Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
And the longer we wait to build enough for all the people who want to live here, the larger the gap between the cost of new housing and the average resident's income will grow.
And every new unit helps an existing affordable unit stay affordable.
Or are you just another NIMBY kidding yourself to believe that Seattle would somehow be more affordable without new housing?
But what is a thoughtful, balanced, current, relevant article doing on Slog?
Well done, Ms. Groover.
I wonder why we don't see more development like what was done at High Point? Lots of attached housing and multi-unit buildings that are attractively designed and were relatively affordable when they went on the market. It seems that would meet the needs better than a small number of set asides in downtown luxury condos.
Zoom out and it looks impressive across all quads of the city.
Oh yeah, that'll win fights.
This is a mis-characterization of what they actually did. The basically punted on a single HALA recommendation to modify zoning in single-family zoned neighborhoods - for now. They didn't back away from the HALA recommendations as a whole.
When pigs can fly.
I am willing to buy that long-term residents should have more rights to decide the matters in their neighborhood/city, but it should not be all-versus-nothing. I see two realistic options to improve the matter: a) show up in the meetings; and b) the city/county/state should have more of a say in such cases and protect those whose rights are inadequately represented at the community level. Well, I am not sure b is a realistic option...
I honestly cannot tell
Housing stock DIVERSITY is important. We need more, and our current zoning still discourages options. For instance, 2 alley-facing townhomes just went in across from my place. They are vertically laid out, and are 4 stories each. We asked the developer why they didn't build a 4-flat. They said that when you arrange units horizontally instead of vertically, you are classified differently and each unit becomes vastly more expensive to produce due to zoning requirements.
That's a shame - This building could have had 4 really nice sized units, and they could have been more affordable due to location. Due to a sloping lot, 2 of them could have been entered at-grade, making them accessible to a wide variety of people, and 2 would have been on upper floors. ~1300 sq. feet per unit.
We need a mix that includes a lot of kinds of units. Affordability is a decades-long game. We need to increase diversity faster NOW in order to manage affordability in the 2020s and 2030s. And we're still not doing it.