1
2
3
4
5
6
7

BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF SEATTLE

8

In Re: Appeal by

9

SAFE AND AFFORDABLE SEATTLE, a nonprofit
corporation, and

10

NO.

NOTICE OF APPEAL

11

MAGNOLIA NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING
COUNCIL, a nonprofit corporation, and

12

ELIZABETH A. CAMPBELL, an individual

13
14
15
16
17

Of the CITY OF SEATTLE, DETERMINATION OF
NON-SIGNIFICANCE OF AMENDMENTS TO THE
LAND USE CODE TO MODIFY DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS FOR TRANSITIONAL ENCAMPMENTS
AND INCREASE THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF
AUTHORIZED INTERIM USE ENCAMPMENTS
(PURSUANT TO SMC 25.05.340 AND WAC 197-11340).

18
I. INTRODUCTION
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

1. Appellant Safe and Affordable Seattle (SAAS) is an alliance of people and
organizational interests that altogether represent Seattle business owners and residents who will
be significantly and adversely impacted by the proposed City of Seattle’s amendments to the
land use code as outlined in the Determination of Non-significance of the amendments to the
land use code, to wit, to “Modify Development Standards for Transitional Encampments and
Increase the Maximum Number of Authorized Interim Use Encampments”.
2. Appellant Magnolia Neighborhood Planning Council (MNPC) is an alliance of
people and organizational interests that altogether represent Magnolia, Interbay, and
Fishermen’s Terminal business owners and residents who will be significantly and adversely
impacted by the proposed City of Seattle’s amendments to the land use code as outlined in the
Determination of Non-significance of the amendments to the land use code, to wit, to “Modify

SAAS ET AL NOTICE OF APPEAL DNS TRANSITIONAL ENCAMPMENTS - 1

 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

Development Standards for Transitional Encampments and Increase the Maximum Number of
Authorized Interim Use Encampments”.
3. Appellant Elizabeth Campbell is a resident of Seattle who will be significantly and
adversely impacted by the proposed City of Seattle’s amendments to the land use code as
outlined in the Determination of Non-significance of the amendments to the land use code, to
wit, to “Modify Development Standards for Transitional Encampments and Increase the
Maximum Number of Authorized Interim Use Encampments”.
4. The obvious and unintended consequences of the amendments are that the City of
Seattle in concert and collaboration with others will significantly expand the number of
transitional encampments in Seattle, to an in excess amount of at least 40 encampments, by
one, authorizing them to be located without restriction or consideration of a location’s a) land
use zone, b) historic district designation, c) urban village and related designation, d) shoreline
zone, d) environmental critical areas zone, e) industrial zone, or any other land use plan,
designation, zone, or other qualification, two, siting them within close proximity to one another
and without regard for other uses in close proximity including but not limited to allowing
encampments to be sited next to preschools, schools (public/private and residences (houses,
apartments, townhomes and the like), stores and shops selling alcoholic beverages and
intoxicating substances, three, allowing an unlimited number of encampments on any land held
or claimed to be controlled by a religious organization (whether constructively or on a contrived
basis, and without benefit of any obligation on the part of the religious organization or its
proxies to comply the City’s land use, environmental, or other property/project controls, and by
four, allowing any transitional encampment to occupy a location in perpetuity.

15
16
17
18
19
20
21

II. APPELLANT INFORMATION
1. Appellant #1
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:

Safe and Affordable Seattle (SAAS)
4027 21st Avenue West Suite 206
Seattle, WA 98199
206.769.8459
safeseattlebuzz@gmail.com

I wish to receive documents from the Office of the Hearing Examiner by
Email Attachment.

22

2. Appellant #2

23

Name:
Address:

24

Magnolia Neighborhood Planning Council (MNPC)
4027 21st Avenue West Suite 206
Seattle, WA 98199
206.769.8459
magnoliaplan@gmail.com

25

Phone:
Email:

26

I wish to receive documents from the Office of the Hearing Examiner by

SAAS ET AL NOTICE OF APPEAL DNS TRANSITIONAL ENCAMPMENTS - 2

 1

Email Attachment.

2

3. Appellant #3

3

Name:
Address:

4
5

Phone:
Email:

Elizabeth A. Campbell (Campbell)
4027 21st Avenue West Suite 206
Seattle, WA 98199
206.769.8459
neighborhoodwarrior@gmail.com

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

I wish to receive documents from the Office of the Hearing Examiner by
Email Attachment.
III. DECISION BEING APPEALED
1. Decision Appealed: SAAS, MNPC, and Campbell are appealing the City of Seattle
Seattle City Council’s/Legislative Department’s Determination of Non-Significance for
Amendments to the Land Use Code to Modify Development Standards for Transitional
Encampments and Increase the Maximum Number of Authorized Interim Use
Encampments (Pursuant to SMEC 25.05.340 and WAC 197-11-340), hereinafter “the
DNS”, challenging the adequacy of the analysis underlying the SEPA DNS, that it is in
large part predicated upon false or misleading information about transitional
encampments, about the history of the existing code that would be amended by the City
Council’s proposed amendments, that it relies upon a constructed narrative or upon
omissions of fact in order to support the multiple and clearly erroneous statements and
conclusions in the underlying SEPA checklist upon which the DNS is based.
2. Property address of Decision being appealed [Applicant Address]: The geographic
area that would be affected by the amendments proposed in the ordinance is all land within
the City of Seattle’s municipal boundaries.
Seattle City Council
600 Fourth Avenue – 2nd Floor
P.O. Box 34025
Seattle, WA. 98104
206-684-8888

21
22
23
24
25
26

3. Elements of decision being appealed. Check one or more as appropriate:
_X_ Adequacy of Conditions
____ Design Review and Departure
____ Conditional Use
_X__ EIS not required
____ Major Institution Master Plan

_X_ Other (specify: DNS)
____ Variance (Departures)
____ Adequacy of EIS
____ Interpretation (See SMC 23.88.020)
____ Short Plat
____ Rezone

SAAS ET AL NOTICE OF APPEAL DNS TRANSITIONAL ENCAMPMENTS - 3

 1
IV. APPEAL INFORMATION
2
1. What is your interest in this decision: (State how you are affected by it)
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

Appellants Safe and Affordable Seattle (SAAS) and Magnolia Neighborhood planning
council are membership based groups, alliances of people, business owners and operators and
organizational interests that altogether represent Seattle business owners and residents who will
be significantly and adversely impacted by the proposed City of Seattle proposal to establish an
unlimited number of permanent transitional encampments in Seattle.
Appellant Elizabeth Campbell is a neighborhood activist who will be significantly and
adversely impacted by the proposed City of Seattle proposal to establish an unlimited number of
permanent transitional encampments in Seattle.
2. What are your objections to the decision? (List and describe what you believe to
be the errors, omissions, or other problems with this decision.)
The Seattle City Council’s determination that there will be no significant impacts from
the amendments proposed to SMC 23.40.002, 23.42.054, 23.42.056, 23.76.004, 23.76.006,
23.84A.038, AND SUBSECTION 23.76.032.C is adequate, was made in error, is outright false,
misleading, or contains substantial omissions of fact, and was made in violation of the State
Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21C, for the following reasons:
1. The SEPA Checklist has been completed without accuracy. Appellants recognize that a
typical SEPA checklist often addresses one specific project; however in this case the
checklist herein is analyzing and making conclusions about the potential environmental
impacts of a proposed, significant city-wide land use code change, a non-project action.
The checklist has been completed under the mistaken assumption that because no
singular project is defined therefore no environmental impacts can be identified.
However, one can easily associate scores of considerable and significant environmental
impacts from the resultant proliferation of transitional encampments the amendments
would authorize, at least 40 transitional encampments on up to an unlimited number of
encampments in Seattle, which require new on and offsite infrastructure to sustain, the
impacts from potentially thousands of newly minted camp residents being housed in
closely located, illegal housing structures, in a wide variety of settings – industrial,
residential, open space, educational, business, recreational, park, shoreline, religious,
historic, entertainment land use zones; and the concomitant phalanx of “camp followers”
that do and will gather around each transitional encampment, itinerant individuals who
eschew regulated living arrangements, purveyors of a variety of goods and services
uniquely curated to serve the interests of a large number of encampment residents, and
the now ubiquitous and significant impacts to the community hosting the encampment,
the impact on the health and safety of the community, its businesses and residents, the
lands surrounding the encampment, and even the disruption of commerce in the location
where a transitional encampment is located.

SAAS ET AL NOTICE OF APPEAL DNS TRANSITIONAL ENCAMPMENTS - 4

 1
2
3
4

2. Appellants object that almost every SEPA Checklist question for the proposed
legislation is answered with “Not Applicable”, “No”, “None”, or that some City of
Seattle ordinance or, that some law or regulation, all unspecified, will in the alternative
cure any possible environmental impact – i.e. that through the operation of the City’s
codes there can be no impact that cannot be cured by operation of law.
It is dismissive and inaccurate for the City Council’s agents to suggest that because the
proposal is a “non-project action” that there are no foreseeable and clearly identifiable
environmental impacts from this proposed legislation. To deny such takes away the
public’s right to review, comment upon, share its viewpoints on, and to help identify the
significant number of real and definable environmental impacts associated with an
approval of the transitional encampment code amendments.

5
6
7
8

And frankly, the whole no significant environmental impacts, or impacts even in general
coupled with the City’s claims that its laws and regulations are what will ensure that no
impacts will exist or will be mitigated is disingenuous at best; for example its claims in
the checklist that no encampments will be located in an environmentally critical area
(ECA) – when three have been, (Tent City V (located in two different ECA locations
and Othello); and that the two still are in ECA locations.

9
10
11
12

Or the multiple claims in the Checklist that the City or a project proponent will carry out
any environmental reviews when required – when the well documented practice has
been to carry out environmental reviews after the encampment has been established,
Low Income Housing Institute (Othello), or to avoid environmental review by
artificially claiming the encampment is below the threshold for requiring SEPA review,
1601 15th Avenue West encampment; or exempting an encampment from SEPA review
on the basis that the City of Seattle Emergency Declaration exempts such compliance
(LIHI – Licton Springs); it does not.

13
14
15
16
17

In recent major land use code amendments, related the the Mandatory Housing and
Affordability, South Lake Union and Uptown, Accessory Dwelling Unit rezone
legislation for example, there was no question that each of those city council actions
while “non-project actions” there were environmental impacts that needed expert study,
public engagement, and a full environmental impact statement.

18
19
20
21

The SEPA checklist herein asks dozens of questions about environmental impacts
related to, including but not limited to:

22
23
24
25
26

•
•
•
•
•
•

Pending government approvals
Surface water and drainage impacts
Plants and open space impacts
Land use changes and impacts
Comprehensive plan and density impacts
Housing unit numbers and neighborhood impacts

SAAS ET AL NOTICE OF APPEAL DNS TRANSITIONAL ENCAMPMENTS - 5

 1
2
3

•
•
•
•
•

Aesthetics impacts
Recreational, open space and park impacts
Displacement impacts
Historical and cultural preservation impacts
Public services impacts – including police, fire, and social service impacts

4
5
6
7
8
9

To every one of these potential significant impacts the City has claimed that the
proposed legislation once in operation will have absolutely no environmental impacts, or
in the alternative that by operation of law the City’s laws and regulations will prevent or
cure any impact. The falsity of those claims cannot be overstated given that with nine
existing transitional encampments now in operation, the majority of which have been in
operation for the better part of some four years, and the multiple and very public record
about those encampments causing a variety of and substantial impacts to the
environments and neighborhoods in which they exist, it is disingenuous at best for the
City to claim that there will be no environmental impacts from an at least ten fold
increase in the number of transitional encampments.

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

3. SMC 25.05.926 Lead Agency for governmental Proposals at Section B requires,
“Whenever possible, agency people carrying out SEPA procedures should be different
from agency people making the proposal.” The City of Seattle/Legislative Department
is a large enough organization that it easily could have assigned other personnel to do
the SEPA Checklist review. Both of the legislative staff involved with preparing the
Checklist and the DNS for the proposed legislation, Ketil Freeman (Threshold
Determination/Responsible Official) and Eric McConaghy (SEPA Checklist
Preparer/Legislative Analyst – Seattle City Council Central Staff) have a documented
history of crafting not only official documents but self-serving master narratives about
why or how the City of Seattle in general and certain departments in particular, in this
case, the City Council, the Department of Housing, and the Seattle Department of
Construction & Inspections can circumvent or entirely ignore or not comply with City
and State law which governs the land use, building codes, landlord tenant, and human
rights laws associated with the transitional encampments the City has already
authorized, operates, funds, and otherwise commits resources to.
4. The City claims in the checklist that the only legal changes that will be required are
those associated with the amendments to the Seattle Municipal Code however it also
acknowledges that these sweeping transitional encampment zoning amendments will
create inconsistencies with the Comprehensive Plan, but denies that the Comprehensive
Plan will need to be amended. This is untrue.
5. The City failed to identify specific transitional encampment locations that are known,
already established, that would be affected by the proposed legislation; it failed to name
and evaluate them for any environmental impacts.
6. The proposed legislation will:
a. Usurp the rights of the public to exercise its democratic rights, weigh-in, have
oversight over, and require any kind of accountability related to the City’s land

SAAS ET AL NOTICE OF APPEAL DNS TRANSITIONAL ENCAMPMENTS - 6

 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

use decision and social programs that are inextricably intertwined with
transitional encampments; and
b. By fiat impermissibly authorize the continued construction of “tiny houses” that
are legally, by state and city law, their building codes nothing more than garden
sheds, that are illegal for any kind of residential use; and
c. Impermissibly lend or give the City’s credit, money, or property to aid an
individual, association, or corporation (Washington State Constitution Article
VIII, section 7); and
d. Gives preferential treatment to religious organizations in order to establish
transitional encampments that will not require environmental and land use
review, without benefit of any permitting by the City (which includes not having
to pay any fees to the City). Under the proposed legislation the City intends to
fund religious organizations because of the religious character, or organizations
because of their religious affiliations; intends to set aside a particular portion of
funds for them.
The SEPA Checklist failed to disclose or analyze any of the above impacts that would
result from the amendments to the Seattle Municipal Code being passed by the Seattle City
Council.
V. RELIEF REQUESTED
What relief do you want? (Specify what you want the Examiner to do: reverse the decision,
modify conditions, etc.)

Appellants request that the Hearing Examiner remand the DNS back to the City of Seattle
with instructions to:
1. Reverse and remand the DNS back to the City Council and require that it be prepared
on the basis of verifiable analysis that includes professional and expert analysis with provable
metrics and design and land use parameters, and proper unbiased government review.
2. Prepare an environmental impact statement as necessary to adequately address the
myriad of deficiencies itemized above in this Notice of Appeal and other deficiencies.

20
21

Filed on behalf of the Safe and Affordable Seattle on this 29th day of August, 2019.

22
23
24
25
26

Elizabeth A. Campbell, MPA
Founder and Director of Safe and Affordable Seattle
Filed on behalf of the Magnolia Neighborhood Planning Council on this 29th day of
August, 2019.

SAAS ET AL NOTICE OF APPEAL DNS TRANSITIONAL ENCAMPMENTS - 7

 1
2
3

Elizabeth A. Campbell, MPA
Founder and Director of Safe and Affordable Seattle

4
5

Filed on behalf of Elizabeth A. Campbell on this 29th day of August, 2019.

6
7
8

Elizabeth A. Campbell, MPA
Individually

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

SAAS ET AL NOTICE OF APPEAL DNS TRANSITIONAL ENCAMPMENTS - 8