Thursday, July 9, 2020

Public Process Waived Due to Lack of Technology

The Laurelhurst Community Club (LCC) published this information in a recent newsletter:



Public Process Waived Due to Lack of Technology 
In a city known for technology, Seattle cannot provide for virtual public meetings. To ensure transparency, the City’s land use and permit processes require public comment and design reviews as part of the normal approval process, in addition to the staff reviews by the Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections (SDCI). During the Covid-19 restrictions, the City’s approval boards, such as the Design Review and Landmark Preservation Boards, have not been offered an electronic meeting option for public participation. 
On April 20, instead of providing technology for virtual meetings, the Mayor’s Office and City Councilmember Straus (District 6) introduced Council Bill #119679. This Bill extends permit deadlines and waives public comment and public meetings requirements in order to expedite developers’ permit approval processes for six months, plus another six months for projects that can be grandfathered into the SDCI permit process if substantially ready. CMs offered many amendments including a 60-day duration (with renewability), but none passed. This Council Bill was initially defeated, with District 4 Councilmember Pedersen and two other members voting against it.
The Bill does not meet the requirements of Governor Inslee’s Emergency Proclamation 20-28, as providing an immediate emergency service or providing an immediate product for the Covid-19 pandemic. State Rep. Gerry Pollet, Chair of Local Governments, wrote his objections to the legislation to Councilmembers stating: “Subject to the conditions for conducting any meeting as required above, agencies are further prohibited from taking ‘action,’ as defined in RCW 42.30.020, unless those matters are necessary and routine matters or are matters necessary to respond to the COVID-19 outbreak and the current public health emergency, until such time as regular public participation under the Open Public Meetings Act is possible.” 
In a rare move, however, the City Council voted to reconsider the Bill, and passed it on April 27, with CM Pedersen and Herbold again voting “no”, but CM Morales flipping her previous vote to an approval. The Bill will be in effect during the Governor’s Emergency Proclamation, or until the City’s SDCI and Department of Neighborhoods can find a way to conduct virtual meetings and include public comment. 
City Council members supporting this Bill claim that it will benefit the low-income population by providing mandatory affordable housing (MHA), although this affects developments only in the design review stage right now. MHA projects with approved permits and construction in process were never stopped with Covid-19 restrictions. 
LCC expressed concerns that the MHA projects on paper should not be exempt from Design Review as a matter of social justice, and that MHA residences should receive design review and public participation to ensure the same quality-of-life amenities as other City residences – such as walkability, light, window placement, access to transit, setbacks, neighborhood character and scale, tree preservation, and adequate vegetation. In addition, LCC expressed concerns that, while the Historic Preservation process could delegate its Board’s authority for minor modifications on landmarked properties, authority should not extend to new development or to controls and incentives without the public’s participation. These actions should be delayed until the City can provide virtual public participation. 
The City offers written comment options, but they seldom receive a response from the City. Local public comments in the context of a project almost always produce a better review guide for staff and result in better outcomes for the built environment. After the pandemic is behind us, the City should not be permitted to use this emergency legislation to pave the way for developers to justify expedited reviews and eliminate public participation.

No comments: