How will “Regulatory Reform” of the Land Use Code now before the City Council affect your Neighborhood and your Rights?

SEATTLE COMMUNITY COUNCIL FEDERATION

Monthly Meeting –Tuesday, April 24, 2012, 7 p.m.

Central Area Senior Center, 500 30th Avenue South  98144

[This beautiful facility with free parking and a grand view of Lake Washington is just three blocks east of Martin Luther King, Jr. Way S. and one block south of S. Jackson Street]

http://seattlefederation.blogspot.com/

 AGENDA

 How will “Regulatory Reform” of the Land Use Code now before the City Council affect your Neighborhood and your Rights?

featuring Mike Podowski, Department of Planning and Development 

 Hear the latest from City officials and neighborhood leaders about Land Use Code changes in Council Bill 117430, which a City Council committee votes on in May.  In the name of “regulatory reform,” the Mayor, Department of Planning and Development, and development community would sweep away long-cherished neighborhood protections and notice/appeal rights.  

 The key changes:  (1) reduce or eliminate parking requirements; (2) exempt much bigger buildings from SEPA notice and appeal; (3) allow commercial businesses in residential zones; (4) release many existing buildings from currently required street-level retail; (5) lengthen temporary use permits to 18 months (often used for parking lots and construction storage) from the current 6 and eliminate the citizen right to appeal them; and (6) expand accessory dwelling units.  

 How will these changes affect your neighborhood or neighborhood plan?  Why didn’t DPD engage the public before presenting these proposals to the City Council?  What can you do to influence the City Council response?  What position should SCCF take on the proposals?  Please come with your ideas and questions!  

 The April meeting also includes our monthly Round Robin to share with others the recent issues and projects in your neighborhood.  If you have informational materials you would like distributed at the meeting, please e-mail electronic copies or links to jeannieh@serv.net. 

            7:00     Administration

1.      Call to order and introductions

2.      Minutes /Treasurer’s Report / President’s Report

       7:10     Regulatory Reform:  Mike Podowski, DPD   

 7:40     Regulatory Reform:  Discussion   

 8:15     Round Robin of issues and projects in your neighborhood

 9:00     Adjourn

Ch21 Video on Regulatory Reform May 23 - Live link here

Seattle Channel 21's April 20 Seattle Inside/Out TV program debated the "regulatory reform" proposal to reduce developers' parking requirements. You can see it on-line on your computer at     
http://www.seattlechannel.org/videos/video.asp?ID=3061216 
On TV cable, the show will be rebroadcast on channel 21 this Monday, May 23, at 1:30 a.m., 8 a.m., noon, and 6 p.m.; Tuesday. at 4 a.m. and 9 a.m., and 12:30 and 6:30 p.m.;  Wednesday at 8:30 a.m. and 1:30 and 8:30 p.m.; and Thursday at 3 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. and 7:30 p.m.  Congratulations to Greg Hill, Oliver Osborne, realtor John Fox, and Colleen Kirk of Cutz Salon for doing a great job as neighborhood advocates on the show.   

HOW WILL “REGULATORY REFORM” OF THE LAND USE CODE NOW BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL AFFECT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOUR RIGHTS?

HOW WILL “REGULATORY REFORM” OF THE LAND USE CODE NOW BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL AFFECT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOUR RIGHTS?

Hear the latest from City officials and neighborhood leaders about Land Use Code changes in Council Bill 117430, which a City Council committee votes on in May.  In the name of “regulatory reform,” the Mayor, Department of Planning and Development, and development community would sweep away long-cherished neighborhood protections and notice/appeal rights.   

The key changes:  (1) reduce or eliminate parking requirements; (2) exempt much bigger buildings from SEPA notice and appeal; (3) allow commercial businesses in residential zones; (4) release many existing buildings from currently required street-level retail; (5) lengthen temporary use permits to 18 months (often used for parking lots and construction storage) from the current 6 and eliminate the citizen right to appeal them; and (6) expand accessory dwelling units. 

How will these changes affect your neighborhood or neighborhood plan?  Why didn’t DPD engage the public before presenting these proposals to the City Council?  What can you do to influence the City Council response?  What position should SCCF take on the proposals?  Please come with your ideas and questions! 

The Seattle Community Federation, the oldest and most active community umbrella group in the nation, was founded in 1949 as the Jackson Street Community Council to facilitate resettlement of Seattle’s Japanese residents who had returned from wartime interment to find their homes and businesses gone. A second founding impetus was to achieve the same objectives for our black veterans facing the same difficulties.

Due to post-war resurgence of community awareness other neighborhood groups emerged, and established councils and clubs blossomed anew, leading to the Federation expansion to represent neighborhood groups in all parts of our city.

Yearly dues for member groups are $50. SCCF welcomes new member groups, and encourages renewal by groups whose membership in SCCF may have lapsed. Individual donations are also welcome and tax deductible, and go very far, as SCCF is an all-volunteer 501(c)(3) organization. Please mail your check to SCCF, 2370 Yale Avenue East, Seattle, WA 98102-3310. For questions, contact treasurer Chris Leman, (206) 322-5463, cleman@oo.net.

The Federation has returned to its roots in central Seattle. NOAA Pacific Headquarters, our meeting place for the past decade, has been closed. Since August 2011 we meet at 7 pm on the fourth Tuesday of every month at the luxurious ADA compliant Central Area Senior Center, 500 30^th Avenue South. http://www.centralareaseniorcenter.org/ 

Homeless in Haller Lake?

Homeless in Haller Lake?

Haller Lake development worries low-income housing advocates. Zoning “Magic Loophole” converts 207 affordable housing units to 2000 unaffordable units, puts residents on the street.

Using what some might call a “magic loophole” in Seattle’s zoning code a developer is converting a couple of hundred affordable housing units to about 2,000 unaffordable units on the same 365,040 square feet on nine square blocks.

The results: Dramatic increases in already challenging neighborhood traffic, congestion, noise and pollution, not to mention an alarming spike in homelessness.

Likely not since lower Queen Anne was scraped clear of its affordable Victorian apartments to make way for the 1962 Seattle World’s Fair have so many Seattle households been so adversely affected.

by LINDA BRILL / KING 5 News

KING5.com

http://www.king5.com/news/cities/seattle/Northgate-development-worries-low-income-housing-advocates-146916515.html

Posted on April 10, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Updated April 10, 2012 at 7:21 PM, edited April 14, 2012 at 3:34 PM by Haller Lake Community Club Land Use Chair Rick Barrett.

SEATTLE -- Community groups and housing advocates have appealed a planned development just north of Northgate Mall and across the street from the famously congested Northgate exit on I-5, are concerned that low-income housing is disappearing in Seattle.

The property in question is Northgate Apartments at 11200 1St Avenue NE. just across the street from the Northgate mall, and located in the southern portion of the almost entirely single and multi-family zoned Haller Lake neighborhood. 
There are 207 low-income units that will likely be replaced by nearly 2,000 mid-and high-income units.

The Seattle Department of Planning and Development has granted the developers a rezone but is not requiring one-to-one replacement of the low-income units.

Resident Frank Booth, who is disabled with diabetes, said, "I don't want to be homeless."

The rezone and development could mean Booth's $800-a-month, one-bedroom unit would be torn down and replaced with a one bedroom renting for twice the price.

"I feel like I'm being run out of Seattle," said Booth.

The Maple Leaf Community Council and The Seattle Displacement Coalition have formally appealed the development, along with a Haller Lake resident and Haller Lake Community Club member. The Coalition's John Fox said failure to require low income units "runs directly in contradiction to the city's commitment to preserve low income housing and it contradicts the city's plan to end homelessness."

In a written statement, developers Northgate Plaza LLC said "there does need to be further consideration of the conditions of approval. That is what the appeal process is for, and we look forward to participating in that process."

The zoning appeal will be heard by Seattle's Hearing Examiner on Tuesday, May 22.

Comments on C.B. 117430, “Regulatory Reform”

Dear Councilmembers,

Attached and pasted below is a letter from the Federation about the regulatory reform proposal you will be considering.  We hope you will consider our comments.

Jeannie Hale, Pres

Seattle Community Council Federation

 April 11, 2012

 Members of the Planning, Land Use, and Sustainability Committee

Seattle City Council
601 Fifth Avenue, Second floor

P. O. Box 34025
Seattle, WA 98124-4025

 Comments on C.B. 117430, “Regulatory Reform”

 Dear City Councilmembers:

The Seattle Community Council Federation has deep concerns about many portions of the so-called “regulatory reform” package.   The administration’s development of these proposals has not been inclusive, and as a result the distorted priorities unreasonably favor certain developers and businesses while undermining rights and protections that residents and small businesses now depend on to ensure the livability and sustainability of their neighborhoods. 

“Regulatory reform” is an Orwellian term for this legislation, which in important ways removes rights that Seattleites now have to participate in decisions that affect them.  One would never know from the many ways that it would degrade the quality of life and sustainability in neighborhoods and the democratic rights of the public.  The changes reverse nearly a century of precedent. They effectively repeal important portions of neighborhood plans without notice or consultation. 

There has been no real outreach and engagement so far with those who most negatively affected.   

The Department of Planning and Development grossly failed the City Council in no real outreach and engagement except to a chosen few, and the City Council must make up for this omission.   The March 28 public hearing was poorly publicized and was held downtown in the daytime.  

Please delay action on this package until public meetings and outreach mailings are held in neighborhoods throughout Seattle.  Not to do so is to disenfranchise the very stakeholders who should most be consulted and involved in consideration of changes of this magnitude.

To be sustainable, growth must proceed at a pace that the public finds acceptable, and through actions that the public understands and participates in.  The policy process must be open and consultative, and the policies themselves must be balanced.  For example, the public’s right of appeal is not a “regulatory barrier”—it is a fundamental of democracy that ensures reasonable and balanced land use decisions at the ground level. 

This legislation would so accelerate the changes occurring in neighborhoods that it will surely undermine the consensus on growth.  Seattle is already growing at a brisk pace, about as quickly as is possible without damaging communities as one sees happening in some world cities with less concern about humanity that Seattle believes it has.  

 

As we understand that the issues of parking and SEPA thresholds are being held for a future Committee meeting, we will provide our comments to you on those topics in a separate letter.  In this letter, we particularly oppose the several ways in which the legislation would detract from the livability and sustainability of residential areas by injecting commercial uses into their midst.  Seattle must remember the answers for why we have residential zones.  The noise, pollution, congestion, and other disruption that accompany business development are damaging to communities. 

 

The Council should refuse to extend temporary use permits to 18 months from the current 6 months and must not remove the current right of appeal.  18 months is certainly not “temporary” and the term should remain at 6 months.  The right of neighbors to appeal the current 6-month temporary use permit is an essential way that land use decisions are kept sane.  This right must not be removed, especially if there is any increase in length of the permit.  The reasoning given for removing this democratic right—that the DPD permit fee could be less—misrepresents the issue.  The City Council can reduce the permit fee without damaging the rights of people to file an appeal that ensures the decision is a reasonable one.

The Council should also resist the proposals to expand the business presence in residential dwellings.  Communities are already being damaged in current law by the displacement of residential space by business space.  There are fewer people living in and participating in communities, fewer “eyes on the street,” and many other negative consequences that the Council has not considered. The proposed changes will accelerate this trend in which Seattle is becoming less of place where people live, and more a place where they maintain technical residence but actually use their residence for business that should be occurring in a commercial zone. 

 Thanks for your consideration of the above comments.  We will follow up with another letter on some of the matters not yet covered here. 

 Sincerely,

 Jeannie Hale, President

3425 West Laurelhurst Drive NE

Seattle, Washington  98105

206-525-5135 / fax 206-525-9631

jeannieh@serv.net

Comments on C.B. 117430, “Regulatory Reform”

 

Dear Councilmembers,

Attached and pasted below is a letter from the Federation about the regulatory reform proposal you will be considering.  We hope you will consider our comments.

Jeannie Hale, Pres

Seattle Community Council Federation

 April 11, 2012

 Members of the Planning, Land Use, and Sustainability Committee

Seattle City Council
601 Fifth Avenue, Second floor

P. O. Box 34025
Seattle, WA 98124-4025

 Comments on C.B. 117430, “Regulatory Reform”

 Dear City Councilmembers:

The Seattle Community Council Federation has deep concerns about many portions of the so-called “regulatory reform” package.   The administration’s development of these proposals has not been inclusive, and as a result the distorted priorities unreasonably favor certain developers and businesses while undermining rights and protections that residents and small businesses now depend on to ensure the livability and sustainability of their neighborhoods.  

“Regulatory reform” is an Orwellian term for this legislation, which in important ways removes rights that Seattleites now have to participate in decisions that affect them.  One would never know from the many ways that it would degrade the quality of life and sustainability in neighborhoods and the democratic rights of the public.  The changes reverse nearly a century of precedent. They effectively repeal important portions of neighborhood plans without notice or consultation. 

There has been no real outreach and engagement so far with those who most negatively affected.   

The Department of Planning and Development grossly failed the City Council in no real outreach and engagement except to a chosen few, and the City Council must make up for this omission.   The March 28 public hearing was poorly publicized and was held downtown in the daytime. 

Please delay action on this package until public meetings and outreach mailings are held in neighborhoods throughout Seattle.  Not to do so is to disenfranchise the very stakeholders who should most be consulted and involved in consideration of changes of this magnitude.

To be sustainable, growth must proceed at a pace that the public finds acceptable, and through actions that the public understands and participates in.  The policy process must be open and consultative, and the policies themselves must be balanced.  For example, the public’s right of appeal is not a “regulatory barrier”—it is a fundamental of democracy that ensures reasonable and balanced land use decisions at the ground level. 

This legislation would so accelerate the changes occurring in neighborhoods that it will surely undermine the consensus on growth.  Seattle is already growing at a brisk pace, about as quickly as is possible without damaging communities as one sees happening in some world cities with less concern about humanity that Seattle believes it has.

   

As we understand that the issues of parking and SEPA thresholds are being held for a future Committee meeting, we will provide our comments to you on those topics in a separate letter.  In this letter, we particularly oppose the several ways in which the legislation would detract from the livability and sustainability of residential areas by injecting commercial uses into their midst.  Seattle must remember the answers for why we have residential zones.  The noise, pollution, congestion, and other disruption that accompany business development are damaging to communities.  

The Council should refuse to extend temporary use permits to 18 months from the current 6 months and must not remove the current right of appeal.  18 months is certainly not “temporary” and the term should remain at 6 months.  The right of neighbors to appeal the current 6-month temporary use permit is an essential way that land use decisions are kept sane.  This right must not be removed, especially if there is any increase in length of the permit.  The reasoning given for removing this democratic right—that the DPD permit fee could be less—misrepresents the issue.  The City Council can reduce the permit fee without damaging the rights of people to file an appeal that ensures the decision is a reasonable one.

The Council should also resist the proposals to expand the business presence in residential dwellings.  Communities are already being damaged in current law by the displacement of residential space by business space.  There are fewer people living in and participating in communities, fewer “eyes on the street,” and many other negative consequences that the Council has not considered. The proposed changes will accelerate this trend in which Seattle is becoming less of place where people live, and more a place where they maintain technical residence but actually use their residence for business that should be occurring in a commercial zone.  

 Thanks for your consideration of the above comments.  We will follow up with another letter on some of the matters not yet covered here. 

 Sincerely,

 Jeannie Hale, President

3425 West Laurelhurst Drive NE

Seattle, Washington  98105

206-525-5135 / fax 206-525-9631

jeannieh@serv.net

LIBRARY LEVY ORDINANCE must increase Library operating hours, NOT displace current funding, and MUST have a public oversight COMMITTEE

LIBRARY LEVY ORDINANCE must increase Library operating hours, NOT displace current funding, and MUST have a public oversight COMMITTEE

The Seattle Public Library is in trouble and needs your help!  In the next few weeks, the City Council will vote to put on the August 7 ballot a $17 million/year, 7-year property tax levy for operations, but Council Bill 117425 would leave the library unaccountable to voters in how it spends the levy and vulnerable to cuts in the funds it now receives.  The Council needs to hear about needed improvements by message (contact info below) in the public comment periods that are at the beginning of any City Council committee or full Council meeting when Council Bill or later proposals are discussed.

Background.  Libraries for All, the 1998 bond issue, was in danger of failing at the polls until the addition of ironclad numerical allocations of the revenues and a strong, independent, geographically based oversight committee.  Unfortunately, C.B. 117425 lacks numerical allocations or an oversight committee.  Letters from the City Neighborhood Council and the Seattle Community Council Federation recommend both, suggesting as a model resolutions 29846, 29952, and 29997 which created the public oversight committee for Libraries for All.  As currently proposed, the Library levy has less accountability than any property tax bond or levy proposed to voters in the last twenty years.  Please urge the City Council to make the following improvements:

1.     Amend C.B. 117425 to commit that the City Council will not cut the existing level of library support from the General Fund, and that the Library Board will increase the hours and days of the week in which libraries are open.  As written, the proposed levy ordinance would allow the Council to completely displace with levy funds the current level of General Fund support now provided to the Library, and allow the Board not to increase the hours and days of being open. 

Without a City Council commitment to maintain General Fund support and a Library Board commitment to increase the hours and days of the week when the libraries are open, passage of the levy could leave the Library with no more funds or operating hours than it has today, plus the possibility that funds and hours will decline when the levy runs out at the end of seven years.  Consider that although part of the 1999 parks levy provided operating support, when the levy ran out that funding was not fully restored from the General Fund, leaving parks funding in worse shape than before the levy was passed.  

2.   Add to C.B. 117425 a strong, independent, geographically based oversight committee like that for the 1998 Libraries for All bond measure as created by Resolutions 29846, 29952, and 29997.  Oversight committees were in the ordinances putting before the voters the Bridging the Gap transportation levy, the Fire Facilities and Emergency Response Levy, the two parks levies, the series of housing levies, and the three Families and Education levies.  The proposed Library levy includes capital spending that needs oversight by a committee.  And contrary to claims that the levy’s primary purpose of operations spending does not require a public oversight committee, oversight committees cover the Families and Education levy (entirely an operations levy) and covered the 1999 parks levy (partially an operations levy). 

Voter-approved funding for the Library is in particular need of a public oversight committee because the City Council and Mayor and hence the voters have so little power over how the Library Board would spend the levy.  A geographic system of representation for the oversight committee is particularly needed because of concerns that the Central Library’s building and programs will take funds away from operations and hours of the branch libraries.  And the committee needs to be independent -- not with voting positions for high-ranking City officials (as with the Bridging the Gap oversight committee) or with just one member required to be a Seattle resident (as with the Fire Facilities and Emergency Response Levy).

WHAT YOU CAN DO NOW

This is urgent, and you can make a difference!  NOW, please contact all nine Councilmembers. The message:  Amend C.B. 11745 committing to increase hours and days of operation while holding the Library harmless from cuts in its current General Fund allocation; and creating a strong, independent, and geographically based oversight committee like the one that Resolutions 29846, 29952, and 29997 created for the 1998 Libraries for All bond issue.  Below are voice mails and e-mail addresses (and/or find the Councilmembers on Twitter and Facebook).  It’s best to write to each separately, not address all in one message.  The fax number is (206) 684-8587.

sally.clark@seattle.gov 684-8802

tim.burgess@seattle.gov 684-8806

tom.rasmussen@seattle.gov 684-8808

jean.godden@seattle.gov 684-8807

richard.conlin@seattle.gov 684-8805

sally.bagshaw@seattle.gov 684-8801

bruce.harrell@seattle.gov 684-8804

nick.licata@seattle.gov 684-8803

mike.obrien@seattle.gov 684-8800

SEATTLE COMMUNITY COUNCIL FEDERATION

March 28, 2012

Seattle City Council
601 Fifth Avenue, Second floor
P. O. Box 34025
Seattle, WA 98124-4025

Re:  Proposed levy ordinance should hold harmless the existing funding of the Library, commit to increased hours and days of opening, and create a strong, independent, and geographically balanced oversight committee to ensure accountability

Dear City Councilmember:

Throughout our 66 year history, the Seattle Community Council Federation has strongly supported funding for the Seattle Public Library.  As you know, Council Bill 117425 is a proposed ordinance that would place before the voters a 7-year property tax levy of about $17 million/year. 

SCCF has not yet taken a position on the proposed levy, but believes that improvements in the levy ordinance are needed to make it most deserving of assent from the voters.  First, we suggest that C.B. 117425 be amended to commit the City Council not to cut the existing level of library support from the General Fund, and to increase the hours and days of the week in which the downtown library and the branch libraries are open.  As currently written, the proposed levy ordinance would allow the City Council to completely displace with levy funds the current level of General Fund support now provided to the Library, and not to make any increase in the hours or days of the week of being open. 

Without a City Council commitment to maintain General Fund support and to increase the hours and days of the week when the libraries are open, passage of the levy could leave the Library with no more funds than it has today, plus no assurance of continued funding when the levy runs out at the end of seven years.  Consider that although the 1999 parks levy provided operating support, when the levy ran out that funding was not fully restored from the General Fund, leaving Department of Parks and Recreation funding in worse shape than before the levy was passed.  

Our other concern is that C.B. 117425 does not include an oversight committee to ensure public accountability for spending of the levy proceeds.  We urge that the levy ordinance include a strong, independent, and geographically balanced oversight committee by use of the same language from Resolutions 29846, 29952, and 29997 that created the oversight committee for the Libraries for All bond measure.

Accountability for voter-approved levy and bond revenues via oversight committees has been central to voter approval of the bond and levy measures of recent decades.  Such committees have overseen not only the Libraries for All bond measure, but the Bridging the Gap transportation levy, Families and Education levy, Housing levy, and both Parks levies.  In almost all cases, the oversight committees were created by the ordinance that put the measure on the ballot.  Some of the committees have been more effective than others, but none have greater power, independence, or geographic balance than did the oversight committee for the Libraries for All bond measure. 

Taxpayers are more likely to approve a bond or levy measure if they know that spending of the revenues will be overseen by an oversight committee.  A strong, independent, and geographically balanced oversight committee is especially needed for the Library levy as it was for the Libraries for All bond measure because the Library Board has so much power but is not elected, and because of concerns that branch libraries will be sacrificed to the funding needs of the downtown library.  

The City Council created a public oversight committee for the Libraries for All bond issue shortly before the November 1998 election because the bond issue was being criticized for a lack of accountability in how the funds were to be spent.  SCCF urges the Council to be more proactive in this case by establishing the oversight committee in the bond issue ordinance (C.B. 117425), using the same language as was in Resolutions 29846, 29952, and 29997.  This letter was discussed, revised, and approved at the Seattle Community Council Federation’s March 27 board meeting. 

Sincerely,

Jeannie Hale, President
3425 West Laurelhurst Drive NE
Seattle, Washington  98105
206-525-5135 / fax 206-525-9631
jeannieh@serv.net