lon

Reference 

Create Date:



RECEIVED BY
PM was

3020845

Jan 04, 2017 1:22 PM

Submit Date: Jan 04, 2017 4:41 PM {if i?liJE 0F
Status: Accepted HFAQING 5Min
Type: Land Use Appeal

Contact Method: Email Attachment

 

Appeal Details

Address:
Decision
Elements:

interest

Objections:

Desired
Relief:

Mod. Devl. Stnd; Viol. Sub. Cr;

The Appellants have varied interests in the project. Standing will be demonstrated in the hearing
for several organizations. which should be suf?cient for the Hearing Examiner's jurisdiction.
Appellant organizations represent individuals who will be negativer impacted by the proposed
project, including (1) people living nearby the project and suffering impacts from the construction
and operation of the proposed facility: (2) people who will be negatively impacted by the operation
of the proposed jail; (3) taxpayers who would be required to fund the pr0posed facility. Other
organizations represent populations that are at risk of over-incarceration in the detention facility
and populations that rely upon public services that are placed at risk by the proposed project's
inordinate waste of public resources and tax dollars. Most individuals and organizations involved
as Appellants have an interest in protecting the lives of the kids most of whom are kids of color 
that would be placed at risk through the construction and operation of the facility.

The public was not provided suf?cient notice and legally required notice, and the notice that was
provided was misleading, substantially inaccurate, and deprived the public and neighbors of due
process. The notices failed to inform the public about the nature and extent of the project and the
proposed departures from the land use code, which were discussed and disclosed for the ?rst time
only after the close of the public notice period. New public notice should have been provided when
the project changed during public review and the City obtained new information. The notice of
decision failed to inform the public of the decisions subject to appeal and was misleading. The
decision was arbitrary and capricious and not supported by substantial evidence. A new SEPA
analysis should have been required due to the changes that have occurred since the original
mitigated determination of non-signi?cance was issued. including: (1) changed public policy and
information about the impacts ofjailing youth, negative impacts of large juvenile detention
facilities, and over?incarceration of youth of color; (2) new information about the need for a new
youth jail; (3) new information about toxins and hazardous materials on the site; (4) new
information about traf?c and parking impacts; (5) changes to the project; (6) failure of the project to
conform to the mitigation required in the and (7) failure to comply with substantive criteria
of the land use code. The mitigation imposed under SEPA was inadequate to mitigate the
environmental impacts of the project, including (1) crime and impacts of incarceration on children
and particularly youth of color; (2) toxins and hazardous materials; (3) traf?c. pedestrian. parking,
and noise; (4) violations of law and public policy; (5) failure to conform to mitigation required by the
iviDNS; and (6) failure to comply with the land use code. The procedures used to mitigate impacts
are inconsistent with public participation requirements. (Additional objections attached)

Appellants request that the Hearing Examiner reverse or reverse and remand the challenged
decision.

 

Contacts
1 .

Appellant

Name:
Email:
Phone:

Fax:

EPIC others (see attached)
endingthepic@gmail.com
(206) 860-2976

(206) 860-4187

Address: do 2317 E. John Seattle, WA, 98112
Authorized Representative

Name:
Email:

Knoll Lowney
knoll@igc.org

1/4/2017 4:52 PM

20f2



Phone: (206) 860?2976
Fax: (206) 860-4187
Address: 2317 E. John . Seattle? WA, 98112

 

Uploaded Material

1.

Organizations&lndividuals Joinging MUP Appealpdf

Upload Date: Jan 04. 2017 4:40 PM
Submit Date: Jan 04, 2017 4:41 PM
OBJECTIONS T0 LAND USE 
Upload Date: Jan 04, 2017 4:40 PM
Submit Date: Jan 04, 2017 4:41 PM
Interest of Appellants in the decisionpdf
Upload Date: Jan 04, 2017 4:41 PM
Submit Date: Jan 04. 2017 4:41 PM

 

1/4/2017 4:52 PM