Hi Everyone, thanks Don for the intro;

And thanks to everyone for considering my motion last evening. Ellen and Don have asked me
to drill down a bit so here goes:

Since our appeal was upheld almost 2 years ago and the City was required to complete a full
EIS on their proposed legislative change to all single-family neighborhoods, I have been
reporting to you on a regular basis that I was hopeful that the city would indeed follow through
with the requirement and their commitment to review all the environmental impacts in a
comprehensive and transparent manner.

The City delayed 6 months privately evaluating their chances of appealing the Hearing
Examiners ruling. They finally committed to complete the EIS, and began doing so about a year
ago. I attended every city meeting including consultants that would complete the work and
reported back to you. I was hopeful that the consultants would be given the freedom to fairly
evaluate the results of our appeal and every noted environmental impact. The DEIS (Draft
Environmental Impact Statement) revealed that many of the issues were given a cursory review
with little substantiation of 'no impact."

Our comment letter as well as hundreds of others noted the glaring deficiencies.

For instance, the proposal to eliminate all parking requirements city-wide deserved a dedicated
evaluation of specific neighborhoods that could accommodate more cars as they are newer,
have wider streets and larger lots. Remember that closer in neighborhoods like the University
District, Wallingford, Queen Anne, Capitol Hill, Mt Baker and others have narrow streets, smaller
lots, and significant parking challenges. I have proposed to consider that some neighborhoods
could consider reduced parking requirements while others would suffer much greater impacts.
The DEIS considered 4 outlying neighborhoods in NE, NW, SE, and SW Seattle and none
within miles of our downtown center. In other words, they ignored citizens requests to even
study the different unique qualities and challenges of our cherished neighborhoods. I was
hopeful that in the last few months of moving from the DEIS to the Final EIS, the city would have
taken this seriously and dug deeper to find the right balance. Sadly, my initial review of the
parking section reveals that the study area and conclusions remain unchanged. One size fits
all!

This is just an example of what I and many others will be reviewing as we evaluate the
conclusions of the FEIS. Has the City and O'Brien listened to the citizens? Have the planners
actually taken the comments gleaned from the DEIS seriously and considered the evaluation
process and results to respect those comments? Have the conclusions regarding
environmental impacts changed between the DEIS and FEIS? And has the proposal been
amended to reflect the thousands of citizen and organization comments and concerns?

As we and thousands of others study the FEIS and evaluate the depth of the study, the resultant
conclusions, and the relationships to many concerns voiced throughout the last few years, folks
and organizations will determine their next steps in deciding to challenge the proposed
legislation. It is with these concerns that I drafted the motion passed last night.

As pointed out in my letter to you yesterday outlining the proposal as read to me by Dan
Beekman, it is immediately obvious to me that CM O'Brien has moved ahead advancing not
only the entire original proposal, but additional conditions that increase the perceived impacts to
neighborhoods and single-family properties and their owners. He and others have been quite
vocal this year in their support to eliminate single-family zoning city-wide. As I have given
numerous media interviews today, I have represented myself and QACC by consistently
answering questions about further appeals based upon my need together with others to
completely review the FEIS and compare the study with the DEIS. At this time, I have not done
so as it will take some time to fit it into my life.

As I have related to CM O'Brien and written before in delivered comments, there is room for
compromise in some cases but the City has revealed that they are not interested in
reconsidering that approach. Unfortunately, we may need to appeal in order to ensure that
300,000 neighbors voices are considered. Please read the FEIS and help me understand your
positions so that all of us can continue our community dialogue. Please pass along your
comments to me ASAP as we need to make important decisions regarding our position within a
few days.

I am dealing with a loaded schedule but hope to get back to Seattle next week and hopefully we
can schedule a special meeting to discuss.

Thanks to all,
Marty