At Thursday’s meeting, I introduced an item of New Business. Basically an ‘undo key’ on Ordinance 1539 from 2012. Or to put it another way, to re-instate Ordinance 1407 from 2007.
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 We repealed that in 2012 (Ordinance #1539).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(1) DMMC 14.08.180 and section 43 of Ordinance No. 1407 are hereby repealed.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.
Comments
Comments are closed.