QUIET ALLIANCE NOISE ORDINANCE ALERT.

ALMOST THERE, ONLY ONE MORE VOTE NEEDED, HERE’S HOW YOU CAN EASILY HELP.

Thanks to a torrent of calls and e-mails from citizens and businesses, we got four votes at the City Council March 2 against the new loophole in the noise ordinance; but we need a fifth vote to pass a brief new ordinance reversing that devastating result. [Too busy to read further? Please leave messages as suggested below.]

There's hope of reversing Monday's decision against allowing annual revisions in the new variance, which now can last the life of a public construction project. Thanks go to Nick Licata, Richard Conlin, Bruce Harrell, and Richard McIver for voting to allow yearly revisions. They stressed that a variance lasting many years cannot foresee all difficulties in regulating noise, and that the Department of Planning and Development and the City Council itself mustn't be denied the ability to revise it yearly to correct mistakes or omissions. Now they can help us get that fifth vote for the brief new ordinance that is required.

Most importantly, urge Councilmembers Tom Rasmussen, Jean Godden, Tim Burgess, Sally Clark, and Jan Drago to help pass a brief new ordinance reversing their March 2 vote against allowing annual revisions in the their public construction variance. As Transportation Committee Chair and Vice Chair respectively, Drago and Clark bear heaviest responsibility for this historic weakening of the ordinance (which until March 2 limited most variances to two weeks!). They passed the changes out of their committee without correcting DPD's failure to reach out to the public, develop alternatives, or identify the businesses, neighborhoods, and the disadvantaged who will be most hurt.

Rasmussen, Godden, Burgess, Clark, and Drago didn't acknowledge--hopefully didn't know--that their "forever" variance could allow all-night construction not just by WSDOT and Sound Transit, but also local road, bridge, sewer and water agencies, any local improvement district, City Light, the new jail, the Port, the Seattle Housing Authority, the Convention Center, public schools and colleges--in fact, any federal, state, local, or special-purpose agency that exists or might be invented.

Noise is harmful--some countries (even our own) have used it for torture. Seattle's noise ordinance (adopted in 1978) explicitly commits the City Council to protect the public's 'sleep and repose.' To be honest, the Council on Monday should also have repealed that uniquely strong commitment--but to honor it, the Council must not allow this new loophole to stand. In barring nighttime noise, the ordinance has for thirty years also protected against nighttime light, dust, vibration, and traffic--all will increase with the new variance that, for the life of the project, could allow construction 24-7.

Without a yearly opportunity to revise the variance, citizens and businesses from now on will have no recourse once they discover how grossly public construction is evading the noise ordinance's protections. Because of how the five Councilmembers voted on Monday, now if the City tries to tighten a variance's hours or noise levels, the construction agency will get a court to block the improvements, as the applicable law is what existed when the variance was issued. The March 2 repeal of checks and balances also makes it easier for regulators to be captured by the regulated. The Council simply must pass a brief new ordinance reversing this reckless, lasting blow to livability and democratic rights--and won't unless you call and write NOW. The decks are stacked against us, but we must try--for ourselves, and for future generations.

The Council must also reconsider its March 2 action because--after the public comment period ended--it suspended its rules to allow Sound Transit to strongly oppose Licata's amendment allowing annual revision of the variance. Revealingly, Sound Transit also acknowledged that it's been working quietly on the proposals since March 2006 with the City regulators (not for another two years did the public and the Council receive the proposals, in April 2008!). On March 2 the Council compounded this incestuous relationship by giving Sound Transit the last word, denying the public any chance to rebut its special pleading before giving Sound Transit what it wanted. Where's the Council's sense of fair play?

Please sound off (quietly) to all! Individually addressed messages are always more heeded than if sent to all Councilmembers in common. The fax number is (206) 684-8587; the address is City Council, P.O. Box 34025, Seattle, WA 98124-4025. Send e-mail and leave a voice mail. Here are the names and message (or just say you support the Quiet Alliance's effort at reconsideration):

PLEASE RECONSIDER YOUR MARCH 2 VOTE, AND SPONSOR A BRIEF NEW ORDINANCE ALLOWING ANNUAL REVISIONS IN THE PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION VARIANCE

sally.clark@seattle.gov 684-8802
tim.burgess@seattle.gov 684-8806
tom.rasmussen@seattle.gov 684-8808
jean.godden@seattle.gov 684-8807
jan.drago@seattle.gov 684-8801

THANKS FOR VOTING TO ALLOW ANNUAL REVISIONS IN THE PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION VARIANCE. PLEASE SPONSOR A BRIEF NEW ORDINANCE MAKING THAT CHANGE IN THE MARCH 2 RESULT

richard.conlin@seattle.gov 684-8805
bruce.harrell@seattle.gov 684-8804
nick.licata@seattle.gov 684-8803
richard.mciver@seattle.gov 684-8800

The above alert was prepared by Chris Leman (Ph.D., political science) for the Quiet Alliance.
He can be reached at (206) 322-5463, cleman@oo.net.

SEATTLE COMMUNITY COUNCIL FEDERATION
Regular Meeting
NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency), Pacific Marine Center on Lake Union
1801 Fairview Avenue East
http://seattlefederation.blogspot.com/
Thursday, February 26, 2009

AGENDA

Street Vacations – Understanding the Process and the
Public Benefit Requirement
featuring Beverly Barnett, Seattle Department of Transportation

Street vacation petitions are filed by private property owners and developers throughout the City. Some are minor; others involve significant transfers of public right-of-ways to private interests. Seattle’s policies require a long-term public benefit to the general public for approval of a vacation petition. How does the City interpret and apply the “public benefit requirement?” Is it sufficient that the community would benefit from the economic growth a shopping mall would bring? Should major institutions such as universities and hospitals be off the hook because they serve a public purpose? Learn about the City’s complex street vacation process, the many issues and how you can get involved from Beverly Barnett who plays a major role in the street vacation process in the City.

The February meeting will also include our monthly Round Robin of issues and projects in your neighborhood. It is your opportunity to brief our citywide membership about what you are working on and to share perceptions on what is going right and what isn’t with our city government.

If you have informational materials you would like distributed at the meeting, please email electronic copies or links to Jeannie Hale at jeannieh@serv.net.

7:00 Call to Order and Introductions
Administration
1. Changes to the agenda
2. Treasurer’s report
3. President’s report

7:15 Street Vacations – Understanding the Process and the Public Benefit Requirement: Beverly Barnett, SDOT

8:00 Round Robin

1. Open and Participatory Government Plan
2. New alliance opposing the Dearborn/Goodwill project
3. Funding for the Mercer Project—or Not
4. HB 1490—Futurewise or Unwise Future?—an Update
5. Other issues/projects

9:00 Adjourn

NOAA is a federal facility on high security alert, so attendees must enter by the security gate and may need to present photo ID. If you haven't attended a recent Federation meeting, please send your name, contact information, and address to rickbarrett@gmail.com to be added to the entry list. No e-mail? Call 206-365-1267. The building is ADA compliant, with ample parking in front.

The latest version of the TOD bill hit the street Friday night, 02/18/09, and significantly waters down some density requirements (The Senate version of the bill is SB 5687.)
The new draft requires 50 units/acre only in areas previously defined by the Puget Sound Regional Council as “growth centers.” These centers are: Auburn, DT Bellevue, Overlake, Everett, Federal Way, Kent, Lakewood, Lynnwood, Puyallup, Redmond, Seatac, Capitol Hill, DT Seattle, Northgate, the University District, DT Tacoma, and Tukwila.

Get the 02/13/09 version of HB 1490 at http://seattletransitblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/h-19642.pdf

THE RAINIER VALLEY POST: What if Futurewise & TCC had a community meeting & forgot to invite the community? 2/14

THE RAINIER VALLEY POST: What if Futurewise & TCC had a community meeting & forgot to invite the community? 2/14

THE RAINIER VALLEY POST: Councilmember Sally Clark to host info workshop on HB 1490; 2/18

THE RAINIER VALLEY POST: Councilmember Sally Clark to host info workshop on HB 1490; 2/18

PROPOSED REVISIONS TO NOISE ORDINANCE

SEATTLE COMMUNITY COUNCIL FEDERATION

February 11, 2009

City Councilmembers
City Hall, 600 4th Avenue, 2nd floor
P.O. Box 94749
Seattle, Washington 98124-4749

RE: PROPOSED REVISIONS TO NOISE ORDINANCE

Dear City Councilmembers:

The Seattle Community Council Federation understands that the City Council may vote as early as February 17 on a historic weakening of Seattle’s noise ordinance. In addition to other points made below, we urge that the Council not create for public agencies a major construction variance that could last the lifetime of each project. This would be another example of government as regulator going easier on itself than on others. If any such variance is to be created, it must not have a term of more than one year.

We suggest that as currently proposed, the variance for major public construction projects would go back on this uniquely strong commitment that the City Council made in the noise ordinance (SMC 25.08.010): “It is the express intent of the City Council to control the level of noise in a manner which promotes commerce; the use, value and enjoyment of property; sleep and repose; and the quality of the environment.”

Public construction variance must not be for more than one year at a time. The proposal that public agencies receive a variance for up to the lifetime of a project would dramatically weaken the noise ordinance. Currently, most major public projects rely on noise variances that last no more than two weeks, and they are being built successfully under this process.

This current need to re-apply for variances is a self-correcting process. The City and the public identify improvements for future variances as mistakes emerge from earlier variances. As the City Council committee was informed by staff at the December 16 meeting, the City cannot legally change the basics of a variance after it is issued. If the Council were to allow DPD to issue a variance for the life of each project, loopholes later discovered in the variance could not be corrected without facing a lawsuit from the public construction agency that holds the variance.

Appeals—and the very potential of their being filed—are an important tool for the public to protect itself from undue DPD permissiveness with public construction agencies. But the Transportation Committee’s proposal would limit appeals to Seattle's Hearing Examiner only about the initial application for this “forever” variance, and would allow appeals to Superior Court only up to the decision--one year into the variance--when DPD makes the variance permanent for the life of the project.

We are not assured by the December 16 amendment language requiring that the new variance be only for the minimum period needed, by claims that DPD can change the variance in mid-stream, and by promises of other protections to be included in the Director’s Rule. These provisions leave great and inappropriate discretion to the Mayor and DPD that is more likely to be used to loosen the variance further than to strengthen it, and the Director’s Rule can be changed at any time. Later legislation attempting to strengthen the variance process could not legally apply to an existing variance, which would be governed by what the noise ordinance said at the time that the variance was issued.

With projects like the Alaska Way Viaduct replacement, SR-520, and the next phase of Sound Transit light rail, Seattle is about to experience the largest and noisiest construction in its history. This is not the time to weaken the noise ordinance, an important bulwark of livability and the public health. The proposed construction variance would lock in permissive treatment of night-time construction noise that Seattle residents and businesses would suffer from for a decade. Please don’t do it.

If the Council must create a public construction variance, it must be for no longer than one year, with each additional year by a separate application that can be appealed to the Hearing Examiner. Experience with a past year's variance would ensure the best decision on next year’s application, as would a yearly right of appeal to the Hearing Examiner.

Don’t repeal the current right to appeal temporary variances to the Hearing Examiner. Another serious weakening in the noise ordinance that the City Council’s Transportation Committee adopted on December 16 was to eliminate the current right to appeal any temporary noise variance to the Hearing Examiner. This change went far beyond transportation projects, as temporary variances can exempt an applicant from any part of the noise ordinance, such as provisions on nightlife noise. We are glad to hear that Councilmember Sally Clark, Vice Chair of the Transportation Committee, no longer supports this change, and we urge you to support her in keeping the noise ordinance’s current right to appeal temporary variances.

Don’t repeal the current requirement for due notice about public meetings regarding proposed variances. We also welcome that Councilmember Clark wishes to reverse the committee’s December 16 repeal of the current requirement for a “public meeting on due notice” for any proposed variance of more than two weeks. However, we urge that in doing so, the Council should not fail to restore the requirement that the meeting have “due notice,” and that “due notice” must be required not only of the public meeting, but of the deadline for written public comment.

Need for public outreach on this legislation. The City Council has not provided for the public outreach that must occur before a policy change of this magnitude is imposed on the public. DPD did absolutely no public outreach on these proposals before presenting them to the City Council on April 16. It is not enough for the Council to blame the executive; the Council must either send the proposal back for a true process, or conduct that process itself, and has done neither. With an issue like this which affects people’s health and their ability to live in the city, it is essential for the City Council to ensure widespread public notice, discussion, and the opportunity to comment. There should be a series of public meetings, and notice of the proposal should be sent to those who have commented to DPD in the past on noise from major public construction projects.

Land Use Information Bulletin must not be used to curtail Council and public debate. It was a disservice to public debate that the December 25 and January 26 issuances in the Land Use Information Bulletin did not list as a possible Council action the limitation of the proposed public construction variance to a one-year term. Its omission has caused the Councilmembers not to receive thorough analysis of this reasonable measure, and the noise ordinance amendments should be postponed until its omission from the Land Use Information Bulletin is corrected. In any case, the Council should recognize that listing of this proposal in the Land Use Information Bulletin is not required prior to its adoption. Such listing is mandated only by the state’s Growth Management Act, and only for development regulations, which as defined by the GMA do not include the noise ordinance.

Thank you for considering the views of the Seattle Community Council Federation.

Sincerely,

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