Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA) Implementing …...Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA) Implementing Zoning Maps November 2016 PRELIMINARY Summary of input from ... refugees,

Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA)Implementing Zoning Maps

November 2016

PRELIMINARY Summary of input from the HALA Community Focus Groups

November 2016 3Mandatory Housing AffordabilitySummary of HALA Focus Group Input

IntroductionBackground As part of the Housing Affordability and Livability Agenda (HALA), the City of Seattle is committed to a goal of building or preserving 20,000 affordable homes over 10 years. A critical part of achieving this goal is the implementation of Mandato-ry Housing Affordability (MHA). MHA will create 6,000 homes affordable for 75 years to households earning no more than 60% of the area median income (AMI). Under MHA, multifam-ily and commercial development will be required to contribute to affordable housing, with additional development capacity allowed to minimize the impact of MHA requirements on the cost of new housing. These housing contributions are consis-tent with a state-approved approach for similar programs. (See http://tinyurl.com/MHA-overview for background on MHA.)

Community Focus GroupsThe Community Focus Groups comprise resident volunteers from neighborhoods across the city, who informed the HALA process. A key topic for the Community Focus Groups is land use and zoning changes that can affect neighborhoods.

• Community Focus Groups meet monthly, March–November 2016.

• Each of the four groups is composed of 20–40 people.

• Groups include representatives of every urban village and neighborhood area in Seattle.

• The meetings are intended to elicit constructive dialogue about housing programs.

• Meetings are open for other members of the public to observe and provide comment during a set time on the agenda.

The City values participation by a broad range of communi-ty members who reflect our City’s diverse population. Focus Groups are assembled to provide balanced representation

from a range of different demographics and perspectives in-cluding:

• Traditionally under-represented groups, including minorities, immigrants, refugees, and non-native English speakers

• Renters

• Households with children

• Experienced neighborhood advocates

PRELIMINARY Focus Group Input on Draft MHA Maps To implement MHA, the city is seeking community input on a set of zoning changes in existing commercial and multi-family zones and in urban villages and centers. In March through June, Focus Group members provided input on a set of Prin-ciples to guide the possible zoning changes. (See the sum-mary of Focus Group input on principles, and the principles statements on page 4.)

Based on the principles, city staff prepared Draft MHA zoning maps for review, releasing a set of maps for an example ur-ban village for each Focus Groups in September. In October, draft maps for all remaining urban villages and centers were provided for comment to Focus Group members and other community members. The draft maps are online for dialogue at HALA.Consider.it.

This document is a preliminary summary of Focus Group member input on the Draft MHA maps. We collected input in the following ways:

• September 2016 Meeting: Focus Group members reviewed one example map from each Focus Group.

• Distribution Online: Participants received the draft

MHA Maps for review online via e-mail in advance of the October meeting.

• October 2016 Meeting: Focus Group members participated in an exercise and a group discussion of each map for that Focus Group.

• Individual Focus Group Member Comments: Some Focus Group members communicated in e-mails, phone calls or informal dialogues with city staff.

• November online meeting and drop-in hours: Focus Group members will review this preliminary summary and provide additional input.

While this preliminary summary does not reproduce every specific comment received, it seeks to summarize themes and attempts to capture all specific MHA zoning map suggestions. During discussion of the maps, many comments addressed broader MHA program concepts. General input about MHA is summarized as part of the discussion themes for each Focus Group.

http://tinyurl.com/MHA-overview


MHA PrinciplesThe MHA Implementation Principles The City developed a set of Principles to help guide MHA im-plementation choices. The statements reflect what the City heard during months of in-person and online conversations in neighborhoods. The Principles guide choices about future changes to zoning or urban village boundaries for MHA imple-mentation in neighborhoods.

Principles that form the foundation of MHA 1 Contribute to the 10-year HALA goal of 20,000 net

new units of rent- and income-restricted housing. Specifically, the MHA goal is at least 6,000 units of housing affordable to households with incomes up to 60% of the area median income (AMI), units that will remain affordable for 50 years. In 2016, 60% of the AMI is $37,980 for an individual and $54,180 for a family of four.

2 Require multifamily and commercial development to contribute to affordable housing.

3 Contributions to affordable housing will be provided by including affordable housing on site or by providing a payment to the Seattle Office of Housing for creation of new affordable housing.

4 Ensure MHA creates affordable housing opportunities throughout the city.

5 In alignment with a state-approved affordable housing based incentive zoning approach (37.70A.540), new affordability requirements are linked to allowing some additional development capacity in commercial and multifamily zones (in many cases this includes one additional floor).

6 Allow a variety of housing types in existing single-family zones within urban villages.

7 Expand the boundaries of some urban villages to allow for more housing near high-frequency transit hubs.

8 Maintain Seattle as an inclusive city by providing housing opportunities for everyone: people of all ages, races, ethnicities, and cultural backgrounds and households of all sizes, types, and incomes.

9 Evaluate MHA implementation using a social and racial equity/justice lens.

Community generated principles that will guide MHA implementation1 Housing Options

a Encourage or incentivize a wide variety of housing sizes, including family-sized homes and not just one-bedroom and studio homes.

b Encourage more small-scale multi-unit housing that is family friendly, such as cottages, duplexes or triplexes, rowhouses, and townhouses.

2 Urban Design Quality: Address urban design quality, including high-quality design of new buildings and landscaping.

a Encourage publicly visible green space and landscaping at street level.

b Encourage design qualities that reflect Seattle’s context, including building materials and architectural style.

c Encourage design that allows access to light and views in shared and public spaces.

3 Transitions: Plan for transitions between higher- and lower-scale zones as additional development capacity is accommodated.

a Zone full blocks instead of partial blocks in order to soften transitions.

b Consider using low-rise zones to help transition between single-family and commercial / mixed-use zones.

c Use building setback requirements to create step-downs between commercial and mixed-use zones and other zones.


4 Historic Areas

a In Seattle’s Historic districts, do not increase development capacity, even if it means these areas do not contribute to housing affordability through MHA.

b In other areas of historic or cultural significance, do not increase development capacity, even if it means these areas do not contribute to affordability through MHA.

5 Assets and Infrastructure

a Consider locating more housing near neighborhood assets and infrastructure such as parks, schools, and transit.

6 Urban Village Expansion Areas

a Implement the urban village expansions using 10-minute walksheds similar to those shown in the draft Seattle 2035 Comprehensive Plan update.

b Implement urban village expansions recommended in Seattle 2035 but with modifications to the 10-minute walkshed informed by local community members. Consider topography, “natural” boundaries, such as parks, major roads, and other large-scale neighborhood elements, and people with varying ranges of mobility

c In general, any development capacity increases in urban village expansion areas should ensure that new development is compatible in scale to the existing neighborhood context.

MHA Principles7 Unique Conditions

a Consider location-specific factors such as documented view corridors from a public space or right-of-way when zoning changes are made.

8 Neighborhood Urban Design

a Consider local urban design priorities when making zoning changes.

Rainier Beach

Uptown

130th & I-5

Columbia City

Crown Hill

GreenLake

North Beacon Hill

Othello

Ballard

Capitol Hill

First Hill

Lake City

Northgate

University District

West Seattle Junction

12th Ave

23rd & Union–Jackson

Admiral

Aurora–Licton Springs

Bitter Lake

Eastlake

Fremont

North Rainier

Greenwood–Phinney

Ridge

Madison–Miller

Morgan Junction

Ravenna

South Park

Upper Queen Anne

Wallingford

Westwood–Highland Park

Roosevelt

Pike/Pine


Lower Density Urban Villages

Greenwood–Phinney RidgeMadison–MillerMorgan JunctionRavenna*South ParkUpper Queen AnneWallingfordWestwood–Highland ParkMagnolia** outside area

Sand Point**outside area

Discussion themesContextFocus Group members emphasized that the City should consider local context (physical, socioeco-nomic, cultural) when implementing MHA, including zone choices and development standards for specific areas.

Review urban village geographiesIt was noted that some of the urban villages in this focus group are drawn with narrow boundaries (e.g., Greenwood–Phinney Ridge, Upper Queen Anne, and portions of Wallingford). This presents challenges creating transitions and limits opportunities for more housing. Consider a review of urban village geogra-phies for more consistency.

InfrastructureInvestments in infrastructure (transportation, ser-vices, wastewater, etc.) should be made along with growth to ensure services keep up with proposed in-creases in development.

TransitionsFocus Group members supported careful attention to transitions between zones. Avoid incompatibilities between adjacent zones and consider development standards within zones to mitigate transitions.

More housing in strong market areasSome Focus Group members stressed the impor-tance of relatively larger MHA zoning increases in areas with strong markets in order to expand housing opportunity in high-demand locations.

Provide notice about zoning and urban villagesFocus Group members emphasized the importance of communicating directly with people who will be affected by the zoning changes and who may not yet be involved in the MHA process, especially peo-ple living in single family areas. It is also important to communicate what urban villages are.

Support affordable housing in smaller-scale buildings owned by local landlordsFocus Group members discussed how small scale existing housing, often owned by local landlords, is a good source of lower-cost housing. Explore how MHA funds can incentivize provision of affordable housing in existing small-scale housing.

South Park has unique conditions South Park was discussed as being distinct from oth-er urban villages because of its proximity to industrial areas, high displacement risk, and few direct connec-tions to other urban villages. Consider giving special consideration to how MHA is applied in South Park.

* The Focus Group did not review a map for Ravenna because parts of Ravenna are being considered as part of a more in-depth University District planning process.

** Because these areas are not urban villages, the Focus Group did not review maps of Magnolia and Sand Point. An interactive map of draft MHA zone changes for all areas, including areas outside urban villages, is available at www.Seattle.gov/HALA.

http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/cityplanning/completeprojectslist/universitydistrict/documents/

http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/cityplanning/completeprojectslist/universitydistrict/documents/

http://www.Seattle.gov/HALA


Comments & Suggestions — Generally Supported

Varied Opinions

Expansion Area Urban VillagesHub Urban Villages

Medium Density Urban VillagesLower Density Urban VillagesGreenwood–Phinney Ridge

åå

åå

AU

RO

RA

–LIC

TO

N S

PR

ING

SU

RB

AN

VIL

LA

GE

¿ ¿¿

¿

¿¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿ ¿¿ ¿¿¿ ¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿¿

¿

¿¿ ¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿¿

¿

¿¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿ ¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿6T

H A

VE

NW

9TH

AV

E N

W

DA

YT

ON

AV

E N

FREM

ON

T A

VE

N

1ST

AV

E N

W

DIB

BLE

AV

E N

W

N 81ST ST

N 76TH ST

N 77TH ST

N 78TH ST

N 84TH ST

N 82ND ST

N 83RD ST

N 75TH ST

N 79TH ST

N 90TH ST

N 95TH ST

N 73RD ST

N 74TH ST

N 97TH ST

N 70TH ST

LIN

DEN

AV

E N

N 72ND ST

N 71ST ST

N 68TH ST

2ND

AV

E N

W

PH

INN

EY A

VE

N

NW 70TH ST

NW 67TH ST

PALA

TIN

E A

VE

N

NW 90TH ST

N 67TH ST

EVA

NST

ON

AV

E N

NW 83RD ST

NW 95TH ST

N 91ST ST

N 98TH ST

N 92ND ST

4TH

AV

E N

W

N 64TH ST

5TH

AV

E N

W

7TH

AV

E N

W

NW 87TH ST

NW 81ST ST

NW 84TH ST

NW 82ND ST

NW 88TH ST

SYC

AM

OR

E A

VE

NW

N 86TH ST

N 87TH ST

N 88TH ST

N 89TH ST

N 96TH ST

N 66TH ST

N 93RD ST

CLE

OPA

TR

A P

L N

W

NW 86TH ST

NW 89TH ST

NES

BIT

AV

E N

MID

VALE

AV

E N

DIV

ISIO

N A

VE

NW

N 94TH ST

KEEN WAY N

NW 97TH ST

NW 73RD ST

NW 64TH ST

STON

E AVE N

FRA

NC

IS A

VE

N

NW 77TH ST

N 87TH ST

FRA

NC

IS A

VE

N

N 72ND ST

DIB

BLE

AV

E N

W

4TH

AV

E N

W

1ST

AV

E N

W

2ND

AV

E N

W

6TH

AV

E N

W

NW 92ND ST

DA

YT

ON

AV

E N

7TH

AV

E N

W

N 96TH ST

PH

INN

EY A

VE

N

PALA

TIN

E A

VE

N

N 86TH ST

NW 97TH ST

8TH

AV

E N

W

3RD

AV

E N

W

AU

RO

RA

AV

E N

GR

EEN

WO

OD

AV

E N

N 80TH ST

N 85TH ST

LIN

DEN

AV

E N

N 65TH ST

WINONA AVE N

GREEN LAKE PARK

GR

EE

NW

OO

D

PA

RK

KIR

KE

PA

RK

SA

ND

EL

PL

AY

GR

OU

ND

DanielBagley

Greenwood

C2-65 | NC3-75 (M)

LR3

| LR

3 (M

)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

NC

2-40

| N

C2-

55 (M

)C

1-40

| C

1-55

(M)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

2 (M

1)

C1-

40 |

NC

3-75

(M1)

C1-

40 |

C1-

55 (M

)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

LR3 |LR3 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

NC2P-30 | NC2P-40 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

NC

2P-6

5 |

NC

2P-7

5 (M

)LR

3 R

C |

LR3

RC

(M)

C1-

40 |

NC

2-55

(M)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

NC3P-65 (3.0) | NC3P-75 (M1)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

LR1

| LR

1 (M

)

LR1 | LR1 (M)

NC3-40 | NC3-55 (M)NC1-40 | NC1-55 (M) NC2-40 |

NC2-55 (M)

NC2P-40 | NC2P-55 (M)

Single Family |Residential Small Lot (M)

LR2 RC |LR2 RC (M)

NC2-40 | NC2-55 (M)

NC1-30 | NC1-40 (M) LR1 | LR1 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR1 | LR1 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

NC2-40 | NC2-55 (M)

NC2-65 (1.3) | NC2-75 (M2)

Single Family |LR1 (M1)

C1-40 | C1-55 (M)

NC2P-40 | NC2P-55 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

C1-

65 |

NC

3-75

(M)

NC

3P-4

0 | N

C3P

-55

(M)

Sing

le F

amily

| R

esid

entia

l Sm

all L

ot (M

)

LR1

| LR

1 (M

)

NC

2P-4

0 | N

C2P

-55

(M)

LR1

| LR

1 (M

)

NC

2P-4

0 | N

C2P

-55

(M)

NC2P-40 | NC2P-55 (M)

LR2

| LR

2 (M

)

LR2

RC

| LR

2 R

C (M

)

NC2-40 |NC2-55 (M)

LR2

RC

|LR

2 R

C (M

)

NC

2-40

| N

C2-

55 (M

)

NC

2-65

| N

C2-

75 (M

)

NC2P-65 (3.0) | NC2P-75 (M1)

NC3-65 (3.0) | NC3-75 (M1)

LR1 | LR1 (M) NC2P-40 |

NC2P-55 (M)

NC1-40 |NC1-55 (M)

NC2-65 (3.0) | NC2-75 (M1)

LR1 RC |

LR1 RC (M)

LR2 RC |LR2 RC (M)

LR2 RC | LR2 RC (M)

NC

3P-4

0 |

NC

3P-5

5 (M

)

NC

3-65

(3.0

) |

NC

3-75

(M1)

Single Family | LR2 (M1)

NC

1-30

| N

C1-

40 (M

)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

Single Family | Residential Small

Lot (M)


Lot (M)


1 The urban village boundary is drawn very narrowly. Consider expanding the urban village to a walkshed in order to establish a more logical urban village extent and create more opportunities for housing.

2 The change from Commercial (C) to Neighborhood Commercial (NC) at the north edge of the urban village seems appropriate to support a walkable neighborhood.

3 General support for the increase in Neighborhood Commercial areas to NC-55. However, buildings taller than the five stories allowed by the NC-55 designation might be out of scale with context on Greenwood Ave N and could create abrupt relationships with adjacent areas.

2

3

1



Varied Opinions


Medium Density Urban VillagesLower Density Urban VillagesMadison–Miller

åå

23

RD

& U

NIO

N–J

AC

KS

ON

UR

BA

N V

ILL

AG

E

FIR

ST

HIL

L–

CA

PIT

OL

HIL

LU

RB

AN

CE

NT

ER

Major InstitutionOverlay

(MHA applies only to non-institutional uses)

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿¿¿

¿ ¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿¿

¿¿

¿¿

¿¿

¿

¿¿¿¿ ¿¿¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿ ¿

¿

E ROY ST

21ST

AV

E E

E PINE ST

18T

H A

VE

E

22N

D A

VE

E

24T

H A

VE

25T

H A

VE

26T

H A

VE

27T

H A

VE

20T

H A

VE

E

18T

H A

VE

20T

H A

VE

22N

D A

VE

17T

H A

VE

E

E MERCER ST

29T

H A

VE

26T

H A

VE

E

21ST

AV

E

25T

H A

VE

E

24T

H A

VE

E

28T

H A

VE

E

E WARD ST

E ALOHA ST

E PIKE ST

E VALLEY ST

16T

H A

VE

14T

H A

VE

E SPRING ST

E HOWELL ST

E JOHN ST

E OLIVE ST

15T

H A

VE

MA

LDEN

AV

E E

E THOMAS ST

E HARRISON ST

27T

H A

VE

E

16T

H A

VE

E

E HIGHLAND DR

17T

H A

VE

E ARTHUR PL

E PROSPECT ST

E GLEN ST

16T

H A

VE

E

29T

H A

VE

E

20T

H A

VE

E

E DENNY WAY

E VALLEY ST

E HOWELL ST

E MERCER ST

E PIKE ST

E PROSPECT ST

E JOHN ST

E REPUBLICAN ST

E OLIVE ST

E HARRISON ST

17T

H A

VE

E WARD ST

25T

H A

VE

E

E OLIVE ST

26T

H A

VE

E

17T

H A

VE

E

27T

H A

VE

E

26T

H A

VE

E

14T

H A

VE

E

E UNION ST

E MADISON ST

19T

H A

VE

E

15T

H A

VE

E

23R

D A

VE

23R

D A

VE

E

E ALOHA ST

19T

H A

VE

15T

H A

VE

M L

KIN

G J

R W

AY

E THOMAS ST

E JOHN ST

MLK

JR

WA

Y E

E PINE ST

24T

H A

VE

E

E JOHN ST

VOLUNTEER PARK

WASHINGTON PARK AND ARBORETUM

MILLER PLAYFIELD

T.T.

MIN

OR

P

LA

YG

RO

UN

D

PLUMTREEPARK

HO

ME

R

HA

RR

IS P

AR

K

SEVEN HILLS PARK

Seattle World School

LR3

| LR

3 (M

)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

LR1 | LR1 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

NC3-65 | NC3-75 (M)

LR1 | LR1 (M)

NC3P-65 | NC3P-75 (M)

Residential Small Lot | LR2 (M1)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

2 (M

1)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

2 (M

1)

NC

2P-4

0 | N

C2P

-75

(M1)

LR1 | LR1 (M)

LR3 | LR3 (M)


LR2

| LR

2 (M

)


NC

1-40

| N

C1-

55 (M

)

Single Family |Residential Small

Lot (M)

NC2P-40

| NC2P

-55 (M

)

LR2

| LR

3 (M

1)

NC2-40 | NC2-55 (M)

LR1 | LR1 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (

M)

NC2P-30 |NC2P-40 (M)

NC2-40 |NC2-55 (M)

NC2-40 | NC2-55 (M)

NC3P-65 | NC3P-75 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

Sing

le F

amily

|LR

3 (M

2)


NC2-40 | NC2-55 (M)

NC3-65 | NC3-75 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR3

PUD

| LR

3 PU

D (M

)

NC1-30 | NC1-40 (M)

NC

1-40

| N

C1-

55 (M

)

NC

2P-4

0 | N

C2P

-55

(M)

LR3

| LR

3 (M

)

LR3

| LR

3 (M

)

LR2

| LR

2 (M

)

Res

iden

tial S

mal

l Lot

|LR

1 (M

1)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

2 (M

1)

NC2-40 | NC2-55 (M)

NC

2-40

| N

C2-

55 (M

)

NC3P-40 | NC3P-55 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

NC

2-40

|N

C2-

75 (M

1)

NC

2P-4

0 | N

C2P

-55

(M)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

2 (M

1)

LR1 | LR1 (M)

NC2P-65 | NC2P-75 (M)

LR1 | LR1 (M)

NC1-30 | NC1-40 (M)

NC2-65 | NC2-75 (M)

NC2-40 | NC2-75 (M1)


LR2 | LR2 (M)

NC2-40 | NC2-55 (M)

NC2-40 |NC2-75 (M1)

NC

2-40

| N

C2-

55 (M

)

NC2-40 | NC2-55 (M)

NC2-40 | NC2-55 (M)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

LR3 | LR3 (

M)

NC2P-40 | NC2P-55 (M)

NC2P-30 |NC2P-55 (M1) NC2P-40 |

NC2P-55 (M)

NC2P-40 | NC2P-55 (M)

1 This is a very good area for zoning that allows more housing because there is clearly a high demand.

2 There is general support among Focus Group members for the changes to Lowrise multifamily from Single Family zoning in the vicinity of Miller Playfield.

3 The Focus Group found it odd to retain small areas of Single Family zoning outside, but surrounded by, urban villages, such as the area along 20th Ave.

2

3

2



Varied Opinions


Medium Density Urban VillagesLower Density Urban VillagesMorgan Junction

åå

åå

38T

H A

VE

SW

41ST

AV

E SW

39T

H A

VE

SW

42N

D A

VE

SW

SW JUNEAU ST

47T

H A

VE

SW

SW FINDLAY ST

37T

H A

VE

SW

SW RAYMOND ST

45T

H A

VE

SW

46T

H A

VE

SW

44T

H A

VE

SW

SW HOLLY ST

40T

H A

VE

SW

SW MYRTLE ST

SW FRONTENAC ST

SW WILLOW ST

HO

LLY PL SW

SW MILLS ST

SW GRAHAM ST

MA

RSH

ALL

AV

E SW

BEV

ERID

GE

PL

SW

47T

H P

L SW

PAR

SHA

LL P

L SW

SW WARSAW ST

SW BEVERIDGE PL

SYLV

AN

LN

SW

WO

OD

SID

E P

L SW

FAUNTLEROY WAY SW

SW EDDY ST

46TH

AVE SW

SW WILLOW ST

47T

H A

VE

SW

46T

H A

VE

SW

45T

H A

VE

SW

40T

H A

VE

SW

44T

H A

VE

SW44

TH

AV

E SW

47TH

AVE SW

SW MYRTLE ST

CA

LIFO

RN

IA A

VE

SWSW GRAHAM ST

SW MORGAN ST

PELLY PLACE NATURAL AREA

MORGAN JUNCTION

PARK

Gatewood

Fairmount Park


Sing

le F

amily

| R

esid

entia

l Sm

all L

ot (M

)

NC

3-30

| N

C3-

55 (M

)

LR3

RC

| LR

3 R

C (M

)

LR2

| LR

2 (M

)

LR1

| LR

1 (M

)


LR2

| LR

2 (M

)

NC

2-30

| N

C2-

40 (M

)

LR3

| LR

3 (M

)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

LR1

| LR

1 (M

)




NC2-30 | NC2-40 (M)

LR2

| LR

2 (M

)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

NC3-30 | NC3-40 (M)

Single Family |Residential Small Lot (M)


Lot (M)

Sing

le F

amily

| R

esid

entia

l Sm

all L

ot (M

)

Sing

le F

amily

| R

esid

entia

l Sm

all L

ot (M

)

Sing

le F

amily

| R

esid

entia

l Sm

all L

ot (M

)

LR2

RC

| LR

3 R

C (M

1)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

1 (M

1)


NC2-30 | NC2-40 (M)

Single Family | Residential Small Lot (M)

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿ ¿¿

¿¿

1 Make sure to provide notice to residents. Many Morgan Junction residents are seniors and may not be aware of possible MHA zoning changes. This is most important in areas changing to Lowrise (LR) from Single Family in this neighborhood.

2 General support for the increase to NC-55 in the center of the business district. However, even if the zoning changes, redevelopment could take a number of years to become viable here.

3 When making zoning changes, consider parking and traffic congestion due to ferry traffic to and from Fauntleroy.

4 General support for the transition to Residential Small Lot (RSL) zoning at the edges of the neighborhood.

2

4

1

1

4

4



Varied Opinions


Medium Density Urban VillagesLower Density Urban VillagesSouth Park

åå

¿¿¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿¿

¿

¿

S DONOVAN ST

5TH AVE S

S ROSE ST

S SULLIVAN ST

S CHICAGO ST

4TH

AV

E S

7TH

AV

E S

S PORTLAND ST

S AUSTIN ST

10T

H A

VE

S

S SOUTHERN ST

S THISTLE ST

S DIRECTOR ST

S HENDERSON ST

3RD

AV

E S

S MONROE ST

2ND

AV

E S

S CONCORD ST

S RIVERSIDE DR

8TH

AV

E S

S KENYON ST

S BARTON ST

DU

WA

MISH

RIVER TRA

IL

S ELMGROVE ST

S WEBSTER ST

14T

H A

VE

S

S CAMBRIDGE ST

S DIRECTOR ST

7TH

AV

E S

S WEBSTER ST

2ND

AV

E S

12T

H A

VE

S

7TH

AV

E S

5TH

AV

E S

10T

H A

VE

S

S SOUTHERN ST

S HENDERSON ST

10T

H A

VE

S

SR 509

WEST M

ARGINAL W

AY S

S CLOVERDALE ST8T

H A

VE

S

14T

H A

VE

S

MYER

S WAY S

16T

H A

V S

BR

IDG

E

S HOLDEN ST

S KENYON ST

EAST MARGINAL W

AY S

OCC

IDEN

TAL AV

E S

S SULLIVAN ST

S TRENTON ST

5TH

AV

E S

8TH

AV

E S

SOUTH PARK PLAYGROUND

MARRA-DESIMONEPARK

SOUTH PARK MEADOW

DU

WA

MIS

H

WA

TE

RW

AY

PA

RK

CESAR CHAVEZ PARK

GEORGETOWN PUMP STATION

ConcordInternational

C2-65 |C2-75 (M)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

NC2-40 | NC2-55 (M)

LR1

| LR

1 (M

)

C2-

65 |

C2-

75 (M

)

C2-

40 |

C2-

55 (M

)

NC

3P-4

0 | N

C3P

-55

(M)

C2-

40 |

C2-

55 (M

)

LR2

RC

| LR

2 R

C (M

)



Single Family | LR2 RC (M1)


C1-

40 |

C1-

55 (M

)



Single Family | LR1 (M1)Si

ngle

Fam

ily |

LR1

(M1)


South ParkNeighborhood

Center

1 Applying MHA zoning changes in South Park may require a different approach because South Park has unique constraints, including limited connectivity to other neighborhoods, adjacency to an industrial area, and high displacement risk.

2 There are vacant businesses in the commercial core of South Park. MHA zoning changes should consider how to support the business district. Consider more Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zoning near S Cloverdale St and 10th Ave S to strengthen the business district.

3 The area near S Cloverdale St and 8th Ave S is not a good location for additional mixed-use development. Don’t encourage a neighborhood center here.

4 Consider connecting the existing multifamily housing at S Henderson St and 12th Ave S with other multifamily and mixed-use areas in the neighborhood.

5 Many of the existing single family zoned lots in the area already small lots. The change to RSL would not be a big change. Consider how the change would affect longtime homeowners.

1 Some Focus Group members suggest that, because South Park has unique constraints (see 1 above), the City should consider not applying MHA in the near term in this urban village. Other Focus Group members seemed to support MHA in the neighborhood.

2

3

45



Varied Opinions


Medium Density Urban VillagesLower Density Urban VillagesUpper Queen Anne

åå

åå

åå

åå

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿ ¿

¿

¿ ¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

4TH

AV

E N

1ST

AV

E W

4TH

AV

E W

1ST

AV

E N

5TH

AV

E W

WA

RR

EN A

VE

N

7TH

AV

E W

W LEE ST

2ND

AV

E W

3RD

AV

E W

BLAINE ST

WARD ST

W BLAINE ST

W SMITH ST

GALER ST

HAYES ST

W RAYE ST

W GARFIELD ST

W HIGHLAND DR

W PROSPECT ST

W COMSTOCK ST

NEWTON ST

W HOWE ST

MCGRAW ST

GARFIELD ST

6TH

AV

E W

HIGHLAND DR

3RD

AV

E N

BIGELOW

AVE N

W KINNEAR PL

2ND

AV

E N

LYNN ST

W BOSTON ST

QU

EEN

AN

NE

AV

E N

LEE ST

W NEWELL ST

WHEELER ST

WIL

LAR

D A

VE

W

W HALLADAY ST

NO

B H

ILL

AV

E N

HOWE ST

LOR

ENT

Z P

L N

OR

AN

GE

PL

N

MA

YFA

IR A

VE

N

HALLADAY ST

CROCKETT ST

W CROCKETT ST

SMITH PL

LEE ST

3RD

AV

E N

3RD

AV

E W

NO

B H

ILL

AV

E N

4TH

AV

E N

WA

RR

EN A

VE

N

1ST

AV

E N

1ST

AV

E W

6TH

AV

E W

2ND

AV

E N

3RD

AV

E N

3RD

AV

E N

4TH

AV

E W

2ND

AV

E N

5TH

AV

E W

5TH

AV

E W

7TH

AVE W

1ST

AV

E N

2ND

AV

E W

2ND

AV

E W

2ND

AV

E N

6TH

AVE W

W NEWELL ST

PROSPECT ST

QU

EEN

AN

NE

AV

E N

6TH

AV

E W

BOSTON ST

W GALER ST

W MCGRAW ST

3RD

AV

E W

7TH

AV

E W QUEEN ANNE DR

W RAYE ST

5TH

AV

E W

W M

CGRAW P

L

SMITH ST

DAVID RODGERS PARK

QUEEN ANNE BOULEVARD

WEST QUEEN ANNEPLAYFIELD

MAYFAIR PARK

KINNEAR PARK

KERRY PARK & VIEWPOINT

EAST QUEEN ANNE PLAYGROUND

OBSERVATORY COURTS

PARSONS GARDENS

WOLF CREEK RAVINE

HIGHLAND PLACE

Frantz Coe

John Hay

McClure

QueenAnne

MR | MR (M)

LR1 | LR1 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

NC

2P-4

0 | N

C2P

-55

(M)

LR3

| LR

3 (M

)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

LR1 | LR1 (M)

LR1

| LR

1 (M

)

LR1 | LR1 (M)

LR1 | LR1 (M)

NC1-30 | NC1-40 (M)

NC2-30 | NC2-40 (M)

LR1

| LR

1 (M

)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

LR1

| LR

1 (M

)

NC2P-30 | NC2P-40 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR1 | LR1 (M)

NC

2-40

| N

C2-

55 (M

)

LR2

| LR

2 (M

)

LR1

| LR

1 (M

)

NC1-30 | NC1-40 (M)

NC2-40 | NC2-55 (M)

NC1-30 | NC1-40 (M)

NC1-30 | NC1-40 (M)

NC1-30 | NC1-40 (M)

1 The urban village boundary is drawn very narrowly. Consider expanding the urban village to a walkshed in order to establish a more logical urban village extent and create more opportunities for housing.

2 Transitions are important because the proposed NC-55 zoning would be adjacent to single family zoning. Consider development standards or other measures to preserve a step-down for new buildings along Queen Anne Ave N.

2

1



Varied Opinions


Medium Density Urban VillagesLower Density Urban VillagesWallingford

åå

åååå

åååå

EAST

LAK

E U

RB

AN

VIL

LAG

EFR

EM

ON

T U

RB

AN

VIL

LA

GE

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿ ¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿ ¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿ ¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿¿ ¿¿¿¿ ¿ ¿¿ ¿¿¿

¿

¿

¿

BU

RK

E A

VE

N

N 36TH ST

N 43RD ST

N 49TH ST

N 48TH ST

N 47TH ST

BA

GLE

Y A

VE

N

N 41ST ST

CO

RLI

SS A

VE

N

MER

IDIA

N A

VE

N

INT

ERLA

KE

AV

E N

1ST

AV

E N

E

N 51ST ST

EAST

ERN

AV

E N

SUN

NY

SID

E A

VE

N

N 46TH ST

MID

VALE

AV

E N

N 38TH ST

N 37TH ST

2ND

AV

E N

E

DEN

SMO

RE

AV

E N

CA

RR

PL

N

N 52ND ST

BURKE GIL

MAN

TRAIL

N 57TH ST

N 53RD ST

N 54TH ST

KEYSTO

NE PL N

WA

LLING

FOR

D AV

E N

WH

ITM

AN

AV

E N

N 42ND ST

N ALLEN PL

N 61ST ST

N 60TH ST

ALB

ION

PL

N

N 62ND ST

N 59TH ST

KEN

SINGTO

N PL N

WO

OD

LAW

N A

VE

N

FAIR

VIE

W A

VE

E

KENW

OOD PL N

N 44TH ST

N 58TH ST

STO

NE

AV

E N

WO

OD

LAN

D P

AR

K A

VE

N

ASH

WO

RT

H A

VE

N

4TH

AV

E N

E

5TH

AV

E N

E

N NORTHLAKE WAY

CANFIELD PL N

6TH

AV

E N

E

NE 42ND ST

N 55TH ST

HIL

LMA

N P

L N

E

N 46TH ST

N 39TH ST

WO

OD

LAW

N A

VE

N

N 52ND ST

4TH

AV

E N

E4T

H A

VE

NE

1ST

AV

E N

E

N 41ST ST

WIN

SLO

W P

L N

5TH

AV

E N

E

N 42ND ST

WO

OD

LAN

D P

AR

K A

VE

N

N 44TH ST

N 55TH ST

N 42ND ST

1ST

AV

E N

E

WO

OD

LAW

N A

VE

N

WH

ITM

AN

AV

E N

DEN

SMO

RE

AV

E N

WO

OD

LAW

N A

VE

N

ASH

WO

RT

H A

VE

N

WA

LLIN

GFO

RD

AV

E N

BU

RK

E A

VE

N

N 43RD ST

N 44TH ST

AU

RO

RA

AV

E N

N 50TH ST

N 40TH ST

N 45TH ST

STO

NE

WA

Y N

N 34TH ST

N 35TH ST

WA

LLIN

GFO

RD

AV

E N

N P

ACI

FIC

ST

GR

EEN

LA

KE

WA

Y N

MER

IDIA

N A

VE

N

N 38TH ST

TH

AC

KER

AY

PL

NE

N NORTHLAKE W

AY

KIRK

WO

OD

PL N

2ND

AV

E N

E

NE 56TH ST

5TH

AV

E N

E

LAT

ON

A A

VE

NE

LAT

ON

A A

VE

NE

AU

RO

RA

AV

E N

WOODLANDPARK

GREEN LAKEPARK

MERIDIANPLAYGROUND

WALLINGFORDPLAYFIELD

GREEN LAKE

Cascadia

HamiltonInternational

McDonaldInternational

John Stanford International

C1-

40 |

C1-

55 (M

)

LR2 | LR2 (M)


IC-45 | IC-55 (M)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

NC

2P-4

0 | N

C2P

-55

(M)

C1-

40 |

C1-

55 (M

)

LR2

| LR

2 (M

)

IC-45 | IC-55 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR1 | LR1 (M)

Sing

le F

amily

| R

esid

entia

l Sm

all L

ot (M

)

C2-4

0 | C

2-55

(M)

C2-30 | C2-40 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)


Sing

le F

amily

| LR

1 (M

1)


LR2

| LR

2 (M

)

C1-40 | C1-55 (M)


C2-

40 |

C2-

55 (M

)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR3

| LR3

(M)

IC-65 | IC-75 (M)

LR1 | LR1 (M)

NC2P-30 |NC2P-40 (M)

NC1-30 |NC1-40 (M)

C1-3

0 |

C1-4

0 (M

)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR2

| LR

2 (M

)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

NC3P-40 | NC3P-55 (M)

LR3

| LR

3 (M

)

C2P-40 | C2P-55 (M)

NC2-40 | NC2-55 (M)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

NC2-40 | NC2-55 (M)

LR2

| LR

2 (M

)

NC

3P-4

0 |

NC

3P-5

5 (M

)



C1-65 | C1-75 (M)

LR2 RC | LR2 RC (M)

LR2

| LR

2 (M

)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

NC2P-65 | NC2P-75 (M)


LR2 | LR2 (M

)

LR1 | LR1 (M)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

2 (M

1)

LR2

| LR

2 (M

)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

1 (M

1)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

2 (M

1)

NC3-

40 |

NC3-

55 (M

)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

3 (M

2)

LR1

| LR

1 (M

)

NC2P

-40

| NC2

P-55

(M)


Sing

le F

amily

| LR

1 (M

1)

LR3

| LR

3 (M

)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

1 (M

1)

LR2

| LR

2 (M

)

MR

| M

R (M

)

C1-

30 |

C1-

40 (M

)

NC1-30 | NC1-40 (M)

LR1

| LR

1 (M

)

LR1

| LR

1 (M

)

LR3 RC | LR3 RC (M)

LR1

| LR

1 (M

)

C2-

40 |

C2-

55 (M

)

LR1 |LR1 (M)

C2-

30 |

C2-

40 (M

)

C1P-30 |C1P-40 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

C1P-40 |C1P-55 (M)

Single Family |Residential Small

Lot (M)

Sing

le F

amily

|LR

3 (M

2)

NC3P

-40

| NC3

P-55

(M)

NC

1-30

|N

C1-

40 (M

)

C2-40 | C2-55 (M)

NC2P-40 |NC2P-55 (M)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

2 (M

1)Single Family |

LR3 RC (M2)

LR2 RC | LR2 RC (M)

NC2P-65 | NC2P-75 (M)

Sing

le F

amily

|LR

2 (M

1)

LR3

RC

| LR

3 R

C (M

)

LR1 RC | LR1 RC (M)

NC2P-40 |

NC2P-55 (M)

C2-40 |C2-55 (M)

NC

1-30

|N

C1-

40 (M

)

C1-40 | C1-55 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

Single Family |LR2 RC (M1)

C1-30 | C1-40 (M)

NC2-40 |NC2-55 (M)

NC3-40 | NC3-55 (M)NC2-40 |

NC2-55 (M)

NC2-40 |NC2-55 (M)

LR2 RC |LR2 RC (M)

LR1 RC | LR1 RC (M)

NC2-40 | NC2-55 (M)NC2-40 |

NC2-55 (M)NC2-40 |

NC2-55 (M)NC2-40 |

NC2-55 (M)

NC2-40 |NC2-55 (M)

NC2P-40 | NC2P-55 (M)

NC2P-40 | NC2P-55 (M)

1 Consider the location of transit when making MHA zoning changes to add more housing. Good transit is present on Stone Way, Aurora Ave N, and N 40th St. Transit on N 45th St is slow due to traffic congestion.

2 Focus Group members generally support multifamily zoning in the area located between Aurora Ave N and Stone Way along Midvale and Woodlawn Avenues. It is well served by transit and well located for more housing.

3 It could be challenging to locate higher-density development along N 50th St because access from the roadway would be difficult and there is no transit.

4 Consider ways to create safe connections across Aurora Ave N to the Fremont neighborhood as growth occurs in the vicinity.

5 Consider extending the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zoning along N 45th St near Stone Way where there is a portion of the frontage that remains Lowrise multi-family zoning.

1 Some Focus Group members suggested additional Lowrise multifamily zoning in areas proposed for Residential Small Lot (RSL). Others felt a transition to RSL was appropriate.

2 Consider increasing the depth of the urban village along the N 45th St corridor at the east end of the urban village.

21

4

3

1

1

5

1

2




Medium Density Urban VillagesLower Density Urban Villages

Varied Opinions

Westwood–Highland Park

åå

åå

åå

¿¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿

¿ ¿

¿¿

¿

¿

20T

H A

VE

SW

18T

H A

VE

SW

17T

H A

VE

SW

24T

H A

VE

SW

15T

H A

VE

SW

14T

H A

VE

SW

29T

H A

VE

SW

SW BARTON ST

21ST

AV

E SW

SW CLOVERDALE ST

SW THISTLE ST

SW KENYON ST

SW TRENTON ST

25T

H A

VE

SW

22N

D A

VE

SW

23R

D A

VE

SW

KEL

SEY

LN

SW

26T

H A

VE

SW

SW CAMBRIDGE ST

27T

H A

VE

SW

28T

H A

VE

SW

SW SULLIVAN ST

SW DONOVAN ST

SW KENYON ST

14T

H A

VE

SW

24T

H A

VE

SW

SW CLOVERDALE ST

SW ELMGROVE ST

22N

D A

VE

SW

15T

H A

VE

SW

27T

H A

VE

SW

28T

H A

VE

SW

29T

H A

VE

SW

SW CAMBRIDGE ST

25T

H A

VE

SW

24T

H A

VE

SW

14T

H A

VE

SW

27T

H A

VE

SW

SW ELMGROVE ST

16T

H A

VE

SW

DELRID

GE WAY SW

SW THISTLE ST

SW TRENTON ST

SW BARTON ST

25T

H A

VE

SW

26T

H A

VE

SW

SW BARTON PL

17T

H A

VE

SW

ROXHILL PARK

S.W. COMMUNITY CENTER AND POOL

E.C. HUGHES PLAYGROUND

LON

GF

EL

LOW

CR

EE

K G

RE

EN

SP

AC

E

Roxhill

DennyInternational

Chief SealthHigh School

LR1 | LR1 (M)


C1-40 | NC3-55 (M)

Sing

le F

amily

| R

esid

entia

l Sm

all L

ot (M

)


LR2

| LR

2 (M

)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

LR2 | LR2 (M)

NC2P-40 | NC2P-55 (M)Sing

le F

amily

| LR

2 (M

1)

Sing

le F

amily

| R

esid

entia

l Sm

all L

ot (M

)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

2 (M

1)

LR3

RC

| LR

3 R

C (M

)

C1-40 | NC3-55 (M)

LR2

| LR

2 (M

)

Sing

le F

amily

|R

esid

entia

l Sm

all L

ot (M

)

MR | MR (M)

LR3

| LR

3 (M

)

LR3 | LR3 (M)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

1 (M

1)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

1 (M

1)

LR2

| LR

2 (M

)LR

3 | L

R3

(M)

Sing

le F

amily

|R

esid

entia

l Sm

all L

ot (M

)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

1 (M

1)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

3 (M

2)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

1 (M

1)

Sing

le F

amily

| LR

1 (M

1)

NC

3-40

| N

C3-

55 (M

)

Sing

le F

amily

| N

C3-

55 (M

2)

LR3 |LR3 (M)

Single Family |NC2P-55 (M2)

NC

2-65

|N

C2-

75 (M

)

0 0.50.25mi

1 The site of the big box retail is a good opportunity to add additional housing by building above retail or adding housing where surface parking lots exist today. Consider a larger MHA zoning increase to support this concept.

2 Parts of the urban village lack good access to transportation options. Make upgrades to transportation for multiple modes (transit, walking, biking) to support growth. Consider an enhanced transit center at the Rapid Ride station.

3 Provide gentle transitions. Several locations propose Lowrise 3 or Neighborhood Commercial zoning adjacent to Residential Small Lot zoning.

4 There are few parks or open spaces directly within the urban village. Consider opportunities to add these assets.

5 Consider how the urban village would work in tandem with White Center, if White Center were annexed by the City of Seattle. The Delridge Way and 10th Ave SW corridors could become the neighborhood center.

6 General support for the proposed addition of Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zoning.

1

3

5

3

66

Documents

Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA) Implementing …...Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA) Implementing Zoning Maps November 2016 PRELIMINARY Summary of input from ... refugees,