UPDATE: Mayor announces another new tiny-home village will go up in District 1

| South Park | West Seattle news

12:23 PM: Ahead of a scheduled appearance this afternoon at an event celebrating the 750th tiny home built at Sound Foundations Northwest, Mayor Katie Wilson has announced another new site for some of those tiny homes – a location in South Park. From the announcement:

… (T)he City has executed a lease on a property in South Park which will become the site of a 90-unit Tiny House Village with wraparound services. Because of previous work to eliminate administrative barriers to accelerate shelter development, the site will be able to go through the development process and be open to bring people inside within the next few months. A community meeting will be held for neighbors in the next several weeks.

The announcement does not include the site’s address, so we followed up with mayoral spokesperson Sage Wilson. He replied, “Unfortunately as a term of the lease, we can’t immediately share the specific address. I can say that it should be able to open in the next few months, but can’t really be more precise than that at this point.” We observed that some are not clear about where West Seattle ends and South Park begins – we’ve even seen erroneous references to the future RV/tiny-house site Glassyard Commons as being SP instead of WS – but Wilson said the new village’s site “is firmly in South Park.” With Glassyard Commons (7201 2nd SW), that means two new sanctioned outdoor-shelter sites in City Council District 1, which already has the decade-old Camp Second Chance tiny-home village on Myers Way.

3:55 PM: Thanks to a commenter, and corroborating city records, we now know the site’s address: 9128 10th Avenue South. The Low-Income Housing Institute, which operates most other tiny-home villages in Seattle, applied for a permit for a 90-unit tiny-home village on the site more than a month ago.

DRW May 7, 2026 (12:52 pm)

Please let this be a drug free zone. Otherwise I do not want my tax dollars to go to this.

Oerthehillz May 7, 2026 (1:06 pm)

The reason for the wrap around services is to offer services to addicts and those with mental health challenges, like the Glassyard site will be. Rounding the people up, putting a roof over their heads, and making opportunities to an array of services available to them, is the best plan we have now.
Best Worst May 7, 2026 (2:24 pm)

There are no moral preconditions that will prevent your tax dollars from being spent on unhoused addicts. They’re going to live someplace be it a tinyhouse, a shelter, prison, or in our public spaces, all of which cost our tax dollars. As long as this crisis persists I’d rather spend on housing someone in a tinyhouse than have them living in and destroying our parks.
- Odd son May 7, 2026 (7:42 pm)
  
  They will still be in parks.
  - MrsT May 8, 2026 (2:17 pm)
    
    There are over 16k homeless people in King County. It is going to take time and housing to get people out of public spaces.
k May 7, 2026 (2:29 pm)

If you think what individuals do when being supported by your tax dollars is bad, wait until you find out what the corporations you support with your tax dollars do with that money.
- Adam May 8, 2026 (5:57 am)
  
  “Oh the corporations, the CORPORATIONS!” Yeah, you mean the folks we aren’t obligated to pay, and when we do pay them we’re paying for specific wants and needs to be met? Yeah k I see zero difference!
- The Real JP May 8, 2026 (8:59 pm)
  
  k, you should really consider posting less. These non sequiturs of yours contribute nothing to the discussion.

Question Authority May 7, 2026 (12:57 pm)

With this emphasis on placement of these villages in SW Seattle I would expect no more campsites or RV’s be allowed in the entire area, that’s the point and goal, right? We’ll see.

Frustrated May 7, 2026 (1:23 pm)

How can they afford this when they cant find 13 million dollars! We already pay enough taxes in Seattle. Also, why are these “tiny homes” not going up in the more prevalent areas, like Mercer Island, Magnolia, etc. This makes absolutely no sense.

WSB May 7, 2026 (2:40 pm)

A site also has been announced for Interbay.

Derrick May 7, 2026 (1:24 pm)

This part of Seattle has no hospital. We have minimal capacity for additional mental health resources. Why are we disproportionately absorbing these sites? THREE?? How many are city wide?

Rhonda May 7, 2026 (1:35 pm)

So, dumping it in South Park instead of the Arroyos, Admiral, Alki, or Arbor Heights where the wealthy and powerful live? How ironic that a self-described Socialist Mayor is protecting the privileged class like her Capitalist predecessors.

Erik May 7, 2026 (4:22 pm)

Rhonda coming in with the pearl clutching again. Where would they put a tiny home encampment in any of those neighborhoods? There isn’t a suitable land area that’s open or large enough to accommodate them.
- anonyme May 7, 2026 (7:47 pm)
  
  “Pearl clutching” is a rather ironic metaphor in this case, given that Rhonda’s statement is critical of those privileged enough to wear them. However, I would disagree on the neighborhoods used as examples of where the “wealthy and powerful” live. I live in AH, and am far from either. But the observation that these villages always end up in neighborhoods that do not have the social or financial standing to defend against them is accurate. What is truly concerning is how these villages will be managed given the city’s record of incompetence and squandered tax dollars.
- Rhonda May 7, 2026 (8:05 pm)
  
  Erik, my point is that the City WOULDN’T put it in snooty areas even if there was room (and there is). The old Roxbury Elementary School isn’t being used right now and there are absolutely fancy areas of the City with room for a tiny house plot: Laurelhurst, Windermere, Magnolia, Sand Point, Madison Park, Madrona, Leschi, etc, all have room. Most of those neighborhoods are less dense than South Park.
Foop May 7, 2026 (5:00 pm)

I generally agree that more neighborhoods need to contribute to helping the homeless – but I imagine access to land the city owns or can easily acquire is a major limitation here, wealthier neighborhoods densify and get built out in a way that doesn’t leave a lot of open space to work with. Admiral is a bad example, poor bus service, no access to medical help or affordable daycare or other services for people with kids. Anywhere near the light rail would be great – we should spread this out so local services can distribute the tasks of helping these folks. Interbay: 75 Pallet Shelter units South Park: 90 Tiny Homes The mayor’s plan is also accelerating the development of sites which had already begun the process: Glassyard Commons: 72 safe RV spaces + 20 Tiny Homes Brighton Village: 15 Tiny Homes Capitol Hill Village: 32 Tiny Homes
- South Park May 16, 2026 (9:49 am)
  
  Admiral has better transit connectivity than South Park, and it has a grocery store. There’s unused city owned properties all over the city. Homeless are pushed here because few lawyers live in South Park. We are a generous community, but so are others wgen given the chance/confronted with need. When we give the shirt off our backs-which we will- thats our last shirt. Other people have a closet full. This is a ANOTHER burden on an already burdened community, and not fair to unhoused people needing to start over-from a remote area without good resources or connectivity. I know because I’ve done it. Homeless twice in my life, now a low income homeowner (mortgagepayer) in South Park. Need a reliable car to live here, no frequent transit, no grocery or drug store, and cut off by a river, a freeway, and one hell of a giant hill. Seattle needs to do better.
Ferns May 8, 2026 (8:05 pm)

Why would you suggest the poorest people be housed in costly areas? It doesn’t make sense. Should we feed them caviar too?
- Tim May 9, 2026 (10:08 pm)
  
  So they should just be put in areas where people with champagne dreams and caviar tastes don’t live. I see.
- South Park May 16, 2026 (10:00 am)
  
  What makes you think these people dont COME FROM wealthier areas? They do. Why should wealthier areas not contribute and help out. Seen it a thousand times, rich and suburban kids, neglected and abused, end up on the streets. Functional and strong soldiers return from wars with PTSD and tbis. Their wealthy families can’t cope. Your comment is completely naive. Unhoused people in Seattle come from all the surrounding neighborhoods and communities. So, why should South Park be the only community helping out?? We are a tiny neighborhood surrounded by industrial area, NOT on frequent transit. We arent even a big enough community to have a real grocery store. This is just the city and region hiding their social shortcomings.

Ron May 7, 2026 (3:10 pm)

YES PLEASE, more of this! Plenty of space in West Seattle to build shelter for the unhoused! Shame they haven’t considered building one at the empty Morgan Junction Park expansion site. They could even build one in one of Lincoln Park’s unnecessarily large parking lots. It’s frustrating unhoused folks aren’t being prioritized more here.

Anne May 7, 2026 (4:50 pm)

Ha-I love nonsensical responses -thanks for the laugh!
erik May 7, 2026 (5:57 pm)

This is a joke right? Both of Lincoln Parks parking lots are jam packed during the spring, summer and fall. Especially on the weekends.
- Ron May 7, 2026 (7:10 pm)
  
  There are unhoused individuals sleeping in the streets outside in the spring, summer, fall and even winter. It would be nice to show a little compassion and make space for these folks who are suffering. Also with the WSLE coming soon, people will have plenty of alternative ways to get to Lincoln Park without needing to drive and take up that space with their cars. Besides, nobody goes to Lincoln Park anymore, the parking lots are always full and it’s too crowded.
  - Name May 7, 2026 (7:42 pm)
    
    Ron must be trolling. So nonsensical he’s even contradicting himself in the same sentence.
    - pelicans May 8, 2026 (1:31 am)
      
      Name, in his last line Ron is quoting/paraphrasing Yogi Berra. It gave me a chuckle.

Akuma May 7, 2026 (3:16 pm)

Oh, a secret! I love a secret! Psst…psst…wanna know where it is? 9128 10th Ave S, Seattle, WA 98108. It is a storage yard about 61,000+ sf.Bonuses! Two parks nearby, an elementary school 2 blocks away, greenbelts all around. I love it when they kick the can where folks can not defend themselves with their $2 million+ homes and their progressive ways. Hey brown people, you are taking one for the team.Thank you for paying attention to this matter!

WSB May 7, 2026 (3:54 pm)

Thank you. City records verify this:
https://services.seattle.gov/Portal/Cap/CapDetail.aspx?Module=SPUEngineering&TabName=SPUEngineering&capID1=26CAP&capID2=00000&capID3=016A3&agencyCode=SEATTLE&IsToShowInspection=
Without a hint previously, I went through all the SP sites I could, but this appears to have been filed a full five weeks ago and I didn’t make it back that far.
Pete May 7, 2026 (5:31 pm)

Definitely a good point about making sure the less well off more diverse communities don’t carry the whole load.
Frog May 7, 2026 (7:20 pm)

Your comment made me wonder — placing a tiny house village in a rich neighborhood would erase probably $50 million of market value in the surrounding area. The people who lost all that money would be hopping mad, of course, but I wonder if the county would at least reflect the new reality in their assessments, and give them a big tax break.
- South Park May 16, 2026 (10:09 am)
  
  But our property value doesnt matter? Just makes low income people even poorer. Not like we have a bunch of other investments either. After the mortgage, not much left to save. Seattle has a LONG history of burdening South Park with whatever they dont want. Its racial, social, and environmental injustice just like always. A new way to redline. This town isnt progressive, just really practiced at gaslighting.
Fauntleroy Fairy May 7, 2026 (7:41 pm)

Thank you Akuma! You are spot on. I know Windermere has green spaces but I’m sure nothing will ever go in there. The city will compromise low income communities that don’t have the means to fight them. Always rules for thee but not for me!
- Ferns May 8, 2026 (8:10 pm)
  
  Why is poor people being housed near lower income people a problem? Are you afraid of them? It is less expensive to house people on low cost property.
  - South Park May 16, 2026 (10:12 am)
    
    On the contrary, the ppl in south park will give you the shirt off their back. Problem is, then theyre shirtless. Wealthier communities are generous too..theyve got closets full of shirts to spare. Give them the chance to show their generosity. We are strapped!
1994 May 7, 2026 (9:43 pm)

Hey senior citizens living in the SHAG complex, thank you for taking one for the team with Camp Second Chance that can grow from 69 beds to 250! If “the bill taken up this week by the council seeks to take advantage of what the mayor’s office believes is underused capacity in existing sites.” Per the Seattle Times today article on the city looking to expand size of homeless shelter sites….Yep looking forward to increased density of people in crisis and unable to manage their lives

Scarlett May 7, 2026 (3:43 pm)

I pretty much avoid this issue anymore because 99% of you airly pontificating couldn’t possibly imagine the nightmarish horror of being homeless – I mean truly “homeless,” not couch surfing at a friend’s place. I was coming through Oregon late last night from a bus trip, and stopped at a rest stop. A young guy was trying to wash his filthy clothes under a water spigot, said he had been walking all night. Gave him the cash I had on hand. On the other hand, maybe it’s better that you can’t imagine it.

South Park May 16, 2026 (10:35 am)

I fully understand. I’ve been homeless twice in my life, both times fleeing violence in my home. Now Im a low income homeowner in South Park, burdened with a mortgage and barely making ends meet. Trying to hang on, making HARD choices between food/medical/repairs. A LOT of people here are just like me, they have struggled and are just ekeing by. Because of that, we are the first to help. We understand. We will see need and will give the shirts off our backs-when its our last shirt. This community cannot bear the burden. Not sure if you live here or not, but Ive been here a couple decades now,and i can tell you this IS A BURDEN and its not fair. Other communities arent strapped like ours, and we sre not the only generous community. Also, these are industrial lots in industrial areas, not where any people should be housed. There are under utilized residential and business lots all over Seattle. Putting humans in industrial areas is not ok. The worst thing i remember about being homeless as a youth was feeling like I didnt belong in normal society, in the “good” places with the “good” people. Its demoralizing and sucks away all the hope. It takes hope to start over, not more shame. These people deserve to live in a well connected liveable place, close to services, transit, (a real grocery store). Even being housed in south park, its a hard life. Loud, dirty, away from stores you need, and cut off from the city. Its the only neighborhood surrounded by toxic industrial properties, not residential or business. We are a major trucking freight corridor and directly under 2 flight paths, seatac airport and boeing field. I fully support the yiny house villages, but to not also point out how low and crappy our city is for pushing unhoused people into poor neighborhoods and industrial areas..i just cant let that slide. They MUST do better.

ActuallyMike May 7, 2026 (4:24 pm)

Her Honor needs to spread the joy a little more fairly–otherwise we’re going to have a Tiny House Ghetto pretty much all in one neighborhood (Southeast West Seattle / South Park–all Council District 1). Piling all the stopgap housing in one place won’t be good for the folks who need housing, or for the folks who already live in the area.

Neighbor May 7, 2026 (5:35 pm)

As frustrating as it is that they keep choosing the same neighborhoods, the lots themselves are good picks. It’s an absolute waste to take the most desirable real estate and put it towards this. Let taxpayers live in those areas. These lots are secluded and make it harder for the residents to disturb the community.

South Park May 16, 2026 (10:44 am)

You think we dont pay taxes in South Park? We live here. We are a neighborhood like any other, except we get dumped on by the city-because of attitudes like yours. Get out of here with your ignorant comment. Theres a reason industrial and residential zoning are seperated. That reason is toxic uses.No living breathing humans should be housed in industrial areas. Period. The results of proximity to industrial zones are shown in multiple health studies of South Park residents living here now-and we are just near the industrial sites-not ON THEM.The City of Seattle is very familiar with those studies as well, which says a lot about how much they really care…

Anonymous May 7, 2026 (6:31 pm)

I googled the address and found its a former storage place for semi-trucks, rvs, boats, canoes- a gravel lot. Second: Bus #60 gets a person to S. Cloverdale & S 5th Ave; then its an 18 min walk to this site (9128 10th Ave S). So I question how this remote location serves a person who Iives there and goes to work? Cuz that’s the long range plan, correct? Provide shelter so people can be sheltered and get back to being contributing members of society ? Yes?

South Park May 16, 2026 (10:57 am)

The villages should be in well connected areas, frequent transit, grocery, pharmacy, other stores. I’m housed in south park near a bus stop and its still inconvenient. The bus svc isnt great. Hard to not have a car and live down here. Our ‘grocery’ us more like a gas station mini mart. I keep thinking these villages (which i support) would be better near a light rail line and actual business district with multiple stores. But ill be called a nimby for saying it. But what would I know!, having been homeless twice, starting over from scratch.. life is hard enough, we shouldn’t be making it even harder for ppl.

don'tblockme May 7, 2026 (6:37 pm)

The Shick Shadel building has been empty for years and as we all know it was a facility for addiction why can’t this be used of housing and maybe even treatment, does anyone know?

WSB May 7, 2026 (7:37 pm)

That would be up to the City of Burien, if you’re referring to the one off Ambaum (only one I know of). This is about Seattle.
- don'tblockme May 8, 2026 (6:39 am)
  
  Thanks for the reply WSB.Unlike Vegas, what “happens in Seattle” doesn’t just stay in Seattle so I thought Shick would be a good idea for all plus it is in King County.
  - ACG May 8, 2026 (3:10 pm)
    
    You’d think that could be an ideal place. If the Regional King County Homeless Authority wasn’t such a scam and a joke, perhaps they would have thought of this idea and done something to try to make use of that facility.
- South Park May 16, 2026 (11:04 am)
  
  The unhoused in Seattle are from the entire surrounding region, not just Seattle. This includes much wealthier areas like Mercer Island, Newport Hills, Sammammish, Bellevue, Des Moines..all over. People get harrassed and run out of the communities where they were originally housed. In Seattle, you become invisible, and at least get a moments peace.

ACG May 7, 2026 (11:18 pm)

Are they expanding the number of tiny homes and shelters at Camp Second Chance? I thought that I read that they were possibly going to expand it from 60-something beds to 250?

WSB May 8, 2026 (1:11 am)

At one of the various briefings there was a slide labeled HYPOTHETICAL showing what an expanded CSC would be like. I have been watching the permit files. There has been no public suggestion of it so far, though.

Kyle May 8, 2026 (7:54 am)

If hosting a site came with increased police presence and enforcement of existing laws so you don’t have drug selling, trash build up, stolen good market, etc. in the nearby area, neighborhoods would be tripping over themselves to host. Would trade some nearby camps for a clean West duwamish greenbelt so I can actually hike the trails without being accosted in a second. What frustrates me the most is when shelter beds and services are offered to homeless residents causing the most neighborhood harm and they’re repeatedly allowed to deny those services and keep doing all those negative, some criminal, things in the same spot. When these transition camps get stood up, if you deny help you need to be charged, or given a notice not to come back for an extended period of time and violating that should have consequences.

anonyme May 8, 2026 (3:55 pm)

Whoa, Kyle! You’re making way too much sense, which is frowned upon here in the land of Backwards.
South Park May 16, 2026 (11:13 am)

I agree, the crime doesn’t seem to come from within the sanctioned camps themselves. I feel like the city just chooses an area to not care about, and lets crime fester. Unfortunately those areas are the same areas they allow the sanctioned camps and villages to locate. Obviously other homeless are the first victims of lack of enforcement/crime. Its not pearl clutching that has South Park concerned, we’ve already watched and experienced this cycle for years. Remember the “Homelessness Emergency” was declared in 2015..its been over ten years.

Amanda DeFisher May 9, 2026 (11:53 am)

As someone who has worked in the nonprofit space for homelessness and substance use disorder, I am a big proponent of housing first, but I struggle with the strategy of increasing the size of tiny house villages, versus creating smaller villages (think 5-10 homes) across neighborhoods based on the needs of various individuals. Not everyone that lives in tiny homes are active drug users and need as much support. Some have other scenarios that are not amenable to shelter setups (ex: married couples, those with pets that need to get off the street and have access to wraparound services to get back on their feet). Jamming more people together is a recipe for disaster, It also creates blind spots when you have 100-150 homes. I am a D1 resident, Commissioner on the Seattle Women’s Commission and on the housing stability subcommittee, I would be happy to organize a meeting for D1 folks who are interested to talk more about what we could do (not just for how this impacts unhoused women being placed in this TH village, but the community as a whole) to ensure that safeguards and accountability are put in place to ensure this isn’t just a place that people suffer and cause harm to those around them, both in the TH village but to the neighbors around them. If folks are interested, feel free to comment and I can start looking at options to set this up. Bringing solid recommendations to CM Saka, the Public Safety Committee and the Mayor is a great way to set a baseline for what is happening here, and influence future decisions for all districts.

Wilson May 9, 2026 (7:15 pm)

I think it’s great the WS area is getting more services for homeless. The poorly run shelter in the triangle is overwhelmed, understaffed, and causes so many issues for the surrounding area. Hopefully more city run services will take people away from that situation.

South Park May 16, 2026 (11:38 am)

Is WS getting more services though? These locations are in South Park, historically weve been told “thats not really WS”. I guess if you want to smugly claim WS cares about the homeless while SP actually carries the weight..we are suddenly WS.

Derek May 10, 2026 (6:18 am)

The anti homeless solution crowd in this thread want homelessness addressed but never seem to like anything other than 20x more expensive imprisoning option. Also why does it matter where it is?

South Park May 16, 2026 (11:32 am)

It matters because its REALLY hard to start a new life, job, etc from a remote industrial lot disconnected from normal society. All the services you need somewhere else and you dont even have a frequent busline. South park doesnt have a real grocery store, drug store, post office, or banks, etc. It also matters that humans shouldn’t be living in industrial areas-there’s reasons we seperate residential and industrial uses. Another consideration, south park is already a low-income community, so our food and clothing banks are already burdened.Other neighborhoods are well connected transit hubs, have all the stores/banks/etc. and can help more with food/clothing/other needs. Location does matter. I live in South Park, you really need a car here, and unfortunately i learned AFTER tying myself to a mortgage that this area is contaminated by surrounding industries/freight/flight paths and a super-fund site river. Im stuck here now. The city of seattle has seen all the health and environmental impacts studies on South Park, they KNOW its not a healthy place to live, they know the pollution is still a problem. Really not cool that they choose to put people, any people, in harms way. Both the sites theyve chosen are in the INDUSTRIAL areas of South Park. Literally ANY other location would be better than these.

Sorry, comment time is over.