Select Committee on the Comprehensive Plan 7/30/2026

to create a new system.

Hey, good morning, everyone.

July 30th, 2026, Select Committee on the Comprehensive Plan meeting will come to order.

It's 9.38 a.m.

I'm Andy Lynn, Chair of the Committee.

Will the Committee Clerk please call the roll?

Vice Chair Strauss?

Here.

Council Member Foster?

She's excused.

Oh, Council Member, okay.

Council President Hollingsworth?

Here.

Council Member Warrens?

Here.

Council Member Rink?

Here.

Council Member Sokka?

Here.

Chair Lynn?

Here.

Six members present.

Okay.

Councilmember Kettle is excused from today's meeting.

I believe Councilmember Foster is also excused, but might also be joining us in a little bit.

If there's no objection, the agenda will be adopted.

Hearing no objection, the agenda's adopted.

Good morning, everyone.

Thank you all for coming to this Thursday morning meeting to discuss the comprehensive plan.

As always, thank you to our state clerks, council, central staff, mayor's office, and the OPCD for helping us prepare for this meeting.

We will now open the hybrid public comment period.

Public comments should relate to items on the agenda or items within the purview of this committee.

Clerk, how many speakers are signed up today?

We have 24 remote and four in person.

Okay, and I think we might have- Five in person.

Five in person, okay.

Okay.

Given there are fewer than 30, we'll give each speaker two minutes.

We will start with in-person speakers first.

Clerk, can you please read the public comment instructions?

The public comment period will be moderated in the following manner.

The public comment period is up to 60 minutes.

Speakers will be called in the order in which they registered.

In-person speakers will be called first, after which we will move to remote speakers until the public comment period is ended.

Speakers will hear a chime when 10 seconds are left of their time.

Speakers' mics will be muted if they do not end their comments within the allotted time to allow us to call on the next speaker.

The public comment period is now open, and we'll begin with the first speaker on the list.

That is Maggie Lewis.

I'm here to speak about the details of the One Seattle Plan corridors and centers as it relates to the east side of 46th Avenue Southwest between Southwest Myrtle and Southwest Frontenac.

The proposal changes these properties from LNR to LR3.

They face 46th Avenue Southwest, which is an inadequate street to support four to five story multi-unit structures in terms of safety, emergency response and utility garbage support.

The street is only 16 feet wide, having just one sidewalk on one side of the street, which is three feet wide with no parking strip.

People from the Kenny Retirement Home and children from Gatewood School cannot walk safely on the narrow, one-person-wide sidewalk, which is not protected from cars.

Most people walk in the street itself.

Emergency vehicles, such as fire engines, already barely make it down the narrow street and around the corner, constrained by telephone poles, parked vehicles, and large delivery trucks at the retirement home.

Smaller-sized service vehicles, such as garbage trucks, are already required to serve 46 Southwest.

Regular-sized trucks can't fit through.

The street is inadequate in width.

Because of safety, emergency response, and service concerns, please return the east side of 46 Southwest between Southwest Myrtle and Southwest Frontenac to NR.

Remove the proposed LR3 upzoning for those properties.

Adding density only compounds the problems.

I know it's a small thing, many big things are happening, but it's an important detail.

The devil is always in the details.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Next up, we have Hannah Ziff.

Hi, my name's Hannah.

I'm in Pioneer Square, and I've been talking about every day how we need to fill in these spots downtown.

So when I saw anti-displacement on the agenda, I was kind of surprised in the context that we have so much empty office buildings and lots.

On my street, there's already businesses that have been displaced, and it's a question of if they can meet rent and also feed their families, and they've also moved out of downtown and still work downtown.

And when I saw that map of anti-displacement, that could also be looked at a map of how okay it is to displace people, which it's completely not, and I want Council to please remember that.

I see earlier on this week people talking about privatizing roads.

If we don't have or alleyway rather if we don't have power we can't even keep our property that we have and I see a lot of black folk in the lobby today and it's just a bad cycle of displacement and then it becomes kind of a dead zone where there's not enough foot traffic and it kind of snowballs.

So can we please, in the context that we have, context is key, devils in the details, fill in these spots before we displace more people.

I don't think that it's appropriate at this time to be displacing anybody.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next up, we have Alexandra Johnson.

Okay.

Good morning, council members.

My name is Alexandra, and I'm a senior policy analyst with the Duwamish River Community Coalition, representing South Park and Georgetown, two neighborhood centers that form the heart of the Duwamish Valley.

Both carry Seattle's highest environmental health burdens, are being asked to absorb significant new density, and both are at documented risk of displacement if that density arrives without protection.

We support housing production, but upzoning without the anti-displacement infrastructure is not housing policy.

South Park's median household earns 41% of Seattle's AMI.

Georgetown's longtime residents, including immigrant families, artists, and working class renters who built that community, are already being pushed out by speculative land purchases triggered by these exact types of zoning changes.

Our asks are specific.

First, no upzone takes effect in high displacement areas until NOAA demolition controls, tenant opportunity to purchase rights, and community benefits agreements are already in law.

Not pending, not promised, but in law.

Sequencing is not procedural preference, it is the difference between growth that includes us and growth that doesn't.

Second, create and restrict six-story affordable housing overlay zones to nonprofit, public, and social developers.

With housing levy and tax credits, nonprofit LR4 can serve 30 to 60% AMI and stabilize a neighborhood.

Third, every month without a land banking strategy in vulnerable areas is a month speculators are winning.

Direct the SSHD to begin land acquisition in the Duwamish Valley ASAP before comp plan up zones are priced into the land values.

And fourth, do not reduce MHA.

If specific projects are genuinely stalled, show us which ones, where, and what the actual fee burden is.

DRCC brought a 10 policy alternative package to the mayor that saves developers more money than a 90% MHA cut through permitting reform, subordinated construction financing, and land cost reduction while requiring more affordable housing, not less.

We are asking this council to write protection into the code as soon as possible so that thoughtful density can occur.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next up, we have Sabrina Burr.

Next.

Oh, you're not?

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

Next up, we have Teresa Velasco.

Necesito intérprete y me va a interpretar.

Buenos días, yo soy Teresa Velasco y, disculpe, tengo un poco de sentimiento porque fui desplazada de mi hogar, de 18 años viviendo ahí, pero No se me dio ninguna oportunidad de poder adquirir una casa asequible o un lugar que sea mis posibilidades.

Pero en mi mismo caso lo tienen muchas personas que son vulnerables, igual que yo, que no pueden adquirir una casa con facilidades de pago, con algo que esté a nuestro alcance para poderlo pagar.

Y ahora yo entiendo por qué hay mucha gente sin casa, sin hogar, porque es difícil poder adquirir un hogar.

It's a dream that sometimes is impossible.

It's a achievement that sometimes is not possible.

I've fought to find a home.

I've traveled to find a home, I've traveled to Northgate, I've traveled to the East, I've traveled to the East, I've traveled to the East, I've traveled to the East, I've traveled to the East, I've traveled to the East, I've traveled to the East, for our people who are vulnerable.

I would like you to do it.

Ahorita we are very discriminated for all parts, for many things that are happening at this moment.

But I would like to say, if I were not here, our young people who are going to live here, have a home, that they can come back to where they grew up, where they feel that they are welcomed.

That is my feeling and sorry for the emotion, but I have fought for a lot to find a place and now I understand all the people who live in the street.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm here.

I need an interpreter.

My name is Teresa Velasco.

I was displaced from my home.

I lived in South Park for 18 years.

And when I left, there was no equitable houses for me to go to.

And this is true for many people.

I find it very easy to understand now why many people are in the streets.

It's a dream.

I'm going to pause time.

It's a dream.

Can you pause it?

I've battled looking for homes.

Yeah, perfect.

I've battled looking for homes, and I haven't found opportunities.

I've been in Northgate, I've been in the East Side, and I would just really like you to make a change.

I'd like you to open doors.

There are many reasons that people can't find homes.

And for the future, when I'm not here, I would like you to find places for our future children that have grown up in here in Seattle to be able to stay.

A place where people feel comfortable, where people can feel like they're a part of their community and don't have to worry about being a part of it.

I now understand why people are, again, not able to find homes and are homeless.

And I've really battled for finding a place to be.

I hope that you're able to make changes for equitable housing, and I hope that that change can happen now.

Thank you, muchas gracias.

That's our last in-person commenter.

We'll now move on to our remote commenters.

We'll start with Anne Tyson.

Good morning.

I know you all want to limit economic displacement, and so does my neighborhood in Northeast Seattle's District 4. I'm concerned about the real risk of displacement of vulnerable residents along a small residential stretch of Northeast 45th Street, now proposed for upzoning to Low Rise 3. My neighbors include a widow on a fixed income, a senior couple in ill health, a disabled Army veteran, and a single mom.

People living here want to stay, but would face higher taxes and other real pressures from this zoning.

Apart from big displacement risks, this area isn't viable for such big development.

The lots are small, on a steep hill, and this area lacks any services or a major transit.

The area is now zoned neighborhood residential, so tall buildings would be incompatible with the surrounding neighborhood.

The great news is my neighbors and I have identified a much better location right inside our neighborhood that can create as many or more new units but will not cause the same displacement.

Unlike the location proposed in the current plan, this area is easy walking distance to services such as a grocery store, pharmacy, and multiple transit routes.

It's actually far more likely to be developed for those reasons.

So it truly would be a win, both for the city and the community, to switch this location.

and more than 1,500 of my neighbors have petitioned to improve the plan by making this change.

So I hope that you will consider it, try to reduce displacement more, and act on this feedback from the community.

As others said, the devil is in the details.

It's a small change and will not affect the number of new units created.

Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you.

Next up, we have Megan Kruse.

Good morning.

I'm speaking on the downtown regional plan.

To make this plan as a success as it can be, we need a detailed and thoughtful plan that this latest iteration is still incomplete and leaves big gaps and questions.

Number one, the plan lacks a flume map showing up zone blocks and parcels.

We've been requesting this for a couple years, and I'm not sure why it's not here.

Zoning is the foundation for all plan initiatives, and everyone should know exactly what's being planned to understand the potential impacts to where they live and work.

Number two, what's the plan to address displacement of economic, residential, and cultural assets?

The plan mentions generally upzoning undervalued properties along the 3rd Avenue bus corridor and the area between Union and Virginia Streets.

These areas contain approximately 31 historic or preservation landmark buildings, serving as homes to housing and small business.

The plan's technical appendix for preferred prototypes are skyscrapers, 1,000 feet tall, with parking for 75% or more residents.

There's a disconnect here.

We should know what will happen to these old buildings in this scenario.

Number three, the plan to eliminate or minimize design review is top and center in this plan.

We really should strive for collaboration, not exclusion, especially since the City has done extensive research showing that design review has not been the cause of these delays in housing.

Number four, doubling down on Third Avenue's overburdened transit sign.

Third Avenue is a designated 24-7 dedicated transit sign and that's the largest in the nation.

The street has created severe limitations for service vehicles and loading for the businesses and residents already living there.

New towers should be spaced throughout the downtown core, not just already overburdened corridors.

Number five, the new waterfront district needs clarification.

What is the significance of a public realm?

Next up we have Lois Martin.

Good morning, council members.

I'm Lois Martin, a third and fourth generation Seattleite, a central district home and small business owner, and a member of the Black Homeowners Policy Council, part of the Embrace Caucus.

Phase three would use a rebuilt displacement map to decide where protections attach.

The city rebuilt the map in 2022, and it now shows less risk in the neighborhoods that lost the most Black families.

But that map measures the income of whoever lives there now.

When the average black family who earns far less than our neighbors is pushed out and higher earning households replace us, the risk score drops.

The economics change and economics are what the map measures.

That is the map counting who moved in, not who was pushed out.

The city's 2024 report admits that a lower score often does not mean the city protected anyone.

It can simply mean the families most at risk are already gone.

So a lower score is not by itself a reason to take protection away.

This is not abstract to me.

My family and friends have been scattered.

We used to run into each other in the grocery store parking lot.

Wow.

Or a small business down the block.

Now we see each other when black center groups gather us back.

At the reunion on Union at Emoja Fest, a lower score does not capture that loss.

It hides it.

Siloing equity and displacement into one June convening, apart from housing, apart from trees, fragments of picture, and choosing who is in the room means you already know what you will hear.

That is not engagement, that is working toward an answer you picked in advance.

The Embrace Caucus, majority black-led, will submit our formal demands to the city.

We ask three things.

Use the 2016 map as a historical protection floor.

Show redlining, covenants, rezoning, and our population loss on one map and hold a briefing led by Black elders and legacy homeowners.

Do not use city-sponsored gentrification, which led to displacement to remove protections.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next up, we have Sandy Shetler.

Good morning, Council.

This is Sandy Shetler with Tree Action Seattle.

Slide 12 of today's presentation shows three equal meetings held with developers, environmental groups, and anti-displacement advocates.

This is not accurate.

The developer meeting was going to be the only meeting until the Seattle Times exposed it.

Then environment and anti-displacement meetings were added, but those meetings were limited to people handpicked by OPCB We were told that the scoping deadline date of June 1st would not be extended to include our input, even though the meetings were being held after the deadline had passed.

Slides 14 and 15 prove my point.

Tree canopy was a dominant theme of the June 4th meeting, but it is mentioned only one time.

Tree canopy and environmental justice are inextricably linked.

Without access to trees, babies are born smaller Children have asthma and cognitive delays.

Cancer rates increase and lives are shorter.

60% of all of our trees grow on private property.

We don't have enough public land to provide anywhere near the minimum tree canopy to protect health.

The current plan is to have 100% pavement on every lot because even the current zoning in neighborhood urban and regional centers allows it.

The majority of Beacon Hill and the Rainier Valley will be a regional or urban center.

100% pavement equals heat islands, disease, and early deaths for overridden communities.

Please ask, where will the trees go?

If OPCD tells you they'll be on public land, you have your answer.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next up, we have Jason Weil.

Hi, good morning council members.

My name is Jason Weil.

I am a homeowner in District 6 and I am speaking in favor of the mayor's taller, denser and faster plan for zoning changes throughout the city, particularly in low displacement neighborhoods such as in the northwest where I live.

Frequent transit is already here and is only going to get better as we expand light rail in the future to our neighborhood.

Expanding regional centres, expanding the ability to build multi-unit housing for everything from studio apartments up to family-sized units is essential to solve the problems that we have with housing and affordability, which has been shown to lead directly to increases in homelessness and otherwise housing insecurity.

I urge the council to allow for denser housing throughout the city, not just in the tiny amount of the city that allows multi-unit housing already.

Doing so is going to prevent further suburban sprawl as our city and our region continue to grow.

Our city has shown up for transit.

Our city has shown up for improved affordable housing.

So we are clearly here to welcome more people.

We just need the city council to meet us where we are and allow more housing to be built in more of the city.

I'm here for more of our neighbors, especially those who don't live in Seattle yet and so can't show up to our meeting.

Thanks so much.

Thank you.

Next up, Tina Boucher.

Good morning, everybody.

Tina Boucher, District 7. Nice to be here.

I'll be speaking to the Downtown Regional Center Plan.

A successful Downtown Regional Center Plan should be judged not by the quality of its vision, but by the accountability of its implementation and the measurable improvements it delivers for the people who live, work, and invest downtown.

The Downtown Regional Center Plan already includes a lot of good words and important commitments concerning affordability, anti-displacement, economic stability, community engagement and coordination.

What's missing is a clear structure for turning these commitments into accountable action.

I asked the select committee to require an implementation framework identifying the lead agency and partners for each major action, realistic timelines, funding assumptions, measurable outcomes, and regular public reporting.

The framework should also establish specific displacement and retention indicators, not only how much housing is produced, but whether existing residents, small businesses, workers, artists, cultural spaces, and community-serving organizations are actually able to remain and benefit from growth.

Finally, downtown communities need a defined continuing role in reviewing progress and recommending corrective action when goals are not being met.

Zoning creates capacity for growth.

It does not by itself ensure and equitable growth.

Please connect the plan's commitments to responsibility, measurement, community oversight and action.

The vision is comprehensive.

The implementation remains fragmented.

Without clear accountability and integrated management, even good policy is producing piecemeal results.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next up, we have Karen Tejada and Paulina Lopez.

I believe you're our interpreter.

I will unmute you after Karen's statement.

Hola.

Hola.

Please go ahead.

We can hear you.

Karina, are you still there?

Karen, can you press star six?

Good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning.

OK, OK.

My name is Karen Tejada.

I am part of the community.

I'm part of the advocacy team of the One Sugar Community Coalition.

I'm here today to share my concern about the displacement happening in our low-income communities including the Guamish Valley and South Park.

These are to our concern about doing increases that are about to happen.

Low income renters in Guamish Valley have been displayed at a rate more than four times higher than the average for the city of Seattle between 2015 and 2022. Our communities are already dealing with so much.

We worry about surviving so many violations because of immigration is that in polar language, we also deal with low income and population in the places where we live.

But now we are also threatened by displacement and the lack of access to affordable housing.

This can be prevented through new policies, policies that truly include rules to protect our children or children or elders and entire families.

For example, demolition rules that limit emulation of rental homes, version of a municipal land bank for affordable housing, and an opportunity to purchase agreements for tenants have the right to buy their building shirts.

I will also like you to consider that when instructors are demolished, they should not destroy all the plants and green spaces already there.

Builders should be required to plan new trees to serve in its basis or created new ones.

Thank you for listening to us and for being part of the solution.

Have a good day.

Thank you.

Next up, we have Rosa Cortes.

Hola, buenos dias.

Mi nombre es Rosa Cortes.

Vivo y soy miembro de la Comunidad del Sur de Searo.

Y quiero hablar sobre el plan integral y el desplazamiento sobre protecciones para familias que viven en departamentos como yo.

Si llega a pasar en mi edificio, me gustaría que los propietarios den asistencia a poder recibir su ubicación y una vivienda justa y digna.

Tener contratos o alguna ley que pueda respaldar acuerdos de oportunidad Y también para que puedan ser accesibles a comprar una casa.

Para inquilinos que tengamos derechos a comprar una propiedad.

Las personas de color o de bajos ingresos son las más afectadas por no estar informados.

Por último, quiero asegurarme que las personas no pierdan sus derechos a una vivienda asequible y que tengan y hagan leyes

Hello, good morning.

My name is Rosa Cortez and I am a member of the community from the south of Seattle.

I want to talk to you about the comprehensive plan and about the anti-displacement and the protections for families that are living specifically in apartments.

Like exactly like it happens in my building.

I would like that the owners give some assistance to leave safely and relocate to just housing and also fare.

We need to have a contract and also laws that can protect us and give us the opportunity to buy.

For those tenants that we need to have the rights to have accessibility for housing because people of color or low-income people are the most vulnerable because we're not usually informed.

Lastly, I want to make sure that we're telling that people do not lose their rights for affordable housing and that we have the laws that are protecting us for our future.

And if they are to be displaced, I hope that never happens.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Next up we have Paulina Lopez.

Paulina, excellent.

Paulina, I see that you're unmuted.

We cannot hear you.

Can you hear me now?

Yes.

Okay.

Good morning, council members.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide public comments.

I'm here speaking on behalf of the Duwamish Area Community Coalition and the Duwamish Valley area about the Seattle Comprehensive Plan.

For generations, the Duwamish Valley has carried an unfair burden on industrial pollution, environmental injustice, and climate impact.

Residents of South Park and Georgetown have experienced some of the highest rates of childhood asthma, further life expectancy, a greater exposure to toxic pollution in King County at the same time.

These neighborhoods face increasing flood risk and displacement pressures that threaten to people who have called this community home for decades.

Seattle's comprehensive plan must do more than create housing.

It is about keeping our most vulnerable communities safe and thriving in general to protect the communities.

I'm asking the city to bring stronger policies to land banks and have communities where we can have more access to community housing decisions.

Growth should not come to the expense of environmental injustice to accelerate displacement.

Our recommendations are threatened anti-displacement strategies, prioritize affordable housing, Recognize cumulative environmental impacts and ensure that historical overburdened communities have a meaningful voice and decisions.

We do not need to be choosing between good protecting environments, parks or trees.

We deserve it all and these recommendations align with the city commitment.

I ask you to center living experience and to stop displacement to protect our neighbors.

I'm tired to see my neighbors leave.

Instead, concentrate on making homes livable, safe and affordable.

we have an opportunity to read Seattle and narrate responsibly.

I also ask you to please make committee more accessible with interpreters.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next up we have Ruth Danner.

Ruth, please press star six.

Ruth Danner, please press star six.

Ruth, we will come back to you.

Next up we have Toby Thaler.

Toby, I saw you unmuted.

Hello?

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Hello?

Morning, Toby.

Hello?

Hello?

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Can you hear me?

We can hear you, Toby.

Please proceed.

All right.

Thank you very much.

If producing market-rate housing solved displacement, then an MHA program should be making a dent in displacement.

However, OPCD has produced no such evidence of this success.

The best data we have is Burke's MHA report, which shows that 95% of new multifamily in-cell developments do not produce low-income housing on site.

The fees are so low that developers pay to have the non-profit sector build that housing somewhere else.

That means more gentrification and displacement, not less.

Both the executive and law departments take the position that simply increasing the quantity of market rate housing is mitigation for displacement.

The public literature says the solution is largely ineffective.

assuming the construction of market-rate housing will reduce displacement is called trickle-down economics, a Republican-developed policy solution, which is almost always an abject failure.

Worst of all, OPCD refuses to develop data and analyses to show where and how much displacement is occurring.

I suggest you ask OPCD why they haven't produced that detailed block-by-block monitoring and evaluation.

County and city parcel and U.S.

Census data are readily available for this work.

Please hold the executive branch accountable for its core work on displacement.

And you should consider adopting the rent roll bill that Mayor Harrell vetoed, CB 120325. That would also give you more better data.

I strongly support the comments from the Duwamish and South Park community groups and Lois Martin, they all made accurate observations.

Thank you very much.

Have a good day and thank you.

Thank you, Toby.

Next up, we have Jean Bateman.

Thank you.

My name is Jean Bateman.

I'm a resident of the Commercial Corps and a small business person.

I attended the July 23rd land use meeting and the presentation on the sub-area plans package one for the 2026 comprehensive plan annual amendment.

I'm speaking to the downtown plan.

First, I want to thank you for reinstating our five neighborhoods in the downtown plans June 26 version.

This is specifically important as it reconfirms our historic identities and our general purposes within the city and sense of place matters.

Downtown Corps has a complicated history, much to resolve around our Native American heritage.

We reach to the water and we are in the urban environment.

And these are important things to this community that need to be addressed.

The plan needs to speak further to how really complex concepts are interacting downtown, particularly visually, and it kind of all lands at First and Pike, and we need to know what's happening there.

Please give us an idea for the waterfront district, the market which just provides so many social services, life to small businesses.

We need a better picture of how all of this is interacting.

Thank you very much for your time.

I believe the plan needs further work before adoption.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next up, we have Ruby Holland.

The only effective and acceptable anti-displacement strategy for former redline communities is no more up-zoning in former redline communities or financial help with taxes as they rise.

MHA resulted in thousands of black homeowners displaced from the CD, Asians displaced from North Beacon, Hispanics displaced from South Park, and white working class displaced from other parts of the urban villages all homeowners in single-family zones.

Yes, the urbanists lie that single-family zoning is the biggest driver of displacement prevails at City Hall.

And to mitigate that City Hall continues to upzone those areas that have already been the only areas harmed by upzoning.

In the end, this is done to transfer land wealth from minorities in the working class to real estate oligarchs and corporate landlords who will hurt all of us, homeowners and renters alike.

I personally worked very hard to get to the place that the governor would mandate an anti-displacement plan.

Back then, I didn't have an EIS.

I went straight to the governor.

I went to the United States Department of Justice under President Biden.

to ask that we be issued an anti-displacement mandate.

So it makes sense that today, if Governor Inslee's wishes is being ignored and disrespected, that I would go back to the same people who I went to to ask for it in the first place.

I realize the Trump administration is a whole different administration and they don't care nothing about black and brown and white working class homeowners, but they do care about disrupting this city and they would love any excuse to come to this.

Thank you.

If you have additional comments, please send them to us by email.

Thank you, Ms. Holland.

Next up, we have Jose Moreno.

Jose?

Hello?

Yes, we can hear you.

Please start.

Okay.

My name is Jose Moreno, and I'm a community member living in South Seattle.

I would like to share my concern about rent increases and displacement in low-income communities.

Our communities in the Guamish Valley have been impacted by pollution and displacement across many years.

I'm here today to talk about the level of affordable housing in my community.

I believe low rise free housing creates more homes and greater opportunities for families in the same zone.

This is important as we will have to reduce the supply and demand and the competition for housing in my community.

I would also like for the city to purchase the city land banking to also create more affordable housing.

When the city buys baking properties and they sell them to a responsible buyer or developer, this helps to make sure that this developer will follow up and uphold community goals and make sure the tenants and families living in this home will have rights.

I would also like to talk about the need for the abolition controls.

This has affected me, me and my family personally, as I was displaced by my previous landlord.

I was given two weeks' notice and removed from my home.

I wasn't given the opportunity to remove my contact and I found out my home had been rented to a different tenant.

This situation was very difficult and I was even living in the street for a long week while I found a new home.

This is why I believe that landlords should provide relocation assistance and right to return guarantees to make sure the tenants like myself are protected against displacement.

Thank you for listening to me today and I hope you will take my testimony into consideration.

Thank you.

Next up we have Susan Fedor.

No, no, no, no.

Hey, good morning.

Susan Fedor, District 1. A couple weeks ago in my comments, I mentioned concerns about the growing number of neighbors being displaced in my immediate neighborhood as a direct result of the acceleration and demolitions, but it's happening all over the city.

A friend of mine who also grew up here and was living in Lake City had to suddenly find a new place for herself and her daughter to live.

Her daughter had an abusive father, so feeling safe is critical.

To humanize the displacement going on, I thought I'd share her comments from a text exchange right after she found out they had to suddenly move.

I'm house apartment hunting because our home has been sold and is being torn down.

Everything I'm finding is at least 700 more per month for less space.

I didn't realize how bad things had changed in the last seven years.

It's like $2,600 for a two-bedroom apartment and then pet rent plus parking if it offers that.

OMG, it's so silly because the housing being created is not affordable.

The affordable housing TM is full of drug addicts and I would never.

Like I clean up literal dead bodies in those.

As a side note, she does biohazard and crime scene cleanup for a living.

Goes on to say, I'm overwhelmed looking for a depressing apartment.

I saw a basement apartment in Ballard last week where we had to enter through a concrete tunnel through the parking garage for $2,200 a month.

I think we can do it, but the hardest part is just finding someplace we can afford that accepts pets and isn't full of mold.

This is my worst nightmare.

Mold will definitely make you sick.

After a time-intensive search, they finally found another place to call home, but abundance doesn't create affordability without regulating other contributing factors.

What percentage of properties in the city are now owned by private equity firms, wealthy corporate interests, or speculative investors?

Zoning appears to be incentivizing teardowns of perfectly good affordable homes.

In residential zones, is there a reason the city doesn't incentivize keeping affordable inventory while also incentivizing the addition of an affordable cottage to the lot?

Please consider a more adaptive approach to the thoughtful and sustainable growth that effectively addresses the unintended consequences and prioritizes people over profit.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next up, we have Alberto Alvarez.

Thank you, Angela.

Good morning.

Housing affordability should be the highest priority from our council.

In connection to this, I want to highlight that many police officers cannot afford to live within our city and walk the beat in our neighborhoods.

Mayor Wilson, we are in full support of your actions and decisions.

Left, right, or center, there are majorities across the entire spectrum who know that the change in leadership with the police department was long past due.

something the council should have been aware of since last year when they signed off on a chief with attendance issues.

There is more work to be done.

Today, I'm proud that Mayor Wilson is willing to take action and lead with our support.

Thank you all and have a good day.

Next up, we have Jennifer Godfrey.

Hi, good morning.

Scientists have proven repeatedly that trickle-down economics, Reaganomics, do not work.

Increasing supply of housing alone does not bring down prices, as shown worldwide and by leading housing researchers that do peer-reviewed research and cite their claims, not just opinions.

Since King County Superior Court and the GMHB will take significantly longer than the hearing examiner, hopefully there is a plan to do a high-quality displacement assessment in this EIS.

Our GMHB appeal included displacement claims because the city didn't adequately cover how they were going to prevent rampant displacement.

To correct one inaccurate statement I heard, I would never argue to invalidate middle housing HB 1110 house bill.

It's a very good bill before it got turned into a luxury housing explosion by Seattle's developer interests.

And I'm also pretty sure you can't challenge a state house bill at the GMHB.

Anyway.

So one of the best ways to increase affordability but probably has been lost by the comprehensive plan is building housing that is actually affordable like sack flats and converting existing office buildings.

Deregulation has resulted in an explosion of four to six oversized single-family homes, misnamed as multi-family, crammed separately with detached walls onto lots without adequate stormwater mitigation.

We watched the densest part of Seattle with the most transit downtown rotting full of perfectly good empty office buildings.

Converting empty existing buildings downtown and elsewhere ASAP is far more eco-friendly than tearing down existing buildings and starting over releasing toxic chemicals into the environment and clear-cutting air and water cooling trees.

Show us you can fix the densest, best transit part of Seattle first.

I'm very concerned now that accountability has been removed by the majority of this committee without reform on the broken public comment system that allowed dangerous errors to persist in the largest environmental impact statement the city will perform.

We need real intake of corrections from the public, not the secret special interest meetings.

It's not a mystery what's going on.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next up we have Colleen McClure.

Good morning, City Council.

Colleen McClure from our Northeast Seattle Community Council.

We do want to thank OPCD for including this important displacement study.

These policies affect every neighborhood in Seattle.

And a few points to remember.

All the new homes built now will be more expensive in rent and mortgage payments on existing lots due to profit-taking and regulations.

So to keep things more affordable, we have to consider retaining some existing housing.

We support OPCD's policies that acknowledge that existing residents should be able to age in place without leaving their resource networks.

Especially true for the physically challenged veterans and anyone over 65, which is an increasing population in Seattle.

Displacement matters to the City Council as well.

They've just recently considered CB121215, which prevents citizens' opportunities to question the failure of a CEPA study.

And secondly, CB12159 will be voted on its no-solicitation legislation that allows homeowners to live where they are without harassment.

These are priorities.

And we ask the OPCD to use priority displacement policies also in the comp plan.

to protect the city's most vulnerable for affordable housing and their safety network.

If there are up zones, for example, compared with two parcels, the one that has rezoning and left displacement should be the preferred location of any new up zone.

And it may take more micro planning, but using a preventing displacement tool, the city and its residents benefit from retaining existing residents, local ties, and makes plenty of room for new folks as well.

Thank you for prioritizing displacement before up zoning.

Next up, we have David Haynes.

We still need a 21st century, first-world quality, great American housing built out that's pedestrian-centric, resident-friendly, that doesn't accommodate the road rage of the car driving through.

Yet, I called in today because the one Seattle plan is been tainted with racism left over from Bruce Harrell's ignorant Jim Crow Law South misinterpretation of equity and proper policy.

And it's not fair that we have restrictions on the comprehensive plan that were sabotaged by the landlords on the city council who were lobbying behind the scenes OPCD.

We need to address OPCD's abuse.

of the people's expectations of a 21st century and for the next 20 years of development.

They put a restriction of six levels all throughout the city.

Can you imagine?

Seattle wants to be a national, international city, but you're only allowed to build six stories.

And there's all these nonprofits that have benefited from a weaponized MHA fee fund that the corrupt progressives took away the incentives from real developers to build between eight and 12 stories with the first three stories being guaranteed affordable housing.

Because some sarcastic devil's advocates claim that if you're gonna be affordable housing on an eight story or nine or 10 story, that you were entitled to the top floor.

And we have some seriously abusive people that are playing the race card to distract from the fact that you're acting like you're doing certain skin colors a favor while sabotaging the integrity of the comprehensive plan.

We need to go back to phase one and take away the restrictions that all the landlords and their sympathizers put on the comprehensive plan that's cheating everybody.

Thank you.

Next up we have Clarissa Carlos.

Hi, my name is Clarissa Carlos and I'm a student at the University of Washington.

I'm also an active community member of the South Park community and today I would like to talk to you about community displacement and the need for demolition controls.

As a student, I was displaced from my previous apartment due to rent increases.

Finding an affordable apartment in Seattle is difficult due to private developers buying apartments and increasingly raising rents, making these unaffordable to many local communities.

Countless families and other community members along the Duwamish Valley, including South Park and Georgetown, White Center, among other communities, have also been displaced from their homes due to the lack of demolition controls.

These circumstances are further exacerbated by the presence of ICE, which continue to terrorize local community and other immigrant members living in these areas.

I ask that you consider supporting demolition controls as these will effectively require landlords to provide relocation assistance, the right to return guarantees, and even ensure replacement of affordable units to tenants before demolishing occupied housing units.

Supporting this amendment to the Comprehensive Plan would limit the demolition of structures used for rental housing and prohibit demolition of doorings unless a complete building permit application has been accepted.

Thank you so much for listening to me today, and I hope you will consider supporting not only this amendment, but also the communities which have been affected in the local area.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We're going to return to Ruth Danner.

Ruth, if you could press star six.

Ruth, Chair.

Good morning.

My name is Ruth Danner, President of Save the Market Entrance.

We'd like to thank OPCD for its June revisions to the DRCP.

We especially appreciate restoring the five-neighborhood framework and stepping back from the earlier concept of adding a waterfront neighborhood.

Over the last few days, Gene Bateman and I have spent many hours reviewing the revised plan and preparing the additional recommendations and graphics we submitted late last night.

One thought kept coming back to me.

Planning documents like this one become the shared language that guides future decisions.

When the language is clear, everyone benefits, citizens, developers, city staff, and elected officials.

When it is vague, it becomes the source of future confusion.

disagreement, delay, and unnecessary expense.

Our comments are intended to shine light where confusion remains.

We hope the next revision will more clearly define what is meant by the proposed waterfront district.

More clearly communicate the current status of the First Avenue streetcar and better illustrate how the plan's major initiatives relate to one another, particularly around Pike Place Market and Seattle's historic core.

Finally, I would encourage OPCD to continue its dialogue with the Duwamish tribe.

The land acknowledgement is an important beginning But there is also an opportunity to work directly with the tribe to ensure that its continuing history and ongoing efforts towards federal recognition are represented as accurately and fairly as the rest of the plan strives to represent Seattle's post-industrial history.

Thank you for your time and for your ongoing efforts to improve and finalize this plan.

Thank you.

Chair, that concludes our speakers.

Okay, thank you everyone.

As there are no additional registered speakers, we'll now proceed to our items of business.

Item one, we'll now move on to our first item of business.

Will the clerk please read agenda item one?

Agenda item one, presentation on anti-displacement strategies for briefing and discussion.

Thank you.

Our representatives from OPCD please join us to present and answer any questions council may have.

Once you're ready and you've got your presentation lined up, please introduce yourselves.

Thank you.

Good morning, everyone.

Good morning, Director.

Thank you, Councilmember Lin, for having us today.

Thank you.

My name is Rick Rick Hitting-Dongo.

I'm the Director of the Office of Planning and Community Development.

Good morning.

Jeff Wentland, Land Use Policy Manager at the Office of Planning and Community Development.

And Michael Hubner, Long Range Planning Manager in the Office of Planning and Community Development.

Should we jump straight into this?

Yeah, let's go ahead and jump straight in.

And colleagues, feel free to ask questions or raise your hand throughout the presentation.

Happy to have a more interactive dialogue.

Thank you.

Thanks.

All right.

So we want to take you through a number of items this morning.

We'll talk about our equity and anti-displacement in the comprehensive plan, anti-displacement definitions, data and strategies.

We want to talk about both phase two zoning and phase three zoning, our planning in that effort related to the SEIS, and then an updated schedule for how we see things proceeding the rest of this year and next year.

So as you know, with our One Seattle plan that council passed in December of last year, thank you for making that happen.

There are four key moves that we have focused on as part of that plan.

Housing and affordability, equity and opportunity, community and neighborhoods, and climate sustainability.

Next slide.

Just for the record, Council Member Foster has joined us quite a while ago.

I just want to note that.

So as you all know, the plan includes an updated growth strategy designed to expand supply and diversity of housing in all of our neighborhoods across the city.

And that growth strategy is implemented through several phases of zoning legislation.

And that includes the phase two zoning legislation that was sent down to council for consideration at the end of January this year.

Next slide.

I'm actually going to pick it up at this slide, Rico.

I'm going to cover a couple of slides that take a bit of a look backward on our process in developing the One Seattle Plan, and then we'll turn it over to Jeff Wentland to talk about phase three of zoning implementation.

But I do want to note, while looking at the growth strategy slide here, that the growth strategy itself is conceived of as an anti-displacement strategy, a foundational one to provide more supply and diversity of housing across neighborhoods in the city as a means both to reduce market pressure that are driving people out of their neighborhoods and the city at large, as well as to reduce development pressure in communities which are most at risk.

Next slide, please.

So displacement pressure is something that we have been studying and focusing on for more than a decade in OPCD.

It was a major theme in the previous update of the City's Comprehensive Plan in 2015. It's a key challenge that we recognize that even as we're addressing the supply of housing and zoning and land use, there can be localized impacts to our land use decisions, and there is certainly a history of localized displacement pressures in neighborhoods across the city, and it takes several forms.

There's the physical displacement, which can occur through eviction, acquisition of properties, rehabilitation and demolition.

Some of that accompanies a land use decision.

Some of it just happens without any zoning change at all.

There's economic displacement, which has become a very expensive city, especially for low-income renters, for long-time homeowners.

The economic pressures can be quite acute.

Property taxes come into play as the value of property rises.

and this is a major force that our comprehensive plan is designed to address in anti-displacement.

There's also commercial displacement where small businesses are facing some of the same economic pressures and cultural displacement where entire communities get to a point where they're hollowed out and there aren't the same critical mass of community members who lived there historically.

So we recognize and try to address all of these forms of displacement.

Next slide, please.

To do so, we do several things as an office.

First and foremost, I do want to talk about the data.

We talk to community members.

We do outreach and community engagement.

We did so with a comprehensive plan.

We started the comprehensive plan process with a convening of community members and organizations that work in the anti-displacement space to do a racial equity analysis of the last Seattle comprehensive plan.

That was a foundation for our work going forward.

We also are very aware of the history of racist real estate and land use practices, as well as community change, and displacement has occurred in the past.

And then, more recently, we are assembling a body of data that tells us where in the city displacement risk is highest, and you see that on this slide.

That's a map we've been maintaining for more than a decade.

Since before the last comp plan update, it draws on a variety of data points.

And we maintain a displacement risk dashboard, which is a new product.

It's available at the OBCD website.

This provides more real-time data related to what's going on on the ground, data like price and rent changes, permit trends, tenant relocation assistance applications, and the like.

Next slide.

In spring of 2025, when the comprehensive plan itself was being considered by the select committee, there was a similar request to come and speak to you about anti-displacement tools and our anti-displacement strategy, considering the comp plan.

At that time, under the Mayor Harrell, there was a convening of departments to talk about the data that we had to augment our data resources, including the dashboard.

and to take stock of the tools that we have to combat displacement across the city.

One of the things that came out of that was an anti-displacement action plan.

That document's available on our website as well, and it talks about our more than two dozen tools that we have in our toolbox to mitigate displacement pressures.

They fall into several categories, one deemed plan-type activities, the data monitoring and coordination we're talking about now, the comp plan itself as a document that has dozens of policies that support anti-displacement.

There's a produce category as well, which covers both the land use decisions that we make as a city that provides space and opportunity to build housing, but more importantly, the affordable housing programs, the funding through the housing levy, through Jumpstart, The inclusionary tools we have, such as mandatory housing affordability and MFTE, are part of that toolbox.

There are tools to protect affordable housing, including tenant support, rental assistance, relocation assistance, and others, and homeowner assistance, such as foreclosure prevention and property tax exemption.

and other tools to help homeowners who will be facing displacement pressures as well.

And finally, preservation of affordable housing in the city through funding programs through the Office of Housing and Home Repair and Weatherization Assistance.

And then finally, I think because it's housed in OPCD, it's worth highlighting and mentioning the Equitable Development Initiative Program, EDI, which provides funds directly to our partners, which are community-based organizations that are doing a wide variety of things to invest in their communities to combat displacement of residents, small businesses, and especially cultural anchors.

Next slide.

I do want to highlight before we talk about the phase three zoning that with phase two, the centers and corridors legislation, we were very aware of the request and the elevation of displacement, anti-displacement, and the resolution that the council passed with the comp plan legislation last December, and delivered a memo to this committee outlining our analysis of how the centers and corridors intersects with both ameliorating displacement pressures, but also the tools that we have to address any unintended effects on displacement that might result from some of that upzoning.

You'll see here on this slide we highlighted both the increase in supply and diversity of housing, expanding capacity in areas of low risk of displacement, which is an important part of our growth strategy that this centers and corridors makes real through changes to zoning.

and finally generating new affordable homes through MFT and especially MHA, which is a component of any of the up zones that are proposed.

And it highlights many of the tools that I summarized briefly that are in our toolbox.

I'm going to turn to Jeff to talk about the next phase of potential zoning changes in phase three.

Okay, great.

Thank you, Michael.

So I'm just going to give an overview here of what we're looking forward to as the next phase of zoning work to implement the comp plan.

So in April, Mayor Wilson announced her intention to pursue a next phase that emphasized strongly some principles, and those principles include pursuing affordable, abundant housing, making sure we're significantly adding to the housing supply of all kinds of new housing, all of the above, in many places.

Mayor Wilson directed us not to wait, to try to deliver options for more housing as soon as we can, including implementing the transit oriented development bill sooner than required.

We'll talk a little bit more about that.

Mayor Wilson emphasized thriving, complete neighborhoods, so a positive vision about adding housing near transit, adding housing near community amenities like parks and schools and libraries.

And this is a zoning discussion, but it's really also about creating great, complete neighborhoods that are wonderful to live in.

and she also emphasized environmental justice.

So it's important to add healthy and safe housing options on quiet, greener streets that are off of heavy arterial roads that have a lot of traffic noise and pollutants.

So these are some of the things that were emphasized.

And these big ideas would be advanced with a series of zoning changes and alternatives.

So we take these ideas and I think there's a lot of overlap in these ideas with Content you have in the chair's letter that I think you'll discuss later But we need to take these ideas to the details of zoning maps and we'll do that with alternatives So we'll provide for the public and for you council a really nice range of choices about the specifics of how you could implement these ideas.

And on the next few slides, I'm going to show you some themes for how these ideas could be brought to those detailed zoning maps.

I want to emphasize that these maps that I'm going to show are not study area maps.

They're not the alternative maps.

They're the ideas that'll help us identify the study area.

So these are the types of places that we'll look at in the next phase for zoning change.

So the first one is the map on the left, and those are the growth centers that are in the comprehensive plan.

So those are regional centers and urban centers, the city's denser places that already have great transit and amenities.

I'm looking at adding more housing there.

It includes additional neighborhood centers.

You all adopted about 30 new neighborhood centers in the comp plan from last year, and this phase will look at the question of whether the city could add even more neighborhood centers.

In addition to growth centers, we would like to look at adding more options for housing near parks and schools.

This is an idea that's come forward recently, and, you know, that would be adding the option for stacked flats and other homes that could support families near the city's biggest and best parks.

and public schools.

So the dots you see on the map are all of the city's public schools, and the green shaded areas are parks that could be considered as good places to add more housing.

Other ideas that will frame the scope are, on the left, the House Bill 1491 station areas.

This is the TOD bill that the state of Washington passed.

and it requires that cities achieve a certain level of density in their zoning that would be allowed within a half mile of light rail station areas and a quarter mile of bus rapid transit station areas.

So today, some of Seattle's station areas already meet that density threshold.

Those are the places in green, and others don't yet meet that threshold.

So through this phase of work, we think it's a great opportunity to meet the requirements of HB 1491 early.

and even beyond those HB 1491 areas, the city has other transit routes that we call frequent transit corridors with very good transit service.

So those are the lines in pink on the map to the right.

So this phase would look at options for adding more housing along even more transit corridors within walking distance.

So those are some of the ideas that'll frame the alternatives, and there'll be some higher change alternatives and some lower change alternatives to give you all a nice range of bookends to choose from as you make your final decision, and also the public will have really ample opportunities to weigh in on those alternatives.

We're at the beginning of a process.

To inform that process, OPCD and Mayor Wilson recently led some stakeholder engagement between April and June.

We had three subject area convenings, as you see here described on the slide.

and because our meeting today is focused on anti-displacement strategies, we want to highlight some of the input from the convening about anti-displacement.

So when we talk about anti-displacement measures, there are basically two categories we'll talk about.

One are zoning choices, what we can do with the zoning, the land use map, Zoning can't solve all of our problems and issues, so it's also very important to think about non-zoning mitigation strategies that could be brought forward in addition to zoning changes.

And the supplemental EIS and this planning process will study all the impacts of what the zoning changes could mean for displacement pressure.

So you'll have good information to inform your decision.

There's a lot here.

I'm not going to hit on every point, but I want to just highlight a few things from the stakeholder meeting on anti-displacement.

It was a great meeting, over 35 leaders who were working in community-based organizations, and these were some of the ideas told to us by them.

So, an equitable distribution of density, so focusing lots of zoning changes in areas with relatively lower displacement risk and high opportunity, and limiting zoning changes in areas with high displacement risk.

That was one idea that came through.

They also told us that we should consider community-led development, so if zoning is held down in high displacement risk areas, the city should also consider you know, providing opportunity to community-based developers to help them bring forward feasible projects in those areas.

City process reform, you know, barriers to development also impact community-based organizations trying to do their projects.

So that's something that came through, is permitting and process reform is important to them as well.

And on the subject of MHA or inclusionary zoning, the group really felt that if the city looks at changes to MHA, it should consider preserving overall funding levels for affordable housing and not increasing displacement pressure with those changes on high risk.

areas.

So those are some zoning themes.

There was also really great discussion of non-zoning themes.

So I'll hit a few highlights here.

The idea of land acquisition and land banking of key sites that are important on locations and community was an idea that came forward and kind of taking those off the speculative market, even if it might take a while to do a community-based project there.

There were strong support for cultural and commercial stabilization programs and support for community developers.

A lot of what you're going to see on this slide is similar to comments we heard today from South Park groups and Central Area groups.

and environmental justice was also important to these groups.

So protecting tree canopy, reducing pollution, there's a lot of overlap on those issues with anti-displacement issues.

Okay, and that, I want to just wrap us up here.

You all asked for a timeline.

This is our best estimation of a timeline for this phase.

I'll just note a few points that later in the fall, in the public engagement row, we would like to do a really nice public-facing update and scope overview, like what we're talking about here today, but with a lot more graphics, a lot more communication outward to the public.

in the September-October timeframe.

And a key point in the timeline is the release of a draft SEIS, which would include those alternatives that I described, and that would happen sometime in the first part of 2027, and that would kick off a really robust and important community engagement time where the public will weigh in on those alternative maps.

So there's a lot here.

I will just sort of pause at this point, and that concludes our presentation, and we'd love to take questions that you might have.

Thank you so much.

Colleagues, any questions?

Councilmember Foster.

Thank you so much, Chair, and really appreciate you all, OPCD, as always, and the work that you're doing.

I was looking at the City's Anti-Displacement Report.

I'm going to tell you which report it is. and it is the Anti-Displacement Action Plan for March of 2025. And one of the things I really appreciate about the design of that plan is it sort of talks about work that the city is doing and helps us understand the evidence associated with different approaches that the city is taking.

And so with that in mind and thinking about, we've also heard other news around challenges with our constrained housing supply right now.

Can you just speak a little bit to the impact of, you know, the number of homes that we need to have in our region?

I believe we need to have 112, maybe it's 114,000 new homes before 2040. Can you just speak to the relationship between the need for new housing production and anti-displacement as it's mentioned in this report?

I can take a first cut at that.

Thank you, council member.

In the lead up to this round of comprehensive plan updates, there was a lot of work done at the state level and at the county level to get a handle on how much housing do we need collectively, not just Seattle, but King County, the region, the state, but especially within the county.

That's one of the places where we get our numbers for the comprehensive plan itself as It's not the only data point we look at.

A lot of times, the numbers we get from the county are, quite frankly, a bit of a lowball estimate of how much demand there is for real estate and for housing in Seattle.

That's why we aimed higher in this comprehensive plan.

But just as important, when those numbers were worked out at the county level, there was also a state mandated analysis of how much of that housing needs to be affordable to households at less than 80% of area median income, at less than 50%, and at less than 30%, and also how much of an increased supply of permanent supportive housing we need as a county, and then those numbers also are assigned a portion of those to cities.

That's a really important set of numbers.

It's documented in our housing appendix, and what it shows is that in addition to needing to increase supply overall, we need to significantly emphasize affordable housing within the new supply and collectively in the county, we need more funding, more resources to provide those affordable homes.

That directly would help us be able to mitigate displacement as we grow.

So we're working with other cities, with the county, and through our own comprehensive plan to plan for a future where we can do a better job in those areas.

And we're held accountable by the state.

We will be reporting back to the state in 2029. It's actually a provision of Growth Management Act on how we're doing under this comprehensive plan, both in housing overall and also for those different income levels.

I appreciate that.

Oh, please, Director.

Thank you, Council Member.

So I would also add, you know, the King County Department of Community and Human Services recently put out a new report, which was an assessment around housing needs across the county It includes reference to the fact that where we are, where we're falling short county-wide is zero to 50% AMI homes.

So we are, as Michael has stated, going to be working very closely with the county related to how City of Seattle is contributing to trying to drive up the number of homes in that lower bracketed area and address that piece of the anti-displacement equation.

I think in addition to that, as you've heard mentioned, we're working with legacy homeowners, we're working with Black Home Initiative, where we are having conversations with not only communities of color, but smaller developers that are community invested, that are seeking to do community-based projects that allow for home ownership, that support existing communities in place, that support our communities that are wanting and needing to age in place.

So I'm just trying to add a little bit of color to the question.

Thank you for that.

I really appreciate that.

And as you were doing that, I was just looking back at some of the data and I was pulling up my notes on the slides that I have from February from Office of Housing around the need that we have for homes.

It's 112,000 homes by 2044. So I was close from memory.

I wasn't exactly there, but I was pretty close.

and I think it echoes what the new county data shows, which is a need on the zero to 30% of 15,000 homes for permanent supportive housing, almost 30,000 homes for non-PSH but up to 30% AMI, 19,000 for 30 to 50, just significant gaps.

But it also shows that when we get into workforce housing, the 50 to 80, the 80 to 120, we still have significant needs there.

And the reason I bring this up, and as well at the 120 AMI and above, we've got almost a need for 30,000 additional homes from the private market side, according to this report from OH.

And the reason I bring that up in the context of this report and this presentation today is

Hello, hello.

Mine seems to be working.

OK.

Hello?

Can you hear me on that one?

Yeah.

OK, well.

All right.

Well, let's see if I can do this without my computer.

And what I wanted to ask is just what I see is that the data shows that it ranks when we're looking at the evidence in terms of things that are helpful to stem against anti-displacement.

it shows the investment and production of affordable housing rated as high, and it shows the production of additional housing around the city, both rated as high.

So that's just something that stands out to me, the need that we sort of continue to focus in both of those areas of production at the same time that we work on different strategies that are more targeted that I'm also supportive of.

And Thank you, Council Member Strauss.

And so I think that's just something I wanted to bring into the conversation because there is a need for us to both be, from my vantage point, more targeted and precise and to develop innovative programs, which I know OPCD has been doing, and also a need for us to continue with that broader focus on supply.

Yeah, I agree.

Thank you.

I don't have my questions, so...

Thank you.

Is it working again?

Council Member Rink.

All right, check, check.

Okay, we're all good.

Thank you so much for the presentation.

I wanted to take us to slide 10 because I'm excited to see the map highlighting our public schools and outdoor parks, because when it comes to getting more housing near these essential locations, I'm wondering how can we expect the environmental review to balance more housing near our schools and parks and the anti-displacement map?

Yeah, so one way, I may not have emphasized this enough in the presentation, is that based on the input we received from community, at least one alternative will hold down or moderate or not propose zoning changes in areas of high displacement risk.

So you'll have that as an option of one choice that just will not up zone at all or as much if it's a very high displacement risk area.

So that's one thing.

The other thing is that a lot of these parks and schools are in great places that do not have high displacement risk that would be good for more housing.

And one idea we like is that around parks and schools, we can couple the zoning change with an incentive to support family-sized homes, because parks and schools are great places for families to have close by.

That was a disagreement there.

Similarly, taking us to the next slide, just related to a similar question about the TOD bill map.

Many areas currently below state requirements in the TOD bill are in areas of high displacement risk.

So, does OPCD have a plan on how best to mitigate displacement risk when implementing the TOD bill?

We do have a plan and will present many options for mitigation measures in the documents.

I know that's a big complicated word, but basically it'll be like a menu of supports that could be brought along in tandem with zoning changes to you know, provide specific and direct ways to support community to stay in place.

So those are like non-zoning tools, and that'll be a menu of those for you to review that could be implemented alongside zoning changes.

Go ahead.

I wanted to add specifically with regard to the state law, House Bill 1491 does provide us in the zoning, in the domain of zoning itself, does provide some flexibility to us in terms of application of the new density requirements.

That's something we can describe to the Council when we come back with a more complete scope.

But basically, the concept that Jeff was describing, that an option we have in areas of high risk of displacement to study a lower intensity of upzoning or perhaps some areas not being upzoned at all, could be something that there's a little bit of flexibility in the bill to take a look at in the supplemental EIS.

So we do have some zoning options.

They are somewhat limited because it's a state mandate, but it did foresee that there might be some areas of higher risk displacement and gives us that flexibility.

And then I would add to that that we have 1.75 million in federal dollars to explore, excuse me, equitable transit-oriented development.

And we've stood up a community advisory group of community leaders to help us look at both issues and opportunities related to transit-oriented development and doing it equitably.

That work will continue over the next couple of years just in terms of setting up a framework.

I think that as we look at implementation on the land use side related to HB 1491. We're also trying to look at the substance of how those opportunities are realized over time, how they include community and community development opportunities for building generational wealth, opportunities for small business to be a part of those development opportunities, how all of that gets baked in at the same time that we're doing our station area planning.

So that's just, again, I think Jeff had said earlier, all the solutions aren't land use related.

So we're trying to be very conscious and thoughtful about how community is at the table as we look at the whole suite of issues, opportunities and tools.

Thank you all for those responses.

That's really helpful information and look forward to further engaging on TOD options.

My final question, if I may, is just related to, I was really pleased to see on slide 15 the mention of land banking, and I'm wondering if you can speak to what efforts are currently being taken to support community-led efforts on land banking, and how can we as council help make land banking succeed in Seattle?

Okay.

Well, what's on the slide is the, you know, direct input and feedback from communities.

So we're trying to reflect their suggestion.

And, you know, the city then has to receive that and think about, well, how could we make that happen?

You know, one of the ways that we think could be effective to explore is to look at coordination across different departments.

Different departments, like a transportation department, for example, has a need to acquire land at times or a utility.

So when we're thinking about land banking, I think the city could probably improve its effort to coordinate those needs and look to try to achieve multiple benefits so that we could acquire a site through another process and then in the future reuse it for a community-based use.

So that's one way, by better coordination, we can look to land bank.

I would also say, maybe more generally, that we are starting a process of looking at what are the properties that are owned by City of Seattle currently in partnership with Sound Transit?

What are properties that were used by Sound Transit for construction of station locations that are now vacant property?

It's not necessarily about acquisition of new property areas, but for land that we already control, are there opportunities for co-development, long-term, like 99-year leases that where public-private partnership can be facilitated that would result in more affordable housing and more community-led development and design opportunities.

I think we're in early days, but I think there's a lot of opportunity there.

Great.

Fabulous.

Thank you so much for speaking to that point.

I know land banking is something that my office has heard of as heard as well from our community partners that as a desire that the city considers some strategies to support that.

And so It was great to hear just kind of OPCD's current orientation and thinking and would like to be a partner in thinking through how we continue that work, both related to bringing potentially new properties out of market speculation, but also looking at existing properties within a city control that we can explore, making use of.

So thank you all for your responses today.

No further questions.

Chair.

Thank you, Council Member Rink.

Colleagues, any other?

Council Member Foster.

Thank you, Chair.

Now that I'm back at my computer, I'll finish with my questions there.

Thanks for bearing with me, folks.

So I'll just actually pick up on this conversation around land banking and say, colleagues, as a reminder, I'm so excited that earlier this year the Office of Housing just acquired property in the Central District that was formerly owned by the Central Area Development Association and that through work that our office did with the Office of Housing has stated that that will be used for priority home ownership and that we will be applying the community preference policy to that and Community preference policy also shows up obviously in several reports that OPCD has done as a, I believe you call it like an emerging or I forget what the word is, but practice around anti-displacement.

So we do have that as well as the Montlake property that the city has just acquired for future development.

I do think what's interesting on the land banking conversation, what I think maybe is the next corner to turn there, and I'll just say I'd love to work with OPCD, Council Member Rank, Chair Lin, you know, is things that I've heard just from some of our affordable housing providers where maybe they have a particular interest in being able to build in a neighborhood or in a community.

and where we have an opportunity to sort of help get ahead of development in partnership with them through acquiring properties that go onto the market.

So I do see an opportunity there for a bit more sort of deeper collaboration, but I think we're doing pretty exciting work in some of these acquisitions that the city has taken on recently.

So just wanna sort of put a stake in the ground there.

And then I wanna turn just back to, and maybe there's more of a statement here than a question, just what I think is some of the nuance around anti-displacement and also the simultaneous need for development that my office has heard.

And, you know, I've heard that in sort of at both ends of the city is where I typically hear it, up north in Lake City and down south in Rainier Beach and, you know, around the Rainier Beach Light Rail Station, there continues to be a demand in the community for development of that area and for folks who've gotten off the train there I think that many people will see that's an area that needs additional development and opportunity and that community members are working on trying to get that.

And at the same time that that's a challenge when it comes to a community that's at high risk of displacement.

So I know that OPCD knows this and just want to bring that nuance into the record for what it's worth there because I do think it's important that Folks do want development, they want it done in the right way and in a thoughtful way, but I know many people are looking to see the opportunity to have, you know, a walkable neighborhood.

I live nearby there, it's walkable, but to have shops and other things off the light rail.

And similarly in Lake City, what we hear from some of the businesses there is a hope to continue to sustain their existing thriving community that they have in Lake City, which is beautiful and diverse and exciting.

And also that there's a need for market rate housing in that community because to sort of create a truly mixed income neighborhood.

And so I just wanna read those into the record a little bit and say, I appreciate the nuance from the department and just knowing that being at a high risk of displacement does not always mean that a community is saying, we don't want new development here.

Thank you for your remarks and observations there, Councilmember Foster.

I think that, you know, as you were speaking, I was thinking not only about Rainier, but Othello, Graham Street, the Lake City Community Center that's under development right now, headed up by Parks.

I think what is critical for the work there for us and for the city is around the idea of what's the right kind of development, the right size of development, what's baked into the development on those sites, who are the partners that are brought to the table, and how can we help facilitate or incentivize development that communities want to see and be a part of.

That is not a simple process.

It is complicated and it takes time, but we are trying to invest in that through our...

Some of it is through our comprehensive plan community engagement, some of it is through our station area planning work.

So just appreciate your thoughts.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Council Member Foster.

Any other questions or comments from colleagues?

I...

have a lot of sort of questions and comments, but I think I'm gonna hold them for today.

We've got a lot going on, other things going on this morning.

But an incredibly important topic.

There's so much to delve into incredibly.

I think it's important that we have a very sort of complex, nuanced discussion about this.

And so clearly there's a lot more that we need to do.

And we heard a lot of really compelling testimony this morning.

I wanna thank everybody who came.

I wanna thank everybody who joined us online and I'm sure that you will all be taking that feedback into consideration as well as I certainly am.

So I would like to move on to our second item of business, which would be a chair's letter, but thank you to our presenters.

Thank you for joining us.

So clerk, could you please read it to an item too?

Go ahead, vice-chair.

Could you please read agenda item two, clerk.

Agenda item two, discussion of chair's letter on phase three of the comprehensive plan for briefing and discussion.

okay colleagues um this one should be short but I just want to uh we have a draft draft chairs letter that we circulated um and this is really for phase three as OPCD moves forward with additional environmental study for phase three as we were hearing about I just want to share some of my priorities things that we were hearing from the community things I was hearing from colleagues things like supporting a diversity affordable housing in every neighborhood around schools, preventing displacement, undoing past harms, mitigating our climate impact and building climate resistance, expanding transit-oriented development, people-centered places, prioritizing deep coordinated community engagement as part of that next phase.

And on that last point, Our office is certainly committed to fully participating community engagement alongside OPCD as these next phases are going forward.

I know that many of my colleagues have done so in the past, in particular, Vice Chair Strauss, I know that you work very closely with your district in looking at all these different zoning proposals.

and so I just encourage the rest of my colleagues to also participate in this next phase because I think it's going to be a more robust dialogue if we engage and don't sort of wait for the proposal to come to us if we engage sort of early and often.

I also encourage colleagues for you to reach out directly to OPCD as part of this next Phase 3 to provide feedback as far as the scoping goes, again, to work with our different communities to provide feedback to OPCD as part of the scoping.

We at one point we're looking at a resolution that is no longer happening.

We decided that this chair's letter and providing feedback in other ways would be more useful.

So that's why we shared this.

And again, just want to say thank you all for participating.

in the many different phases of this comprehensive plan.

And with that, I just want to see if you have any questions or comments.

Okay, well thank you all again for coming, colleagues.

Thanks for sticking with us on a morning with a lot going on.

We have reached the end of today's meeting agenda.

Is there any further business?

Hearing no further business, we are adjourned at 1127. Thank you.