Oct

7

Great City’s Position on Council’s Backyard Cottage Legislation

Filed Under Great City, Housing, Neighborhoods, Zoning 

Cottage Housing in South Seattle

The Seattle City Council’s Planning, Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee is meeting at 2:00 pm in Council Chambers at City hall this Thursday to discuss their proposed backyard cottage legislation. Members of the public are invited to attend and submit comments.

Great City has taken a position on the issue. We generally support the effort but would like to see a few improvements to the proposed legislation. Our letter summarizing our position on the proposed legislation to Council member Sally Clark who chairs the Planning, Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee after the jump.

October 7, 2009

Honorable Councilmember Sally J. Clark
Chair, Planning, Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee
Seattle City Council
PO Box 34025
Seattle, WA 98124-4025

Dear Councilmember Clark,
At Great City, we believe that one of the key components to a livable city is the provision of housing that is accessible to all citizens regardless of income level. We are on record as supporting this year’s Housing Levy, but we realize that this will not meet the needs of all of Seattle’s residents. In addition, the current economic recession makes leveraging tax credits all the more difficult. For these reasons, we strongly support a diversified strategy for meeting our city’s housing needs. We believe that the proposed Backyard Cottage (otherwise known as the Detached Accessory Dwelling Unit, or DADU) ordinance is an important part of this overall strategy.

There are four primary reasons Great City recommends the passage of the Backyard Cottage ordinance: affordability, multigenerational inclusivity, cultural inclusivity, and the environment.

Affordability: In 2007, approximately 45% of renters and 41% of home owners with mortgages in King County paid 30% or more of their household income for housing. The affordability gap, or difference between what a median-priced house costs and what a household making a median income can afford, was $138,000 as of August 2009. Low-income households have a particularly hard time finding housing; as of 2008, the average studio and two-bedroom rental price was more than what a low income and very low income renter could afford. While housing prices are dropping, this is part of a temporary economic cycle and will not result in long term affordability. Backyard Cottages are, by nature, smaller units and add one more type of affordable housing option to the limited array of choices in Seattle.

Multigenerational Inclusivity: Backyard Cottages offer an alternative form of housing for many families in the region. With tuition rates rising and incomes stalling, many parents are unable to pay for their children’s housing at college. On the opposite spectrum of the life cycle, the large Baby Boomer generation is looking at diminished retirement options due to loss of stock portfolios. Backyard Cottages would allow families the ability to support both of these groups while neighborhoods would receive a wealth of social benefits that multigenerational communities provide.

Cultural Inclusivity: Seattle has one of the fastest growing minority populations in the United States. For many of these groups, such as Latino and various Asian communities, living with extended family is an essential part of their culture. If Seattle is to welcome these groups into our city, we must provide them the flexibility to accommodate their cultural values.

Environment: Recent global warming studies make clear the need to step up our response to our environmental challenges. At Great City, we believe that providing more housing options in the city, close to mass transit, is vital to ending the unsustainable land use patterns present in the Puget Sound area.

The Planning, Land Use, and Neighborhoods Committee (PLUNC) is currently evaluating changes to the proposed ordinance. We think the Planning Commission and CORA have done much to articulate the importance of passing a robust ordinance, but we will highlight a few recommendations that we think are vital to making the Backyard Cottage legislation an effective tool.

They are:

  1. Remove the 50 unit cap in the proposed ordinance and city wide: The proposed cap is arbitrary and sends mixed signals to neighborhoods. If we believe that Backyard Cottages are a worthy tool for all the above reasons, it makes little sense to limit them. Surveys in SE Seattle, where 19 Backyard Cottages have been built or are under construction, indicate that these buildings have not led to neighborhood opposition. In fact, most neighbors indicated they were not even aware of the cottages’ existence. We support lifting the cap citywide and evaluating the program in a few years to see if a cap is warranted.
  2. Maintain the proposed 23 foot height limit: As the Planning Commission has pointed out, the inability to build to a 23 foot height limit severely limits the effectiveness of the Backyard Cottage structure by minimizing usable space when combined with a first floor garage. Bedroom and bathroom placement becomes increasingly difficult as you lower the height limit. In addition, the proposed height limit already requires homeowners to utilize a more expensive truss system, while both 21’ and 22’ height limits would add even more building costs, reducing the affordability and effectiveness of these structures.
  3. Remove the parking requirement within Urban Village boundaries: The City of Seattle’s Comprehensive Plan states that the city shall promote “densities, mixes of uses, and transportation improvements that support walking, use of public transportation, and other transportation demand management (TDM) strategies, especially within urban centers and urban villages” (italics added). For this reason, Great City encourages the City Council to remove parking requirements in areas identified as Urban Villages.

We commend the committee for proposing the Backyard Cottage ordinance and strongly urge the passage of legislation that is robust, effective, and accessible to Seattle residents.

Sincerely,

Joshua Curtis
Executive Director, Great City

CC:
Mayor Greg Nickels
Seattle City Council Members
Diane Sugimura, Department of Planning and Development
Adrienne Quinn, Office of Housing
Ray Gastil, Department of Planning and Development
John Skelton, Department of Planning and Development
Mike Podowski, Department of Planning and Development
Andrea Petzel, Department of Planning and Development
Rebecca Herzfeld, Council Central Staff
Sara Belz, Council Central Staff
Traci Ratzliff, Council Central Staff
Barbara Wilson, Planning Commission Director
Josh Brower, Planning Commission Chair

Comments

Leave a Reply