16 Replies to "Development rules @ Seattle Council: 'Low-rise corrections' get final OK; 'lot boundary adjustments' notice to be discussed this afternoon"

• Fourth July 7, 2015 (4:07 pm)

  And next in Seattle development, this breaking news, courtesy of Danny Westneat:

  The mayor’s housing taskforce wants to eliminate all single-family zoning in Seattle.

  http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/get-rid-of-single-family-zoning-in-seattle-housing-task-force-says-in-draft-report/

  I can only hope this brilliant idea ends up in the circular filing bin.

• flimflam July 7, 2015 (4:56 pm)

  ok Mayor – it might have been good to mention while running for office that you want to do away with the evil, racist, exclusionary single family zoned areas.

  .
  good grief. how could something this major be simply forced through via some committee? I certainly didn’t vote for the task force…

  .
  i’m finally reaching the point in this political climate where I may need to start voting republican. its a weird thought for me, but this city is going off the rails with its “progressive” desires.

• Bree July 7, 2015 (7:38 pm)

  It also saddens me that with so many needing help with low income housing due to buildings being torn down, rents increasing, etc. that they keep doing away with it. People are desperate out there and as we have said before we never knew how desperate until we started helping a senior find housing. It is almost impossible & with waiting lists of 1 to 3 years. We feel for all those out there that are looking & finding the same problems we are. Do our politicians care for our seniors and the families in need of housing….???? And now wanting to take away single family zoning??? What is happening to us?

• JanS July 8, 2015 (1:58 am)

  according to a statement by the mayor, it was just something discussed in HALA, the committee, and that it was never really sent to the mayor, who then didn’t take it to the City Council, so the doing away with single family zones was never on the table.

  Guess we’ll see. That someone even thought of doing that, let alone verbalized it, and then they talked about it in committee is disturbing to me. Ed Murray says he wants this city to be family oriented/friendly. That’s not the way to do that. And, seriously, when you think about it, do you really think the neighborhoods of Mt. Baker, Madrona, Leschi, Madison Park, Sand Point, Laurelhurst, Magnolia, Wedgewood, Beach Drive, and on and on, would put up with that? I am so disappointed in what’s happening within that committee. They’ve been meeting for months, and we have heard next to nothing about what is going on within that committee.A big thank you to Danny Westneat. We’re the ones it’s going to affect. So disappointed in the mayor, the CC, the “system”. Would love to know how many developers are on that committee (the city folks are having a love affair with them, you know) Seems that there should be none…it sorta stacks the decisions against the people in the community from the get go…..sigh…

  • WSB July 8, 2015 (6:44 am)

    Jan’s opening line is sort of what’s been said BUT with one big caveat: None of this is past-tense yet. The HALA committee has not yet presented its official report/recommendations to the mayor – that’s expected soon – and only once that happens, and the mayor reviews it, he’ll decide what to send to the council, and they’ll decide what to do with it. Someone launched this as a discussion topic in the forum last I looked and I think that’s the place for it right now, since as far as I can tell, this “leak” was somebody’s idea of a trial balloon – a trial balloon so big, it was more like a trial blimp. Given the amount of time it takes for concepts to travel from proposal to vote, the housing proposal, whatever’s in it, might not even come before the council prior to the November election, so it might be more of a campaign issue right now than anything else. – TR

• Paul July 8, 2015 (6:41 am)

  These recommendations do not seem like a big deal to me. As a homeowner in a single family neighborhood, I do not see what all the fuss us about.

• jetcitydude July 8, 2015 (8:06 am)

  @ flimflam.. don’t go over to the darkside never vote Republican. No matter how bad it get’s I vote Democratic til the day I die.

• WS since '66 July 8, 2015 (8:10 am)

  The Seattle Times is in business to sell the news. It’s a for profit thing. The headline is very misleading and before your knee jerks right out of the socket please read the “Lot Boundary Adjustments notification” link so kindly provided by WSB. It is only 3 ½ pages with easy to understand language.

  There are 2 kinds of leaders which includes mayors. Those who just act as a manager of the status quo and those who propose, what seem drastic at the time, and it now commonly accepted and enjoyed. The latter are those who made Seattle the city which we all want to preserve the status quo. I recommend reading a couple of books written about the history of Seattle. There are many who shaped Seattle and the surrounding area for the better. Look up R.H. Thompson, Virgil Bogue, and James Ellis just to name a few who made profound changes which we all benefit from and enjoy

  Many complain about the affordability of homes. Then when more home are proposed it brings another complaint. We live in a capitalistic society which means supply and demand dictate value. Remember high demand and low supply means higher values. Low demand and high supply brings values down

  I’ve proposed this question many times with rarely, if ever get an answer or idea. With all of the people moving into Seattle, for all the reasons we live here, what would your proposal be to accommodate them?

• Fourth July 8, 2015 (8:28 am)

  @WS since ’66 – I have some recommended reading for you, as well, that might help answer your question:

  http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/cs/groups/pan/@pan/documents/web_informational/p2182731.pdf

  The city’s own study says that we already have the capacity — based on current zoning– to add 224,000 housing units. More than enough to accommodate all the people estimated to move here over the next 20+ years.

• G July 8, 2015 (9:46 am)

  jetcitydude,

  Really? Most Republicans I know would never make that kind of a juvenile comment on a neighborhood blog where the reader might be a neighbor, or someone you interact with on a daily basis. Oh, and yes, I vote Republican.

• WS since '66 July 8, 2015 (12:11 pm)

  Thanks for the link, Fourth, I’ve already seen it.

  If one reads only The Summary on page 2 of the 22 page report I see where your statement is true regarding capacity.

  However there is more specific detail regarding said capacity on page 7’s “Why upzone when so much development capacity exists? While the city may have enough development capacity overall, upzones may be proposed to encourage growth in very strategic locations. While the city may have enough development capacity. Upzoning (changing the zoning of a parcel from one category to another) has occurred in urban centers and villages where the potential for major job and housing growth increased because of the transit investments. For example, voters approved Sound Transit 2 in 2008, a$17.8 billion investment to construct the LINK (light rail) system. Zoning changes can leverage this investment for more housing and job growth in key locations. Upzones may help to implement policies in comprehensive plan and neighborhood plans that encourage residential and job growth in urban centers and villages.”

• Fourth July 8, 2015 (1:47 pm)

  It’s not “my” statement, it’s the city’s own. Add to that, 77% of the existing capacity is already in an urban center or village. And nothing that comes after that in the report undermines those facts. Obviously upzoning creates greater capacity- I don’t think that’s really up for debate. But upzoning in “strategic locations,” as this report mentions, is FAR different than HALA’s recommendation to do away with the SF Residential zoning designation altogether.

• WS since '66 July 8, 2015 (4:18 pm)

  Fourth, I’ll let you have the last word instead of going back and forth. Best of luck to you.

• G July 8, 2015 (5:41 pm)

  See President Obama’s “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rules.” This is merely carrying out the administration’s philosophy to impose racial, socio-economic quota’s on neighborhoods, even if that means circumventing local control. May present an uncomfortable dilemma for those who have long espoused fair housing, but find this hitting too close to home.

• flimflam July 8, 2015 (6:08 pm)

  jetcitydude, trust me, I’ve been as far from republican as can be, forever – but lately so many of the city policies and social engeneering, etc have really been bugging me.

• Neighbor July 14, 2015 (7:35 pm)

  If the upzone occurs as written in the now released report, basically every single family homeowner in WS Junction is at risk of being adjacent to a multi-family building. I doubt most residents would welcome with open arms such development if they knew the Mayor is proposing allowing developers to remove backyard space for their kids to play, split lots and block sunlight and views, and increase density, all the while assuming WS residents will ride their bikes to work because he has no reasonable plans in MOVE Seattle to actually improve commutes in and out of WS.

Sorry, comment time is over.