOUR VOTES
IN FAVOR AND ZERO AGAINST.
>> THE MOTION WILL BE SENT TO
THE FEBRUARY 10th, 2026, CITY
COUNCIL MEETING. MOVING ONTO MY
MOVE THE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND
PASSAGE OF COUNCIL BILL 121135.
IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT IS MOVED AND SECONDED .
COUNCIL BILL 121135. ARE THERE
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I
MOVED TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL
121135 AS PRESENTED ON THE
SUBSTITUTE BILL. IS THERE A
SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU. IT IS MOVED AND
SECONDED. ANY COMMENTS ON THE
SUBSTITUTE? OKAY. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLE IN THE
ADOPTION OF THE SUBSTITUTE BILL?
>> [ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
>> CHAIR, THERE ARE FOUR NO --
VOTES IN FAVOR AND ZERO OPPOSED.
>> ANY COMMENTS?
>> CHAIR?
>> I MOVED TO AMENDMENT ONE,
VERSION 2.
>> HEAR A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT IS MOVED AND SECONDED TO
AMEND THE BILL. COUNCIL MEMBER
WOO RINCK?
>> A BRIEF THE AMENDMENT FOR THE
COMMITTEE.
>> BRING UP THE SUBJECT OF TMPs
AGAIN. WHAT COUNCIL BILL 121135
WHAT DO IS ILLUMINATE SOME
REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY
IN CONSOLIDATE CONSOLIDATE -- SO
CURRENT PLACES WHERE REQUIRED
YOU WILL SEE THAT LANGUAGE
STRUCK AND THERE IS A NEW
SECTION WITH NEW TMP
REQUIREMENTS. THOSE TMP
REQUIREMENTS SET THRESHOLDS
ABOUT WHICH TMPs WOULD BE
REQUIRED. COUNCIL MEMBER
RINCK'S AMENDMENT WOULD MODIFY
THOSE ABOUT WHICH PROGRAMS ARE
REQUIRED FOR NONRESIDENTIAL USES
BY COUNTING FLOOR AREA AND IS
NOT REQUIRED ACCESSORY PARKING
TOWARDS THE THRESHOLD ABOUT
WHICH TMPs ARE REQUIRED. IN MANY
AREAS OF THE CITY, THERE IS NO
REQUIRED ACCESSORY PARKING SO IF
A NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OR
MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT CHOOSES TO
PROVIDE NONREQUIRED PARKING,
THAT FLOOR AREA WOULD COUNT
TOWARDS THE TMP THRESHOLD.
>> THANK YOU. ANY COMMENTS ON
AMENDMENT ONE?
>> THANK YOU CHAIR, AND THANK
YOU FOR THAT BRIEFING, KETIL.
COLLEAGUES, WITH REQUIREMENTS
CHANGING FOR BUILDINGS ONCE WE
PASSED THIS LEGISLATION, WE ARE
WORKING TO ENSURE THAT
MANAGEMENT PLANS ARE ABLE TO BE
ENACTED WITHOUT ROLLBACK. BY
LINKING TO SQUARE FOOTAGE RATHER
THAN THE NO LONGER EXISTING
TIA'S, WE CAN UPHOLD THE STATUS
QUO . ACHIEVE VEHICLE REDUCTIONS
WERE AIMING FOR IN THE RECENTLY
PASSED PLAN AND I ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER
RINCK. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL ON THE ADOPTION OF
THE AMENDMENT ONE?
>> [ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
>> CHAIR, THERE ARE FOUR VOTES
IN FAVOR AND ZERO OPPOSED.
>> AMENDMENT ONE IS ADOPTED. ANY
OTHER COMMENTS ON THE BILL AS
AMENDED? OKAY. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE
RECOMMENDATION TO PASS COUNCIL
BILL 121135 AS AMENDED?
>> [ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
>> CHAIR, THERE ARE FOUR VOTES
IN FAVOR AND ZERO OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU. THE MOTION
CARRIES. THE BILL AS AMENDED
WILL BE SENT TO THE FEBRUARY
10th, 2026, CITY COUNCIL
MEETING. SO WE HAVE REACHED THE
END OF TODAY'S MEETING AGENDA.
THANK YOU TO MY COLLEAGUES.
THANK YOU AGAIN TO THE MEMBERS
OF THE PUBLIC AND TO OUR
PRESENTERS. OUR NEXT MEETING IS
WEDNESDAY FEBRUARY 18th, 2026,
AT 9:30 A.M. ANY FURTHER
BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE BEFORE WE ADJOURN?