It Ain't Over Till It's Over

In my last post, I told you about the short notice we were given to file an appeal to challenge the city's decision to allow the Alki 11 row house project to go forward. I described mounting an appeal in just 9 days as a "nearly impossible task."

But not completely impossible, it turns out. Thanks to neighbor, Marty McQuaid, an appeal was filed yesterday, citing the city's failure to meet state SEPA guidelines, and irregularities in the city's granting of lot boundary adjustments (LBAs), among other issues.

Read the appeal document, filed by land use attorney, Cynthia Kennedy. And the declaration from Marty McQuaid. The appeal was filed on behalf of the Alki Neighborhoods for Sensible Growth, a newly formed association comprised of residents affected by the Alki 11 development. The filing was covered by the West Seattle Blog.

For those of us involved in the controversy, it was a great relief to hear from the land use attorney that we have grounds to challenge the LBAs. It was clear to us from the beginning that two sets of row houses back to back, as the Alki 11 is proposed, would be illegal. The city clearly states that row houses cannot have principal residences behind them. But by rearranging the lot lines and declaring each set of row houses to be on a separate piece of property, the developer was able to turn an illegal project into a legal one.

This, not surprisingly, infuriated the neighbors who saw these LBAs as sneaky and underhanded. We were further frustrated by the fact that the city told us we couldn't address the issue of boundary adjustments in the review process. We were told that the project wasn't under land use review, only a SEPA review. Our objections had to be limited to the environmental aspects of the project. Period. We were told that our comments regarding design or land use would be disregarded. I felt like we had been issued a gag order.

It is clear to everyone that if the LBAs were not granted, this project would not be a row house project. It would be a town house project. If it were a town house project, subject to the same guidelines and requirements as the other town house developments on our street, there would not have been a protest.

If nothing else, appealing the city's decision will give us the opportunity, at long last, to bring attention to the LBA issue and let our objections be known.

No date has been set for a hearing. When it is, I will let you know.

The City Has Reached A Decision on The Alki 11 Rowhouse Project

Three months after the public meeting requested by Alki neighbors, the city has handed down a decision on the SEPA review of the Alki 11 rowhouse project. They have approved the project, over numerous neighborhood objections, with "conditions." The conditions all relate to conduct during construction and have no bearing on the design.

The city published the decision on the DPD website on October 10, but neighbors did not receive notification of the decision until October 15. We were given a deadline of October 24 for an appeal - just 9 days in which to review the decision and decide what, if any, grounds there might be for appeal. A nearly impossible task.

Needless to day, neighbors are very disappointed with the city's decision. Moreover, late notification for some people, with many names misspelled, and no notification at all for others, gives the impression of lack of respect on the part of city officials. None of this sits well. And we are not alone. All over the city, citizens are organizing and protesting runaway development and lack of consideration from the city. It will be interesting to see what affect this will have on the upcoming election in which we choose a mayor and members of city council.

Coverage of the decision on the West Seattle Blog contains links to the relevant documents. 

We Had Our Meeting With The City, Now What?

The public meeting my neighbors and I requested to express our concerns about the proposed Alki 11 rowhouse project was held last Wednesday, July 17. We had a good turnout - my guess is between 50 and 60 people. This was a SEPA meeting and we were directed to offer comments on environmental issues only.

Initially, 12 people signed up to speak, but as the meeting went on, a few more signed in and spoke. Close to 20 people had their say. Topics included those covered on this blog: lack of stormwater mitigation, more cars parked on the street, more congestion, inadequate infrastructure to handle all the waste and stormwater, the potential for flooding,  and contributing to sewage overflows into Puget Sound. Older residents who have lived here for many years, some whose family has had property here for generations, talked about how this project fails to consider the character of the neighborhood. Several people reviewed the developers SEPA checklist and pointed out inaccuracies and incomplete answers. Others lamented the loss of wildlife habitat, challenging the developer's statement that there is no wildlife present in this area. Lack of green space, and blocking light and air for neighboring properties was mentioned, as was the lack of transit options available here. Between the oral and written comments, I believe we explained the negative environmental impacts pretty thoroughly.

The meeting organizer and Department of Planning and Development (DPD) planner in charge of this project, Tami Garrett, said that she would be reviewing all of our comments, along with the reviews still to be completed by other planners, before writing her decision. She will accept written comments for about one more week. If you have anything you would like to submit, email it to her at tami.garrett@seattle.gov. Obviously, the sooner she gets comments the better.

She will write her decision, it will be reviewed by her supervisor, and then it will be published. She expects this to be done within the next two months. After the decision is published, the neighbors will have two weeks to appeal the decision if we aren't happy with it.

The mood as we left the meeting was subdued. We get it. There's not much the DPD can do for us. They don't make policy or write ordinances, their job is simply to enforce the rules. The rules are made by the city council, with input from the mayor.

Since the meeting, several neighbors have written to Richard Conlin, the city council member who chairs the Planning, Land Use and Sustainability Committee. He has agreed to look at how the zoning evolved that could allow this project to happen. But he says there's nothing he can do about this now. Here's a quote from one of his emails:

"I am trying to be really, really clear on the permitting process. The Council cannot legally take any action that will affect a permit that has been filed with DPD. There is no action that we can take that will affect or stop the project you are concerned about. Only DPD has the authority to do that. 

If, in reviewing the zoning, there is a case for changing it, that could apply to prospective projects in the future, but it cannot be applied retroactively."

So there you have it, the DPD punts to the City Council and the Council punts the issue back to the DPD. In the meantime, projects like the Alki rowhouses and other egregious developments are sprouting up all around us. At some point, city officials may see that mistakes were made and change the rules, but for now, these projects are going to get built. Once they're here, they're here to stay - for decades - along with the problems they spawn. There has to be a better way to manage growth and development in Seattle.

Related posts:

What Does SEPA Mean, Anyway?

The Environmental Impacts of the Alki 11 Rowhouses

What Does "SEPA" Mean, Anyway?

This question has come up often when neighbors have been discussing the Alki 11 review process. We were told that the project was under SEPA review; that the developer had filled out a SEPA checklist; that the meeting the city was granting us was called a SEPA meeting. But what the heck was SEPA?

Here is the definition, taken from the first paragraph of the City of Seattle's Department of Planning and Development's SEPA Checklist. Developers have to fill one of these out as part of the permitting process.

"The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21 RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from your proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required."

Prior to our public meeting last Wednesday, several neighbors reviewed the SEPA checklist the Alki 11 developer filed with the city. They found inaccuracies and incomplete responses which they have addressed in both written comments and in their oral comments at the meeting.

If a project in your neighborhood is under SEPA review, this is what it is all about. To access the developer's checklist for that project, follow the instructions here. Fill in the project's Master Use Project (MUP) number. When the records come up, scroll down to find the SEPA checklist.

Related posts:

How To Access Permit and Property Records for Seattle Development Projects

The Environmental Impacts of the Alki 11 Row Houses

Will the Alki 11 Row Houses Cause Flooding?

We Have A Meeting Date!

Meeting date: Wednesday, July 17. 2013

Time: 6:30 - 8 p.m.

Location: 

Youngstown Performing Arts Center

Auditorium

4408 Delridge Way SW

Seattle, WA 98106

This meeting is facilitated by DPD for a land use application (3014675) that has an associated Type II MUP (Master Use Permit) component-SEPA (which refers to environmental issues).  DPD will provide a brief overview regarding the proposal; discuss the SEPA process and project milestones; and allow the public to submit verbal (limited to 2 minutes per speaker) and written comments. All comments should be directed towards the environmental aspects of the project. 

How the Proposed Alki 11 Fails to Meet City Parking Requirements

In an earlier post, I showed a map of the Alki Parking Overlay. Within this area, developers are required to provide 1.5 parking spaces for each dwelling unit. This supersedes other city-wide parking regulations which allow for fewer off-street parking spaces. The reason for this is that Alki Beach is a destination for the rest of Seattle, especially in the summer months. If you live here, you know that it is nearly impossible to find street parking, even when there aren't visitors. This special parking requirement is intended to provide more off street parking and reduce congestion.

The site of the proposed Alki 11 is located inside this parking overlay. So following this formula, 1.5 spaces for each dwelling unit, the developer of this project is required to provide 16.5 off street spaces. In the developer's SEPA statement he claims that there will be two parking spaces for each unit, for a total of 22. But is that even possible?

The standard size for a parking space is 9 feet wide and 18 feet long. "Compact" spaces are 8 feet wide and can work in open parking lots where there is more room to maneuver. They are too narrow for garages because drivers have to contend with garage doors and walls. And once they are inside the garage, there's not much room to open car doors or walk around vehicles. Developers often fudge on garage sizes in townhouse autocourts in order to cram more units onto the property, which is why people who live in those buildings park on the street. There's no reason to expect that this project will be any different.

The minimum size for a 2-car garage is 20 feet wide and 20 feet long. But it is difficult to park SUVs and pickups in garages that size, so builders and architects are now recommending that garages measure 24 feet wide and long.

Each rowhouse in the Alki 11 will have an attached garage, located under the unit. In order to accommodate 22 cars, there would have to be space for a two car garage at the base of each rowhouse.

However, only three of these units are wide enough for a minimum-sized 2-car garage.

The architectural plans filed with the city show the following dimensions for the various units:

The units in the triplex facing 55th Ave SW
20'4" wide - 28'6" long
Number of cars that can fit in each garage: 2
Total number of cars that can park in this building: 6

The units in the duplex facing 55th Ave SW
18'6" wide - 28'6" long
Number of cars that can fit in each garage: 1
Total number of cars that can park in this building: 2

The units in the 4-plex facing Wickstrom Place SW
17' wide - 28'2" long
Number of cars that can fit into each garage: 1
Total number of cars that can park in this building: 4

The units in the duplex facing Wickstrom Place SW
16' wide - 23'8" long
Number of cars that can fit into each garage: 1
Total number of cars that can park in this building: 2

Here's the math --- > 6 + 2 + 4 + 2 = 14 cars can park off street

This is in violation of the Seattle Municipal Code requirement of 16.5 spaces.

How Many Parking Spaces Are Developers Required to Provide in the Alki Neighborhood?

The short answer is this: For every dwelling unit within the Alki Area Parking Overlay (see map) developers are required to provide 1.5 parking spaces. 

For the long answer, follow the link below to Chapter 23.54 of the Seattle Municipal Code. When you get there, you will find a long document that explains parking requirements for buildings and institutions throughout the city. For specific mention of the Alki neighborhood, scroll down to Table B, "Parking for Residential Uses," then scroll down to item "O." 

Reference: Title 23 - LAND USE CODE

Subtitle III - Land Use Regulations
Division 2 - Authorized Uses and Development Standards 
Chapter 23.54 - QUANTITY AND DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ACCESS, OFF-STREET PARKING, AND SOLID WASTE STORAGE

Adversity Builds Community

A proposed "row house" project has mobilized my Alki Beach neighborhood in a way that few events, short of natural disaster, can. We knew for several months that development was planned for three lots on our street. The rumor was that it was going to be a townhouse complex. No one seemed upset by that. But when the land use sign went up and neighbors started looking at what was being proposed, the consensus was, "Whoa!"

Townhouses are one thing. Row houses are another. Townhouse developments are required to provide off street parking for their residents and include green space to mitigate environmental impacts. But row houses are not. Our little beach community has serious parking problems because it is a destination for Seattlites on sunny days. The runoff from this development will flow directly into Puget Sound, 1/2 block away. If this development is allowed to go forward as proposed, it will add to our existing parking and water pollution problems. It will block views for many neighbors, with 3-story buildings set just 5 feet from the sidewalk.

I could write a lengthy post about all that is wrong with this proposal. But for me, the most interesting thing about the situation has been how neighbors have come together to express their concerns and communicate them to the City.

It began with one neighbor photographing this sign and emailing it to others, alerting us to the fact that the comment period was pretty short. Several people wrote the city to request a two week extension and we were granted that. Then at least 6 people wrote to Seattle's Department of Planning and Development, expressing their concerns about various aspects of the project. Their comments (including mine) are part of the public record, which can be accessed at the DPD website.  Enter project number 3014675 and wait a minute for the records to come up. You'll find all documents pertinent to the project there.

After the comment period closed, we asked the city when we would get a public hearing to discuss this project. We were told that public hearings are not part of the process for these types of projects, but that the city planner might give us a hearing if we submitted a petition with at least 50 signatures. I remember saying to neighbors when we got the news, "I can easily see us getting 20, but 50?"

The great thing about this neighborhood is that we are a close community. We get along well, many of us have become friends over the years, and we do things together like summertime potlucks. Because I've been one of the potluck organizers, I have email addresses for many neighbors. So I sent an email to my list, explaining my concerns about the project and that we needed to get a petition circulated ASAP. Over the next couple of days, 10 people came forward to offer to gather signatures. We quickly got the required 50 (one neighbor collected 55 by himself!) and went on to collect 2-1/2 times that many before the deadline.

In the process, friends became closer and acquaintances became allies. We were drawn together in a way that made me appreciate this neighborhood more than ever.

Will we get our hearing? It's only been a few days since we submitted our petition and we haven't heard anything yet. But whatever happens, we are a better community for having had this experience.