Clyde Hill News: Local man concerned that fire department can’t locate fire hydrants
Also: homeless housing regulation discussion continues
Subsidized rental housing for homeless people — “permanent supportive and transitional housing facilities” — is the topic of a proposed Clyde Hill ordinance. The city’s Planning Commission met earlier this week to continue discussing it. More on what this ordinance would mean for residents, below, along with an update about fire safety.
Disclaimer: while I am a councilmember on the Clyde Hill City Council, I write this newsletter in my capacity as an individual resident. Any opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily the position of the City. The information and references here are from public sources. I welcome email responses — and if the topic is about City business I will respond from my City email account.
Housing the homeless in Clyde Hill
The Planning Commission earlier this week spent a second multi-hour session discussing a proposed ordinance related to “permanent supportive and transitional housing facilities” in Clyde Hill. The Planning Commission will hold a third meeting and public hearing on this ordinance in April. For reference:
“Transitional Housing” refers to projects intended to provide “housing and supportive services to homeless persons or families for up to two years,” according to these Planning Commission meeting slides (link).
“Permanent Supportive Housing” refers (paraphrasing the same slides) to subsidized rental housing “with no limit on length of stay.” It uses admissions practices “designed to use lower barriers to entry” particularly related to “rental history, criminal history, and personal behaviors.” It “prioritizes people who need comprehensive support services to retain tenancy.”
From a resident’s point of view, here’s what’s going on…
Required by state law
State law as of 2021 requires cities (including Clyde Hill) to permit subsidized rental housing intended for homeless and in-need people anywhere in its residential zone.
Technically, the state law prevents local authorities from prohibiting “transitional housing and permanent supportive housing in any zone in which residential dwelling units or hotels are allowed.” (link)
The purchase of the nearby La Quinta Inn is an example of this locally. Earlier this week, the City of Kirkland approved an “agreement to use La Quinta for housing homeless people.” (link)
Other cities’ plans
Other cities have passed local laws to comply with (and in many ways restrict the impact of) the state law. For example, according to a document from the Planning Commission meeting (link):
“Cities can put parameters in place to limit the occupancy, intensity, and spacing of the facilities to the extent that these laws do not hinder accommodation of the city’s projected needs as established by the Washington Department of Commerce.”
Clyde Hill’s plan
During 2022, Clyde Hill’s Administration developed the proposed ordinance based on a Medina ordinance with the assistance of an outside consultant.
Following the Administration’s recommendation, the city council referred the proposed ordinance to the Planning Commission with no changes.
During its February meeting, the Planning Commission expressed concerns with the Administration’s proposal. Based on that feedback, city staff and the city attorney drafted revised text based on the City of Redmond’s ordinance (link).
The latest revision of the proposed ordinance now (link):
imposes a minimum distance from schools for these new facilities,
bans supervised/safer consumption or injection facilities (link),
requires an operating agreement between the site operator and the City of Clyde Hill, and
specifies performance requirements, program rules, and a code of conduct for any permanent supportive or transitional housing development.
Next month, at its April meeting, the Planning Commission will continue its discussion and hold a public hearing to get gather community feedback.
What it means for residents
It’s not at all clear — we are in the middle of a public deliberative process dealing with a topic that is complicated and nuanced. Briefly:
The intent of ordinances like this one appears to be limiting the impact of the state law on current residents.
It’s not clear what happens when a developer pushes back or files a lawsuit about restrictions like the ones in this ordinance.
Right now, Clyde Hill has no limits at all on this kind of housing development. A government or private agency could buy a property in Clyde Hill and develop permanent supportive or transitional housing next door or across the street from any of the schools or parks in Clyde Hill.
One way to make sense of the situation is that the Administration wanted to get something in place, the council wanted to get resident feedback through the Planning Commission, and the residents on the Planning Commission thought the Administration’s proposal fell short and are putting in the time to make it better.
This topic is complicated and nuanced… I will provide updates as the process continues.
Local man concerned that fire department can’t locate fire hydrants
Several readers pointed me to a recent write-up about the city council’s action earlier this month about fire hydrants.
Public safety
The most important issue here is public safety.
Briefly, the Administration recommended an update to the city code to make it consistent with Bellevue’s code regarding fire hydrants. The recommendation followed close work between the Administration and Bellevue to understand the impact on public safety. The city council approved the Administration’s recommendation.
Bellevue Fire Department representatives attended March’s city council meeting to listen to community concerns. They were clear about how seriously they take public safety and confirmed that — yes, they know where all the fire hydrants are located (link), and have many tools (GPS, maps, regular visits…) to find them. They did not express any safety concerns related to this code change.
Local man concerned
Despite the statements of a Bellevue Fire Department fire marshal as well as city staff, at least one local man remains concerned about this issue. He’s not sure if Bellevue Fire Department can find fire hydrants.
The resident also questions why the code update happened at all.
Why: consensus
The origins of the code update effort go back to 2021 and a series of debacles and kerfuffles regarding unclear and inconsistent enforcement of city code. Some examples (link):
The Administration investigated 6 inch tall plantings in front of one resident’s house, visiting the site, sending multiple emails, and engaging the City Attorney.
The Administration permitted another resident to keep a trailer in front of his house for a month. Trailers are typically limited to 48 hours (link).
The Administration’s enforcement of hedges continues to be sporadic and uneven.
The Administration responded to feedback from the city council and residents. Some milestones along the way:
In June of 2022, Clyde Hill’s Mayor published a memo (link) about code enforcement, inviting the city council to “repeal or, at the very least, amend those parts of the Code... in which there is no vested public interest or a public health/safety issue present.”
In November of 2022, in a document about its 2023 priorities, the Administration affirmed a plan for “Ongoing code analysis to update sections identified for revisions” (link). This fire hydrant update was another in a series of updates related to this priority.
The fire hydrant code update, according to Cm Steve Friedman’s description at the March 2023 meeting, is part of this larger effort to deliver “clear code, consistently enforced” to residents.
Public expectations
I sign my name to this newsletter and provide context and citations (like the ones above) for the claims I make.
I think the public should expect this from all news sources, and that Clyde Hill residents would be better served if authors signed their work more clearly.
If you’re trying to make sense of conflicting signals, I recommend talking with any of the other four city councilmembers.
We are very different, and we don’t always agree – but we share a commitment to serve the city and its residents, we took an oath of office, and we are publicly accountable for our actions and statements.
Thanks for reading! Please forward and share with your friends and neighbors, and if you are not already getting this newsletter, subscribing is both easy and free.
Dean Hachamovitch