Land Use Committee 9/18/23

30 a.m.

I'm Dan Strauss chair of the committee.

We are joined by Councilmember Herbold today who would like to speak to an amendment to Council Bill 120622 and Councilmember Mosqueda has been excused.

Will the clerk please call the roll?

Councilmember Nelson?

Councilmember Peterson?

Present.

Vice Chair Morales?

Chair Strauss?

Present.

Three, present.

Great, and we will let you know when, Councilmember, we are going to speak slowly.

If you could call Councilmember Nelson one more time.

You can do it right now.

Councilmember Nelson?

Present.

Four, present.

Thank you.

Council Member Mosqueda is excused and Council Member Her will join us shortly.

We have seven items on the agenda today.

Hopefully it will not take three and a quarter hours like it did last week.

We have appointment zero two.

We have an appointment.

Two appointments to the Equitable Development Initiative Advisory Board.

We have an appointment to the Urban Forestry Commission.

We have Council Bill 120622, which is the Vacant Building Monitoring Program.

Council Bill 120631, briefing about the lodging uses in Belltown.

We have Council Bill 120632, regarding the Downtown Retail Rezone on 3rd Avenue.

We have Resolution 32097, Regarding the impacts the transportation resolution regarding impacts on the industrial maritime zoned areas Before we begin if there's no objection the agenda will be adopted Hearing no objection.

The agenda is adopted at this point.

We will remote we will open Public comment.

This is hybrid public comment we have a one person in chambers and three online.

We will do two minutes a piece.

We will take in-person first, followed by online.

Clerk, we're not gonna play the video today because I think everyone has heard this video many times.

So just understanding, please speak, you must speak to an item on the agenda and please be kind.

With that, I'm going to open the hybrid public comment for today's meeting.

In person, we have Sharon Lee.

Sharon, welcome.

And then following Sharon online, we have Megan Cruz, Stuart Tanz, and Richard Schobel.

Good morning, Sharon.

Good morning.

Good morning.

I'm Sharon Lee.

Director of Lehigh Low-Income Housing Institute, and we own the Glenn Hotel, which is right in the middle of 3rd Avenue, where the rezone is being proposed.

And we've had affordable housing there for many, many years, but our residents are suffering from the safety and, you know, problems plaguing 3rd Avenue.

And we very much would like to see the transformation to work with the city on the transformation of 3rd Avenue to create a safe place and also to help revitalize the retail core in downtown.

And as you know, we are very good at negotiating agreements.

So if there is an opportunity to sell, we will preserve housing opportunities.

We know that currently the Glen has SRO units and they're The bathrooms and showers are down the hall.

It is frankly not COVID safe.

We are very much interested in providing a much better, higher quality of living for our residents.

So we know that the overall plan will increase housing quite a bit and we look forward to being part of the citywide effort to revitalize downtown.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Sharon.

Up next we have Megan Cruz followed by Stuart and then Richard.

Megan welcome.

Good morning.

Good morning.

I'm Megan Cruz an owner in the Fisher Studio Building a Seattle landmark on 3rd Avenue.

I respectfully ask CB 120632 Amendment 3 be withdrawn or alternately keep it and add the OPCD separation amendment.

If the intent is to preserve the Fisher Studio Building for future generations The most important thing to do is pass the amendment drafted by OPCD, preserving the current 15-foot development separation for health and safety.

Many of our owners wrote and spoke last week, but during deliberations, no one even referred to the problem.

Please discuss it today.

We face imminent decline in devaluation because adjacent redevelopment to our south will allow a wall five feet away, leaving the majority of our homes without daylight and requiring extraordinary measures to maintain a facade and window within a five-foot wide crevasse.

Without this modest separation, our building will cease to be a sustainable investment, but we'll still have the expense and responsibility of maintaining a century-old landmark structure.

This bill rewards speculative investments over people who've preserved a landmark and provided inclusive homeownership for 43 years.

The parcel to our south is owned by the same international investor who designed two towers blocking our building's entire west facade.

On that project, we asked for more sympathetic design, but they simply said they weren't required to do it.

And they won't this time with the property they own on our south line.

It's fine for the city to rule large-scale development, but it shouldn't come at the expense of the little guy.

By striking amendment three, this bill releases us from preserving the facade if the worst happens and we're no longer viable as homes.

We aren't looking to redevelop, but without the option, we're further devalued.

Either add the OPCDS separation amendment or please strike Amendment 3. Thank you.

Thank you, Megan.

Up next is Stuart Tans, followed by Richard Schoble.

Stuart, welcome.

Good morning.

I see you're there.

Star 6 to unmute.

Stuart, now is the time.

If you could, there you are.

Hi.

I see you're off.

Yes.

At your convenience.

Great, thank you very much.

I certainly appreciate having the ability for us to speak this morning in front of the City Council.

My name is Stuart Cairns.

I'm the CEO of Retail Opportunity Investment Corp.

ROIC is the leading grocery anchored retail shopping center on the West Coast.

Today, the company owns about 18 retail shopping centers in the state of Washington, including the Crest building.

on 3rd and Union in downtown.

And just wanted to jump in and just tell you that we are in support of the mayor's proposed downtown activation plan for 3rd Avenue.

As you know, the Crest building has been vacant since 2020 when IDA vacated the property.

And as always, we're actively working to attract tenants to downtown to our space.

As we tell experts, we hear from tenants that more residential activity and improved street presence is critical for successful downtowns, and we're excited to work with the other owners on the block, including LIHI and Rick Yodler, to support more residential density and active streetscape on 3rd Avenue.

We believe the Crest building, under its new zoning, could support hundreds of new units over a new variety of active and vibrant street-level uses, And it would also contribute millions under the city's mandatory housing affordability program for new affordable housing.

We encourage the city council to adopt the up zone to support a more vibrant downtown.

And please call or email me with any questions.

Thank you for letting me speak.

Thank you, Richard, or Stuart, excuse me.

Up next is Richard Schobel.

Richard, I see you're here.

Star six to unmute.

There you are.

Take it away at your convenience.

Good morning.

This is Richard Schoble.

I am with Retail Opportunity Investments Corp.

I'm calling in support of CB120632.

The team here at ROIC is excited about working with our neighbors Lehigh and Rick Yoder.

and the city on the revitalization of 3rd Avenue.

We appreciate the city's efforts to date and encourage a yes vote today.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Richard.

With that, we have no further public comment registrants physically or remotely present.

So I will at this time close public comment on the Special Land Use Committee meeting for September 18th.

We're gonna move on to the items of business on the agenda today.

Up first, and Clerk, if you could read both appointments in at the same time for the Equitable Development Initiative.

We have appointments 02745 and 575, which appoint Denise Perez-Lally and Evelyn Thomas-Allen to the Equitable Development Initiative Advisory Board.

Appointments, items one and two appointments 02574 and 02575. Appointment of Denise Perez-Lally and Evelyn Thomas-Allen to the Ecuador Development Initiative Advisory Board for briefing, discussion and possible vote.

Wonderful, thank you.

We are joined by Abisha Sherfara, excuse me, there from the Office of Planning and Community Development for this discussion.

Welcome.

Would you like to speak to the candidates and if they are here, introduce them.

Good morning.

Thank you for having me and thank you for this confirmation.

My name is Officer Shafra.

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

with the EDI, the EDI team, Equitable Development Initiative team.

And today we have Ms. Denise and Ms. Evelyn.

They're both not present.

They had prior commitments.

So they're not able to be present, but they're really excited to be appointed and reappointed.

Miss Evelyn is a longtime community leader in Seattle, especially in the central district in South Seattle, working on various.

activities and initiatives in community, varying from human services to community development on housing.

And she is currently on the ADI advisory board and has been serving for the last, I believe, two years.

So we would love to have her be reappointed as she's been extremely helpful and strategic and Our efforts in the central district in South Seattle, and they're currently actually, Miss Evelyn is working on a project in South Seattle.

The Elizabeth Thomas homes, which is providing affordable housing in South Seattle to.

Uh, community members, and that will be actually, I think it's currently opening, or we'll have a grand opening end up this month.

So it's a huge win for community in that.

In that aspect, and Mr knees currently works for in West Seattle.

With the African development housing organization.

I am messing up the name, but she, yeah, she's currently working with them to provide both.

Human services and housing support previously, Miss Denise was with a center that and was instrumental in the development there and we're excited to have her.

Hopefully be appointed as she's also really strategic and pushing forward efforts.

That is working on and.

He can heal and various areas of Seattle.

Wonderful, thank you.

I see Vice Chair Morales ready to speak, so I'm going to pass it to her.

I will just briefly say, having reviewed these appointments and having met with OPCD, I'm very excited to be able to appoint these two candidates today.

Vice Chair.

Yes, thank you so much chair.

Thanks so much for introducing these 2 candidates.

I will say I was just going by the.

Homes on Henderson yesterday that Miss Allen is building and it's beautiful.

Really creates a lot of vibrancy over there by by the Rainier Beach community center by South Shore elementary.

And as you said, much needed housing and also know the work of the African development housing.

Corporation, um, that, uh, that is Lolly is part of, um.

In housing, unity, housing and development down in C tech, we work closely with them on projects throughout South key county.

And, um, I think it's really exciting that we've got these 2 leaders in the community development field, uh, joining the equitable development advisory board and really, um, bringing their expertise, their experience in development and deep connection to community to this body so that as we move forward with this work, we are benefiting from both their technical expertise and also the relationships that they have.

So really appreciate you bringing them forward and I'm looking forward to working with them.

Very well said, Vice Chair.

Colleagues, any other questions, comments?

Let me just bring this back up.

Ms. Denise Lally, born and raised in Denver, Colorado.

Her board packet is very extensive, as well as Evelyn Thomas having worked for FAME, Catholic Community Services, Randolph Carter Family and Learning Center, and the African American Family Center of Catholic Community Services.

I'm very excited to have them both on the advisory board.

Colleagues, any other questions, comments this time?

I'm seeing none from the dais.

Seeing none, I move to recommend confirmation of appointments 02574 and 02575. Is there a second?

Second.

It has been moved and seconded to recommend confirmation of appointments 02574 and 02575. Will the clerk please call the roll?

Councilmember Nielsen?

Aye.

Councilmember Peterson?

Yes.

Vice Chair Morales?

Yes.

Chair Strauss?

Yes.

Four in favor.

Thank you.

And thank you for both of these applicants for their willingness to serve, to volunteer their time on behalf of the City of Seattle.

On the advisory board, the appointment and committee's recommendation will be sent to the full City Council for a final vote on September 26th.

We'll move on to the next item.

The next item on the agenda is a briefing discussion and possible vote on appointment 02631, which will appoint Nathan Collins to the Urban Forestry Commission.

Clerk, will you please read the short title under the record?

Item 3, appointment 02631, appointment of Nathan Collins to the Urban Forestry Commission for briefing discussion and possible vote.

Thank you, and we are joined by Patty Backer from the Office of Sustainability and Environment for this discussion.

Patty, would you like to introduce Nathan?

I see Nathan here.

Yes, thank you, Chair Strauss, and good morning, council members.

So yeah, I'm Patty Backer.

I'm the Urban Forestry Policy Advisor with the Office of Sustainability and Environment, and in this role, I support the Urban Forestry Commission.

The subject of the appointment today is position 9, and that position is the economist, financial analyst, real estate broker or similar professional.

And this is the commission appointed position.

And we're pleased to put forward for your consideration today, financial analyst Nathan Collins as appointee for this position and Nathan would be serving the remainder of a 3 year term ending March 31st, 2026. We're excited to bring this appointee to the commission as Nathan brings valuable knowledge and experience in financial analysis, along with ideas for valuing ecosystem services, as well as a strong personal desire to serve his community.

He also serves on the United Way of King County's Emerging Leaders 365 Committee.

Nathan is here today, and I'll turn it over to him to provide background on himself and his interest in serving on the commission and to answer any questions council members have for him.

So, Nathan.

All right, thank you Patty and thank you as well.

Everyone for having me here.

So, I've lived in Washington my entire life grew up in this area.

I've lived in Seattle proper for over 10 years.

From my time there, I've seen the benefits of living in an area that has a well maintained and well preserved tree canopy and urban forest.

Um, I've also spent the past year as Patty mentioned with the United way of King counties, 365 committee from there.

I've had the chance to see the benefits of.

And focusing specifically with a racial and then social equity lens to community involvement.

And so seeing that that is part of the urban forestry commission's mission as well as personally having a lot of passion.

An interest in maintaining our own forestry or urban forest, I'd like to be able to bring my skills and financial experience, particularly related to data analytics.

I think would be a lot of interesting things that we can look at regarding the tangible and intangible benefits of a well maintained urban forest.

And so with that, that's my reasoning for wanting to be on this commission.

Thank you, Nathan.

And with over seven years, I see your seven year anniversary was just a couple months ago in July, seven years with Packer in the financial department.

it's clear that you absolutely meet the requirements of the economist or financial analyst position on the Urban Forestry Commission.

I would say what is most important to you in your perspective as you're joining the Urban Forestry Commission to help plant, steward, and grow our tree canopy here in the city?

Um, so most important, I will mention again, the, the focus on racial and social equity when we're, we're looking at creating a well maintained canopy, because.

I think that's something that we.

Can grow in a lot in Seattle and being able to bring that to communities where, you know, an urban force might not necessarily be something that exists now.

And then being able to kind of move that move that out as well.

Well said, Nathan.

Council Member Peterson, any questions, comments?

No?

Sure.

Council Member Nelson.

One of your responsibilities with PACCAR is, and I'm quoting from your resume, collaborate with global truck divisions, Kenworth, Peterbilt, DAF, to assess financial impact and identify factors affecting performance, partnering with internal teams to investigate and diagnose changing trends.

I bring that to light just because I appreciate that we have somebody with some applied knowledge in industrial zones or with industrial issues that's going to be on the Urban Forestry Commission, hopefully.

So thank you very much for your willingness to serve.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Thank you for volunteering for this role.

It's incredibly important that we are able to meet our canopy goals and grow the canopy that we have today, especially in areas of the city that have been under canopied.

With that, are there any other questions or comments or anything else that you'd like to share, Nathan?

No, no, just want to thank the council as well for having me.

Wonderful, wonderful.

Seeing as there's no final comments before we move on to a roll call, I move to recommend confirmation of appointment 02631. Is there a second?

Second.

It has been moved and seconded to recommend confirmation of appointment 02631. Will the clerk please call the roll?

Council Member Nelson?

Aye.

Council Member Peterson?

Yes.

Vice Chair Morales?

Yes.

Chair Strauss?

Yes.

Four in favor.

Thank you.

The motion passes.

Appointment 02631 will be sent to the full City Council on September 26. Nathan, you do not need to attend that meeting.

I know that you also have a busy schedule and this is an all-volunteer role, so we appreciate your willingness to serve.

See ya.

The next item on the agenda is briefing discussion and possible vote on Council Bill 120622, which will strengthen standards for the vacant building monitoring program.

Clerk, will you please read the short title into the record?

Item 4, Council Bill 120622, vacant building monitoring program for briefing discussion and possible vote.

Thank you.

We had this briefing last week on September 13th, 2023. Quinn Majewski and Michelle Hunter with the Seattle Department of Construction Inspections presented then and are here with us today, as well as Ketel Freeman with Council Central staff presented and is here today.

We, I'm also bringing an amendment on behalf of Council Member Lisa Herbold.

I apologize for the amendment not being attached to the agenda.

By the time we received the amendment, the agenda was posted and we will be, we have sent this amendment around via email and it will be posted to the Legistar site as soon as possible.

With that, colleagues, are there any questions on the underlying bill for Quinn, Ketel, or Michelle?

Seeing as no, we have no questions, Ketel, would you like to be able, I'm gonna move the amendment so then we can speak to it if we, and so, yeah, so I move to adopt amendment one to council bill 120622, is there a second?

Second.

It has been moved and seconded by Councilmember Peterson.

Welcome Councilmember Herbold, great to see you.

Councilmember Herbold, maybe if you want to share the intention of this amendment and then we will pass it over to Ketil Freeman to discuss it.

Absolutely.

Thank you so much.

And my apologies for seconding out of order.

So I've learned, because I've been talking with Chief Scoggins for several months about specifically the need to address the safety issues that are created for firefighters when responding to fires and things.

And so there has been a new work group created between the fire department, the police department and the city attorney's office and the city attorney's office.

And I shared with me that the charge of this group is that they have identified the top 20 most hazardous buildings properties, and they intend to create an action plan for each of the 20 buildings and execute on that action plan within the next 20 days.

The.

Specifically, Scott Lindsey and the city attorney's office has explained that at the completion of the 90 days, Chief Scoggins, Director Torgelson, and Scott Lindsey will conduct a review to examine the success or shortcomings of that 90-day effort and whether or not there are additional new legal tools necessary to address the safety hazards associated with vacant buildings.

They are planning to finish that review by the end of November.

And Scott Lindsey has offered a briefing to my committee in early December after budget.

And so this amendment speaks to that ongoing work and requests a report and briefing from this interdepartmental team to the Public Safety and Human Services Committee meeting this December.

Thank you.

Wonderful.

Thank you, Council Member Herbold.

Ketel, would you like to share your screen and walk us through this amendment?

Technically, and I am just very thankful for Council Member Herbold's leadership on this issue for many years.

Much of why we have this work before us today is because of her efforts.

Mr. Freeman, please.

So Councilmember Herbold described the amendment.

Well, hopefully everybody can see it now.

We would add a new non-codified section to Council Bill 120622 requesting the reporting that Councilmember Herbold mentioned by December 12, 2023, which is the regularly scheduled Public Safety and Human Services Committee meeting date.

It also recites the site, but establishes the council's intent to consider budgetary actions as part of the 2024 budget to formalize the interdepartmental team.

So, among other things, we would work with.

Council offices to understand to what extent the work of the can be accomplished under existing resources and whether additional resources.

Thank you, Ketel.

Very well said.

This is an amendment that I will be supporting today.

Colleagues, are there any questions, comments, concerns on the amendment before us right now?

I'm seeing none from the dais.

None online.

Wonderful.

Council Member Herbold, anything else to close us out here?

All right, nothing further, Chair.

I appreciate the opportunity to be with you here this morning, and appreciate your recognition of my work on this issue in the past.

Absolutely.

I mean, it's honest, true, and direct that you have worked on this policy issue for many years, and we wouldn't be where we are today without you.

Thank you for everything you've done, and we look forward to making this vacant building monitoring program stronger than it is today.

With that, Amendment 1 has been moved and seconded.

If there are no additional comments, questions, concerns, will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of Amendment 1?

Council Member Nelson?

Aye.

Council Member Peterson?

Yes.

Vice Chair Morales?

Yes.

Chair Strauss?

Yes.

Four in favor.

Thank you.

The motion passes.

Amendment 1 to Council Bill 120622 passes.

Colleagues, are there any other questions, comments, concerns on the underlying bill before we go to vote as amended?

I'm seeing Council Member Nelson.

Thank you.

If you recall, I did ask a lot of questions about this policy to the staff of SDCI who were here with us last meeting.

I was mostly concerned about the fact that primarily imposing a lien on someone's property for failure to pay the cost of compliance with this program was fairly a harsh penalty in my estimation, particularly when considering that if the unsecured buildings were a problem because of trespassers and it was difficult to remove trespassers or the people who own the buildings were out of town.

In any case, I asked a bunch of questions and I do want to acknowledge that SDCI responded answering some of those.

And the most important part of the email, the response that I received, basically said that we know that most property owners are doing their best to keep their properties secure.

SDCI's goal is compliance and safety.

The legislation is not meant to be punitive or to treat all property owners as bad actors.

We work closely with with owners and are often the liaison between them and SPD when they need help clearing a site.

SDCI would not file liens on every property that is passed due on any amount.

And that was important to me because I just wanted to make sure that this was not blanketly applied to all situations.

And I'm just gonna have to go on trust that this is not a problem that I need to be concerned about.

And so I'll be voting in favor today.

Thank you, Council Member Nelson.

Colleagues, any other questions, comments, concerns?

Seeing no further from the dais, Vice Chair Morales, seeing none from you.

Well, thank you very much.

And I also want to thank Quinn Majewski, Michelle Hunter, everyone at SDCI.

Again, when I brought my issues regarding the vacant building monitoring program to SDCI and proposed that we develop legislation, I had a laundry list of issues that I wanted to attend to in SDCI.

presented a bill that they had already been working on that addressed every single issue that I asked for.

We almost had a verbatim list.

And so again, Quinn and Michelle, very well done here.

Faith Lumsden, thank you for your work on this as well.

Colleagues, the amended bill is before us.

I will move to recommend passage of Council Bill 120622 as amended.

Is there a second?

Second.

Second.

It has been moved and seconded to recommend passage of Council Bill 120622 as amended.

Will the clerk please call the roll?

Council Member Nelson.

Aye.

Council Member Peterson.

Yes.

Vice Chair Morales.

Aye.

Yes.

Chair Strauss?

Yes.

Four in favor.

Thank you.

Council Bill 120622 as amended passes.

This bill will be sent to the September 26, 2023 City Council meeting for a final vote.

The next agenda item before us is briefing discussion and possible vote on Council Bill 120631, an increase in flexibility for lodging uses in the Belltown neighborhood.

Clerk, will you please read the short title into the record?

Item 5, Council Bill 120631, Boutime Zoning Amendment for Lodging Use Flexibility for Briefing Discussion and Possible Vote.

Thank you.

We were joined by Rawan Hassan and Jeff Wetland of Office of Planning and Community Development last week for a briefing on September 13th.

We were also joined by Lish Whitson from Council Central Staff who's joined us here in Council Chambers.

I will just open it up.

Colleagues, we had a very robust conversation last week.

I want to open it up to see if there are questions, comments, concerns on the Belltown Lodging Use Bill that is a part of Mayor Harrell's Downtown Activation Plan.

I am seeing no questions from the dais.

We had a very long meeting last week, so maybe we got all the questions asked answered and discussion dealt with.

If there are no further questions here, I'm going to put this up for a vote.

One last look.

I'm seeing no questions here.

With that, with no final comments before we move on, I'll just say that downtown activation plan is incredibly important.

When we saw the map of the area that this includes, it's in and around Cinerama, where I had the distinct pleasure of popping chocolate popcorn about a decade ago.

And I shared the story last week about the difference that was on that street block when the parking lot was developed.

The problems were that people who were from out of town were very upset that they couldn't find a place to park.

And the benefit was for Seattleites, because what went from a empty space that often provided a space for negative behavior, we now have a place where you can shop, eat, get a meal before the movie, as soon as Cineramas reopened.

and a place for people to live.

And so this is a much better use than a parking lot that we hope that this bill will incentivize other parking lots in those few square blocks to be developed.

With that, I move to recommend passage of Council Bill 120631. Is there a second?

Second.

It has been moved and seconded to recommend passage of Council Bill 120631. Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Council Member Nelson.

Aye.

Council Member Peterson.

Yes.

Vice Chair Morales.

Yes.

Chair Strauss.

Yes.

4 in favor.

Thank you.

Council Bill 120631 passes and will be sent to the September 26, 2023 City Council for a final vote.

Our next item on the agenda is briefing discussion and possible vote on Council Bill 120632, which rezones parts of downtown, specifically in and around 3rd Avenue and Pike Pine.

If you can tell the difference between Pike and Pine, you will win the almost live Jeopardy.

Clerk, will you please read the short title into the record?

Council Bill 120632, Downtown Retail Rezone for briefing discussion and possible vote.

Thank you.

As I have mentioned a couple of times, I'm glad that this meeting is going quickly because our last committee meeting lasted over three hours discussing all of these bills.

We did receive a briefing on this item on September 13th in the Land Use Committee.

Rawan Hassan with the Office of Planning and Community Development is here again to answer any questions and provided a robust presentation along with Jeff Wendland.

We also have Lish Whitson from Council Central staff who briefed the committee last weekend is here again.

with some proposed amendments.

We do have a few amendments here.

The first amendment is Amendment 1, which is my amendment.

I'll address it now.

This is a technical amendment proposed by Council Central staff.

This amendment would replace Map 1A to the Seattle Municipal Code Chapter 23.49 with a new Map 1A, which reflects the new boundaries in this legislation.

I'm going to move to adopt Amendment 1 and then we can have a discussion on it.

So I move to adopt Amendment 1 to Council Bill 120632. Is there a second?

Second.

It has been moved and seconded to adopt Amendment 1 to Council Bill 120632. Lish, would you like to speak to this amendment?

Yes, basically this replaces a map that is included in the downtown chapter of the land-use code with an updated map that reflects the rezone boundaries that are being adopted through this bill.

Wonderful.

Are you able to share your screen just with the...

I was bumped out, so I'm just getting back in right now.

Clerk, are you able to share the screen?

Actually, I am now able to.

So the existing map is being struck out and a new map showing the new boundaries of the downtown Rio Till core is being added.

And it's in this area under the hand.

Wonderful.

Thank you.

Colleagues, any questions, comments, concerns on Amendment 1?

I am seeing none.

With that, it has been moved and seconded to adopt Amendment 1. Clerk, will you please call the roll on adoption of Amendment 1?

Council Member Nelson?

Aye.

Council Member Peterson?

Yes.

Vice Chair Morales?

Yes.

Chair Strauss?

Yes.

We're in favor.

Thank you.

Amendment one to Council Bill 120632 passes.

And we will move on to the next amendment.

Amendment two is sponsored by Council Member Peterson.

Council Member Peterson, let's move the amendment now.

And yeah, I'll pass it over to you and then let's have some discussion.

Thank you, Chair.

I move to adopt Amendment 2 to Council Bill 120632 as published on the agenda.

Thank you.

Second.

Thank you.

It has been moved and seconded to adopt Amendment 2. Council Member Peterson, would you like to speak to this amendment?

And then we will pass it over to Lish to walk us through it.

Thank you.

Both of my amendments are responding to the very thorough central staff memo that we received on this legislation.

This one is the easier one.

It's a recital that we'd be adding to encourage collaboration between our Seattle Department of Transportation and our Seattle Department of Construction and Inspection.

So if there's a bunch of construction activity here, we want to make sure people still have access to the sidewalks and to the bus stops.

So that's what this recital will do.

But our central staff can probably explain it better than I can.

Wonderful.

Over to you, Wish.

Let me share this one.

Yes, it adds one recital indicating the council's intent that SDOT and SDCI collaborate to ensure access through the area during development and work with pedestrian disability rights organizations to ensure that pedestrian safety is maintained.

Wonderful.

I support your amendment, Council Member Peterson.

I think this is a good amendment.

Colleagues, any questions, comments, concerns on the amendment right now?

And I just got a note also that Council Member Mosqueda is actually able to join us for a couple minutes, and I think she's waiting in the waiting room, Mr. G. I'm in support of this amendment.

I'm seeing no further comments, questions, or concerns here.

It has been moved.

It has been seconded.

So will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of Amendment 2?

And Council Member Mosqueda has joined us for Amendment 2, which is seeming to receive unanimous support across the board here.

So with that, clerk, will you please call the adoption of Amendment 2?

Council Member Nelson?

Aye.

Council Member Peterson?

Yes.

Council Member Mosqueda?

Aye.

Vice Chair Morales?

Yes.

Chair Strauss?

Yes.

Five in favor.

Thank you.

Amendment two to Council Bill 120632 passes.

And we will move on to amendment number three.

Council Member Peterson, again, you are the sponsor of this amendment.

Would you like to move your amendment and then we'll get into conversation?

Yes, thank you, Chair.

Colleagues, I'd like to move amendment number three to Council Bill 120632 as shown on today's agenda.

Thank you very much, Council Member Peterson.

Second.

was the word that I was supposed to use.

It has been moved and seconded to adopt amendment three to council bill 120632. Would you like to speak to it?

We'll pass it over to Lish and then I'll share my thoughts.

Thank you.

Yes, again, just picking up from some of the suggestions that we saw in the city council central staff memo, this one is about some of the buildings are already designated as having significant historical facades.

And so this amendment would encourage the preservation of those facades, even as it allows greater density and development on those parcels.

But yes, let's turn it over to central staff to explain better.

And that was a good explanation.

Let me...

So the current code for the downtown retail core includes requirements that projects on sites with these significant facades incorporate the facades in their future development if they are going to exceed 85 feet in height, and the amendment would Maintain those provisions for the five buildings that are in the rezone area and require that the facades Be maintained for projects going over 85 feet in height in under the new zoning Wonderful Thank You mr. Whitson Councilmember Peterson anything else

Just we did hear from public commenters who were residing in one of the buildings, I think the condo owners who are interested in an additional amendment regarding the spacing between the buildings if there's new development.

If a council member with more of a nexus to that Neighborhood were to support that I would support that but this is a separate issue raised by central staff on the historical facade.

So I just wanted to It's really about the historical facade that we want to try to preserve if possible.

Thank you.

Absolutely in councilmember Peterson.

I will admit I Thought about bringing this amendment myself I was I did land in a different place from you and I want to share why, which is that the landmark structures that are listed are already subject to facade protections because of the incentive and controls agreement coming with the landmark designation.

So, said another way, any changes to a landmark would have to be addressed by the Landmarks Preservation Board.

For the structure on the list that is not yet landmarked, the Ross Building, there is a process in place that would refer for review by Department of Neighborhoods for possible landmark status.

In my analysis of this, Amendment 3 is duplicative of other protections in place for historic preservations and could unnecessarily reduce the flexibility for more expanded range of approaches to historic preservation beyond the incorporation of just the facade.

I admit I am a really big fan of keeping facades, even though, you know, And I just don't want to overstep the landmark and historic board here.

So that's why I won't be supporting your amendment today, even though I support the intent that you brought it here with.

Thank you.

Questions, colleagues, any questions, comments?

Yeah, Council Member Nelson.

We had a public comment from Sharon Lee basically saying opposing this amendment or either oppose this amendment or do something else with OPCD.

So, Lish, do you understand that tradeoff that was being proposed?

I think I missed that.

It was an either or.

Yeah, I missed that.

I'm sorry.

OK.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am curious.

Lish did raise the issue in the memo about the concern of or just the issue that the facade improvement or facade preservation.

Might raise some questions here, so I'm wondering if you can just address your issues that you raised in the memo and whether this really was just applying to the 1 building, or if it applies to the others as well.

I'm sorry, can you repeat your question?

In the memo that you drafted, you did raise the issue of facade preservation as these projects get redeveloped.

I'm wondering if the issue was raised because that concern applies to all of these buildings or just the one building that Chair Strauss mentioned?

Oh, so four out of the five buildings are currently landmarked.

The one building that isn't is the last one on the list, the former Woolworths building, now Ross Dress for Less.

And yes, Council Member Strauss is correct that any changes to the landmark buildings will require review by the Landmarks Preservation Board.

And that the former Woolworths building is likely, according to the Department of Neighborhoods Landmark Surveys, is a likely landmark and would be reviewed.

for potential landmark status by the Landmarks Preservation Board if a proposal were to come forward either to landmark it or to demolish the building.

The reason why I raised this in my memo is that this is a unique provision in the code.

We don't have any language like this in other parts of the code that call out specific structures with unique facades.

And so I felt like it was important to at least note that there was a change to something that past councils had found was significant.

Vice Chair, any?

Thank you.

Anything further?

Thank you.

Yeah.

Keep going.

Keep going.

I'm done.

Thank you very much.

Okay.

Sorry.

Trying to outnice each other here on the dais today.

Great to see everyone.

With that, are there any questions, comments, concern, further questions, comments, concerns about Amendment 3?

I am seeing none.

It has been moved and seconded.

Yes, please.

Oh, Council Member Peterson, of course.

Thank you, Chair.

I just, I think the person who had called in about this was Megan Cruz.

It was not Sharon Lee.

Okay.

Apologies.

But, but really do appreciate the, the, the public commenter, you know, advocating for their, their building.

And I, again, I'd be willing to support something at full council regarding that issue they're bringing up.

And this I see as separate, but anyway, thanks for your consideration.

Thank you, Council Member Peterson.

As always, I highly discourage amendments at full council that work should be reserved for the committee, which is why we have the bill before the committee twice before we voted out, which is why we're having a special meeting today so that we provide the time necessary in committee rather than spending full council as a committee meeting.

With that, it has been moved and seconded to adopt Amendment 3. Will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of Amendment 3.

Council Member Mosqueda.

No.

Council Member Nelson.

Abstain.

Council Member Peterson.

Yes.

Vice Chair Morales.

No.

Chair Strauss.

No.

One in favor, three opposed, one abstention.

Thank you.

The amendment three to council bill 120632 does not pass and we now have and then I would also like to make mention that I had intended to bring an amendment to this bill upon further review.

I think that it needs a little bit more analysis.

And so I'm not going to bring it here nor at full council.

So just so everyone's aware, I am taking the time to do more analysis before we pass any amendments, further amendments to this bill regarding podium height.

Council Member Nelson.

I like that approach.

And I'm just noting that because we had this package on Thursday and it's Monday, I am abstaining largely, not largely, but I think it's important for me to make sure that I understand the nuances of what we're doing here.

So thank you.

Wonderful.

Thank you.

Are there any other questions, comments, concerns on Council Bill 120632 as amended?

Council Member Morales and then Council Member Peterson.

Thank you, Chair.

I just want to make sure I understand the last exchange.

Are we not voting on this bill today?

Did you say you were going to do more analysis on amendments?

Great question, Vice Chair.

I had intended to bring an amendment regarding podium heights.

to this bill, that amendment I felt needed more analysis before it was ready for our committee.

And so I am not going to be bringing an amendment regarding podium heights.

to council today as I didn't bring it today and I will not be bringing it to full council.

It needs additional analysis and will be taken up in a separate process if we decide to take action on it.

This is again why we have committee meetings, bills before our committee twice and just demonstrating that I too sometimes want to do more than and move faster.

And when there is more analysis needed, I also slow down and sometimes don't move what I want to move forward because we need to take the time needed to understand the implications.

So yes, to answer your question directly, Council Member Morales, we are voting on this bill today.

I had a proposed amendment that I am not bringing forward.

Got it.

Thank you very much.

Absolutely.

Council Member Peterson.

Thank you, Chair Strauss.

I want to thank central staff for their memos on this legislation and the additional research they did on this.

They posted, for the public's benefit, they posted onto the agenda the State Environmental Policy Act documents.

Appreciate the chair and whoever made that happen.

And also, who owns the dozen parcels?

There are 12 parcels that would be benefiting from these up zones.

Obviously, I wish my amendment on historic facade preservation had passed.

And while I'm not able to get there on this bill today, I'm hopeful I can get there at full council.

I want to support the two nonprofits who own the two parcels, including Lehigh.

My concern is with the other 10 parcels.

I just need a little bit more time for additional research to assess the financial benefits that City Hall would be granting to the for-profit owners of those buildings and the landowners versus the public benefits that we hope to receive in return.

I know there was a little discussion in the memos about how much money for mandatory housing affordability.

I don't think we're, I think the incentive zoning benefits have changed for this and would love to see some on-site low-income housing built as well.

So it just needed a little bit more time.

We had our meeting last Wednesday and our meeting today on Monday and so hoping I can get there because I think this is coming to full council not tomorrow but the next week.

as I understand.

That's correct.

I encourage you to think about the whole city.

Downtown is the core, not only of our city's economic engine, it's the core of our region's economic engine.

And I would venture to say it is the core of our, from here to the Twin Cities, Chicago, that's the next closest United States city of our size.

Otherwise than that, it's the Salt Lake City or Denver or Sacramento, San Francisco This third Avenue is the core of the economic engine that is beyond our districts.

It's beyond our city This the improvements that we need to make down there for not only the safety but the vitality as I was just talking about with Cinerama far outweighs, I think much of the work that we do here.

And this is really important.

And we did hear from Sharon Lee today about the importance of revitalizing Third Avenue.

You heard from me the story about the Cinerama parking lot.

This work is really bigger than any of us.

And so I hope that you're able to get there.

I hope that your vote does not delay this further by creating a divided report.

And I also really appreciate how you come to this work because the facade element was also something that I shared deeply and actually had started working on an amendment.

But as you also saw with my work, just because my amendment wasn't ready for prime time today, I didn't want to hold up this whole process because I know how important downtown's recovery is.

Colleagues, any other questions, comments, concerns?

Council Member Peterson, is that an old hand?

Yes.

Yes.

Vice Chair?

Well, thank you, Mr chair.

I do appreciate the effort that is being made here to bring more residential into downtown.

As I was saying before last week, when we had a committee meeting, I do think it's important to contemplate what the future of downtown's in general.

Looks like, and I do think that for many of us, we really need to start thinking about how we create more livability in our downtown areas and create it as more than just a commercial place, but as a neighborhood.

So I think that this is.

A good 1st step.

That said, the challenge that I have, um.

Is that where other zones require up to 11% of onsite affordability, which I will say, I still don't think is enough.

This reason would allow for less, not more housing that is affordable for working folks.

And, you know, as currently zoned, it has.

Almost 4% onsite production mandate.

But after passage of this, it will have 0 mandate for any onsite affordability.

And and I'm really, I'm really struggling with that at best.

I think we could get.

20, maybe 30 units over 20 years somewhere in exchange for effectively doubling the height of new construction in the area.

Um, so, you know, I appreciate the amendment that council member Peterson added.

Just including in the recital, an acknowledgement as well of the disruption that might happen on 3rd Avenue, our major transit corridor through downtown.

But I don't see anything else that addresses that in the actual ordinance language itself.

And we know that.

That is the key corridor for us for folks who rely on transit to get round.

So, um.

I regret that we really haven't had a lot of time to understand the impact of this.

I appreciate the second meeting, having a special meeting, but it's really only three days after we heard this.

So I will be voting no on this bill and look forward to continuing to try to build more opportunity for folks, particularly for working families to have affordability in the city.

Thank you, Vice Chair, and I think that we have an asset on this block that is unlike an asset that we have anywhere else in the city, which is we have one of our affordable housing providers owning land on this block.

When you own land, you have more ability to negotiate and create covenants beyond just what's in this legislation.

We heard that in public comment today.

You know, what I don't want to do is tie the hands of people who know how to negotiate very well.

And I'm confident that we can increase the amount of affordable housing that is on this site, not through legislation, but through negotiation.

And so I understand your take today, Vice Chair Morales, and I'm confident that we are going to be able to overcome the concerns that you have on this block.

With that, any other questions, comments, concerns?

Seeing none, clerk, will you please call the roll on the, on Council Bill 120632 as amended?

Council Member Mosqueda?

Aye.

Council Member Nelson?

Aye.

Council Member Peterson?

No.

Vice Chair Morales?

No.

Chair Strauss?

Yes.

Three in favor, two opposed.

Thank you.

Council Bill 120632 as amended passes.

And it is unclear whether we'll be sending it to the September 26th meeting or the following meeting of the full city council.

And we will convey that information in council briefing later this afternoon.

With that, our final item on the agenda today is, and thank you, Mr. Whitson.

Thank you, Rahwan and Jeff for your work on this.

Final item on the agenda today is briefing discussion on Resolution 32097, which is a resolution to endorse freight transportation issues in industrial and maritime areas.

Clerk, will you please read the short title into the record?

Item 7, Resolution 32097, Industrial and Maritime Transportation Resolution for briefing discussion and possible vote.

Thank you.

This resolution, I'm going to take us in the way back time machine just to say that we have done quite a bit in this committee this year.

We have had more committee meetings than were scheduled in January, and a lot of that work was on the tree protection ordinance.

Directly from the Tree Protection Ordinance, we took up the Industrial Maritime Zoning Changes, which the Tree Protection Ordinance, first of its kind, some folks have been working on it for 20 years.

Industrial Maritime Protections were put in place for the, this is the first zoning change that has happened since 2007. And so the industrial maritime work has not stopped even though we passed it out of committee and full council this summer because a number of the issues that were raised during the stakeholdering process to get us to 86% consensus and actually to final passage, there were a number of items which dealt with transportation issues specifically.

Since we had a land use bill before us, we could not take up those transportation issues in committee, which is why we have this transportation resolution to accompany that work and memorialize on the record the issues that we're taking up during that stakeholdering process.

I have attached the updated version to the agenda.

Lish Whitson from Council Central staff is here to walk us through this resolution.

Again, I had attempted to pass this resolution at the time that we passed the land use legislation.

When it wasn't ready, I took the additional time to do stakeholder outreach.

We thought that we could possibly pass it in August.

We needed to do additional stakeholder outreach.

thought that we could pass it at the first meeting in September, just this last week, we needed to do additional outreach.

And so that's why it's on the agenda today.

So we have a substitute that has been vetted by many, many stakeholders throughout the city.

Again, this is one of those situations where If I just wanted to rush it through, I would have rushed it through.

It is my desire to take the time necessary to get the product that is right for the record.

So with that, I want to first also thank S.OPCD, the mayor's office, the port, SOTO, BIA, International Longshore Workers, the best baseball team in America, the Seattle Mariners, and many more stakeholders who were able to add their thoughts into this.

With that long intro, Mr. Whitson, I'll let you take it from here.

And if you could walk us through this substitute, because the substitute has included so many different partners' changes.

Yeah.

Thank you.

And yes, this reflects many voices.

As you will see.

So the first change incorporated into the substitute is a new whereas clause that ties this resolution back to the work of the Industrial Maritime Stakeholders, the Industrial Maritime Strategy Advisory Council, and notes that this Resolution is intended to complement that work.

In Section 1, you see some additional stakeholders called out as people or organizations that should be consulted in implementing the resolution, including Sound Transit, the railroads, and property owners in the area, in the industrial areas.

Section A1 is added to prioritize freight movement on streets classified as major truck streets within and near manufacturing industrial centers.

And please stop me if anyone has questions as we go through this.

Section A7 is added to request that SDOT implement regulatory and design standards to reduce conflicts between industrial and non-industrial users of the freight network, including limits on curb cuts and intersections that can accommodate freight vehicles.

New Section B asks that when a transportation project could result in a reduction in the number or width of lanes that SDOT consult with the Freight Advisory Council and the Seattle City Council's Committee with purview over transportation issues prior to making those changes.

Section D and E E are amended to more clearly identify the departments that are responsible for each of these sections.

In Section D, there is a shift.

The first version included reporting every two years after discussion with the Departments, this reporting on non-industrial development is split into two phases.

Annual reports on the amount of development occurring of non-industrial areas in manufacturing industrial centers.

And then every four years, a report on sort of recommendations and analysis based on those annual reports.

So annual reports on what's happening and then every four years coming to council with recommendations for changes if necessitated.

Section E is amended to state that the Site development review should improve or enhance industrial centers and transportation networks and reduce curb cuts along major truck streets.

Section F is amended to prioritize freight movements on streets in manufacturing industrial centers with tools such as freight only lanes, freight and transit lanes, or Q jumps for freight and transit, and other tools that are identified over time.

And Section G is amended to include seeking increased funding for pavement maintenance, including maintenance of minor truck streets and non-arterials.

and bridge repair preservation for bridges that serve industrial areas and the bridges over the Argo Yard along 1st and 4th Avenue.

The 1st Avenue South Bridge and the Bower Bridge are all called out.

Wonderful.

Thank you, Lish.

Colleagues, I've been back and forth on this resolution for months, so my questions are answered.

I do just want to take this moment to check to see if there are questions, comments, or concerns.

Seeing none.

Did Leary Avenue come up in your discussions with the mix at all?

Not specifically.

Is there something in particular?

I just remember receiving a letter a while back from NSIA about Leary and the changes proposed there.

So I just was assuming that when you referenced the mix, that would also include north and south.

So.

Would you like to hold the resolution?

No.

Okay.

Fair enough.

I do believe that, you know, when we talk about freight routes, you know, we talk about freight routes in here, specifically freight only lanes, which are really important to me.

And Leary may be a candidate for something like that.

Oh.

That's something that we can continue to look into.

Part of the genesis of this resolution and the work regarding industrial and maritime lands is the fact that our city has changed so much and industrial zones have a pretty heave and keel when it comes to their economic activity.

And so in times of economic boom and growth, there's not, they seem like they're doing less than the rest of the city.

And then when economic downturns occur, they don't change and they suddenly become our economic engine.

They really buoy our city.

And so in this way, we have been able to protect our industrial maritime lands while at the same time providing additional flexibility to the edge areas that have become more urban and are less industrial or maritime focused, and so we have been able to add housing, we've been able to add the option of office space, and we've been able to protect our industrial maritime zones.

So I'm excited to pass this.

Council Member Nelson, something else?

Nope, I've always been a big fan of freight mobility, so thank you very much.

Wonderful, and you know, something that came up this weekend is that The ability to create a deep water port is incredibly difficult.

We here in Seattle have the asset of the deep water port that we can see here from our chamber windows.

And between that deep water port and Interstate 90, which runs through the heartland of America and all the way out to Boston, are our city streets that can sometimes inhibit the movement of freight.

And the last thing that we want is for the last mile of travel or the first mile of travel from cargo ships to Interstate 90 to be the choke point.

And I think that's a lot of what this resolution talks about, that we want to keep the movement of freight and goods flowing freely without being encumbered because it has direct impacts on our economy here.

Thank you for letting me wax poetic, colleagues and friends.

With that, seeing no further comments, I am going to move Amendment 1. Did I already move Amendment 1?

Who knows, let's do it again.

I move Amendment 1 to Resolution 32097. Second.

It has been moved and seconded to adopt Amendment 1 to Resolution 32097. Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Council Member Mosqueda.

she has returned to excused status.

Council Member Nelson?

Aye.

Council Member Peterson?

Yes.

Vice Chair Morales?

Yes.

Chair Strauss?

Yes.

Four in favor.

Thank you.

Amendment 1 to Resolution 32097 passes.

Any final comments before we call the final vote on Resolution 32097 as amended?

Seeing none, thank you colleagues.

I recommend passage of Resolution 32097 as amended.

Is there a second?

Second.

It has been moved and seconded to recommend passage of Resolution 32097 as amended.

Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Council Member Nelson?

Aye.

Council Member Peterson?

Yes.

Vice Chair Morales?

Yes.

Chair Strauss?

Yes.

Four in favor.

Thank you.

Resolution 32097 as amended passes.

and will be before full council on September 26th, 2023 city council meeting.

Moving into final item of business today, good of the order and adjournment.

We had a couple appointments today to the equitable development initiative advisory board and the urban forestry commission.

We had a number of other appointments both to the urban forestry commission and to design review boards, which we had intended to get to council today.

We had a little bit of a hiccup with introduction.

We are hoping to be able to bring those possibly to full council during the budget session because we'd like to get them posted as soon as possible.

It is just that this committee has been full of activity this year.

And while appointments are incredibly important, it has been equally as important to provide the time needed to study, analyze, review, and pass the legislation that this committee has passed this year.

This will be the final committee until December, until it is technically November.

This is the final committee until after the budget session.

I do just want to remind us, thank us for all of the time that we've spent in this committee this year, because we have passed historic legislation, not once, not twice, but a few times over.

And so thank you all for your work.

Thank you, Lish and Ketel.

Yolanda, Allie, everyone from Office of Planning and Community Development, Seattle Department of Construction and Inspection, and Office of Sustainability and Environment for your work this year.

With that, that concludes the Monday, September 18th Land Use Committee meeting.

The next Land Use Committee meeting is a special meeting on November 29th, 2023 at 2 p.m.

Thank you for attending.

We are adjourned.