By Lauren Craig
Puget Sound Sage joined as one of five signatories with affordable housing advocates, labor, and environmental organizations to an op-ed last week expressing our support for the Housing Affordability and Livability Agenda (HALA) committee’s recommendations to increase zoning density in conjunction with affordable housing strategies. Continue reading “The HALA Recommendations, Why We Support Them, and Why it is About Race”
By Lauren Craig
The time to act is now – Tell City Council to implement the HALA recommendations as soon as possible. Continue reading “The HALA Recommendations That We Support (Among Others)”
Last week, Councilmember Mike O’Brien introduced a proposal to strengthen Seattle’s incentive zoning (IZ) program: a “linkage fee” rather than recommend tweaks to the existing IZ policy. If Seattle is serious about not becoming a city only for the elite and serious about carbon reduction, the linkage fee proposal is a no-brainer.
We have been long critical of the City’s IZ program. Under the current IZ policy, developers built affordable units or paid a reasonable fee to the City in exchange for permission to build to a greater density. Because developers volunteer to participate, the affordable housing requirements only kick in for a portion of a new building and applies to only a few neighborhoods that have undergone upzoning, Seattle’s program is considerably weaker than those in other cities. To date, the IZ program has only produced an estimated 714 units since 2001.
Unlike IZ, a linkage fee policy requires all new residential office or commercial development above a certain size to contribute to an affordable housing fund. The policy, as adopted in several major cities in the U.S., is premised on a link between new development and a subsequent increase in demand for low-income housing.
So, why do we need to pass this fee now? There are many reasons developers should pay their fair share of affordable housing, the most important of which is absolute necessity. Growth is happening now. People are being displaced now, and 40% of Seattle will not be able to live here if we do not create and preserve affordability now. We need more money to build and preserve more housing now, and into the future.
We have written about the housing crisis in Seattle. Affordable housing is not available for low income people and families. It is well-documented that low-income people and families mainly consist of communities of color, immigrants, refugees and single mothers. Demographic changes in Seattle and South King County indicate that people of color have been displaced from Seattle as rents have risen over the past ten years. Rents have increased even more dramatically in the past year, and Seattle is currently the fastest growing city in the country. In order for Seattle to walk a path of justice, we need more affordable housing now.
A linkage fee is necessary to prevent displacement, is good for the environment, and good for Seattle. It is only fair that developers, who profit from our infrastructure investments, pay their share for affordable housing. Stand with Puget Sound Sage and the Growing Together Coalition and urge City Council to pass a linkage fee in October!
Across the country, Seattle is well known for its commitment to environmental sustainability. And with the recent passage of a $15 minimum wage, the City of Seattle is poised to become not only a leader in protecting our environment, but also a leader in addressing income inequality. These dual priorities are best intertwined in Mayor Ed Murray’s commitment to prevent displacement of low-income communities and people of color, ensuring that everyone who works in Seattle can also afford to live in Seattle. By building sustainable and dense communities, everyone will have the opportunity to have good jobs and an affordable place to live.
High-density cities contribute less greenhouse-gas emissions per person than other areas of the country, largely because people who live in cities do not need cars to travel to and from work. When low-income people and people of color – who are more likely to be transit reliant – are priced out of cities and become suburban auto users, the environmental gain of building dense neighborhoods is undermined. In fact, higher income households moving to new development near transit are more likely to own a car than lower-income people who are displaced.
Exacerbated by recent bus cuts in the suburbs, displacement could become a driver of increased greenhouse-gas emissions and increased traffic. In light of this, solving the crisis of affordable housing in Seattle may be one of the most effective strategies for reducing our carbon footprint.
To address the need for affordable housing, the Mayor and the City Council is revamping the City’s Comprehensive Plan, a 20-year plan for most of Seattle’s big-picture decisions on how to grow while preserving and improving our neighborhoods. Councilmember O’Brien’s Sustainability Committee is looking to harness this growth to build or preserve affordable housing.
Next month, the City Council will wrap up a year of study and advisory committee meetings on how market-rate developers can contribute to affordable housing. Specifically, the City Council is examining its controversial incentive zoning program, generally criticized by housing proponents as weak and currently being challenged by developers in court.
The current incentive zoning program allows developers to build higher and bigger buildings in exchange for contributing a small number of affordable units or marginal fee to an affordable housing fund. This current policy is considerably weaker than similar policies in other major cities such. The City’s consultants estimate that since 2001, the program has created only 714 affordable units, prompting the City Council to review new options for the program to increase the amount of affordable housing.
As we have mentioned in our previous post, the City’s consultants have recommended two options to strengthen developer contribution to affordable housing. First, the City can increase required units or fees under the existing program, though the consultants caution this will create only a marginal gain due to legal constraints and limited geographic scope. Second, the City could opt for a new strategy that requires developers in most areas of the city to pay a fee for new construction of market-rate real estate.
These two strategies take advantage of the very thing that is causing displacement – rising property values. Commercial property owners across the city are enjoying record land values, due in part to relaxed zoning limits and massive public investment in infrastructure, such as the light rail, a new street grid north of downtown, transformation of the waterfront and new investments in parks. With these benefits, property owners and developers are granted enough economic value that allows them to build densely, contribute a fair share to affordable housing and make a profit.
We need all tools available to ensure affordable housing. Seattle residents have certainly been doing their part – paying for affordability for many years through the Housing Levy. The proposed policies affecting developers won’t single-handedly solve our crisis, but they represent an important piece of a comprehensive housing affordability strategy. With a strategy that does not deter growth, we can achieve both sustainability and equity in a city in which all families can thrive.
