As you can see, I’m making a few changes to the pages–hopefully it will make the site more useful. The PSAs are now on the right side of every page, along instructions on how to provide public comment. Also, there is a feed from the Official City Calendar. It’s good for seeing the dates, but the City is still not putting links to the content (agendas, instructions, etc.) so please continue to use the links I provide which do take you there.
This Week
Tuesday: Distributing flyers for the big Holi Festival on the May 14 at Saltwater State Park!
Thursday: Meeting with Congressman Adam Smith. Mr. Smith has been working hard to obtain EPA grants to help with aviation studies. My interest is (as always) finding ways to reduce the noise and pollution and providing meaningful compensation to our City.
Thursday: 4:00PM Public Safety Committee (Agenda)
Thursday: 5:00PM City Council Meeting (Agenda) The highlight is a proposal from the City Manager to move in-person meetings to 6:00PM. Traditionally these have occurred at 7PM, but were changed during the pandemic, basically to make things more convenient for staff. I didn’t quite get this because other cities did not adjust their schedules.
I object to one Whereas which states that there have been no public complaints about the earlier start times. Not true. I’ve heard tons of complaints about it from working people.
That said, SeaTac meetings start at 6:00. Burien at 6:30. I understand why staff prefer the earlier time but apart from any tradition, my preferences would be to return to the 7:00PM because I think the later time is easier for working residents to come to City Hall. But I’m not sure. So…
Last Week
Tuesday: Port of Seattle Commission Meeting (Agenda) the big highlight is wass their return to in-person (and hybrid) meetings at Sea-Tac. Other items:
- As with the Third Runway, there are a number of signs the Port is moving ahead with the SAMP. The Commission voted to issue $1.1 billion dollars in intermediate bonds.
- On a somewhat more positive note, the Commission approved a test plan to determine the safety of large-scale hydrogen storage. There is a growing consensus that hydrogen cells are the only practical method for powering commercial aircraft at any point in the next 40 years. Battery development just isn’t moving ahead fast enough. There are currently hydrogen auto fueling stations, but Sea-Tac Airport measures its storage tanks for Jet-A (kerosene) in the millions of gallons.
Wednesday: Sea-Tac Airport Roundtable (StART) Meeting (Agenda). Different day, say ol’… The thing I keep saying over and over about StART is that all the Cities seem to have decided to team up with the Port to achieve a shared policy agenda. The practical effect has been to simply avoid any local action.
It’s all relative.
The most notable feature of every StART meeting now is the presence of at least thirty (30) commenters. However twenty nine of them will be Vashon Island residents demanding to be allowed to join the group (which is currently limited only to fence line communities.) I kinda have to smile at this because it’s like people demanding to get into a club that has nothing good to do.
Thursday: SCORE Jail. Director Devon Schrum gave me a tour and I was impressed with everything I saw. She also wanted me to know that they are hiring–and from what I can tell, for the right person, these are good jobs most people would never think to consider. But I left some brochures at City Hall or you can call them for more info
The City of Des Moines is a part owner of the facility as part of an ILA with several other near by cities. So the City Council has a particular interest in how the place is managed. (Until 2020, the City Council had a liaison who attended their meetings and reported at Council Meetings; that role has since been taken up by City Manager Matthias.)
Unfortunately, SCORE is where a lot of people finally get the services they need to tackle addiction and mental health issues and their staff spend a lot of effort on those aspects of their mission. They have a lot of skills that could be applied to people who need help outside of the court/jail system and it would be interesting to think about how that might work.
Thursday: Economic Development Committee (Agenda) (Video). Their first meeting of year, CM Nutting returns as chair with two new members: Deputy Mayor Buxton and Vic Pennington. Key item: a discussion of the Masonic Home EIS.
Thursday: Municipal Facilities Committee (Agenda) (Video) , CM Nutting returns as chair with new member: Harry Steinmetz and returning Mayor Mahoney. City Manager Matthias complimented the Committee for its wisdom in “continuity of leadership.” The group acknowledged that because the group was basically four months behind, they should stick with the staff’s recommended plan. The Mayor also acknowledged that at least two summer meetings would be cancelled in order to accommodate staff holidays. The Mayor was concerned that, being new to the committee, CM Steinmetz had not received a copy of the Capital Improvements Plan. This struck me as a bit odd considering that, like the TIP, the CIP is a public document and available 24/7/365 on the City web site? The meeting lasted eleven minutes and there were compliments as to how well it was run.
Thursday: City Council Meeting (Agenda)Â (Video) Perhaps the most important item was not on the Agenda. The City Manager provided the first update on the ARPA Stimulus spending since September 16 where we spent all $9M. I’ll have more on that in another article but I think the most notable item was that the business grant program seems to be ready to go.
There was also an item to accept a Port of Seattle grant to help promote that business grant program. I voted no on it for the same reason I always vote no on these. There is a sentence in there which indicates we support the Century Agenda. Saying so is not a requirement for obtaining the grant so either they just keep cutting/pasting every year or the City really does support the Century Agenda–and if so, they should find work elsewhere.
Standard Equipment
To be less confusing: We used to have a section in our building code (Ordinance 1407 from 2007) which required sound insulation in all new construction. We repealed that in 2012 (Ordinance #1539). The operative language was as simple as this:
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DES MOINES ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
(1) DMMC 14.08.180 and section 43 of Ordinance No. 1407 are hereby repealed.
That is all it took to remove the requirement for sound insulation.
I want to bring back what we had before: sound insulation for new construction.
My proposal is simply this:
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DES MOINES ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
(1) DMMC 14.08.180 and section 43 of Ordinance No. 1407 are hereby reinstated.
Get it? Just put back what was taken out in 2012. Hopefully, it doesn’t require any ‘study’ or ‘analysis’. It requires no coordination with the Port or the FAA. If it worked before, it will work now. How am I so sure? Because it’s the same code that is currently in use in both Burien and SeaTac.
But before we get rolling, it never ceases to amaze me how one can be criticised for doing the right thing. In this case, I was told by three people “Dude. Know when to stop talking. They said Yes, already!” Like so many things in Des Moines these days, I fear that our love of (cough) ‘few words’ has led to an abnormally short attention span. Please note:
- That discussion, which seemed so interminable, lasted a whopping ten minutes. We talk about anything airport-related about… oh… once in a blue moon. Even though it is the single most significant impact to our community.
- And even with my ‘windiness’ our meeting was still able to conclude in a very crisp 1:15.
The good ol’ days…
When people talk about how great things used to be, they aren’t kidding. There was a sweet spot in the 1970’s where flights were plentiful enough to keep property values super-cheap but not so many flights as to drive people insane-o. But there had been enough community resentment after the second runway (primarily in the Sea-Tac Area) that when the Puget Sound Regional Council approved funding for a third runway in 1996, they mandated that 11,000 housing units gets those Port Packages. That’s an important detail. That happened before all the lawsuits.
(What kills me is that we all yearn for the days of flights which were “three to five minutes apart.” The people on Vashon Island show up at community meetings and their first words will always be: “The flights are now insane. They’re three to five minutes apart!”)
There were other strings attached to those Port Packages. The Avigation Easement was one (homeowners give perpetual license to fly over their property in exchange for the one-time Port Package.) That one really sucks.
But another was that each city receiving Port Packages (Des Moines, Burien and SeaTac should add a section to their building codes requiring new construction to provide sound reduction equivalent to what the Port Packages provide. In our case that was Ordinance 1407. The logic is simple: The Federal government was being asked to pay to mitigate homes that were there before the new runway. Fine. But it would not be fair to let developers continue to build homes without sound insulation and then later ask taxpayers to foot the bill for it. That would be like allowing builders to continue to build without the appropriate design upgrades after an area is identified as an earthquake risk.
I was against it… before I voted for it…
Last week I enthusiastically supported a new housing development on 216th and 12th-ish. They are the first new units in the area in a very long time and the first to use the kind of middle-market approach that makes for 23 really nice homes on a footprint where once there were four. The only fly in the ointment? No sound code. Those homes are uniquely positioned to get a double-dose of noise: landings on 34L (third runway) and take-offs on 16C. If any development should have sound insulation? That’s the one.
This is equity
How do I know it sucks? I’ve been brow beating the Port Commission to finally insulate all the remaining apartment buildings from that 1996 agreement. Because the strategy the Port employed in deploying Port packages was to begin with all the single family homes. They left the apartments for last. But in 2008, basically the moment the Third Runway was completed? They stopped the Port Package program. For the next ten years they averaged about eight new installs a year and did nothing about over 1,100 remaining multi-family buildings. Because there was no one to say “make me.”
Funny thing about apartments: that’s where a very large portion of the BIPOC community live. Not to mention lower income people of all types–but especially women with children. One may call it ‘coincidence’ but the demography is striking: the overwhelmingly white single-family homes got Port Packages and all the predominantly not-so-white multi-family homes did not.
That is what structural racism looks like today.
To their credit, the 2020 Port of Seattle Commission voted to correct that inequity. So the Villa Enzian Apartments are now being retro-fitted with high quality sound reduction; as are hundreds of similar apartments along Kent Des Moines Road. But not too much credit. Because it took 20 years for the apartment dwellers along Kent Des Moines Road to obtain the same basic quality of life as the predominantly white single family homes only two blocks away.
And one other ‘inside baseball’ politics detail: I did not support Stephanie Bowman’s bid for re-election as Port Commissioner. It was, hands down, the toughest ‘politics’ call I’ve made, because the fact is that she was, hands down, the most sincere advocate on the Commission for sound insulation–including getting those apartments done. This is what political courage looks like. Let’s be honest. Port Commissioners tend to get re-elected by doing projects about photogenic Orcas and High Schools. There is no photo-op in providing sound insulation for old apartments. Pushing that issue got her zero votes. But giving every resident the same opportunity to have some peace and quiet? That is what equity really looks like, in my opinion. And if she ran for any other office, I’d have to give her strong consideration.
You can’t fool me. I know what year it is!
Now, something may have occurred to you: If we repealed our sound ordinance in 2012, what about all those new homes built since then? Exactamundo.
It is hard to report on ‘untruth’. Using “the L word” offends people. But if one reads the “Whereases”, the Ordinance makes three main points and all of them are whoppers.
- “Developers have told us we cannot build here with all these regulations!” Any yet? Both Burien and Sea-Tac residents got Port Packages, neither city repealed their sound code. And both have built lots of nice homes since 2012.
- “Off the shelf products and generally accepted construction standards have improved to where one does not need any of those damned regulations!” And yet, area developers offered “optional” sound insulation packages in areas such as Blueberry Lane. Which is like having optional seat belts.
- “Foregoing sound code will not prevent home owners from seeking noise mitigation in the future.” OK, that one is true–if by “homeowner” you mean Marty McFly and by “the future” you mean 1986. Because that’s the cut-off date for FAA eligibility. Every home built in Des Moines since we repealed our sound code in 2012 will never be eligible for a Port Package.
And I could not agree more with that policy.
You’re a Senator or the FAA Administrator. Your constituency is “America”, not “Des Moines”. If Des Moines comes to you in 2022 and says, “Please give us $300M in new Port Package money for new houses inside the DNL65. Here’s the conversation:
FED: Didn’t you used to have a sound code? We gave you money for every home inside that area. And you agreed to add sound to your building code.”
DM: “Well, yes we did. And gosh we tried. Really we did. But the developers said they wouldn’t come here anymore if we did that. So really, it’s their fault.”
FED: OK, but then how come Burien and SeaTac didn’t do that?”
DM: Well……. we weren’t working here then. So it’s not our fault either.”
You’re asking the Federal Government to give a retroactive gift to developers for lobbying the City to go against the whole intent of the Third Runway mitigation. In fact, you’re actually rewarding the City for circumventing the will of Congress.
It’s so annoying…
Mitigating airport impacts is hard. Since the emissions from jet engines are so different from those of automobiles, they haven’t (until recently) even begun to be understood. And noise? The idea that it is simply a matter of sensitivity is so baked into us that the technical term for the harm it causes is ‘annoyance’. It’s not annoying. It’s harmful to human health and we should start talking about it like that. It’s harmful. Not annoying.
Now, try walking into Federal Court to argue the potential community harms of airport expansion. You start whipping out decades of public health studies about the negative effects on human health of excessive noise. It’s a lock, right?
Then the smartly dressed FAA lawyer on the other table simply whips out that one single sheet of paper, Ordinance 1539, and calmly reads…
“WHEREAS, continuing improvements in State building and
energy codes are resulting in quieter homes…”
You simply cannot expect judges or electeds to believe that you care about noise impacts if you create an ordinance with the express purpose of contravening the will of the Federal Government. Your only argument becomes, “Well, yes but now it’s much, much worse.”
Uh huh.
It’s a feature…
That is why I proposed that we immediately re-instate the sound code–and why I objected to being cut-off while speaking. The Council must understand what is at stake. The issue is not as simple as “remand it to the committee.”
 We must have that sound code in place in order to expand the Port Package program to every part of Des Moines. Because no way the FAA pays for it otherwise.
And everyone should celebrate–especially developers. Because if every new home really is being built with the same (or better) sound reduction as a Port Package? Developers should have no problem. If they’re already doing it, they should actually welcome it as a sales tool. From that perspective, the sound code is not a hindrance, but rather a sales feature. And proof that they really are providing a safe, quiet product.