Form revised: December 6, 2011

FISCAL NOTE FOR NON-CAPITAL PROJECTS

Department:	Contact Person/Phone:	CBO Analyst/Phone:
Legislative Planning and Development Neighborhoods	Sara Belz/4-5382 Mike Podowski/6-1988 Karen Gordon/4-0381	NA

Legislation Title:

AN ORDINANCE relating to the referral of certain permit applications from the Department of Planning and Development to the Department of Neighborhoods for historic landmark review and amending Sections 25.05.800 and 25.12.370 of the Seattle Municipal Code.

Summary of the Legislation:

This legislation would require the Department of Planning and Development (DPD) to refer permit applications to the Department of Neighborhoods (DON) that 1) involve structures that exceed the thresholds listed in the following tables, and 2) appear to meet the criteria for landmark designation that is set forth in Seattle Municipal Code (SMC) Chapter 25.12.

Zone	Residential Uses Permit Applications for additions, modifications, demolition, or replacement of structures with more than the following number of dwelling units are referred to DON for landmark review:
SF, RSL, LR1, NC1, NC2, NC3, C1, C2, Industrial zones	4
LR2	6
LR3	8
MR, HR, SM, Downtown zones	20

Zone	Non-residential Uses Permit Applications for additions, modifications, demolition, or replacement of structures with more than the following square footage amounts are referred to DON for landmark review:
C1, C2, SCM, Industrial zones	12,000
All other zones	4,000

Under SMC 25.12, an object, site or improvement that is more than 25 years old may be designated as a landmark if it has significant character, interest or value as part of the development, heritage or cultural characteristics of the City, state, or nation, if it has integrity or the ability to convey its significance, and if it falls into one of the following categories:

A. It is the location of, or is associated in a significant way with, an historic event with a significant effect upon the community, City, state, or nation; or

B. It is associated in a significant way with the life of a person important in the history of the City, state, or nation; or

C. It is associated in a significant way with a significant aspect of the cultural, political, or economic heritage of the community, City, state or nation; or

D. It embodies the distinctive visible characteristics of an architectural style, or period, or of a method of construction; or

E. It is an outstanding work of a designer or builder; or

F. Because of its prominence of spatial location, contrasts of siting, age, or scale, it is an easily identifiable visual feature of its neighborhood or the City and contributes to the distinctive quality or identity of such neighborhood or the City.

Background:  

DPD staff conduct environmental review of proposed development projects pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). When an element of a proposed project that is subject SEPA review also appears to meet the City’s criteria for landmark designation (see above), DPD refers the application to DON’s Historic Preservation Program staff for further analysis.  This referral practice was established pursuant to the SMC and in an interdepartmental agreement but the practice itself is not codified in the SMC.

The City’s existing SEPA thresholds for projects in all zones are consistent with the tables that appear on page 1 of this fiscal note.  This legislation would codify those thresholds as thresholds for historic landmark review that are separate from the City’s environmental review thresholds under the SEPA.  As SEPA thresholds are subject change over time, this legislation will help preserve DON’s ability to determine the landmark eligibility of historic resources that could be impacted by future development projects.  

This legislation is intended as a companion ordinance to CB 117430, which, in part, would raise SEPA thresholds in multifamily and commercial zones that are located in Urban Centers and Station Area Overlay Districts. 

Please check one of the following:

_X__ This legislation does not have any financial implications.

____    This legislation has financial implications.

Other Implications:

a) Does the legislation have indirect financial implications, or long-term implications?

No; the purpose of this legislation is to codify an existing City practice that was previously established via an interdepartmental agreement between DPD and DON. 

b) What is the financial cost of not implementing the legislation?

It is unlikely the City would bear any direct financial costs as a result of this legislation not being implemented.  However, if the ordinance is not passed and DPD and DON’s existing practice of reviewing project applications for potential impacts to historic resources is not codified, it is possible that structures eligible for landmark status could be significantly altered or destroyed.

c) Does this legislation affect any departments besides the originating department? 

The legislation references DPD and DON; however, it would not implement any new City policies nor create any additional responsibilities for department staff.  Staff from both departments assisted with the preparation of this ordinance.      

d) What are the possible alternatives to the legislation that could achieve the same or similar objectives?

DPD could continue to operate in accordance with an interdepartmental agreement that articulates when a project should be referred to DON for historic landmark referral.  However, as SEPA thresholds and DPD staff change over time, understanding and awareness of such an agreement could erode.  Codifying the departments’ existing practices of referring and reviewing proposed projects that may impact historic resources would help ensure potential landmarks within the City of Seattle are identified and preserved.  

e) Is a public hearing required for this legislation? 

No.

f) Is publication of notice with The Daily Journal of Commerce and/or The Seattle Times required for this legislation?

No publication of a public hearing notice is required.

g) Does this legislation affect a piece of property?

No.

h) Other Issues:  None.

List attachments to the fiscal note below:  None.