understanding that we have quorum, we will come to order.
Good morning.
The December 9th, 2020 meeting of the Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee will come to order.
It's 9.31 a.m.
I'm 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 McKayla?
Here.
Clerk Strauss?
Present.
Thank you.
The city council rules are silent on allowing remote meetings and electronic participation at city council and committee meetings.
To allow this committee to conduct business remotely, the council rules will need to be suspended.
If there is no objection, the council rules will be suspended to allow the Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee to meet remotely and participate electronically.
Hearing no objection, the council rules are suspended and the committee will continue this remote meeting.
The Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee of the City of Seattle, a city named after Chief Sealth, begins this committee by acknowledging we are on the traditional and ancestral lands of the first people of this region, represented in a number of tribes and as urban natives, past and present, in honor with gratitude, the land itself and the people of this land.
We start with this acknowledgement to recognize the fact that we are guests on this land and should steward our land as such, as guests.
Today, we have three items on the agenda, a public hearing and briefing on clerk file 314461, an application for an extension of a contract rezone of 1106 34th Avenue.
We have a briefing and discussion on SDCI and OSC's quarterly progress report on tree protections and a briefing and discussion on extending interim floodplain regulations that the council adopted earlier this year to comply with FEMA requirements.
The next regularly scheduled meeting of this committee falls during council recess.
So this will be the final meeting of 2020. Our next meeting of the Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee is on Wednesday, January 13th, starting at 9.30 AM.
Before we begin, if there is 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 items on today's agenda.
Before we begin, I ask that everyone please be patient as we learn to operate this new 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 this 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.
Public comment for this meeting is up to 10 minutes and 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 a speaker's name, staff will unmute appropriate mic, and automatic prompt, if you have been unmuted, will be the speaker's cue that it is their turn to speak.
Please begin speaking 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 speakers hear the chime, we ask that you begin to wrap up your public comments.
If speakers do not end their comments at the end of the allotted time provided, the speaker's mic will be muted after 10 seconds to allow us to call on the next speaker.
Once you've completed your public comment, we ask that you please disconnect from the line.
And if you continue following, if you plan to continue following the meeting, please do so via Seattle Channel or the listening options on the agenda.
There is a separate public hearing on the agenda for item one, clerk file 314461, the contract rezone extension.
The public hearing is being conducted under the council's quasi-judicial rules, meaning that only established parties of record are eligible to provide comment at the public hearing.
Parties of record were notified of this opportunity by email.
If you are not a party of record, then the quasi-judicial rules prohibit you from providing comment at either the public hearing or the public comment.
The public comment is now open, and we will begin with the first speaker on the list.
I do see Max Liebowitz listed for the public comment.
However, I see, Max, you are listed as not present.
I also notice that you have signed up to speak about the item which is quasi-judicial, and it is my understanding that you are not a party of record.
IT, can you confirm that Max is not present?
That is correct.
Can you confirm that we have no further individuals signed up for public comment?
Confirmed.
No other individuals are signed up for public comment.
Thank you.
Seeing as we have no speakers signed up nor remotely present, the public comment period is now closed.
And we will move on to the next agenda item.
Our first item of business today is a public hearing, briefing and discussion on Clerk File 314461, an application to extend a contract rezone of property at 1106 34th Avenue.
Noah, will you please read this item into the record?
Agenda Item 1, Clerk File 314461. Application of Martin Leibowitz and 34th and Spring LLC for an extension of the contract rezone of the property at 1106 34th Avenue.
Original contract rezone application approved through clerk file 314325 and ordinance 125433.
Thank you.
As a reminder, this item is being considered on Council's quasi-judicial rules.
Council members should refrain from hearing arguments for or against the merits of this application outside of today's hearing for parties of record.
We are joined today by Ketil Freeman of our Council Central staff.
Ketil, can you provide us an overview of this application and the process for considering it and how this This is a non-standard, we don't typically extend these contractory zones is from my understanding, and can you speak to how the extension is different from a standard contractory zone?
Sure.
Yes.
Thank you, Council Member Schast, Ketel Freeman, Council Central staff.
Happy to distinguish this from other quasi-judicial actions and walk through some background here.
Materials that you have that are attached to the agenda is a brief memorandum from me that describes some background.
a recommendation on the contract rezone extension from SDCI, written comment received by SDCI on the contract extension, and a draft bill that would extend the contract rezone for an additional two years and adopt an amended property use and development agreement.
So as Council Member Strauss requested, I'll walk through a little bit of background here, talk about this type of action, distinguish it from other quasi-judicial actions, and then talk about the criteria that the Seattle Municipal Code provides for consideration of a contract-free zone extension.
So by way of background, as mentioned in the introduction, this property, the subject property was rezoned in 2017. It was a contract rezone, meaning it was a site-specific rezone with an adopted property use and development agreement, which is the contract and contract rezone.
I'll share my screen here to show you in the world where this is.
Can you all see that?
Not totally sure here that, well, looking at what I'm looking at, but I think you are.
So I'm looking at SDCI's GIS.
This is the GIS map projected on an aerial photograph.
We are in Madrona.
The subject property is right down here.
The rezone in 2017 was from low rise two to neighborhood commercial one.
with a 30-foot height limit.
That rezone also applied the mandatory housing affordability program to that site.
For those of you who are familiar or not familiar with Madrona, this is kind of the town center in some respects.
It's not an urban village for the purposes of any comprehensive plan designation.
The kind of mustard color is neighborhood commercial.
All of that zoning was upzoned through the MHA upzones in 2018. The brownish zoning over here is low-rise.
Similarly, those zones were upzoned in 2018 through the MHA implementation legislation.
Just some landmarks here to help you situate yourself.
This is what the cursor is pointing to here is the Madrona Elementary School.
This is Madrona Park.
For those of you who are familiar with Madrona, just north of the site is the building that has the Vendamia restaurants.
Bistro Turquoise is also there for those of you who orient yourself by restaurants.
So that's where we are in the world.
The subject site, again, is right here.
It's developed with one single family house and a fourplex.
As I mentioned, the site was upzoned in 2017. The neighborhood was upzoned in 2018 through the MHA implementation legislation.
A little arcana here about the MHA citywide implementation ordinance, it did not affect sites for which there were quasi-judicial rezones.
So if somebody had applied for a contract rezone After the MHA framework legislation was passed by council, but before the implementation bill had occurred, those sites were exempted from MHA.
They weren't necessarily exempted from MHA.
I should say that MHA was applied through the terms of the contract rezone.
So there was a period of time in which there was a director's rule which guided MHA implementation.
This particular site was rezoned while that director's rule was in place.
So there are a couple of sites in the city that are like this, that MHA was applied through a contract rezone and for which there hasn't actually been a subsequent development proposal.
As Council Member Strauss mentioned, this is a slightly different type of quasi-judicial action.
We rarely but occasionally get contract rezone extensions.
Typically, a contract rezone lasts for three years and then is extended when a development proposal is applied to that site.
Occasionally, an applicant will not find a development partner or will delay development.
and we'll seek an extension of a rezone that the council has approved previously.
I think the most recent circumstance in which the council extended a rezone was in 2015 when the council extended a rezone that was granted to the Seattle Housing Authority.
Unlike a typical quasi-judicial action, the council does not rely on a recommendation from the hearing examiner for contract reasons and extensions.
They are, in some ways, quasi-judicial decisions light.
Instead, the council relies on a recommendation from SDCI and also public comment provided by former parties of record who are notified when the extension is sought.
So what kind of criteria does the council apply in making a decision on extending a contract rezone?
These are criteria that come directly from the Seattle Municipal Code.
The reason or the basis for the extension has to be reasonable.
Under the circumstances, circumstances can be considered.
Here, there's a changed circumstance with MHA implementation citywide.
And another thing to consider is whether the additional time is reasonably necessary to comply with conditions of approval for the original adopted contract rezone.
Your materials have a link to the original rezone ordinance.
The only condition of approval for that rezone that was perhaps a non-standard condition for In certain contexts for rezone approvals was implementation of MHA.
So the only condition that applies to future development of the site is that that development participate in the MHA program.
So you have a recommendation from SDCI.
SDCI looked at the criteria and recommends that the extension be approved.
Today, the council will hear public comment from parties of record on the rezone extension and You have a draft bill in your packet.
If the committee chooses to extend the rezone, that bill would be introduced during the break and would be available for committee consideration on the 13th.
So unless you have any questions, I think we can open the comment period.
Thank you, Mr. Freeman.
I do have a couple of questions.
I'll just look to my colleagues to see if anyone else has questions at this time.
Seeing none.
Thank you for reminding us of the adjacent zoning.
How does the 30-foot height limit of this contract rezone compare directly to the surrounding height limits?
with MHA now adopted?
Is it higher, lower?
What is the difference between the surrounding zoning?
Yeah, so that's a good question.
Thank you for that, Council Member Strauss.
With MHA implementation, all of the adjacent commercial and multifamily zones have increased height and density associated with them.
So most of the, I can share the screen again, perhaps, just to make it a little bit Am I still sharing my screen?
I can't actually see.
Let me share my screen again here with you all.
The mustard colored commercial area has seen a height increase from 30 feet to 40 feet through MHA implementation.
The brown area, which is multifamily, mostly low-rise, that has seen an increase in height from 30 to about 40 feet through MPA.
through MHA implementation and also an FAR increase as well.
One thing to keep in mind is that the subject site was originally low-rise 2 and through the contract rezone to a commercial zone designation, neighborhood commercial 130 with an MHA suffix.
If the extension is not granted, the underlying zoning would not actually be the low-rise 2 zoning granted through the MHA program.
a low-rise two zoning without an MHA suffix and without the concurrent height and density increases that go along with it.
So the height that could be developed on the site if the rezone were to lapse would be 30 feet and the FAR would be lower than the adjacent density available for low-rise development and like the multifamily zone across the street.
It would be a 1.1 FAR as opposed to 1.4 FAR.
Thank you.
So what I heard you say is that it would be the same height.
The difference would be that the F.A.R. would be different and it would not be within the M.H.A. program.
Is that a correct understanding?
Yeah, correct.
And I mean, another key aspect to the rezone that was sought in 2017 is a change from multifamily to commercial zoning.
So what that allows as well as development of commercial uses of the ground floor and what one might see in a zone like this would be something like a neighborhood shared in retail.
Thank you.
Am I correct that it is unusual to see a contract rezone application without an associated development proposal for the site?
This might be a better question for the applicants, but do we have a better- No, I can answer that question.
It is not unusual.
A typical rezone application includes a development proposal.
but it's not required.
Most contract free zones that the council considers have a development proposal associated with them.
So somebody is applying for a mass use permit at the same time they're applying for a contract free zone.
But it's not required.
And I would, I'm just hazarding a guess here, probably about 10% of the contract free zone applications that the council considers don't have an associated development project.
With MHA implementation, I think there was only one other property that did not also have a concurrent mass use permit with the contract rezone application.
I believe that was Wallace property, a property up near Northgate Mall that's controlled by Wallace Properties.
Thank you.
And at what point would this existing contract rezone expire?
So they have, the applicants, applied within a time period that's specified in the code for extending the rezone.
I believe that had they not made the application within that time period, the rezone would have already expired.
But because they made that application, they've kept it alive for council consideration.
Thank you.
That is, in sum, the total of my questions, double-checking.
Any questions from colleagues?
I see Council Member Peterson.
Thank you, Chair Strauss.
Have we heard from the council?
So this is in Council District 3, is that correct?
Council Member Swalwell's district.
Correct.
So have we heard any feedback from her office as to whether she's OK with this?
I have not had any personal communications with her office about this application.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.
Not seeing any further questions.
And before we open the remote public hearing, I would again ask that everyone please be patient as we continue to learn, operate this new system in real time and navigate through the inevitable growing pains.
We are continuously looking for ways to fine tune this process and adding new features that allow for additional means of public participation in our council meetings.
I will moderate the public hearing in the following manner.
will be given two minutes to speak.
I will call on one speaker at a time.
And in the order in which they registered on the council's website, if you are a party of record and have not registered to speak, but would like to, you can sign up before the end of this public hearing by going to council's website at seattle.gov forward slash council.
The link is also listed on today's agenda.
Once I call the speaker's name, staff will unmute the appropriate microphone, and the automatic prompt if you have been unmuted will be the speaker's cue that it is their turn to speak.
You will then need to press star six to unmute yourself.
Please begin speaking by stating your name and the item you are addressing.
As a reminder, public comment should be related to council file, clerk file 314461. If you have comments about something that is not on, that is not court file 314461, you can always provide written comments by emailing my office.
Speakers will hear a chime when 10 seconds are left of the allotted time.
Once you hear the chime, we ask that you please begin to wrap up your public comment.
If the speakers do not end their public comment or their comments at the end of the allotted time, the speaker's microphone will be muted to allow us to call on the next speaker.
Once you have 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 Seattle Channel or the listening options listed on the agenda.
The public hearing on Clerk File 314461 is now open, and we will begin with the first speaker on the list.
I see Frida Wiesman and Abigail DeWies.
Apologies if I have pronounced your name incorrectly.
Council Member Strauss, actually Marty's the first on the list.
I had to scroll up the list.
Marty Liebowitz is first on the list, followed by Frida and then Abigail.
Thank you, Eric, for correcting that.
So please, Marty, welcome.
I'm not seeing.
There's Marty.
Marty, I see you now.
Good morning.
Press star six to unmute yourself.
Martin Bernal, HOC, he could be on the zoom client instead of calling in.
So he may just have to hit the mute button as well.
Okay.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Hi.
Okay.
This is Marty Leibovitz speaking on agenda item number one.
relating to the extension of the rezone.
Just to tell you a little bit about myself, I'm a former president of the Madrona Community Council and a resident of Madrona since 1978. And I'm a strong advocate for neighborhood business districts and NC zoning.
NC zoning really assists society in helping alleviate climate change because it puts neighborhood businesses close to residential areas to eliminate the need or minimize the need for people to drive to do their purchasing.
Our company, Madrona Enterprises, is a small family-run business that we established in 1978. We started building townhouses, won numerous awards for our townhouse structures, including Miller Muse, which was the first design review townhouse project long ago.
I wanted to just mention that Abby DeWeese is representing me because as you can tell, this is a very complicated thing, not easily decipherable.
and Abby has set me straight.
Originally, I was representing myself, applied myself, did some mistakes.
I tried to bring to the attention of the council that this site is an anomaly and should have been similar to the other sites adjacent to it.
It was processed in a complicated way So rather than tracking the original intent to make it like the other business district sites, zoning-wise, it was converted to this contract rezone.
And I was muted there.
Marty, we have reached the expiration of your two minutes plus the additional time.
Thank you for those thoughts.
I know that Abby is coming up in just a moment, and we look forward to hearing from her.
Up next is Frida.
Frida, welcome.
Frida, I see you.
If you want to hit unmute.
There we are.
Good morning, Frida.
Good morning.
Good morning, council members.
Thank you for this opportunity.
actually in support of this extension, this rezone number 314461. I think what Marty said is right on.
I think neighborhood businesses and multi-use land is really important so people don't have to travel far and wide to get what they need to live a good life.
So I'm totally in support of this rezone.
Thank you.
Anything else to share?
I see Frida has muted herself.
Thank you, Frida.
Last is Abigail.
Abigail, welcome.
Good morning.
Hi, good morning, Council Member Strauss and committee members.
My name is Abigail DeWeese, I'm speaking on behalf of the applicant, Marty Lebowitz, for council file 314461 regarding the rezone extension.
I'm a land use attorney with the Hillis Clark firm.
First, we just wanted to thank both SCCI and Council Central staff for their work on this rezone extension.
I think Kato has done a great job giving an overview of what we're asking for today.
And we really hope that the city council will support the rezone extension so that Marty has a chance to develop this property consistent with adjacent zoning.
Council member Strauss, you had a great question earlier about what the extension really does with respect to consistency with adjacent zones.
And I think that's really important.
As Kito pointed out, the height limit isn't going to be different under this NC3 zoning versus the LR zoning that it would default to.
But it's an issue of consistency with a portion of the site falling under the MHA rezone with neighborhood commercial zoning.
And then this also being neighborhood commercial zoning, it would be really, really hard to develop the site in the future.
if there is a split zone condition between low rise and neighborhood commercial zoning.
So that's really what's unique about this situation.
And then we think that the circumstances surrounding COVID and Marty has been searching for a development partner to develop this site, but because of COVID and the economic conditions, it really hasn't happened yet, but he absolutely hopes to.
So thank you so much for your consideration.
Thank you, Abigail.
Seeing no further speakers, and that was our last speaker remotely present to speak at this public hearing.
The public hearing on IT, Eric, can you confirm no further speakers?
That is correct, no further speakers.
Thank you, that was our last speaker.
And so the public hearing on Council Clerk File 314461 is now closed.
Thank you to everyone who provided comment today.
And unless there is any further discussion, this will be back before the committee on Wednesday, January 13th, 2021 for a possible vote.
So I see Council Member Peterson, take it away.
Thank you, Chair Strauss.
Do we know if any trees are going to be removed?
Any older trees are going to be removed from this site for the development?
I think, and Kito, correct me if I'm wrong, I think what we heard is that there's not a development application or there's not a proposed project at this time.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Council Member Strauss, there's not a mass-use permit application at this time.
how the site will be developed, whether there are significant trees, how they will be preserved if there are, is not information that's available for the extension.
And it would be subject to whatever regulations are in place at the time the applicant applies for a master use permit.
We will have our tree ordinance before that happens.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Colleagues, our next item of business today is a briefing and discussion on our quarterly tree protection report, timely, per the last question.
Mr. Ahn, will you please read into the title, the short title, and to the record?
Agenda item two, Seattle Department of Construction and Inspection and Office of Sustainability and Environment Tree Protections Update.
Thank you.
We are joined by Sandra Pinto-DeBater from the Office of Sustainability and Environment, and Shonda Emery and Mike Poddowski from the Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections.
Ladies and gentlemen, will you please take us away?
Thank you very much, Council Member Strauss and committee members.
We're here with our third quarterly report to tell you about our progress on tree protection enhancement.
And we have some really good news to share, both on the updates to the urban forestry plan, as well as some administrative and other regulatory efforts.
So Sandra and Shanda will take it from here.
And I think we're going to start out with Sandra and talk with you about the plan.
Thank you so much, Mike.
Thank you, everyone.
I appreciate the opportunity to share the progress on the Urban Forest Management Plan.
update and I just wanted to provide a little bit of background.
The urban forest management plan is the document that provides the framework for policy as well as action that guides city government decision making and to help Seattle maintain, preserve, enhance, and restore our urban trees and our urban forest.
I'm sorry, I just hear backgrounds.
Thank you so much.
This plan was originally created in 2007 and we strive to update it every five years.
The last time we updated the plan was in 2013, and then we resumed work in 2018 with a robust public engagement, intentionally engaging communities of color that have not been brought to the table and engaged in the past.
We have been talking about the plan in our quarterly reports, and I just wanted to update you on progress.
The city's core team working on urban forestry kicked off the draft 2020 Urban Forest Management Plan update public input process, providing a briefing to the Urban Forestry Commission on October 14th.
We ran the public input process process through November 30th.
The team created a webinar style presentation as well as an online feedback form to support public input in this era that we're not able to meet in person with community.
We posted the urban forest management plan documents, including the actual draft plan, the plan's executive summary, the presentation, and I mentioned in the online form on the Trees for Seattle website, which is And we share the information broadly with the community members that we engaged during the phase one of inclusive engagement.
We also re-engaged key stakeholders that participated in listening sessions.
that we held early in the process in 2018. And we also share links to elicit public input through the Urban Forestry Commission bulletin, the Trees for Seattle newsletter, the OSC newsletter as well.
And just to give you a sense of the range of outreach that we did is through the inclusive engagement phase one, we continue to ask participants whether they wanted to remain involved in the process and provide input once the draft plan was ready.
We gathered 90 residents that were interested.
We also shared all of these documents and requested input from the 650 members of the Urban Forestry Commission Bulletin.
We reached out to roughly another 120 participants from listening sessions, including tree advocates, implementation partners like nonprofit organizations that we work with ongoingly, government agencies, and tree service providers.
We received 165 responses to the online comment form.
89 of such responses included pretty detailed feedback and staff also received 11 direct emails.
With letters commenting on the draft plan.
So we have our work cut out for us.
We're very excited that we receive such robust response and the team is currently reviewing and discussing input received and determining, you know, like we're going to be creating a summary.
We're going to be Creating a series of themes.
We are certainly seeing a series of themes as we're reviewing the public comment, and we're going to be incorporating public comment into the new draft of the plan.
And in terms of next steps, we're going to be doing all of this review in December.
We plan to incorporate it into the plan and produce a new draft in January.
Then we will submit it to the mayor's office for approval.
Once approved, the plan will undergo SIPA review, and SDCI will issue a determination, and the team expects to share the plan formally with council in the spring.
I don't know if you have any questions at this point, or if we want to wait until Shanda finishes her piece on the three regulations to answer questions.
So Shanda, would you mind?
Yeah, I don't see any questions at this time.
Let's hear from Shonda.
Thank you, Sandra.
Good morning.
Thank you, Sandra.
SDCI and OSC and its partners have been working to improve tree protections and explore strategies to increase tree protections as outlined in Resolution 31902. So we take this task seriously, and we've undertaken work on a number of fronts.
As you know, the proposed draft Director's Rule 13-2020 received over 800 public comments this summer, with the vast majority in support of increased tree protections, and then many of those comments that we received asked us to go further with code updates.
SDCI is in the process of reviewing and responding to stakeholder comments on the proposed draft at this time.
As far as tree mapping, SDCI is working with other city departments to acquire updated tree canopy data in 2021. That'll show us the extent and distribution of trees across the city.
This project is a 3D aerial scan of the earth's surface that has many applications, including the measurement of tree canopy.
We're anticipating that with the city's commitment to this project, that the Department of Natural Resources will be successful in the next step to win the federal grant that will allow this key LIDAR project to move forward next year.
We have continued to improve permit review coordination.
We have two arborists at SDCI that are assisting in the permit review, including giving us advice on code enforcement cases.
As far as education and information updates, early next year, SDCI will be reaching out to local arborist companies with updated information about tree protection regulations and best practices, including the upcoming SDCI virtual home fairs.
This will help property owners learn more about the existing tree codes, such as what you need to know to protect exceptional trees, what the tree removal limits are, and how you can protect those trees when remodeling your home, as well as adding a detached accessory dwelling unit.
For tree tracking and removal and replacement, we're being very data-driven in our approach.
SDCI analysts continue to capture tree-related information from approved construction permit applications going back to July 2019. We plan to use that information to guide and inform us on approaches to increase protections for trees.
We're using that collected data to monitor the status of these trees, whether those trees are existing, preserved, and or replanted as part of mitigation, which allows staff to make adjustments as needed.
Right now, we've been working in partnership with the Office of Sustainability and Environment to evaluate the strategies identified in Resolution 31902 using a racial equity lens.
Right now, staff is considering whether any additional or alternative strategies might be better suited to address environmental disparities.
So we know that there are neighborhoods in Seattle that have a lower percentage of tree canopy coverage, and we're taking the time necessary to carefully evaluate those strategies identified in the resolution through that racial equity lens so that we can address the disparities as one of our guiding principles for any changes going forward.
So as far as next steps, our future work will involve a tailored public outreach effort to reach BIPOC residents who live in low income and low canopy neighborhoods.
We look forward to working with you over the next several weeks and months as we begin to prepare what this public outreach plan will look like and what it'll include for 2021. I can say that it'll certainly be a robust plan that moves us forward with an approach rooted in environmental justice.
That really concludes our briefing today.
We're happy to answer any questions that you have this time.
Thank you, Shonda.
Thank you, Mike.
Thank you, Sandra.
And your memo that is attached to the agenda today is very helpful.
I would ask that in the future, please, to have a PowerPoint presentation.
I had incorrectly made the assumption, and that is on me for making that assumption that we would have a PowerPoint today.
Within the memo, under progress on the urban forest management plan update, the webinar style presentation.
I'm signaling this for the viewing public.
Sandra has a video that is hosted on the Seattle government's website going through essentially most of this presentation.
And so for the viewing public, if you would like to view that, please do open the memo that is attached to this agenda item.
And in the third paragraph, click the hyperlink to the presentation.
Again, departments, I would strongly ask and encourage you to bring these types of presentations forward.
As we are here in the remote setting, just hearing verbal updates can be hard to follow along at times.
This memo is very comprehensive, and I appreciate it, but just wanted to signal that for our friends at SDCI and OSE.
Colleagues, I've got a couple small questions, but want to just check to see if any of you have questions.
Council Member Peterson, take it away.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair Strauss.
OSCE or STCI, when, and I'm sorry if you already said this, but when will we be getting the tree ordinance to review?
Is there a revised estimate of that, at least a month?
Not the exact day.
Yes, thanks for that question, Councilmember Peterson.
As Shonda had mentioned, we are planning to do this equity analysis of the strategies that are contained in the resolution.
And those really will drive the recommendations for code updates.
So we can't say for sure now what the results of that would be.
We are gonna be talking with the mayor's office hopefully in the next couple of weeks about our strategy moving forward with the public outreach as well as the equity analysis and the formulation of recommendations.
And we're hoping that we'll have more to share with you about the schedule as part of our fourth quarter report.
So more information is coming soon.
I know that you are very interested in tree code updates and we're working hard to help you with that.
Thank you.
And Council Member Peterson, I appreciate your sign in the background, and I'll also share with you, I've got mine here as well.
I think that this year, we had this resolution that I helped as staff to create, outlining our steps.
As we all know, this year was unexpected, and so those timelines I found to be, We need this year is all about remaining flexible in Sandra's video Presentation that is hosted on the Seattle government's website There is a next steps timeline Towards the end of that presentation, but again, I just hesitate before before tying us down to hard and fast dates and times with all of the different changes and the need to prioritize and focus in on such important issues this year.
It's just disrupted everything, as everyone already knows.
My only question here is, what are some of the uses of the data we receive from the LiDAR project, and how does it compare to the past LiDAR survey that was conducted?
I'll be happy to answer that.
So, LiDAR is a technology that sends kind of laser impulses, and then as they come back, they kind of register to help us create very detailed mapping.
There are quite a few city departments that use the LIDAR data for a multitude of uses, including geographic, land use, geological purposes.
I believe that The municipality involved has used LiDAR to try to plan ahead of landslides like what happened with Oso.
In our case, we use LiDAR for mapping the canopy.
So now they're too, I'm not gonna get too technical because actually I don't understand a whole lot of it, but I just wanna provide kind of like a, a framework for what I'm going to say.
So you can do LiDAR leaf on, meaning you do it during the summer where all the trees and leaves are on, but that only has the use for urban forestry.
Because the majority of the uses require leaf off, which is acquiring the data either in the spring or in the fall when there's no leaves on the trees.
We had to actually acquire the leaf off data and then follow a protocol well established by the U.S.
Forest Service that means that we have to pair it up with satellite imagery.
And in that way, the LiDAR information is kind of like a census of trees and it has a plus or minus a margin of error, which is the most accurate.
And then we pair it with a satellite imagery that brings in the leaf on color of the trees.
Anyway, that's as technical as I'm gonna get.
One of the things that we wanted to do with the 2016 LiDAR project was to be able to use the same technology that we used at the very beginning when we created the first plan.
We created that 2007 plan by doing an analysis of LiDAR information.
And we wanted to create a trend, to figure out what the trend the canopy cover change over time is for Seattle so that we could really tailor the work that we do and our actions and strategies and policies accordingly.
Unfortunately, we were not able to do a comparison.
When the consultant we hired looked at the 2001 data, And that was the highest, you know, the best way to measure at the time.
They realized that that data was not, didn't have enough resolution for it to be meaningful in terms of comparison.
And they explained to OSCE and the core team, you know, we can spend all of your money trying to clean up that data, but we would recommend that you consider 2016 your baseline.
We are participating in a multi department team that is looking into the possibility of acquiring LIDAR data next year, and we are applying for a grant.
to hopefully be able to do that.
So again, the way I try to explain this to people is technology changes, and we cannot blame.
Remember those PDAs, the Palm Pilot, that were so wonderful at the time?
We cannot blame a Palm Pilot for not being able to stream video today.
It's different technology.
Technology continues to improve.
And our intention is that when we do the next assessment, we're gonna continue to use the same, not only technology, but the protocol that will allow us to compare apples to apples.
I hope that answers your question, Councilor.
It does, that's very helpful.
And I'll look up your presentation on my Blackberry now.
Unfortunately, that would not be possible.
Right.
I really appreciate that review.
Colleagues, any further questions on this tree update?
I know because of the amended schedule for this year, we would have had many more updates, and I wanted to make sure that we got one last one in before the end of the year.
We'll have more updates next year as well.
Seeing no other questions, I want to thank you all, Mike, Sandra, Shonda, for joining us today to provide this update.
I'm glad that we'll be working with all of you to advance these tree protections in our city and look forward to bringing a new tree ordinance to the council as soon as possible.
So thank you all.
Thank you.
And our final item of business today is a briefing and discussion on the extension of the interim floodplain regulations.
Noah, will you please read this item into the record?
Agenda item three, extension of interim floodplain regulations.
Thank you.
We are joined by Maggie Glowicki, SDCI, and Keil Freeman of council central staff.
Before we begin, a note on process.
We have not yet introduced legislation to adopt the extension that we are discussing with committee today.
We have a plan.
We plan to have the legislation introduced next week to allow for a public hearing and consideration in January.
Given that we have a tight timeline to meet the adopt, that meet and adopt this legislation.
We're holding a preliminary briefing now so that we can quickly act in January.
Typically, I like to have two meetings before passing legislation, which is why we're having a short briefing today.
Thank you.
Maggie and Ketel, please take it away.
And I'll just say a couple of words to remind the council members about the legislative history here and then turn it over to Maggie to talk about the legislation that should be introduced shortly and what it would do.
So as the committee will recall, back in July, the council passed ordinance 126113, and that ordinance adopted interim floodplain regulations so that the city could continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program.
Those interim regulations will expire in February, and the committee and council will be considering an extension of those interim regulations here in January.
So I'll turn it over to Maggie to talk about on what the extension would do.
Good morning, Chair Strauss and committee members.
Thank you for having me here today.
And I'm going to share my screen with you because I do have a PowerPoint presentation that walks us through the information.
So, I'll be talking about the Interim Floodplain Development Regulations Extension.
I'll cover an overview of the regulations and a reason for the extension, as well as the public outreach that we've conducted to date and the next steps that we anticipate.
So, as Keto mentioned, in July 2020, City Council passed and the mayor signed Ordinance 126113, establishing interim floodplain development regulations.
These regulations contain building codes as well as other standards that make homes, businesses, and people safer from flooding.
They apply to the permit applications for construction on property within mapped floodplain areas.
So, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, also known as FEMA, produced the updated maps that we adopted in the interim regulations, and they also established the minimum required standards for those regulations.
These regulations are due to expire February 24th of 2021. And if these interim regulations are not extended, the property owners in the FEMA floodplain areas may not be able to purchase flood insurance or renew any existing policies.
So the reason for the extension is that we need additional time to evaluate properties that are not mapped by FEMA but are mapped by SPU as flood prone to determine if additional areas to determine if these additional areas need to be included in the regulations.
Also, the public outreach and environmental review for the permanent regulations have taken longer than we anticipated.
So here's an example of an area that is mapped by SPU as flood prone, but not mapped by FEMA.
So this is an area in the South Park neighborhood.
So we would like to evaluate areas such as these to determine if we're going to adopt these additional areas that then would be regulated under the floodplain regulations.
So to date, the public outreach that we've conducted is that we have a project web page up and running with information about both the interim regulations and the anticipated permanent regulations for the floodplains.
And we also have an area to sign up for people to be included in our email list for any public meetings that we do, as well as any additional information.
So prior to establishing the project webpage, we sent out 2,400 postcards to owners of properties in the FEMA floodplain areas, letting them know that they are mapped as floodplain areas and to direct them to our webpage for additional information and to sign up to be on our email list.
As of now, we have 160 subscribers to our email list for the floodplain development regulations.
So for the next steps on our work, we will continue with this public outreach.
We will also work with SPU staff to evaluate if additional areas should be included as flood prone, and we'll work on developing the permanent regulations.
So if you have questions, I can take those now.
Thank you, Maggie.
Let me just look at this.
I do have a few questions I want to check with my colleagues.
Seeing no questions from the colleagues yet.
Can you remind us of the significance of adopting this legislation in January and what the consequences to our city or property owners are if we do not adopt this legislation in January.
Yes.
So, um, Because of the delay in the permanent regulations, those interim regulations would expire.
And so that would mean that anybody in the property owners within the floodplain mapped areas would not be able to get insurance.
So if, say, a property owner was selling their property, then the new owner would need to acquire floodplain insurance.
They would no longer be able to get the floodplain insurance.
as well as if any of the policies are expiring, then they would not be able to renew those policies.
So that's the main consequence.
Thank you, that's helpful.
And as we had this legislation before us earlier this year, are there any changes in this legislation other than extending the interim regulations as compared to what we already adopted earlier this year?
So with the extension of the interim regulations, that's limited to only the interim regulations.
So there would be no additional regulations added on.
Great.
Thank you for that.
That's helpful.
And can you share a little bit, I can imagine why, but can you share a little bit about why it has taken longer to adopt permanent regulations than previously anticipated?
And so one of the reasons is COVID and everything just taking more time, you know, the public outreach.
And also regarding the public outreach, you know, we are basically, we didn't have a listserv with identified property owners in the floodplain areas.
So we needed to do a bit of legwork.
We worked with Office of Economic Development to get information on property owners in the Duwamish area.
We did outreach there, as well as mailing out the postcards, so then giving time for the postcards to get to everyone and then directing them to our website in order for us to build the listserv.
And then another main reason is that So there are areas that are mapped by SPU as flood prone areas, but they are not mapped by FEMA.
And so we really wanna do our due diligence to look at those areas and make sure that we evaluate whether we should bring in more areas to be regulated under the regulations to ensure safety during floods and additional flooding that we anticipate.
An immense amount of very technical work that is incredibly important to how we are going to live as the climate crisis continues until we have a major shift in how we do build and live our lives.
Lastly, have we heard any opposition to these interim regulations as they've already been in place for some time, or the permanent regulations from property owners in the affected areas?
Yes, so we've been working directly with port staff and they've, so the port has raised some concerns regarding existing over water structures on piers and what that would mean if they were going to do some repair projects or replacement projects because the pier is already there in a fixed elevation.
And so how's that, how will the regulations impact if they're going to redevelop on top of the pier.
And so we've identified that as an issue and we're working with staff at FEMA to see how, you know, if other areas have experienced that and how, you know, the best way to address that.
So, you know, we're working with the port staff as well as FEMA staff on that issue.
And then we've been doing reach out, you know, we're doing the public outreach in the, the Duwamish area.
And so far, we've just been walking property owners through how the regulations would impact their properties.
And so far, we haven't gotten any specific issues that any property owner has raised at this point.
But we'll continue to do the outreach and make sure that we identify all of those issues.
Thank you.
So it sounds like if there are issues, especially with the port and appears that we may that we have the opportunity to address those before the permanent regulations come in, come before the committee.
Exactly.
That's the full intent.
Thank you.
I believe you asked how the proposed legislation may differ from the previous one.
As Maggie said, the regulations are not being changed by the by the legislation that the council will consider.
One difference is that the length of the interim regulations, the length of time during which the interim regulations will be in place is gonna be somewhat longer than the six months that were for the current interim regulations.
So the bill that council will consider will provide for a year long extension to give STCI and the council additional time to consider permanent regulations.
Thank you for noting that and for the public, the viewing public and everyone, that was a request made by me so that we did not have to continue extending interim regulations as we understand that some of this outreach, because it is so detailed and technical, may need to take longer.
And rather than continuing to extend interim measures, I wanted to provide a more robust amount of time.
Any other questions?
I see Council Member Peterson.
Nothing over there.
Great.
Maggie, excellent work.
Thank you so much.
Council Member Mosqueda, I see you.
No questions there.
No questions.
Thanks, Mr. Chair.
And so if we have no further questions, Council Member Juarez, nothing, you're good, thumbs up.
Thank you all.
As I stated, I'd like to usually have two meetings on items.
And because we needed to have the legislation referred before we can publish public hearing notices, this item will be back before our committee on Wednesday, January 13th for a public hearing and a vote.
Thank you, Maggie.
Thank you all.
Thank you.
Good of the order.
Colleagues, any items for the good of the order?
I am seeing none.
Great.
Well, thank you all.
This does conclude the Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee of December 9th, 2020. As a reminder, our next committee meeting will be on January 13th, starting at 9.30 a.m.
Thank you for attending, and we are adjourned.