SPEAKER_03
Good morning, colleagues.
The January 27th, 2021 meeting of the Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee will come to order.
It is 9 31 a.m.
I am Dan Strauss, chair of the committee.
Will the clerk please call the roll?
Good morning, colleagues.
The January 27th, 2021 meeting of the Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee will come to order.
It is 9 31 a.m.
I am Dan Strauss, chair of the committee.
Will the clerk please call the roll?
Council Member Peterson?
Here.
Council Member Lewis?
Present.
Council Member Juarez?
Here.
Council Member Mosqueda?
Here.
Eric Strauss?
Present.
Fye, present.
Thank you.
The Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee of the City of Seattle begins this committee by acknowledging we are on the traditional and ancestral lands of the First People of this region, past and present, represented in a number of tribes and as urban natives, in honor with gratitude the land itself and the people of this land.
We start with this acknowledgment to recognize the fact that we are guests on this land and should steward the land as such, as guests.
We have four items on the agenda today.
A discussion and vote on Council Bill 11992, which adopts the Seattle Construction Code, and a discussion and vote on Council Bill 11993, which adopts the Seattle Energy Code.
We also have a discussion and vote on Clerk File 314461 and Council Bill 11993. 987, which approves an extension of a contract rezone of 1106 34th Avenue.
We are anticipating canceling the February 10th meeting of the Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee.
Our next committee would be on Wednesday, February 24th, starting at 9.30 AM.
Before we begin, if there's no objection, the agenda will be adopted.
Hearing no objection, the agenda is adopted.
At this time, we will open the remote public comment period for the items on today's agenda.
Before we begin, I ask that everyone please be patient as we learn to operate the system in real time.
While it remains our strong intent to have public comment regularly included, on meeting agendas, the City Council reserves the right to end or eliminate these public comment periods at any point if we deem that the system is being abused or is unsuitable for allowing our meetings to be conducted efficiently and in a manner which we are able to conduct our necessary business.
I will moderate the public comment period in the following manner.
The public comment period for this meeting is up to 10 minutes.
Each speaker will be given two minutes to speak.
I will call on each speaker by name and in the order in which they registered on the council's website.
If you have not yet registered to speak, but would like to, you can sign up before the end of public comment by going to the council's website.
The public comment link is also listed on today's agenda.
Once I call speaker's name, staff will unmute the appropriate mic and the automatic prompt if you have been unmuted will be the speaker's cue that it is their turn to speak.
Please begin by stating your name and the item in which you are addressing.
Speakers will hear a chime when 10 seconds are left on the allotted time.
Once a speaker hears the chime, we please ask you to wrap up your comments.
If the speakers do not end their comments at the end of the allotted time provided, the speaker's microphone will be muted after 10 seconds to allow us to call on the next speaker.
Once you have been completed your public comment, we ask that you please disconnect from the line.
And if you plan to continue following this meeting, please do so via the Seattle channel or the listening options listed on the agenda for items three and four.
Clerk File 314461 and Council Bill 119987 related to a contract rezone, which is being considered under the council's quasi-judicial rules.
Public comment on these items is prohibited.
So if you are here to speak about the contract rezone, we have had public hearings on these previously, and today is not the appropriate place to share your public comments.
I am seeing 28 people signed up, not all are present.
And so I can assume that we will extend public comment.
Speakers, if you are able to share your public comments in fewer than two minutes, please do so to allow other folks to speak as well.
The public comment period is now open, and we will begin with the first speaker on the list.
Just a moment.
If we do extend public comment, we will reduce the time to one minute.
So for the first 20 minutes until 9.55, please expect to have two minutes.
If you are after speaker 10, please expect to only have one minute.
Listed on for public comment today, I see Anne-Marie Dooley.
Rich Vogt, I don't see that you are present.
Rob McVickers, so please do call in if you are.
Rob McVickers, Michael Ruby, Leanne Geyer, Steve Gelb, Areva Morris, Jim Street.
I do see that Cynthia Jatul, Eric Armbruster, you are not present, so please call in.
We will go from there.
Good morning, Anne-Marie.
My name is Anne-Marie Dooley.
I'm a doctor and a member of Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility.
Seattle building codes matter.
They've prevented COVID deaths where I practice because these codes demand much faster air exchange rates in medical buildings.
I ask you to look at building energy codes in the same way, a tool for saving lives by reducing carbon relief outside and improving air quality inside.
Most people think of smoke and transportation as a source of air pollution.
While our buildings have too long received a free pass, gas appliances in residential and commercial buildings can produce seven times the amount of nitrogen oxide as gas power plants.
And the resulting smart particle matter can increase asthma rates and reduce lung function by 40%, especially in women and children and often those who are lower income.
Seattle really has no excuse to not electrify all buildings.
certainly not the excuses I have heard that the upfront costs are too high or that it's not profitable.
We need to dispel the myths that electricity is more expensive than gas or that public health has no value.
The reality of our climate crisis is inescapable and we all face difficult decisions, but we expect you to be bold.
Please pass the updates to the Seattle Commercial Energy Codes and remove gas and water from space heating.
Thank you.
Thank you, Anne-Marie.
Up next is Rich Vogt.
I don't see that you are present, so Rich, please do call in if you would like to speak.
Up next is Robert McVickers.
Michael Ruby is next.
And then Leigh Ann Geyer, you're on deck.
Good morning, Rob.
Hi, my name is Rob McVickers with Build Sound.
I'm a townhouse builder here in Seattle.
And I'm calling in to discuss the striking of the exemption from the Washington state code about forcing sprinklers in townhouse units of four units and under.
One of the main focuses of our business has always been entry-level housing.
We've been very successful at building some affordable housing for sale.
We've built about 150 homes here in Seattle, so I kind of consider myself an expert.
And I'm here to say that every time we add cost to the building, of a house in Seattle, it absolutely increases the sales price.
We as builders don't have enough slush fund in our projects to just absorb every cost, so we have to pass that on to homeowners.
And I was looking at the values of SDCI, and one of them was equity, which kind of jumped out at me.
And I feel like we're not being equitable as we keep increasing the price of housing.
I did some math on medium median income housing.
And I won't go through the details of how I kind of figured out what I came on to.
But for every $10,000, we increase the cost of housing here in Seattle, we push out approximately 976 potential buyers for every $10,000 if you base that on a $500,000 house.
It's just it's It's for us, it's frustrating because we keep getting hit with these added costs, added costs, and I understand that the council and FDCI feels like these are legitimate needs, but at some point, we're hitting a balancing act that we just ain't, and we're running into a brick wall on being able to strive to build affordable housing, because a lot of us in the townhouse industry, that's what we like to do.
We like to get people into homes as affordably as possible.
Thank you, Rob.
And if you have more comments, please do send them in for written comments.
And I absolutely hear you on that.
And thank you for your comments today.
Up next is Michael Ruby, then Leanne Geyer on deck, Steve Gelb.
Michael, good morning.
Hello.
Good morning.
Hi.
Thank you.
I want to comment on the commercial energy code.
When future historians look back at our time, there are going to be two issues that they're going to comment on.
How well did we respond?
The pandemic will have been be as forgotten as the Spanish flu.
And so will many of the other things we worry about today.
But there will be two things they will look back on and say, how well did we do?
The first, of course, is how well did we respond to Ben Franklin's challenge?
You have a republic if you can keep it.
That is now a challenging effort for us, and we need to respond to it.
The other that we really need to respond to is how aggressively did we respond to the challenge of global warming?
Did we have the courage to do the very difficult things that need to be done to actually make a difference?
We need at this point to adopt the Seattle Commercial Energy Code.
There are many updates in it that will help us use our energy more efficiently and ultimately reduce our release of greenhouse gases.
We need to make two amendments to the code.
One is to remove the delay for buildings to use efficient electricity for space heating.
You've received detailed written comments on this from various people.
The second is that we need to amend the code to require efficient electricity for water heating for all buildings and not just hotels and multifamily buildings.
Again, you've received detailed written comments from a variety of folks detailing this.
Thank you very much for your attention and your courage to do what needs to be done.
Thank you, Michael.
Up next, we have Leanne Geyer, followed by Steve Gelb and Areva Morris.
You are on deck.
Good morning, Leanne.
I see you maybe hit star six, Leanne.
I see you there.
I see Leanne, but she's still on mute.
You'll need to hit star six.
There we are.
Good morning, Leanne.
I'm so sorry.
I kept hitting pound.
Silly me.
Anyway, good morning, Chair Strauss and committee members.
My name is Leanne Geyer, and I am speaking here today in opposition of ordinance number 11993, amendment one and two on behalf of over 3,800 members of plumbers and pipefitters, local 32, the Seattle King County area jurisdiction.
The proposed legislation exceeds the 2018 state energy code to take effect on February of 2021. The mayor's proposal on the original bill has an implementation date of January of 2022. And to quote, to allow for additional outreach.
We understand the council sense of urgency to implement a current proposal but we have serious concerns regarding job loss for our members and believe that natural gas is a reliable and affordable part of a balanced and clean energy future.
By eliminating natural gas as a space heating source to all commercial buildings in Seattle may be creating unintended consequences.
Currently the state legislator is considering several bills related to heat pumps and hydrofluorocarbons related to those heat pumps.
By implementing law prior to legislation working through the various components of the proposed legislation will create a great burden on the construction industry.
I have met with many of our members who work in the refrigeration service industry in Seattle.
Refrigeration license is required to install and maintain these systems.
Not one of them has been asked to produce their license.
I strongly encourage the committee to reject Amendment 1 and Amendment 2. Thank you so much for your time.
Thank you, Leanne.
Up next is Steve Gelb, followed by Areva Morris and Jim Street.
Council Member Jim Street, you're on deck.
Good morning, Council Members.
I'm Steve Gelb with Emerald City's Collaborative and Ship Zero's Building Electrification Task Force.
For 10 years, Emerald City's mission has been to bring the benefits of the new clean energy economy to low-income communities and communities of color.
To that end, we have worked with the affordable housing community on energy retrofits Renewable Energy Projects and HTC's Exemplary Buildings Task Force.
Creating sustainable, efficient, and safe homes for low-income families has many benefits.
Improved health reduces the instances of respiratory disease.
Better comfort allows families and children to focus on school and each other rather than staying warm.
And reduced energy burdens frees up money for food, health care, and savings.
That is why we support the proposed energy code improvements before the committee today.
But we also are aware that better buildings can have slightly higher costs.
And to that end, we'd like to share the following.
First, many of the improvements in code bring energy and financial savings to residents and building owners and pay for themselves over time.
Second, the code writers worked with the affordable housing community to adapt the code to affordable housing's unique needs and requirements, allowing less expensive electric resistance space heating to heat the smaller, efficient units that are typical in our affordable housing.
And finally, we urge you to continue to support funding to increase the supply of affordable housing, including additional costs for environmental sustainability.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you, Steve.
And I see that Rich Vogt has returned, and so we will hear from Areva Morris next, Jim Street following, following Jim Street, and then Rich, you are on deck.
Good morning, Areva.
Hi, my name is Areva Morris, and I'm from the 43rd District Environmental Caucus.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak.
The climate crisis is a chronic crisis that eats at our future, even as we speak today.
There is no vaccine.
Only the many decisions we as a society make to follow the science and choose policy decisions to apply the engineering solutions at hand.
The new commercial energy codes are technically feasible and provide consumer benefits.
Reduced energy costs.
Less pollution from buildings from fossil burning fossil fuels.
Safety with elimination of gas lines.
and a chance to bend the curve on greenhouse gases to secure our future.
The urgency is clear.
Please accept the amendments to restrict the gas, use of gas in space heating and switch to electric as soon as possible.
Architects and builders can design beautiful buildings that are cost efficient and work with zero carbon requirements.
This is a transition we're in.
We need to make that transition.
We in Seattle as a society want to step up to a transition away from fossil fuels.
Not passing these new energy codes would be like not wearing a mask, not getting vaccinated, or not social distancing.
Please support these energy code changes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
And again, my apologies for mispronouncing your name.
Former Council Member Jim Street, I saw your photo as I walked into the office today.
Good morning.
Following Jim will be Rich Vogt, and Cynthia Jetul, you are on deck.
Good morning, former Council Member Jim Street.
Good morning.
My name is Jim Street, and I'd like to recommend to you a fascinating and powerful article published last week in the New York Intelligencer Magazine entitled Life After Warning.
It's really worth It's really worth reading.
The most important thing I learned from that article is that delay matters.
Today, we are at 1.2 degrees centigrade above pre-industrial levels.
At 1.2 degrees, we are already experiencing global warming that is having impacts in Seattle and far greater impacts in other parts of the world.
Our planet has a carbon budget, which equals the maximum amount of carbon we can add to the atmosphere if we hope to avoid a temperature increase of more than 1.5 degrees centigrade.
Every year, every day of delay expends more of the carbon budget.
Every delay in the application of a new carbon-saving improvement in the Energy Code expends more of the carbon budget.
At the current level of emissions, we will exhaust our carbon budget in this world in seven years.
I didn't know that.
Seven years.
Climate scientists estimate in order to hold to one and a half degrees, we would need to reach zero emissions by 2035. Currently, Seattle's goal is to reach zero emissions by 2050. So we cannot afford any delay in effective policies that will reduce emissions now.
That is why the 43rd Democratic Environmental Caucus and many others are urging you to delete the provision in the proposed building code amendments that would delay implementing the use of efficient electricity for space heating.
Delay matters.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Jim.
Rich, you are next, followed by Cynthia and then Eric Armbruster.
After Eric, we will be reducing the time to one minute.
So speakers, Holly Towns, Deepa, Chris, Jess, you'll please be prepared for a one-minute comment period.
We will, at that time, extend for an additional 10 minutes.
We will attempt to bring everyone into public comment today.
So after 10.05, we will be reducing to 30 seconds for public comment.
Thank you, and good morning, Rich.
My name is Rich Fogut, and I live in the 4th District, and I'm a member of the 43rd District Environmental Caucus.
I will repeat a statement I have read and then said before.
COVID is a pop quiz.
Climate change is a final exam.
With over 427,000 deaths, I think we can agree that the U.S. has failed the pop quiz.
Climate change brings multiples of death and economic devastation if it isn't addressed now.
I am encouraged by statements from the new Biden administration that it would treat the climate crisis as emergency that it is. and that every agency is now a part of our climate team.
So I'm asking you to make every agency of the City of Seattle government become a part of your climate team.
Which brings us to the matter before your committee.
I urge you to pass the Seattle Energy Code update to increase energy efficiency and reduce climate pollution from commercial and large multifamily buildings.
And also urge you to pass amendments being introduced to increase its impact and ensure it makes a difference sooner.
No delay in efficient electric space heating requiring efficient electric water heating for all commercial buildings or at least those with high water usage.
In Seattle buildings contribute about one third of the city's pollution.
Due to the urgency of this crisis and the fact that Seattle is falling behind on its goals we need concrete action now.
Therefore, I urge you to coordinate this policy with existing and new city workforce development programs, focusing on increasing equitable access and opportunity, and align city incentives and technical support for this code toward affordable housing.
Passing the Seattle Commercial Energy Code is a concrete step we can do now.
Thank you.
Cynthia, you are next, followed by Eric Armbruster.
We will then have to extend public comment.
Holly Towns, you're on deck.
Good morning, Cynthia, I see you.
Press star six to unmute.
If you're hitting pound six, make sure you're hitting star, star six.
I can still see you there.
However, you are on mute.
IT, any thoughts?
I see Cynthia, but she's still on mute.
Star six, she is there and she just needs us to hit star six.
Thank you.
If you want, you can move on to the next one and come back to Cynthia.
Let's give it just one more second.
Cynthia, hit star six.
All right, Cynthia, we will come back to you.
Eric, good morning.
Good morning.
Can you hear me OK?
Yeah, I hear you loud and clear.
Very good.
Thank you, chair and other members of the committee.
My name is Eric Armbruster.
I own and operate Ashworth Homes, a proud Bill Green contractor.
I've also served as a board president for the Master Builders Association, Seattle Builders Council, and have been a guest speaker at the UW Rundstedt School of Real Estate.
I founded Ashworth Homes over 20 years ago with the purpose of building townhomes in the city of Seattle, where I was born and raised.
Since then, we have constructed over 400 homes.
We have purposely focused on what's recently become called the missing middle housing market.
I know you'll be voting on the technical code updates today, which are necessary and often mundane process of keeping a city's respective codes in step with state, federal, and international codes.
Most of these updates have been in process for a long time, and their approval is all but guaranteed.
I have no misconception that these codes will be approved as they're presented today.
Rather, my purpose in speaking to you today is to raise the alarm that the cumulative costs layered on townhomes specifically by things like MHA, utility main extensions, curb ramp replacements, street improvements, exclusive bike parking, trash facilities, and so on, all of these are adding up to a cumulative cost burden that has made townhomes financially infeasible to build.
We've gone from having approximately 50 per year in our development pipeline down to zero.
We aren't even looking to acquire land that could be developed into townhome because the pro formas simply don't work any longer.
I'd like to draw your attention to two specific impacts of the codes you'll be approving today.
One is the energy code and the second is fire sprinklers.
While we're supportive of more energy efficient buildings, The cost associated with the energy code is somewhere between 5 and 25.
Thank you, Eric, and please feel free to send in the rest of your public comments.
I'm sure we will have an additional opportunity to speak about.
What you shared with us today, Cynthia is Cynthia still available or no.
Either way, if there is no objection, public comment will be extended for an additional 20 minutes to 10. We'll just, an additional 23 minutes to 10.20.
For the next 10 minutes, until 10.10, we will take one minute comment.
And after 10.10, we will take 30 second comment.
Up next is Holly Towns.
We will follow by Cynthia Jatul and Deepa Sivarajan.
You are on deck.
Good morning, Holly.
Holly, I see you, and I see that you are unmuted.
Are you there?
You put yourself back on mute.
There you are.
Is your phone on mute?
Oh, there you go.
There you are.
Good morning, Holly.
Oh, OK.
Do I have a minute or two minutes?
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
You have one minute today.
OK.
Hi.
This is Holly Towns.
I'm a mechanical engineer, and I urge you to support the Seattle Energy Code plus the amendment to not delay the restriction on using fossil fuel for space heating.
I also urge you to extend fossil fuel restriction for water heating to all commercial buildings.
To not delay the code, instead of an amendment, you should pass a resolution today that commits the committee to passing legislation in the next month to restrict fossil fuel, water heating, and all commercial buildings.
At the same time, hotel and multifamily buildings are restricted, January 1st, 2022. We must, as a community, act on these concrete proven measures to fight climate change now, today.
I'm reminded of when the chair of the committee, you, Dan, Councilperson Dan Strauss, came to our group, and when he was elected, he said he was committed to fighting climate change as a priority.
And he thought that people did not realize we'll have to do business differently.
Yes, we will.
And you all have an opportunity to do this now.
Thank you.
Thank you, Cynthia.
And yes, we have limited time to address this climate crisis.
I still believe that today.
Cynthia, I see you still.
Are you able to press star six?
And she makes sure that the phone is not in sleep mode as well, too.
Cynthia, we'll leave you up, and once you are able to come back and press star six, we'll take your public comments.
Up next, we have Deepa Sivarajan, followed by Chris Halstern, and on deck is Jess Wallace.
Good morning, Deepa.
Thank you, Trish.
To clarify, do I have one minute or 30 seconds?
We are at one minute.
Thank you.
My name is Deepa Sivarajan.
I'm the Washington Policy Manager at Climate Solutions.
We support the updates to the Commercial Energy Code with a crucial amendment, which would remove the unnecessary delay of the implementation of space heating provisions until next year.
These code updates are an important step forward in curbing Seattle's greenhouse gas emissions, as well as protecting the health and safety of our residents and workers.
As Dr. Dooley mentioned earlier, buildings in Washington emit pollutants that can harm respiratory, cardiovascular, and neurological health, and that air pollution happens both indoors and outdoors from buildings.
Air pollution disproportionately impacts BIPOC communities and low-income communities, since the historical impacts of segregation and redlining have led these communities to be pushed to live in places with greater exposure to air pollution.
And the current COVID-19 pandemic further heightens these risks.
as a small increase in various pollutants is correlated with a large increase in the COVID-19 death rate.
For these reasons, delaying parts of the code would create greater risk to the health of Seattle's residents and workers.
And we also encourage council to look ahead past this update to another ordinance that electrifies all new buildings in Seattle.
While this code update is a great first step,
Thank you, Deepa, and please do feel free to send in your written comments.
Up next, we have Chris Halstern, followed by Jess Wallace, and on deck is Benjamin Marit.
Good morning, Chris.
Good morning.
Thank you.
My name is Chris Halstern.
I'm a practicing architect in Seattle.
I'm here on behalf of the American Institute of Architects Seattle Chapter in support of adopting the 2018 Energy Code and both proposed amendments from the council members Muscata and Lewis.
I'll keep it simple with two main points.
First, we need energy code and its continued improvement so Seattle can meet its climate targets and in an equitable way in order to address some of the city's largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions.
Number two, architects in the building industry need this continued environmental leadership from the city to help bring up the baseline for building owners who won't voluntarily meet the energy and decarbonization targets that they should.
Raising the floor helps all of us to live healthier lives.
And there's two main cost topics I want to touch on briefly.
First, the cost of inaction or delay inaction is really too great.
If we keep pushing off building responsibly, it'll cost us all more in the future because building retrofits are really more expensive.
And the doctor in the first testimony talked about the health impacts as well.
Secondly, clear legislative policy direction is key to reducing market costs.
Thanks for supporting me.
Thank you, Chris.
Next, we have Jess Walls, followed by Benjamin Marat, and Brittany Bush-Bolay, you are on deck.
Cynthia Chatul, if you are able to press star six, and once we see that you're off mute, we'll bring you back into the queue.
Good morning, Jess.
Good morning, council members.
My name is Jess Wallach, and I'm one of the campaign's co-directors with 350 Seattle.
And for more than half my life, Seattle's mayors have been promising bold action on climate.
and yet our climate pollution has gone up every single year.
Today, council can change that by passing the strongest energy code updates possible.
2021 can finally be the year that Seattle's climate pollution starts going down.
350 Seattle believes that Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections has done a rigorous, inclusive, and thoughtful job in preparing this legislation for the council's consideration.
We strongly support Council Member Mosqueda's common sense amendment to remove the delay for efficient space heating.
We also support Council Member Lewis' concept amendment which would extend the water heating requirement to all commercial buildings.
We understand that there's implementation details to sort out.
And so today, I simply want to thank all the council members here for being committed to work with SDCI to move this forward.
From wildfire smoke, to raging storms, to families across the country losing their homes, we've all seen the very real human costs when climate action is postponed.
We urge you to pass the strongest possible energy code updates without delay.
Thank you.
Thank you, Jess.
Up next, we have Benjamin Marit, followed by Brittany Bouchboulay and Alicia Ruiz.
You are on deck.
Good morning, Benjamin.
I see you.
Just please press star six and ensure your phone is not on mute.
Benjamin, are you able to press star six?
If not, we will come back to Benjamin.
Oh, there we go.
I see you in there.
You're off mute.
Good morning.
Great.
Thank you.
I'm a developer of market rate affordable housing.
Can you hear me?
Yes, we can.
Loud and clear.
Okay, great.
I'm sorry.
I'm a developer of market rate affordable housing.
This is my first time speaking in this way.
I'm in support of the new energy code and opposed to the amendment that will accelerate the heat pump requirement.
Good morning.
I'm a developer of Market Rate Affordable Housing.
I'm in support of the new energy code and opposed to the amendment that will accelerate the heat pump requirement.
I want the committee to know that if we implement the new code, it'll cost us $10,000 to $15,000 more to construct our apartment pumps.
This will translate to an increase in rent of about 50 to $100 per month.
The cost savings for our residents and utilities will be only about five to $10 per month.
This technology does not pay for itself.
It must be paid for by our city's renters who are currently experiencing both COVID and a housing crisis.
This is the wrong trade-off.
Thank you.
Thank you, Benjamin.
And if you have further comments that you did not get to share, please feel free to email them to me.
Up next, we have Brittany Bouchboulay, followed by Alicia Ruiz and Zach Amite.
You are on deck.
Again, apologies to all speakers if I'm mispronouncing your name.
Benjamin Wolk, I see you after Zach.
However, you are not present at this time.
Brittany, good morning.
Good morning Chair Strauss and other members of the Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee.
My name is Brittany Bush-Bolay and I am the chair of Sierra Club Seattle Group.
I'm calling to thank you for considering and advancing the important energy code updates that are before you today and for your continuing partnership in moving Seattle away from fracked gas and other fossil fuels.
Seattle already faces the impacts of climate pollution every day and as you've heard one third of this pollution comes from buildings.
Most of it produced by the use of fracked gas.
When modernizing the commercial building codes is a simple and effective way to quickly reduce our frack gas consumption, slowing the damage to our climate.
We feel that the updates as presented will do a good job of advancing our environmental progress, but ask you to improve them further by removing the delay for efficient space heating.
We also look forward to working with you on extending the new water heating rules to apply to all commercial buildings.
Thank you again for your vote today to remove one more fossil fuel source from our buildings and from our lives.
Thank you.
Thank you, Brittany.
Up next, we have Alicia Ruiz, followed by Zach Amite.
Benjamin Wolk, you are still not present.
If you remain not present, Eleanor Bastian, you are on deck.
Good morning, Alicia.
Good morning.
I'll make this short and sweet.
I'm testifying.
So my name is Alicia Ruiz, Seattle Government Affairs Manager for the Master Builders Association.
And I'm testifying today against the adoption of proposed action to no longer exempt smaller townhome development from requiring fire sprinklers.
This can add, speaking to some of my builders, anywhere between $11,000 to $16,000 per unit.
Add that to other city fees mandates and regulations which can add over or up to two hundred thousand dollars to the cost of building a townhome in Seattle.
Which leads us to the question how can our industry provide more housing when the city is constantly adding additional costs.
As I've shared with some of you before townhome permits are down drastically and this should be a huge red flag for City Council.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alicia.
Up next, we have Zach Amite, Benjamin Wilk, you are still not present, followed by Eleanor Bastian and Amy Wheelis.
You are on deck.
Good morning, Zach.
Chair Sprouse, committee members, thank you for the opportunity to provide comment today on the proposed updates to the Seattle Energy Code.
My name is Zach Amitai, Advocate with Environmental Entrepreneurs, or E2.
As you may know, E2 is a national advocacy network of over 9,000 business founders, executives, investors, and other private sector professionals who work across all industries and sectors.
And I'm here today to express E2's support for the proposed updates to the Energy Code.
While the climate imperative is clear, E2 also recognizes the immense economic opportunity presented by strengthening these codes.
The proposed updates would deliver long-term savings to building owners and renters alike, and they will also drive additional cleantech investment and job growth in the city, building on the more than 48,000 clean energy jobs in Seattle at the beginning of 2020. To maximize the climate and economic benefits of these updates, E2 also asks the council to remove the unnecessary delay for buildings to use electricity for space heating and to require all buildings covered under the code to use electricity for water heating.
Thank you, committee, for your work on these updates and for your time.
Thank you, Zach.
Up next is Eleanor Bastian, followed by Amy Willis and Matt Comey is on deck.
We are at 10.10 a.m.
After Eleanor, time will be reduced to 30 seconds.
And so please adjust your comments as such.
We can always receive your comments via written email.
So thank you and good morning, Eleanor.
Thank you.
Good morning, Chair Strauss, Vice Chair Mosqueda and council members.
My name is Eleanor Bastian, and I am the Climate and Clean Energy Policy Manager at the Washington Environmental Council, Washington Conservation Voters, a group with thousands of members across the city supporting the council and these updates to the city commercial energy code.
I will be brief.
Frack gas has no place in our future.
It's not reliable.
It's not safe.
It's not clean.
and the updates that you are taking today take the step to start getting us off rat gas.
And the longer we wait the more we just kick the can down the road.
So I appreciate the action the council is taking today and encourage them to remove the unnecessary delay for buildings to use electricity for heating.
Thank you.
Thank you, Eleanor.
Up next, we are now adjusting to 30 seconds for speakers.
Up next is Amy Wheelis, followed by Matt Comey and Johnny Kocher.
You are on deck.
Good morning, Amy.
Good morning, Chair Strassel and members of the committee.
My name is Amy Wheelis.
I'm a policy analyst with the Northwest Energy Coalition.
I also co-chair SHIP Zero, an alliance of organizations working towards zero carbon buildings for all in Washington.
I urge your support on these energy code updates today.
The updates and this meeting is a culmination of more than a year and a half of work and stakeholder outreach to ensure that these updates are as strong and implementable as possible for stakeholders throughout the building and street.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you Amy.
Next we have Matt Matthew Comey followed by Johnny Kocher and Sean Armstrong.
You are on deck.
Good morning Matthew.
Good morning.
My name is Matthew Combe.
I'm the executive director of the Seattle 2030 District, a nonprofit organization that breaks down market barriers to building efficiency.
I will keep this short.
I'm here today to support the Seattle Energy Code update.
Energy code is a critical mechanism in achieving decarbonization of the built environment at the city scale.
Please refer to my letter of support for information.
Thank you.
Thank you, Matthew.
Up next, we have Johnny Kocher, followed by Sean Armstrong and Elizabeth Stampy.
You are on deck.
Again, apologies for any mispronunciations.
Good morning, Johnny.
Good morning.
Good morning, council members.
My name is Johnny Kocher, and I work for the Rocky Mountain Institute.
The city council should approve the amendment that removes the unnecessary delay for buildings to use electricity for space heating and pursue a separate piece of legislation that would require all commercial buildings covered under the code to use electricity for water heating.
All electric buildings are simply cheaper to construct.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you, Johnny.
Sean Armstrong, you are next, followed by Elizabeth Stampy and Andrew Echols, you are on deck.
Good morning, Sean.
Hey, good morning.
I'm Sean Armstrong, managing principal of Redwood Energy, a national affordable housing energy design consulting firm.
So what we've seen in more than 100 all electric low income residences is that All Electric has helped lower construction costs by $2,000 to $3,000 per unit, supported by many studies that have been done as well to support the California Code development.
So All Electric doesn't solve the national crisis of homeless housing, but it does provide enough savings to make a difference to developers and contractors, helping pay for safety features like water sprinklers.
Every apartment is first built All Electric, with electricity delivered to every gas-using appliance for electric ignition, fans and pumps, and then contractors add gas to the building, which raises costs
Thank you, Sean, and please feel free to send in any additional comments.
Up next, we have Elizabeth, followed by Andrew, and I believe it's Yuki Uche.
You are on deck.
Good morning, Elizabeth.
Good morning, council members.
I'm Elizabeth Stamp with NRDC, the Natural Resources Defense Council, expressing our strong support for the strongest possible proposed Seattle commercial energy code updates with no delay.
Buildings generate a third of Seattle's climate pollution.
At NRDC, we know Seattle is a climate leader, but the city's recent emissions report reveals more is needed, especially on buildings.
Buildings stand for decades, so that fossil fuel pollution is locked in for generations, unless you act today.
Thank you.
Thank you, Elizabeth.
Up next is Andrew, followed by UCHE, Yuki, I believe.
My apologies for mispronunciation.
And Kurt Swanson, you are our last speaker.
Cynthia Jatul, Benjamin Wolk.
If you are planning to call in, please call back in and we will call at you at the end.
Good morning, Andrew.
Hi, Andrew.
Seattle resident calling to say in support of the energy code updates and the amendment to explain the timeline, Support everything that's been said and just wanna add, please tax the rich to fund affordable housing.
We're not gonna get out of the climate crisis without massive influx of money and we need to take some people that are profiting off the pandemic and the massive wealth inequality in this country.
Tax the rich to pay for this.
Thank you.
Andrew, up next.
And please tell me how to pronounce your name and my apologies.
I see you on mute.
That's all right.
My name is Uche Okazi, and I'm the Director of Real Estate Development for HomeCite.
I am commenting in support of updates to the Seattle Commercial Energy Code.
HomeCite for many years has been committed to providing safe and healthy environments for low-income first-time homebuyers.
Our focus is on developing environmentally sustainable homes with long-term durability and low operational housing costs.
Presently, we are developing a permanently affordable limited equity residential co-op and have already invested in the building measures required by this code, including balanced ventilation, electric heat pump, hot water system.
Thank you, Uche.
And please feel free to send in your written comments.
Kurt Swanson, you are next.
And again, Cynthia Jatul, Benjamin Wilk, if you would like to speak, please call in now.
Good morning, Kurt.
Good morning, Chair.
Thank you.
My name is Kurt Swanson.
I am a business agent for United Association of Plumbers and Pipefitters, Local 32. We represent over 700 members in the state of Washington, working directly in natural gas with thousands of members that install natural gas piping and equipment in commercial, light commercial and residential structures.
I'm speaking in opposition to this legislation and proposed amendments.
The legislation will result in loss of work for our business partners and therefore our members during this tough economic period.
I ask for your support in rejecting this.
At a minimum, please stick to the original promise of performing additional outreach
Thank you, Kurt.
And I do know from our conversations and you will hear at committee that additional outreach on some of these sections will be occurring.
At least that's my understanding at this time.
IT, can you confirm Cynthia Jatul and Benjamin Wook are not present?
There are no other callers.
Thank you.
Seeing as we have no additional speakers remotely present, we will move on to the next agenda item.
And seeing as we have no additional speakers signed up or remotely present, the public comment period is now closed.
Again, we will move on to the next agenda item.
Our first item of business today is discussion and vote on the proposed updates to the Seattle Construction Code.
Mr. Ahn, will you please read the abbreviated title into the record?
Agenda item 1, Council Bill 119992, an ordinance relating to Seattle's construction codes, adopting the Seattle Boiler Code, Seattle Building Code, Electrical Code, Existing Building Code, Fuel Gas Code, Mechanical Code, Plumbing Code, and Residential Code.
Thank you.
We are joined by Seattle City Council Central Staff, as well as technical staff from Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections to answer any questions.
Will you please introduce yourself, starting with Central Staff, and give us a brief refresher on this legislation?
All right, Ketel Freeman, Council Central Staff.
I can start in on the refresher, but maybe we should do introductions first.
Yes, if SDCI, if you could introduce yourself again, I know this is the second time this has come before our committee.
So it's great to see you both, Ardell and Micah.
It's great to see you both again.
And Dwayne.
And Dwayne.
Thank you.
Micah Chappelle, Technical Code Development Manager for SDCI.
Ardell Jala, Building Official for SDCI.
John Lynn, Energy Code Advisor for SDCI.
Wonderful.
Is there a presentation or just.
So, there's there is not I was just going to refresh the committee's memory about what council bill 119992 does, which is the construction codes, but does not include the energy code.
That's the next agenda item.
And then.
I'll remind the committee a little bit about the process to date, what it does, and then there are some testimony about fire sprinkler requirements, and I think I'll ask Ardell and Micah to speak to the Construction Codes Advisory Board's discussion on that addition to these construction codes.
So process to date, as you all know, Seattle adopts new construction codes approximately every three years, so this is the 2018 construction code cycle.
Adoption follows a cycle of revisions to model codes by the International Code Council and the Washington State Building Code Council.
Local revisions are informed by a stakeholder process that includes consultation with the Construction Codes Advisory Board, that is a city board.
State law requires that the city adopt and enforce state construction codes and provides only limited authority for the city to amend those codes.
Construction codes for this cycle were originally intended to go into effect on July 1st, 2020. That was extended to November 1st, 2020 through the governor's proclamation 2040 associated with the COVID civil emergency and has been further delayed to February 1st, which is next Monday.
So what would Council Bill 119992 do?
It adopts updates to eight construction codes, the boiler and pressure vessel code, which is a unique code to the city of Seattle, the building code, the electrical code, the existing building code, the fuel gas code, the mechanical code, the plumbing code, and the residential code.
At the last committee meeting, STCI highlighted some of the notable changes in these construction code updates.
I'll just reiterate a few here.
There are some standards that codified for construction with cost with cross laminated timber There's codification of standards for gender-neutral toilets There are some new standards Updates to existing standards that are would be new that reflect the various natural hazards to which Seattle is susceptible, including tsunami loads and updates to seismic design requirements.
And then there are some new standards for tiny houses.
And my read on this, Micah and Ardell can correct me if I'm wrong, is that this primarily pertains to what we would call detached accessory dwelling units in a land use context, not necessarily tiny house villages in a land use context.
And finally, there are new requirements for fire sprinklers for townhouse development below a certain size threshold.
I guess I'll ask Ardell and Micah to chime in here and describe the Construction Codes Advisory Board's discussion of that standard.
Thank you, Cato.
So the change for townhouse sprinklers was also discussed at the state level, and Seattle further amended to require townhouse sprinklers in all townhome construction.
And again, a reminder that townhomes are three units or more that are connected.
And so the difference between Seattle and the state is three and four unit townhomes in Seattle will be sprinkled.
Again, sprinkler, really the discussion at CCAP was we all accept that sprinklers protect for hazards between buildings.
And the question is, what is the acceptable risk for fire spreading to adjacent units that.
Builders are correct are absolutely right.
There is added cost and adding sprinklers to townhome units and that does get transferred to.
the residents and the cost of housing in the city.
There's the cost of the sprinklers.
There's the cost of connection to the water main.
I'm sure I'm not capturing those costs, but those are the big ones.
And the question is, how do you recover that cost?
We did have discussion at CCAB about reductions in rated construction, reducing, helping to counter that cost, as well as reduced insurance costs.
Michael, do you want to add anything?
Certainly, I think you covered most of that.
We did have multiple meetings at CCAB on this topic, and we had both for and against.
And when it came up for vote at the Construction Code Advisory Board, it was a unanimous vote to move forward with our language, which would be to require in all townhomes.
One of the other things that we had a question come up previously was, how is this shown in the code?
We wanted to just make sure that it's identified by the language.
And so we did not technically adopt the exception from the state.
So that would be the only change that you would see in the code is that there's not an additional exception that we're adopting.
Again, the state is adopting sprinklers in units that have five or more townhouses.
So if you have any other questions, please let me know.
Thank you, Micah, Ardell, Duane, and Ketel.
For the viewing public, if you go to the city's Legistar website, seattle.legistar.com, you can pull up today's committee agenda with supporting documents, and there is a PowerPoint from our last meeting where this was all discussed.
Colleagues, do you have questions at this time?
Or Ketel, any further information we should consider?
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you again for your leadership on this issue and for helping to steward these discussions with central staff.
Appreciate all of the updates that we are including here.
I want to note my appreciation for Mass Timber and the work that is going on in this area, but also, you know, continue to reiterate, let's go taller, right?
Let's keep using our iron and steel construction, and let's do more, especially in the realm of affordable housing, to build taller and denser neighborhoods and more options across our city.
We know that many of our ironworker friends are eager to engage in the work of building opportunities for families of all sizes to live in this neighborhood.
So just want to make a plug for continuing to use iron and steel construction, especially as we think about using the airspace that is unused in many parts of our city.
And we have some good test pilots that are happening right now related to housing and affordable housing and using that type of frame.
But I think all options are good, but just want to keep plugging away for let's keep going taller and let's let's put those ironwork receipt to work to agree.
Councilmember Peterson, please.
Thank you, Chair Strauss, and thank you for giving us the extra time to digest these items.
Having that committee back on January 13th and then again today was very helpful.
And I also wanted to thank the executive branch staff who completed the fiscal and the summary and fiscal note, which has those two climate change questions in it now.
So that's a template for all new legislation.
It asks whether the legislation is going to increase or decrease carbon emissions.
It asks whether the legislation is going to help the city become more resilient in the face of the climate change that we're already in the midst of.
And, you know, and this, so if you, if you do look at those public looks at those materials and they open up that fiscal note, they'll look on page three, they'll see those climate change questions.
And this is showing that this legislation is going to help decrease carbon emissions and increase resiliency in the face of climate change, which is good news.
Thank you.
Thank you, Councilmember Peterson.
Councilmember Juarez, Councilmember Lewis, any questions before we continue?
None for me, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
Okay, thank you.
And so at this time, if there's no further discussion and no amendments, I would like the committee to vote the construction code out of committee.
Double-checking, no further questions.
Looking good.
So at this time, I move the committee recommend passage of Council Bill 119992. Is there a second?
Second.
Thank you, Vice Chair.
It has been moved and seconded to recommend passage of the bill.
If there are no additional comments, will the clerk please call the roll?
Council Member Peterson?
Yes.
Council Member Lewis?
Yes.
Council Member Juarez?
Council Member Juarez?
We'll come back to Council Member Juarez.
Council Member Mosqueda?
Yes.
Chair Strauss?
Yes.
And could you call on Council Member Juarez one more time?
Yes.
Council Member Juarez?
I'm going to stall for just a second because I believe that she was having technical difficulties earlier this morning.
An issue with her laptop.
So let me Just continue to wait one second.
Clerk, can you please remind me what the process is for putting her vote on the record should we need to continue at this time?
You may be able to reconsider the vote later.
If one of the other clerks can chime in.
You may be able to call for reconsideration later so that all five can vote, but that might only be in order if it's someone who votes no.
Amelia, I see you.
Thank you.
That's correct, Council Member Strauss.
If we need to go back to this vote, we can move to reconsider the vote and Council Member Juarez can then vote on that item.
Great.
Thank you.
Mr. Ahn, we can continue.
OK.
Four in favor, none opposed.
Thank you.
The motion carries.
Thank you all.
This legislation will be before the city council next Monday.
And we will return if Council Member Juarez feels strongly about having her vote recorded.
Our next item of business today is the other half of the construction code conversation, the energy code.
Mr. Ahn, will you please read the abbreviated title into the record?
And item 2, Council Bill 119993, an ordinance relating to Seattle's construction codes, adopting the Seattle Energy Code, and chapters of the Washington Administrative Code.
Thank you.
And we have the same set of presenters on the line for this item.
And before we get to amendments, can you please provide a brief refresher?
And I know that we had this before our committee at our last meeting, so this is, again, a refresher.
For the viewing public, if you would like to go to our legislator, seattle.legislator.com, that is where you will find the presentation from our last committee meeting.
Good morning, Yolanda is central staff introduce yourself and then we'll have STC.
I take it away.
Right?
Yolanda council central staff, as the, as the chair stated, I will be giving a brief overview and kind of noting some policy guidance related to the energy code would note on top of what mentioned.
in terms of describing the process.
In particular, the energy code has the most extensive outreach and engagement process of Seattle's construction codes due to Seattle's longstanding commitment to lead on energy efficiency in the state.
Almost 20 years ago, the council adopted Resolution 30280, which identified actions to accelerate Seattle's green building program, One action therein was for the department that is now the Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections for them to propose amendments to the energy code that would increase energy efficiency up to 20% above national standards.
Also important as part of this discussion is that the state does allow Seattle to amend the portion of the energy code that is applicable to new multifamily buildings, to multifamily buildings over three stories and commercial buildings as well as alterations of these buildings, but does not allow amendment of the code affecting residential buildings.
As part of the update process, SDCI staff worked with technical experts and other stakeholders as it developed proposed amendments to the state energy code for the majority of 2020 and presented the proposed amendments to around 40 different stakeholder organizations.
So a lot of communicating with community Notable changes in the proposed 2018 Seattle Energy Code include the addition of a goal of reducing carbon emissions to the code, in addition to the existing goal of increasing energy efficiency.
This new goal is consistent with Seattle's 2013 Climate Action Plan and Resolution 31895, which established the Green New Deal for Seattle.
adopted by the council in 2019, which included a goal of making Seattle free of climate pollutants by 2030. To achieve these goals, these two goals, the proposed code would restrict the use of fossil fuels and electric resistant systems for space heating for all commercial and multifamily buildings, and also restrict the use of fossil fuels for water heating in multifamily and hotel uses.
The water heating restrictions would only apply to these types of uses based on the rationale that they have more predictable water demand than commercial uses, where demand can vary widely depending on the type of business.
Because these are new restrictions, these two provisions are proposed to have an effective date of January 1st, 2022, rather than March 15th, 2021, when the rest of the code would go into effect.
SDCI staff noted that the effective date delay for space heating was proposed in order to allow for additional outreach, but that products necessary to achieve a compliance are already available.
But in the case of water heating, more time is necessary for both outreach and to allow for the technology to reach the market.
Would also just note that the environmental analysis conducted as per SEPA The State Environmental Policy Act states that these measures will reduce carbon emissions by 4.4% by 2050, and that in this new code update, carbon emissions would be evaluated as part of the building's energy model, not just energy use.
Other measures in the proposed 2018 Seattle Energy Code would improve insulation, enhance the building envelope, and increase production of renewable energy.
Thank you, Yolanda.
Dwayne, Micah, Ardell, anything to add?
Yolanda did a great job.
I think we're good.
Wonderful.
Not seeing Micah or Ardell with further comments.
Yolanda, I believe that we have a number of amendments.
Yes, that is correct.
There are two amendments.
I will give an overview of Amendment 1, which is sponsored by Council Member Mosqueda.
And this would change the effective date delay for the restrictions on the use of fossil fuels and electric resistance for space heating.
This amendment would make, so, oh, sorry, I should also note that there was Version 1 of the amendment, which was attached to the memo, has now been superseded by version two of the amendment, which I sent out right as the committee commenced this morning version two.
So, version one proposed to remove the, the July, June, January 1st, 2022. effective date delay entirely, which would make the restrictions for space heating go into effect on March 15th, 2021, with the rest of the energy code.
Version two instead proposes that these restrictions should go into effect on June 1st, 2021. So the version two is what I believe the sponsor would like considered by the committee.
Thank you, Yolanda.
And do you have a screen that you can share for us to visually see the amendment?
And Vice Chair Mosqueda, do you have any thoughts you'd like to share on this?
Thank you very much.
And thank you, Mr. Chair, again, for your work to have these robust discussions, build in enough time for us to consider possible changes.
And thanks as well to the executive for the robust stakeholder engagement.
I understand that they have also done on this issue.
Mr. Chairman, if it pleases you, I will sort of describe the amendment again and then move it, if that sounds reasonable.
Or would you like me to move it first?
A brief discussion would be great, and then we will get into moving the item after that.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Committee colleagues, the amendment that's in front of you, version two of amendment one, helps to move the effective date of the implementation of heat pumps to June 1st, 2021 instead of January 1st, 2022. This was an implementation date specifically for the restrictions related to the use of electric resistance or fossil fuels for space heating.
This amendment would make the restrictions go into effect on the effective date of June 1st.
which would give us the opportunity to have more robust stakeholder engagement.
Having conversations over the last few days, and especially with some of our folks from building construction trades, also UA32 laborers, and a handful of our folks that you heard from this morning as well from the environmental justice world and housing world, including AIA, Northwest Energy, 350 Seattle, Emerald Cities, and a few others.
We wanted to make sure that there was the ability to make the change to using space heating available earlier than originally proposed in the legislation in front of us, but also are very sensitive to wanting to make sure that there's a robust stakeholder engagement for rulemaking.
I also understand that there's some pieces of legislation moving their way through the halls of Olympia and out of respect for that process, recognizing that there's a conversation specifically dealing with refrigerant pipes and how those refrigerant pipes could be used in heat pumps for space heating, we want to make sure that we have all the available information in front of us as we finalize rules.
The desire here is to make sure that the implementation date is June 1st, 2021, so we can move forward with urgency, but also do it in a way that makes sure that the rulemaking is reflective of any changes that may occur in the state legislative session and also gives us time to have engagement with stakeholders here.
Colleagues, we know from our own city footprint that we currently see every day that the historical landmarks that we see across our city, specifically as well in Pioneer Square, that the buildings that we create and that we build have the ability to last for decades, if not for generations.
I'm really excited that we're working on passing the energy code today and know we must also aim to improve the construction of both businesses and homes to make sure that we are moving towards a greener, healthier and future, greener and healthier future for the next generation.
I think that the codes in front of us make some critical changes in addition to this amendment today with this change date to June.
We also are working collectively with various stakeholders to help make sure that the buildings are moving towards more energy efficiency, that we move towards a just transition as we think about new technologies at hand, and that we are creating sustainable policies as well as working in partnership with trade unions and other architecture, engineering, and construction organizations.
that we heard from over the last few meetings.
Really appreciate your consideration of this amendment in front of us, and I think it echoes much of what we heard this morning during public testimony, looking for that right balance as we shift away and move towards clean, renewable energy and making sure that we're doing it through just transition strategies and when the technology is available, like it is here, that we do it with a sense of urgency.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Vice Chair, and thank you for both bringing the amendment forward and then incorporating stakeholder feedback to be able to make this fit as correctly as possible.
I really appreciate that.
Colleagues, do we have any comments?
Council Member Peterson.
Thank you, Chair Strauss.
Thank you, Council Member Mosqueda, for explaining this amendment so thoroughly and the thought process behind it.
I just have some questions for staff.
So as I understand it, the Construction Advisory Board recommended the January 1, 2022 date.
So there was an official process that various stakeholders already went through to come up with that date, January 1, 2022, which then the executive accepted and submitted to us for our consideration.
Is there, and the fiscal note in dealing with the climate change questions, it says that emissions will go down, resiliency will go up if this is enacted with the January 1, 2022 date.
We obviously heard lots of passionate comments from groups who'd like to have this happen sooner, which makes sense as well.
Then we also heard from certain labor organizations, those who build the housing, who would prefer the January 1, 2022 date.
So I'm just sort of struggling with this a bit in terms of the implementation date.
Either way, the council is gonna pass something that improves the code and makes it more, you know, addresses climate change.
It's just the effective date is the key issue here.
And so, for staff, is there anything preventing those building, new buildings, from using these changes voluntarily?
I guess we could start with you, Alonda, and then, or Micah.
Go ahead, Micah.
Great question on asking if they're allowed to use those currently.
Yes, if an applicant chooses to implement this themselves with their application under the 2018 codes, we would accept that as part of the package.
There would be an additional step where they would need to provide pretty much a code alternate request, which is just another minor step to allow that.
But my understanding is, yes, we would allow that to occur if they wanted to implement this on their own at an earlier date than what is stated here.
I would just add that everyone's always free to go better than code.
Right.
OK.
OK.
I appreciate that.
Thank you.
That's my only question now, Chair Strauss.
Maybe other council members might generate more questions.
But thank you.
Thank you, Council Member Peterson.
Council Member Lewis, did you have comments?
Thank you, Mr. Chair, I just want to Yes, take a moment here to speak up in favor of Councilmember Muscata's amendment.
I had also been considering moving a variation of this amendment in conversations with stakeholders.
I was happy to stand aside for the process that Councilmember Muscata convened and appreciate that the deadline that Councilmember Muscata ultimately agreed on is one that is cognizant of other moving pieces in Olympia and feedback from stakeholders in labor and in industry.
I appreciate the exchange that Council Member Peterson just had with central staff.
I think our response in our built environment to the climate emergency has to go beyond expectations of people doing more than what is expected.
and voluntary, essentially, use of some of these different materials, some of these standards, and observing some of these energy policies.
I know we have a great many builders, especially in District 7, who have gone above and beyond.
And there's been a lot of innovation, for example, of people taking advantage of the green building pilot.
which has been a case of incentivized use of a lot of these energy standards that we are discussing and codifying now to an even more extreme degree.
But we need to take this next step.
We need to do it with urgency and on an accelerated timeline.
And I think this amendment Council Member Mosqueda has put together is a good balance of talking to all the stakeholders to have a reasonable timeline that balances those interests.
So I'm going to be voting in favor of this amendment today.
Thank you, Council Member Lewis.
Council Member Juarez, any comments at this time?
I see that you have resolved your technical difficulties.
Thank you.
I actually do.
I know that you want to change it from January 2022 to June.
June 2021, correct?
And I know that you're talking about this accelerated timeline, and I understand the concerns, but I also understand from looking at what the Construction Advisory Board said.
And I apologize, I have not read the whole 12-page memo from Kiel and Yolanda, thank you.
I guess I just, and from listening to public comment and some of the, like the pipe fitters and some folks and some of the calls we got that asked us to reject this amendment.
What is the actual, and just, you know, if I'm wrong, I'm wrong.
That's fine.
The expediency of like right now, like why, why now, right now, in light of what we're dealing with and what we're looking at on the state side, is there just a kind of common sense approach to The reason why we want to move it up is because this will happen, or is it just climate change and we need to do everything now?
I'm just asking the practical question.
Vice Chair Mosqueda and then Dwayne, I see you are also off on mute.
I'm happy to wait until after central staff or the department staff respond if that's appropriate, Mr. Chair.
Not a problem.
Dwayne?
It's quite unusual that we put a delayed implementation date on anything in the construction codes.
We did originally with the heat pump water heating because that's an unusual type of construction for most contractors and engineers still.
There was some learning curve.
Our original bill did not have a delay for the space heating because that's conventional construction that is widely used all over.
This did come up as kind of a compromise with several other issues in the midst of the CCAB discussions.
And it's what the mayor put forward was the one-year delay.
But there wasn't a specific technical need for that particular delay.
Okay, so it wasn't actually a date set and then we said, okay, let's have a delay.
And then we pick January, they pick January, 2022. I mean, if it's political and policy, that's fine.
I don't have a problem with people having an agenda.
I just need to know what it is and not dress it up in some practical, like, you know, climate change is gonna hit us in a week and we gotta do it now.
That's just all I'm asking.
I'm not trying to be cute here.
I'm just trying to figure out why we're spending so much time on moving something up.
when it's basically, if it's the policy piece and there's an emergent issue of climate change and we need to do this now, I get that.
And I'd rather just hear that.
So I'll leave it at that.
Thank you.
Council Member Juarez, I'll say in our last committee hearing, there was conversation of bringing both the heat pump and the water heating forward.
And we requested to, because the technology is not ripe today, Okay.
Water heating would be delayed.
There is a policy reason there because we just don't have that technology there today.
As far as heat pumps, it's my understanding that we do have the technology here today, that that technology is ready to implement and that in the And then so we decide when to bring this into implementation.
As we heard earlier today, Council Member Mosqueda brought the amendment up for March, so that would be next month.
And then to provide some more buffer zone for people to have time to ramp up, that's why the June date has been chosen, is my understanding at this time.
Okay, well, thank you.
I love that phrase, we have the technology.
That probably predates you, Council Member Strauss, from the bionic man.
You probably have no clue what that means.
So I'm hoping people are watching.
Was that the foreign sector gadget?
Yeah.
Close enough.
Close enough, buddy.
Thank you.
Absolutely, Council Member Juarez.
Vice Chair Mosqueda, any further comments?
And would you like to move the bill or move the amendment?
Both thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Yeah, I think it's a combination of we have the technology and I think that it's also reasonable for us to ask for a June 1st implementation date to make sure that we're also reflecting any of the possible changes that might be underway related to refrigerant pipes that are used in the Heat pump technology appreciate you a 32 of the feedback that I've received from them specifically the ongoing conversations that they're having with legislators in Olympia about how to mitigate the impact of greenhouse gases that are used in the refrigerant and the hydrofluorocarbons that they still are trying to address if there's any possible changes that are coming from the state legislative discussions, we also want to be reflective of that.
So it's really about a practical date for implementation, recognizing that technology is in front of us, but also building in enough time to incorporate any potential changes from the state legislature and frankly to also give us the time for sufficient stakeholder engagement on rulemaking.
I was originally supportive of the March date.
I think as we think about rulemaking and wanting to make sure that there is the opportunity for us to also build into rulemaking the need to be working with licensed tradespeople, especially in the area of plumbers and pipefitters, and making sure that there's the appropriate folks, as you heard from President Geier, who have the responsibility of making sure that this technology is being applied correctly, technology that's available today, but that we're having the right skilled tradespeople implementing it.
We also, I think, have a chance to work on rulemaking to make sure that those license are being displayed anytime or implementing these new technologies.
And with the broader trades, making sure that jurisdictional rules and responsibilities I think are clearly laid out in rulemaking is going to be important too.
So moving from March to June made a lot of sense to me, both reflective of the need for stakeholder engagement and feedback from any state legislative bills that pass.
But the technology is here, so I think it's of the utmost urgency to move forward and to do so in a way that also takes in that stakeholder engagement.
Again, I want to thank members of the Building Trades, specifically UA32, for some feedback within the last 24 hours and also all the work that folks have been to make sure that we don't have another year's worth of delay here.
But I think this strikes the right balance.
And with that, Mr. Chair, I would like to move Amendment 1, Version 2 to Council Bill 119993. Thank you.
And is there a second?
I will second the amendment.
It has been moved and seconded to amend the legislation as shown in Amendment 1. If there are no additional comments, seeing no additional comments, will the clerk please call the roll?
Council Member Peterson?
No.
Council Member Lewis?
Yes.
Council Member Juarez?
No.
Council Member Mosqueda?
Yes.
Chair Strauss?
Yes.
Three in favor, two opposed.
Thank you.
The motion carries.
The second amendment, my understanding is that the Lewis amendment would unfortunately require us to delay implementation of this legislation for an additional environmental review.
Council Member Lewis has agreed to pull this amendment and consider separate legislation down the road.
Is that correct?
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to address that for a moment, sort of related to our previous discussion about accelerating the implementation of a lot of these critical Um, uh, code updates, uh, in consultation with central staff and the executive level offices, we learned that it will perhaps require and I'll, I'll, I want to turn it over to you in a second to, to talk about some of this from the.
central staff point of view as well, that there would be additional SEPA work required to extend some of these requirements to all commercial buildings that would necessitate delay of the underlying legislation for at least an additional month and possibly longer.
In the interest of allowing us to pass these critical changes on the expected timeline, my plan is to withdraw my amendment and to seek additional legislation on its own timeline to pursue putting these same code changes toward broader applicability to commercial buildings.
And in so doing, make sure that process is not like an anchor pulling everything else down in terms of the time.
So I guess what I would say is I'm not interested necessarily in exploring it.
I'm committing right here that I will be introducing additional legislation, since I know there's a lot of stakeholders and folks.
who are watching and really supportive of this amendment.
I just want to reassure everybody that the goal here is to pass this as a separate bill so that we don't delay the implementation of these other critical changes.
And that I intend to do that through Council Member Strauss' committee here over the next couple of months as we go through an additive SEPA process.
But I'll let Yolanda jump in a little bit too to explain some of the technical, more technical side of that.
But that is my thinking.
Thank you.
Yolanda?
Yes.
So Council Member Lewis covered most of it, but yes.
Because the extension of the restrictions on the use of fossil fuels for water heating to commercial buildings was not a part of the initial environmental review, which accompanied this legislation, that will require an addendum, which will have to include this additional provision.
And as discussed previously, building code changes are highly technical, Um, very, you know.
really, you know, they get really into the weeds on building design and technology and electricity and, you know, lots of really complicated factors.
Having SDCI staff engaged in this process and, you know, due to the extensive amount of outreach that they conducted on these amendments, you know, that is also a factor to consider as the council considers potential future amendments to the energy code.
It's a complicated, intensive process for staff and just making sure that everyone understands the implications moving forward will be important.
But yes, in terms of the additional analysis, as many of you are familiar with, along with SEPA, there's following kind of the threshold determination by the analysis of, significance or non-significance, there will be a comment period, an appeal period, and then the council will then be free to act on the legislation.
So that's kind of the standard process, and that's where the kind of approximately the minimum of a month just to do that aspect of the work is kind of coming into play.
Thank you, Yolanda.
And this was what I had referenced during public comment that to ensure that we are engaging the correct stakeholders, because this is again, a change that we don't have the technology ready to implement today, that we need to have a further discussion about.
Are there any other questions from colleagues about this process or about Council Member Lewis's comments?
Seeing none, is there any further discussion of the underlying bill?
Seeing no further discussion of the underlying bill, I move that the committee recommend passage of Council Bill 11993 as amended.
Is there a second?
Second.
Thank you.
It has been moved and seconded to recommend passage of the bill as amended.
If there are no additional comments, will the clerk please call the roll?
Council Member Peterson?
Abstain.
Council Member Lewis?
Yes.
Council Member Juarez?
Yes.
Council Member Mosqueda?
Yes.
Chair Stroud?
Yes.
Four in favor, none opposed, one abstention.
Thank you, Chair.
And Amelia or Mr. Ahn, can you please remind me about the process for the bill moving to full council?
Oh, and the motion carries.
start there.
The motion carries.
Can you remind me the process of moving to full council?
It's my understanding that this bill needs to be implemented in the same timeline as the state codes.
And then I see Vice Chair Mosqueda will have a comment afterwards.
I'm waiting for Amelia to come off mute.
I would defer to her.
I believe with a divided report, there's a one-week delay, but I don't know if an abstention counts as a divided report.
It does not.
That's correct.
An abstention does not affect the legislation being immediately forward to the next City Council meeting.
Thank you, clerks.
Thank you, Council Member Peterson.
Vice Chair Mosqueda, do you have something to share?
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I did not get a chance to say this during sort of discussion.
I just have a question while we have some of our friends from the the team who worked on drafting the legislation on the line.
So I know there's there's been a lot of conversations, Mr. Chair, that you have been involved in and that this is a big priority for you as well as we think about just transition and making sure that folks have access to good living wage jobs.
As we think about the abandoned pipes around our city that are causing potential harm to our residents.
For example, what happened in Greenwood a few years ago.
Can you talk a little bit more about any strategies or the timeline for addressing those abandoned pipes and how we can help make sure that the licensed trade folks who should be doing that type of work to decommission those are being put to work and any way that we can help ensure that both it's being done safely and with the right trades that would be helpful to know.
Thank you, Vice Chairman Mosqueda.
This was a conversation that during the, as this bill came before our committee, I was looking at other issues regarding natural gas lines.
We know that 50% of fires during seismic events are due to natural gas lines.
And as you mentioned, Council Member Mosqueda, the Greenwood explosion was, from a decommissioned line that we thought was not active, and it was in fact active.
And so I have asked the questions on how we can ensure that licensed trades are able to ensure that natural gas lines that we believe are decommissioned are truly decommissioned.
When I did the research into this, it became clearly apparent that this is not a energy code.
It is, in fact, in the fire code.
And so I will be following up with our public safety chair to ensure that we're able to bring the appropriate amendments so that decommissioned lines are truly decommissioned and that work is completed by the correct licensed practitioners.
Any other comments?
If not, thank you for your concern.
Mr. Chair, can I say something quickly?
Yeah.
I want to apologize.
I didn't get a chance to vote on the construction vote.
I don't want you to have to go back and do it, but I was going to vote yes.
So I'll vote yes when we get down to full council.
So thank you for pointing out the technical thing, just so people know, because my staff is going crazy.
Like, you didn't vote.
Everyone's going to be mad at you.
Not a problem.
Thank you, Council Member Juarez.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you for your discussion of these bills, but the energy code and construction bill will be before full council on Monday.
Our next item of business is Clerk File 314461, an application to extend a contract rezone of 1106 34th Avenue.
This item is being considered under council's quasi-judicial rules, so communications with proponents or opponents is prohibited outside the established process.
Mr. Ahn, will you please read the abbreviated title into the record?
Agenda item three, Click File 314461, application of Martin Leibowitz and 34th and Spring LLC for an extension of the contract to rezone the property at 11th and 34th Avenue.
Thank you.
We received a briefing and held a public comment on this application in December.
Ketel, since it has been a while since then, could you provide us a brief refresher?
Sure, happy to do it.
I guess I suggest that we also read in the title to Council Bill 119987. These are two pieces of the same action.
Happy to.
Mr. Allen, will you please read the abbreviated title of Council Bill 119987 to the record?
I do, and item four, Council Bill 119987, an ordinance approving an extension of a contract rezone at 1106 34th Avenue.
So as Chair Strauss mentioned, this is the second briefing on contract reason extension requested by Marty Leibovitz.
I'll briefly run through some of the legislative history here and then describe what Council Bill 119987 would do.
So as the committee will recall, in 2017, the Council passed Ordinance 125433, that ordinance upzoned on approximately 11,000 square foot site located in Madrona from low-rise 2 to neighborhood commercial 1 with a 30-foot high limit, and M, mandatory housing affordability suffix.
That ordinance also accepted a property use and development agreement in conjunction with the upzone.
Unlike many contractory zones, but not all, that upzone was not associated with a development proposal.
It was just a rezone of the property.
In 2018, the council passed ordinance 125791, which implemented the mandatory housing affordability program citywide.
That ordinance upzoned adjacent commercial and multi-family properties that are adjacent to the subject site.
The pandemic and changing development climate has forestalled the applicant, Mr. Leibowitz's plans to redevelop the site.
And Mr Liebowitz applied over the summer to extend the life of his original rezone by two years.
In October, STCI recommended approval of the extension.
And in December, of course, the committee was briefed and held a hearing on the extension.
So that's the legislative history.
What does Council Bill 119987 do?
What would it do if it were approved by the Council?
It would extend the rezone for two years, and it would accept an amendment to the Property Use and Development Agreement to reflect the two-year extension.
So it's a pretty simple, mechanical Council Bill.
So unless the Council Members have any questions about it, I'll turn it back to you, Council Member Strauss.
Thank you, Quito, and thank you for that refresher.
Liz Atkinson, I see you have your hand raised.
I want to double check that that is intentional.
I see the hand has been lowered.
Thank you.
Council members, colleagues, do we have questions on clerk file 314461?
I'm not seeing any questions.
Quito, can you remind us of SDCI's recommendation of this application?
Yes, so that you will find in that clerks file on the recommendation from SDCI.
It was issued in October, and the recommendation is to extend the rezone for two years.
There are some criteria that the council and SDCI uses in making a decision about whether or not to extend a contract rezone.
That's the reason or the basis for the application for the extension is whether or not that's reasonable, whether change circumstances in the area support an extension.
And whether the additional time requested is necessary to comply with the conditions of approval.
So STCI's recommendation is based on those three factors.
As I mentioned in the introduction, there are sort of two that were noted by STCI and the applicant.
One is the pandemic and also the change circumstances associated with the development climate that have forced all redevelopment.
Thank you, Mr. Freeman.
And can you provide us what the procedural next steps are if we pass this today?
Sure.
So if you pass this today and you want to consider it this coming Monday, we will need to have an executed PUDA from the applicant, Mr. Leibowitz, and have that in the hands of the clerk by tomorrow so that you can substitute it at full council prior to full council voting on the committee's recommendation.
Thank you.
And do we believe that this is Well, I guess I'll leave it up to the applicants.
I've been in communication with them, and they're aware of the timeline.
And so I think they're just waiting to see what the committee does today.
Wonderful.
Any further discussion, colleagues?
Seeing none, I move that the committee recommend approval of this application in passage of clerk file 314461. Is there a second?
Second.
It has been moved and seconded to recommend the passage of the clerk file.
If there are no additional comments, will the clerk please call the roll?
Council Member Peterson?
Yes.
Council Member Lewis?
Yes.
Council Member Juarez?
Yes.
Council Member Mosqueda?
Council Member Mosqueda?
Can I vote yes for her?
Just kidding.
Technological issues.
Mr. Onuf, we can move on and call it at the end.
Oh, there we are.
There you go.
Chair Strass.
Aye.
5 in favor.
No opposed.
Thank you.
It has been moved.
The motion carries.
Now we can move to our final item, Council Bill 119987, which implements the contract rezone extension we just approved.
Ketil, are there any additional facts or pieces of information we should know before voting?
Oh, I've described the council bill.
As I mentioned, it's pretty mechanical.
It extends the life of the contractory zone for two years and accepts an amended property use and development agreement.
Thank you.
Any further discussion on this bill?
Seeing none.
Mr. Ong, I move the committee recommend passage of the council bill 119987. Is there a second?
Second.
It has been moved and seconded.
Mr. Ong, will you please call the roll.
Councilmember Peterson?
Yes.
Councilmember Lewis?
Yes.
Councilmember Juarez?
Yes.
Councilmember Mosqueda?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Thank you.
The motion carries.
Thank you all.
Both the clerk file and council bill for this application will be back before the council on Monday should the applicant submit their PUDA.
And If there are no items for the good of the order, seeing none, this concludes the Wednesday, January 27th, 2020 meeting of the Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee.
As a reminder, the February 10th meeting will be canceled.
Our next committee meeting will be on February 24th, starting at 9.30 a.m.
Thank you for attending.
We are adjourned.