http://www.greatcity.org Wed, 08 Sep 2010 18:43:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 en hourly 1 http://www.greatcity.org/2009/10/07/great-citys-position-on-councils-backyard-cottage-legislation/ http://www.greatcity.org/2009/10/07/great-citys-position-on-councils-backyard-cottage-legislation/#comments Wed, 07 Oct 2009 22:21:09 +0000 paul http://www.greatcity.org/?p=3150 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.  ]]> http://www.greatcity.org/2009/10/07/great-citys-position-on-councils-backyard-cottage-legislation/feed/ 0 http://www.greatcity.org/2009/09/29/gaming-the-proposed-mulitifamily-land-use-code/ http://www.greatcity.org/2009/09/29/gaming-the-proposed-mulitifamily-land-use-code/#comments Tue, 29 Sep 2009 09:06:49 +0000 paul http://www.greatcity.org/?p=3114 Editior's Note: This post was written by Great City super volunteer Jeff Reibman and David Neiman of the Congress of Residential Architects (CORA) who participated in the CORA team described below. The Seattle City Council's Planning Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee (PLUNC) is considering an update to the Multifamily Zoning Code. To aid in their process they asked three groups to test run the new Low-rise sections of the proposed code to see what sort of outcomes we might produce on several different sites. Teams were asked to produce both “White Hat” schemes that showed to positive potential of the proposed code and “Black Hat” schemes that attempted to game the code to maximize development potential while producing results counter to it’s intent. The goal of the exercise was to help council members visualize the real world impact of the proposed changes and to see how it could be modified to better accomplish the city’s goals. The three teams were picked to represent a spectrum of relevant ideas Team 1 was The Master Builders Association. Team 2 was The Congress of Residential Architects (CORA) with some involvement from Great City. Team 3 represented longtime neighborhood advocates. CORA's team was represented by a number of seasoned multi-family architects who drew on their experience to test a wide range of ideas. Our black hat schemes were intended to illustrate extreme of significant loopholes and unintended consequences while our white hat schemes highlighted the type of development we hope to see more of and advocated for changes that would incentivize it. On 9/24/09 all three teams presented to PLUNC in council chambers. CORA displayed and explained the 20 boards posted here to council members and the public. Here is a link to the Executive Summary (Small PDF) and here is a link to the Full Report (Big PDF - 13 MB). Of eleven recommendations that would close the major loopholes exploited by the bad schemes & provide additional flexibility where it would allow the good schemes to be improved. Our major recommendations include:

1. Reduce allowable FAR for ground-based housing. Above 1.1 FAR, the wheels start to come off the cart for most ground based housing schemes. At 1.4 FAR most ground based housing schemes are a disaster. We need to revisit allowable FAR & use it as a tool to reward desirable features & outcomes. For small-lot ground-based housing, FAR needs to be kept relatively low. For structured parking solutions, large lots, and projects that undergo full design review, higher FAR is appropriate.
2. The residential amenities requirement is far too permissive – it reduces open space to an afterthought. It's not hard to correct. The requirements just need to be dialed up to be more significant. See executive summary for proposal.
3. Lift the density limits in all L-zones to allow diverse unit types, sizes, affordability levels.
4. Return to a 30' base height limit for all L-zones w/ a 4' height bonus in L3 for structured parking.
5. Encourage basements by exempting them from FAR – you get a privacy grade break & create opportunities for inexpensive rental flats.
6. Reduce required Green factor. If it were working, it would incentivize open space, privacy screening, tree planting & permeability. It does none of those things; it simply covers your land in shrubs & your walls in vines.

]]> http://www.greatcity.org/2009/09/29/gaming-the-proposed-mulitifamily-land-use-code/feed/ 0