>>> THE REGULAR SCHEDULE
MEETING IS ON JUNE FOR STARTING
AT 9:30 AM IN THE COUNCIL
CHAMBERS.
BEFORE WE BEGAN WE HAVE TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA FOR TODAY'S
MEETING.
IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION WILL
THE AGENDA BE ADOPTED?
TODAY'S AGENDA IS ADOPTED.
AT THIS TIME WE WILL TAKE
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS THAT
APPEAR ON TODAY'S AGENDA.
SPEAKERS ARE ALLOWED TO
MINUTES.
IF IT EXCEEDS THE TWO MINUTES
THE MICROPHONE WILL BE TURNED
OFF.
THIS BECAUSE ARE ASKED TO BEGIN
THEIR COMMENTS BY IDENTIFYING
THEMSELVES AND THE AGENDA ITEM
THAT THEY WISH TO ADDRESS.
AS A REMINDER PUBLIC COMMENT IS
A LIMIT TO ITEMS ON THE AGENDA.
OR WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE
COMMITTEE.
FIRST ON THE LIST IS RUTH DANNER
.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY?
>> CAN YOU SPEAK INTO THE
MICROPHONE.
>> MUCH BETTER.
>> INC.
YOU VERY MUCH.
MY NAME IS RUTH DANNER, I AM
THE PRESIDENT OF SAVE THE
MARKET ENTRANCE . I AM HERE TO
TALK ABOUT THE NEED FOR DESIGN
REVIEW REFORM.
AS IT RELATES TO THE CEPA
PROCESS.
WE CONSIDER AESTHETIC DESIGN
BEFORE STAFF HAS HAD AN
OPPORTUNITY TO COMPLETE THE
CEPA CHECKLIST.
WHICH IS IMPORTANT ATTRIBUTES
OF THE BUILT AND NATURAL
ENVIRONMENT.
AND BEFORE STAFF IS HAD IN
OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW REQUEST
FOR WAIVERS AND DEPARTURES.
TO PUT AESTHETIC DESIGN BEFORE
FUNCTIONAL DESIGN IS
IMPRACTICAL.
IT'S LIKE PLANNING AND PICKING
THE PAINT COLOR BEFORE YOU PLAN
THE FOUNDATION.
I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHEN THIS
COMMITTEE WILL BE CONSIDERING
NEW REFORMS FOR THE DESIGN
REVIEW SO THAT I CAN,
PARTICIPATE AT THAT TIME.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
AND ALSO THANK YOU FOR YOUR
PARTICIPATION IN THIS PROCESS.
I KNOW IT IS A BIG ONE.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT ON OUR LIST KNUTE?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
VERY BRIEFLY WE ARE CHALLENGING
A PROPOSED TOWER ON SECOND
AVENUE.
IT WOULD LOOM 500 FEET ABOVE
OUR HISTORIC LANDMARK AND IT
WOULD PUT IT IN A 100% SHADE IN
THE AFTERNOON.
IT WOULD OVERWHELM OUR ALLEY
AND CREATE TREMENDOUS TRAFFIC
PROBLEMS AND PUBLIC HAZARDS BY
APPROPRIATING THE ALLEY FOR ITS
OWN USE AS ITS OWN ENTRANCE.
AND IT WOULD MAKE IT INTO AN
UNREGULATED STREET.
IT IS A VASTLY OUT OF PROPORTION
TO THE REST OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD
WHERE THERE ARE MANY HISTORIC
BUILDINGS.
TWO YEARS AGO THE DESIGN REVIEW
BOARD REJECTED A PROPOSED
BUILDING FOR THIS A SITE THAT
WAS HALF OF THE SITE OF THE ONE
THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING
PROPOSED AND THAT THE DESIGN
REVIEW BOARD UNANIMOUSLY
APPROVED. ARE POINT THE EARLY
OUTREACH.
THIS WAS THE FIRST PROJECT THAT
WAS REQUIRED DID NOT WORK.
THE DEVELOPER HAD ITS WAY.
THE EARLY DESIGN REVIEW.
THE REVIEW BOARD WAS TOTALLY
UNINTERESTED IN HEARING PUBLIC
COMMENTS AND DID NOT TAKE INTO
ACCOUNT A 75 PAGE DOCUMENTATION
OF THE PROBLEM THAT WAS
COMMITTED TO THE BOARD.
THE REVIEW BOARD APPROVED THIS
AND AS A RESULT THE PROJECT IS
NOW VESTED WITH THE CITY.
WITHOUT HAVING TAKEN INTO
ACCOUNT ALL THE FUNCTIONAL
REQUIREMENTS. THIS PROJECT IS
REALLY OUT OF SCALE TO THE REST
OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT IS NOT SCALED TO THE
INFRASTRUCTURE THAT THE
NEIGHBORHOOD OFFERS.
NEVERTHELESS IT WAS APPROVED
AUTOMATICALLY IN THE EARLY
DESIGN REVIEW.
IT IS ARBITRARY, CAPRICIOUS AND
RESULTS AND UNPREDICTABLE
OUTCOMES.
IT HAS TO CHANGE.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT IS STEVE GILLESPIE.
>> GOOD MORNING STEVE GILLESPIE
FROM FOSTER PEPPER.
AND HERE FOR THE TEXT
AMENDMENT.
WANT TO THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR
TAKING UP OUR BILL AND THANK YOU
MISTER CHAIR FOR JUMPING INTO
THE DEEP END OF THE POOL.
IT'S A BIG CHALLENGE BUT I
REALLY APPRECIATE YOU STEPPING
UP IN THE STATE HE NEEDED YOU.
THIS BILL HAS BEEN THREE YEARS
IN THE MAKING.
IT'S A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGE
IN THE RUN UP TO THAT IT WAS
ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT THE
COUNCIL ADDRESSED.
WE WORKED WITH ELECTED
OFFICIALS, THE INDUSTRIAL LAND
ADVOCATE, AND OTHERS IN AN
EFFORT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
ADDRESS CONCERNS.
IN A CONSISTENT MESSAGE THAT WE
HAVE GOTTEN IN THE AMENDMENT
THAT WAS PROPOSED IS ONE OF
SUPPORT.
WE HAVE SOME INDIVIDUALS WHO
SPENT THEIR ENTIRE PROFESSIONAL
LIFE ADVOCATING AND SUPPORTING
ARMAMENT.
WE ARE GOING TO ASK YOU TO
SUPPORT IT AS WELL.
THE POLICY DECISIONS WERE MADE
DURING THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLANNING PROCESS.
THE TEXT AMENDMENT IMPLEMENTS
THOSE POLICY DECISIONS.
YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR THAT IT
HAS TWO PARTS.
THE FIRST WOULD ALLOW
INSTITUTIONAL USES NEWER THAN
1987 WITHIN A VERY LIMITED
GEOGRAPHIC SCOPE THE SECOND
PART WOULD ALLOW A CREATION OF
OVERLAY WITCHES A YEAR-LONG
PUBLIC PROCESS.
WHICH IS THE LONGEST IN
SEATTLE.
YOU WILL HEAR MORE ABOUT IT.
AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.
>> NEXT IS MEGAN CRUISE.
>> HELLO.
I'M ALSO HERE TO TALK ABOUT
DESIGN REVIEW REFORM.
WE HAVE SEEN IT OVER THE LAST
FOUR YEARS.
AND IT'S ABOUT AESTHETICS AND
IT'S IGNORING THE CONCERNS
ABOUT LIGHT, AIR, AND THAT
PRIVACY.
DOES THIS HAVE THE ABILITY TO
CONTAIN WASTE.
MOST OF THE TOWERS WILL HOLD
1000 PEOPLE DO NOT.
I THINK IT IS BECOME A LEGAL
FORM.
YOU HAVE ATTORNEYS FOR THE
DEVELOPER.
AND I THINK IT'S INTIMIDATING
WHEN IT COMES TO PEOPLE WHO ARE
VOLUNTEERS AND BEING ASKED TO
MAKE A DECISION.
IF THEY WANT TO CONSIDER ONE OF
THESE ASPECTS THAT ARE REQUIRED
BY THE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
GUIDELINES.
THERE IS A LAWYER THERE TO
ARGUE IT.
INCREASINGLY THEY DO GET VOCAL
IN THESE MEETINGS.
I THINK WE NEED TO PUT THE
PUBLIC BACK INTO THIS PROCESS
AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT
HAPPEN SOON.
THANKS.
>> THANK YOU.
NEXT IS GEORGIA DANNER.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.
MY NAME IS GEORGE DANNER. I
LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT THE DESIGN
REVIEW COMMITTEE.
THE CYNIC IN ME SAYS GET RID OF
THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD.
I PERSONALLY TESTIFIED IN
PUBLIC IT TO MEETINGS.
MOST OF THE TESTIMONIES WERE
STRICKEN FROM THE REPORT THAT
FOLLOWED THAT I WITNESSED THE
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD CONDITION A
MEETING PRIOR TO HER
RECOMMENDATION WHERE THEY ASKED
THE DEVELOPER TO SUPPLY SPECIFIC
INFORMATION PRIOR TO THE REC
MEETING.
THEY NOT ONLY IGNORED THEIR OWN
RECOMMENDATIONS BUT THEY DIDN'T
ALLOW TESTIMONY FROM THE PUBLIC
, CONCERNING THE IMPORTANT
REGULATIONS.
I KNOW YOU CANNOT ELIMINATE THE
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD.
BUT THE CURRENT MAKEUP IS
BASICALLY A RUBBER STAMP FOR
THE DEVELOPER'S.
THEY HOLD PUBLIC MEETINGS
BECAUSE THEY ARE REQUIRED.
ANYTHING THAT THIS COMMITTEE
CAN DO TO MAKE THE PUBLIC FEEL
LIKE THEY ARE BEING LISTENED TO
WOULD BE WELL RECEIVED.
WE COME HERE TO TESTIFY BECAUSE
WE HAVE TIME AND WE LIVED
DOWNTOWN AND WE SEE THE EFFECTS
OF THE REVIEWS AND DECISIONS.
WE SEE THESE EFFECTS OVER TIME.
WE ARE THEY CANARIES OR COME
BACK AND TELL THEM WHERE THEY
MADE BAD DECISIONS.
WE CONTINUE TO DO THIS AND WE
CONTINUE TO BE IGNORED.
THE COST TO THE CITY OVER THE
NEXT 40 OR 50 YEARS IS GOING TO
BE PAID BY ALL OF US.
AND DESIGN REVIEW NEEDS TO STEP
UP AND RECOGNIZE THAT THEIR
DECISIONS HAVE LONG-TERM IMPACTS
AND MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TO GET
OTHER PEOPLE ON THE BOARD TO
MAKE THESE DECISIONS.
THANK YOU
>> NEXT IS A STEVE WE ARE BACK
TO NORMAL WEAR ONLY THE
CHAIRMAN IS HERE.
WHICH IS HOW THE COMMITTEE
FUNCTIONS.
THE LAST COUPLE FULL OF
MEETINGS I WAS SURPRISED TO
SPEAK TO MORE THAN JUST THE
CHAIRMAN.
I THINK IT'S TIME TO MENTION
ALL THE GREAT ENVIRONMENTALIST
IN SEATTLE.
WE STILL DON'T HAVE A TREE
ORDINANCE.
WHILE YOU SAY THAT YOU ARE A
GREEN.
WE SEE SO MANY THINGS PUSHED
THROUGH THE COMMITTEE THAT I
CONSIDER TO BE LESS IMPORTANT.
WE WILL GO FORWARD AND DESTROY
OUR HERITAGE TREES WHICH WILL
NOT BE REPLACEABLE IN MY
GENERATION THE CITY DOESN'T
SEEM TO CARE BUT WE CALL
OURSELVES A GREEN LIBERAL CITY.
DESIGN REVIEW USED TO MEAN
SOMETHING MORE THAN WHAT COLOR
YOU ARE GOING TO PAINT.
THE IMPORTANCE OF DESIGN REVIEW
WAS THAT WE HAD A WIDE RANGE OF
THINGS INCLUDING PARKING AND
SIZE OF BUILDING AND WHAT WOULD
FIT IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
WHAT WOULD BE VIABLE.
THE ENTITLEMENT.
THE PARKING SPACES.
AND WHETHER THE FUNCTION FITS.
WHO CARES IN THE CITY.
WILL NEIGHBORHOODS DO CARE.
AND I THINK IT IS TIME THAT THE
CITY COMES BACK TO MAKING
DESIGN REVIEW A REAL PROCESS IT
LOOKS AT HIS SITE HOW THINGS FIT
AND MAKES THE BUILDING FIT THE
NEIGHBORHOOD INSTEAD OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD ACCOMMODATE THE
BUILDING.
ESPECIALLY IF IT MAKES A BIGGER
PROFIT FOR THE DEVELOPER.
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING.
IT'S NICE TO HAVE ONE PERSON
HERE.
>> THANK YOU
>> GOOD MORNING MY NAME IS
ALICIA RUIZ.
AND I'M HERE ON THE MASTER
BUILDERS ASSOCIATION AND I
WOULD LIKE TO FULLY SUPPORT
THIS MEASURE
>> IS ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT?
SCENE AND I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC
COMMENT.
AND MOVE ON TO THE FIRST ITEM
OF BUSINESS WITH THE REVIEW
BOARD.
WOULD YOU PLEASE READ THESE
APPOINTMENTS INTO THE RECORD.
AGENDA ITEMS ONE THROUGH 19.
APPOINTMENTS OFAPPOINTMENT OF
PHOEBE ERIN BOGERT AS MEMBER,
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, APRIL 3,
2021.
2. APPT 01327 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE APPOINTMENT
OF TIMOTHY CARTER AS MEMBER,
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, FOR A TERM
TO APRIL 3, 2021.
3. APPT 01328 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE APPOINTMENT
OF ALAN GRAINGER AS MEMBER,
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, FOR A TEM
TO APRIL 3, 2021.
4. APPT 01329 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE APPOINTMENT
OF DANIEL MAIER AS MEMBER,
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, FOR A TERM
TO APRIL 3, 2021.
5. APPT 01330 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE APPOINTMENT
OF JEN MONTRESSOR AS MEMBER,
DESIGN REIEW BOARD, FOR A TERM
TO APRIL 3, 2021.
6. APPT 01331 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE APPOINTMENT
OF GARRETT NELLI AS MEMBER,
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, FOR A TERM
TO APRIL 3, 2021.
7. APPT 01332 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE CLICK HERE
FOR ACCESSIBILITY INFORMATION
AND TO REQUEST ACCOMMODATIONS.
PAGE 3 PLANNING, LAND USE, AND
ZONING MAY 15, 2019 COMMITTEE
AGENDA APPOINTMENT OF LAUREN
POWERS AS MEMBER, DESIGN REVIEW
BOARD, FOR A TERM TO APRIL 3,
2021.
8. APPT 01333 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE APPOINTMENT
OF MAY SO AS MEMBER, DESIGN
REVIEW BOARD, FOR A TERM TO
APRIL 3, 2021.
9. APPT 01334 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE REAPPOINTMENT
OF MELISSA ALEXANDER AS MEMBER,
TO APRIL 3, 2021. D, FOR A TERM
10.
APPT 01335 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE REAPPOINTMENT
OF KATY HAIMA AS
>> WHAT EVERYONEMEMBER, DESIGN
REVIEW BOARD, AT THE TABLEFOR
A TERM TO APRIL 3, 2021.
11.
APPT 01338 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE REAPPOINTMENT
OF MATT HUTCHINS AS MEMBER,
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, FOR A TERM
TO APRIL 3, 2021.
12.
APPT 01339 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE REAPPOINTMENT
OF CRYSTAL LOYA AS MEMBER,
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, FOR A TERM
TO APRIL 3, 2021.
13.
APPT 01340 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE CLICK HERE
FOR ACCESSIBILITY INFORMATION
AND TO REQUEST ACCOMMODATIONS.
PAGE 4 PLANNING, LAND USE, AND
ZONING MAY 15, 2019 COMMITTEE
AGENDA REAPPOINTMENT OF
PATREESE MARTIN AS MEMBER,
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, FOR A TERM
TO APRIL 3, 2021.
14.
APPT 01341 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE REAPPOINTMENT
OF STEPHEN DOUGLAS PORTER AS
MEMBER, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD,
FOR A TERM TO APRIL 3, 2021.
15.
APPT 01342 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE REAPPOINTMENT
OF BELINDA BAIL AS MEMBER,
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, FOR A TERM
TO APRIL 3, 2021.
16.
APPT 01336 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE REAPPOINTMENT
OF ANDREW HAAS AS MEMBER,
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, FOR A TEM
TO APRIL 3, 2021.
17.
APPT 01337 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE REAPPOINTMENT
OF ALASTAIR TOWNSEND AS MEMBER,
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, FOR A TERM
TO APRIL 3, 2021.
18.
APPT 01343 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE REAPPOINTMENT
OF BRIAN WALTERS AS MEMBER,
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, FOR A TERM
TO APRIL 3, 2021.
19.
APPT 01344 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET DISCUSSION
AND POSSIBLE VOTE CLICK HERE
FOR ACCESSIBILITY INFORMATION
AND TO REQUEST ACCOMMODATIONS.
PAGE 5 PLANNING, LAND USE, AND
ZONING MAY 15, 2019 COMMITTEE
AGENDA APPOINTMENT OF JAMIE
MARIE STROBLE AS MEMBER,
SEATTLE PLANNING COMMISSION,
FOR A TERM TO APRIL 15, 2022.
20.
APPT 01347 ATTACHMENTS:
APPOINTMENT PACKET
>> MY NAME IS LAUREN POWERS.
AND I APPOINTMENT TO THE EAST
APPOINTMENT OF AL LEVINE AS
BOARD.MEMBER, SEATTLE PLANNING
COMMISSION, FOR A TERM TO APRIL
REAPPOINTMENT OF AMY SHUMANN AS
>> CAN YOU REFRESH WHAT THE
DIVINE DESIGN REVIEW PROCESSES.
>> THE DESIGN REVIEW PROGRAM
REVIEWS PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT ON
PRIVATE PROPERTY.
COVERING THE ENTIRE CITY WHICH
IS DIVIDED INTO EIGHT
DISTRICTS.
EACH DISTRICT HAS ITS OWN
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD.
WE HAVE SIX OF THE NEW NINE
APPOINTEES.
THEY ARE VOLUNTEERS THAT DO
SERVE FOR A TWO-YEAR TERM.
THEY ARE PASSIONATE AND
DEDICATED VOLUNTEERS WHO ARE
LENDING THEIR EXPERTISE IN THE
FIELD OF DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT.
LANDSCAPE DESIGN AND ETC.
BEFORE YOU WE HAVE EXCELLENT
NEW ADDITIONS TO THE BOARD THAT
WE'VE MADE RECOMMENDATIONS TO
THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL ABOUT.
>> IF EVERYONE COULD SPEND A
COUPLE MINUTES TELLING US WHY
YOU WANT TO SERVE ON THE DESIGN
REVIEW BOARD?
>> MY NAME IS DANIEL AND I'M A
MECHANICAL ENGINEER. I APPLIED
TO THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
BECAUSE I'VE BEEN WORKING ON
PROJECTS IN SEATTLE FOR THE
PAST FEW YEARS.
I'VE BEEN IN THE INDUSTRY FOR
EIGHT YEARS.
I LOVE SEATTLE, I LOVE MY
NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'VE SEEN A LOT OF BAD DESIGN
IN WASHINGTON, D.C. WHERE I AM
ORIGINALLY FROM.
AND I THOUGHT THAT THE DESIGN
BOARD HELPS BRING A DIFFERENT
PERSPECTIVE AND EXPERIENCES TO
THE BOARD.
AS AN ENGINEER.
THAT IS WHY I APPLIED.
AND I'M EXCITED TO BE HERE.
>> HELLO MY NAME IS GARRETT.
I ARCHITECT HERE IN SEATTLE.
I'VE LIVED HERE FOR FOUR YEARS
AND I HAVE A GREAT APPRECIATION
FOR THE CITY IN THE CULTURE AND
I WANT TO GIVE BACK TO THE CITY
THAT IS GIVEN SO MUCH TO ME.
AS A PRACTITIONER IN THE PUBLIC
REALM I'M INTERESTED IN THE WAY
THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT
INTERFACES WITH OUR COMMUNITY.
AND HOW WE CAN ENSURE THE
GROWTH OF SEATTLE HAPPENS IN A
DEMOCRATIC MANNER.
I'M HONORED AND INSPIRED TO USE
MY SERVICES AS AN ARCHITECT TO
ELEVATE THE VOICES OF THE
COMMUNITY AND ENSURE THE
DEMOCRATIC GROWTH OF THE
NORTHWEST REGION.
>> I AM JEN AND I'VE LIVED IN
SEATTLE FOR 20 YEARS.
AND I WATCHED IT GROW AND
CHANGE A LOT.
I AM PASSIONATE ABOUT THE
LIVABILITY OF OUR CITY AND
MAINTAINING THAT.
AND OUR PUBLIC REALM.
IS A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT I AM
PARTICULARLY INTERESTED IN ALL
THE SPACES OUTSIDE OF THE
BUILDING ENVELOPE.
AND HOW THAT INFLUENCES THE
FABRIC OF OUR URBAN REALM AND
IS DEMOCRATIC SPACE.
AND HAS A VERY HUMAN SCALE.
>> HELLO I AM PHOEBE SIMILAR TO
GARRETT AND JEN I AM AN
ADVOCATE OF A LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTURE.
AND FOR THE PUBLIC AROUND.
AND AS A CITY GROWS AND EXPANDS
THIS IS THE PLACE WHERE PRIVATE
DEVELOPMENT REALLY INTERSEX AND
AFFECTS THE PUBLIC.
I THINK THOSE PIECES ARE VERY
CRITICAL FOR HOW THE SITE
DEVELOPS AND HOW IT INTERFACES
AND CREATES A TRULY PEDESTRIAN
AND PUBLIC EXPERIENCE ALONG THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY. THAT IS THE
PIECE THAT WE ARE AFFECTING
WITH THE DESIGN REVIEW.
ADDITIONALLY I AM A SEATTLE
NATIVE.
AND I HAVE SEEN THE CITY GROW
OVER TIME I'M A RELATIVELY NEW
TO THE NORTHWEST THE
NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I SEE THIS AS A OPPORTUNITY
TO BECOME INTEGRAL TO MY
NEIGHBORHOOD.
>> LAUREN POWERS.
I THINK MY FIRST INTEREST IN
SERVING WITH THE DESIGN REVIEW
BOARD IS HAVING AN ACTIVE ROLE
IN THE SHAPING OF OUR CITY.
I'M VERY INTERESTED IN THE
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NEW
DEVELOPMENT AND RESPONDING AND
SUPPORTING EXISTING CHARACTER
AND IDENTITIES OF
NEIGHBORHOODS.
I HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH AND I
BELIEVE STRONGLY IN THE DESIGN
PROCESS.
AND THE ABILITY OF THAT PROCESS
AND ARCHITECTURE TO STRENGTHEN
THE LIVABILITY OF NEIGHBORHOODS
AND COMMUNITIES.
AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THAT
OPPORTUNITY.
>> I AM A RECENT TRANSPLANT
FROM VANCOUVER CANADA.
I HAVE BEEN REALLY LUCKY TO
LIVE IN SOME URBAN
ENVIRONMENTS.
RIGHT NOW I LIVE IN CAPITOL
HILL.
I THINK TERMS OF HAVING SEEN
VANCOUVER GROW OVER THE LAST 20-
30 YEARS.
AND SEEING THE GROWING PAINS IN
SERVING ON A COMMITTEE THERE A
PLANNING COMMITTEE TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT HOW TO SENSITIVELY
RESPOND TO GROWTH IT'S A REAL
PASSION OF MINE.
AND HAVING MOVED TO SEATTLE I
SAW THE VIBRANCY OF SEATTLE AND
THE OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES
WITH THIS NEW E.R.A.
OF GROWTH.
I THINK SERVING ON THE REVIEW
BOARD IS WHERE THE RUBBER HITS
THE ROAD.
WHERE THE PLANNING TOUCHES THE
GROUND. THE DESIGN REVIEW
BOARD IS REALLY A CONVERSATION
BETWEEN THE PUBLIC THE COMMUNITY
AND PEOPLE WHO WANT TO BUILD IN
THE COMMUNITY AND A MORE
PROFESSIONAL OPINION OF WHAT
WOULD MAKE GOOD URBAN DESIGN.
I FEEL LIKE MY CONTRIBUTION IS
BEING PASSIONATE ABOUT DESIGN
AND HOW TO MAKE THIS A BETTER
CITY.
IS LISTENING TO ALL THE
DIFFERENT VOICES THAT ARE GOING
TO BE IMPACTED BY DEVELOPMENT
AND APPLY MY PROFESSIONAL
SKILLS IN TERMS OF BEING ABLE
TO APPLY SOME DESIGN STANDARDS
AS WELL.
HAVING THAT BE A FLEXIBLE
RESPONSE ULTIMATELY TO THE
CONTEXT AND MAKING THE CITY A
MUCH MORE LIVABLE PLACE.
>> THANK YOU AND WELCOME TO
SEATTLE.
>> A VERY IMPORTANT PIECE THAT
I LEFT OUT OF MY INTRODUCTORY
REMARKS.
WHICH IS THE REVIEW OF
BUILDINGS AND LOOKING AT THE
ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN.
AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THIS GROUP
OF PEOPLE THE FOCUS OF THE
PROGRAM IS ABOUT THE APPEARANCE
OF THE PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT AND
THESE ARE ALL PEOPLE WHO WORK
AND ARE PASSIONATE ABOUT THE
FIELD OF DESIGN AND APPLYING
THAT TO DESIGN REVIEW.
>> CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE NOT HERE
TODAY?
>> WE ALSO HAVE THREE PEOPLE
WHO COULDN'T MAKE IT HERE TODAY.
HAN BEH WILL BE SERVING
DOWNTOWN.
IS A LICENSED ARCHITECT AND HAS
DONE A LOT OF INTERNATIONAL
HIGH-RISE BUILDINGS.
WE ALSO HAVE TIM CARTER WHO IS
AN ARCHITECT WHO OWNS HIS OWN
PRACTICE WITH MIXED USE
RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS. HE HAS
LIVED IN SEATTLE FOR QUITE A
WHILE.
AND ALAN GRANGER WHO IS A
LICENSED ARCHITECT AND ONE OF
THE FOUNDING PRINCIPLES WHO
LIVES IN WEST SEATTLE AND
SERVES IN THE WEST SEATTLE
BOARD.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE SERVICE
YOU GIVE TO THE CITY.
AND IF I CAN BE OF SERVICE TO
YOU REACH OUT TO ME AS WELL.
I MOVED TO APPROVE THE
APPOINTMENTS.
THERE IS NO OBJECTION? HEARING
ON.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR BOAT AYE.
THE APPOINTMENTS PAST.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>>> THE NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS
ARE TWO REAPPOINTMENTS.
>> AGENDA ITEM 20 THROUGH 22.
APPOINTMENT OF AL LEVINE AND
AMY SHUMAN, AND JAMIE THROUGH
APRIL 15, 2022.
>> WHAT EVERYONE AT THE TABLE
PLEASE INTRODUCE THEMSELVES.
>> MY NAME IS VANESSA MURDOCH,
I AM SEATTLE PLANNING
COMMISSION.
>> CAN YOU GIVE A BRIEF
OVERVIEW?
>> THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS A
16 MEMBER VOLUNTEER BODY THAT
IS ADVISORY TO THE MAYOR AND
THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY
STAFF ON HOUSING, LAND-USE, AND
TRANSPORTATION POLICIES.
WE ARE NOT A REGULATORY BODY.
WE ARE STEWARDS OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH IS THE
MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY THAT
GUIDES GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
>> CAN YOU STATE WHY YOU ARE
INTERESTED IN SERVING ON THE
PLANNING COMMISSION?
>> I'VE HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF
BEING ON THE PLANNING
COMMISSION FOR THE LAST TWO OR
THREE YEARS.
I REALLY CAME FROM THE
NONPROFIT SECTOR IN THE
CHINATOWN INTERNATIONAL
DISTRICT.
I WAS LOOKING AT THE PROJECTS
WORKING WITH YOUTH.
THE PARK REDESIGN AND A
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE.
REALIZING THAT A LOT OF OUR
COMMITTEES WERE NOT
REPRESENTATIVE AT THE DECISION
MAKING TABLES.
AND THAT SPARKED ME GETTING
INVOLVED WITH THE HOUSING
AFFORDABILITY WORK, AND APPLY
FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
I THINK HAVING A STRONG EQUITY
AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY ARE
REPRESENTATIVE AT THE TABLES.
AND HOW THE CITY IS BEING
SHAPED IS REALLY CRITICAL.
>> VANESSA CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE
APPOINTMENTS AND REAPPOINTMENTS
WHO ARE NOT HERE TODAY?
>> ALAN LEVINE IS A NEW
APPOINTMENT.
HE IS OUT OF THE COUNTRY AND
UNABLE TO BE HERE TODAY.
AND AMY SHUMAN IS UNABLE TO BE
HERE DUE TO A DEATH IN HER
FAMILY.
MISSED HER LIVING COMES TO US
WITH 40 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE.
HE WORKED 24 YEARS AT THE
SEATTLE HOUSING AUTHORITY.
SERVING AS THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR.
HE STEPPED AWAY FROM RETIREMENT
WHERE HE WAS A PART-TIME
PROFESSOR FOR REAL ESTATE
DEVELOPMENT.
WE ARE PLEASED TO BE BRINGING
HIM ALONG AMY SHUMAN IS AN
ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER.
SHE'S SERVED ON THE COMMISSION
FOR TWO YEARS AND HAS A WEALTH
OF EXPERIENCE AND HOW THE
COMMUNITY SHOULD BE INFORMED BY
PUBLIC HEALTH CONCERNS AND HOW
IT IS AFFECTED BY THE DECISIONS
WE MAKE IN THE PLANNING, LAND-
USE, AND TRANSPORTATION SECTORS.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE
TO OUR CITY.
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US IF
THERE IS NO OBJECTION I WILL
MOVE TO VOTE.
SCENE AND THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE
VOTE AYE ? ADDING A LITTLE
SUSPENSE.
THOSE OPPOSED?
THE APPOINTMENT PASSES.
THANK YOU AGAIN.
AND I I COULD BE OF SERVICE
PLEASE REACH OUT.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU
CHAIRMAN PACHECO FOR MOVING
FORWARD ON THE APPOINTMENTS.
THAT BRINGS US TO 13-16.
AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO FILLING
THOSE ONCE THE MAYOR HAS MADE
HER DECISION.
THANK YOU.
>>> THE FINAL ITEM OF BUSINESS
TODAY IS23.
CB 119489 AN ORDINANCE RELATED
TO LAND USE AND ZONING ALLOWING
LIMITED EXPANSION OF MAJOR
INSTITUTION USES A PORTION OF
INDUSTRIAL GENERAL ONE INTO
ZONES AND INDUSTRIAL BUFFER
ZONES LOCATED NEAR SEATTLE
PACIFIC UNIVERSITY.
>> CAN YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELVES.
LISH WHITSON, COUNCIL CENTRAL
STAFF
>> ERIC ENGMANN, SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTION AND.
WE WANTED TO GIVE YOU AN
OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSED
CHANGES.
WE REALLY?
WANT TO GO OVER THE PURPOSE AND
VALUE.
HERE'S A LOOK AT THAT.
A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND.
MAJOR INSTITUTIONS INCLUDE USES
LIKE HOSPITALS, UNIVERSITIES,
AND COLLEGES.
ACCORDING TO THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN THESE MAJOR INSTITUTIONS
CREATE ONE OUT OF SIX JOBS IN
THE CITY.
SEATTLE UNIVERSITY IS ONE OF
THOSE AND IS LOCATED ON THE
NORTH SIDE OF THE ALL OPPOSED?
HILL NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT IS LOCATED SOUTH AND WEST OF
THE UNIVERSITY.
MOST OF THE INDUSTRIAL LAND IS
PART OF THE NORTH AND
MANUFACTURING CENTER.
IN DECEMBER 2018 A
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
WAS ADOPTED REMOVING THREE
BLOCKS DIRECTLY NORTH OF THE
UNIVERSITY.
THIS AMENDMENT IS A SECOND PART
OF THAT EFFORT. WE LOOK AT THE
CURRENT CODE LANGUAGE.
MAJOR USES CAN OPERATE
INDUSTRIAL AREAS BUT ONLY
WITHIN AN AREA THAT IS LOCATED
2500 FEET FROM THE OVERLAY
BOUNDARIES AND ONLY INSIDE OF
BUILDINGS THAT WERE BUILT BY
OCTOBER 7, AND 1987.
LEAVING LIMITED OPPORTUNITIES
FOR THE BUILDINGS AND
ENVIRONMENTS THAT ARE SUITABLE
FOR A UNIVERSITY FACILITY.
THE MAJOR OVERLAY RESTRICTS THE
OVERLAY EXPANDING INTO
RESIDENTIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
ZONES.
>> WHAT DEFINES A MAJOR
INSTITUTION AS OPPOSED TO SOME
OF THE SMALLER COLLEGES THAT
ARE IN SEATTLE?
>> I AM NOT SURE EXACTLY.
>> THERE IS A MINIMUM SIZE LIMIT
ABOVE WHICH A COLLEGE OR
UNIVERSITY WOULD BE CLASSIFIED
AS A MAJOR INSTITUTION.
BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF LAND AREA
AND THE AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE
.
>> SO POPULATION ISN'T TAKEN
INTO CONSIDERATION?
>> NO, I BELIEVE THERE ARE 16
IN THE CITY RIGHT NOW.
>> LOOKING AT THE PROPOSED
CHANGES.
SPECIFICALLY WHAT IT DOES IS A
PROVISION FOR ZONING. IT
ALLOWS THE MAJOR INSTITUTION
USES TO OPERATE INDOORS OR
OUTDOORS IN THIS THREE BLOCK
AREA.
IT ALSO ALLOWS FOR AN UPDATE TO
THE UNIVERSITIES MASTER-PLANNED
AND FEATURES EXPANSION OF THAT
OVER LATE.
INTO THIS LIMITED AREA.
LIKE I SAID THE AMENDMENT SETS
SPECIFIC BOUNDARIES TO LIMIT
FUTURE EXPANSION INTO
INDUSTRIAL AREAS UNLESS OTHER
AMENDMENTS TAKE PLACE.
IF YOU TAKE A LOOK.
THE MAP SHOWS AN AREA THAT
WOULD ALLOW FOR THAT LIMITED
EXPANSION. THE PROPOSED
AMENDMENT INCLUDES THE SPECIFIC
AREA WHERE THE UNIVERSITY CAN
BAN.
ENSURING THAT THE INDUSTRIAL
PROPERTIES CAN BE MAINTAINED
FOR INDUSTRIAL USES. SINCE THE
PROPERTIES INSIDE THIS AREA ARE
ZONED INDUSTRIAL CURRENT
INDUSTRIAL USES CAN REMAIN ON
THOSE PROPERTIES.
>> DO WE KNOW WHO THE CURRENT
OWNER OF THE PARCEL IS?
>> SEATTLE PACIFIC OWNS A GOOD
CHUNK OF THEM ALREADY.
THERE ARE OTHER PRIVATE
INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES IN THEIR
OWN BY DIFFERENT AMENITIES.
WITH THAT I'M HERE FOR ANY
QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE?
>> WHAT DO WE KNOW HOW THEY
INTEND TO USE THE PARCELS OF
LAND?
>> THAT'S GOING BE PART OF THE
UPCOMING EFFORT.
THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO GO
THROUGH AND FIGURE OUT THE
LARGER CHANGES OF THE MASTER
PLAN.
IF THERE ARE SMALLER ONES IN
THE MEANTIME THEY COULD DO
THAT.
A LARGER EFFORT TO DO THE
OVERALL CHANGES IN FIGURE OUT
WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH THAT.
>> THE LEGISLATION WOULD ALLOW
THE UNIVERSITY TO BUILD NEW
BUILDINGS IN THE INDUSTRIAL
AREA BEFORE THE MASTER PLAN IS
UPDATED.
THAT WOULD REQUIRE A NOTICE TO
THE MAJOR INSTITUTION ADVISORY
COMMITTEE.
AND REGULAR PERMANENT PURVIEW.
>> THANK YOU.
AND THANK YOU FOR JOINING US THE
LEGISLATION WILL BE BACK FOR A
PUBLIC HEARING ON WEDNESDAY,
JUNE 5. THANK YOU FOR SPENDING
YOUR TIME HERE THIS MORNING.
>> THIS CONCLUDES THE MAY 15,
2019 PLANNING, LAND USE, AND
ZONING COMMITTEE THE NEXT
REGULAR MEETING WILL BE JUNE 5
STARTING AT 9:30 AM IN COUNCIL
CHAMBERS.
THANK YOU AGAIN FOR ATTENDING.
WE ARE ADJOURNED.