The Queen Anne Community Council hosted nearly 100 residents
from Queen Anne, Magnolia, Ballard and other nearby Seattle neighborhoods for a
lively discourse over affordable housing in regards to Seattle City
Councilmember Mike O’Brien’s accessory dwelling unit proposal.
The Nov. 1 meeting was an opportunity for the Queen Anne
Community Council to discuss its appeal against the city’s final environmental
impact study for O’Brien’s proposal to make it easier for people to construct
attached and detached accessory dwelling units on their properties.
The city published its FEIS on Oct. 4, which finds O’Brien’s
plan would have no significant impact on Seattle if approved and executed.
QACC member Marty Kaplan, who led the community meeting,
said the community council is concerned the FEIS was not “nuanced” enough and
should have focused more on each Seattle neighborhood individually.
“There’s a few issues that really raise themselves to the
top,” Kaplan said. “And they will be challenged in the hearing, because they
don’t meet the level of analysis required in an environmental impact study.”
For the last 20 years, attached accessory dwelling units and
detached accessory dwellings units
(AADUs and DADUs) have been legally built in Seattle neighborhoods with certain
restrictions.
O’Brien did not respond to a request for comment left with
his office.
According to O’Brien’s proposal
page on the city’s website, there are nine major changes to the city’s code
to help more residents build accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and promote more
affordable housing in Seattle:
• Allow a property to have both an AADU and DADU with the
existing building envelope. Currently owners of single-family homes can only
have one ADU on their lot.
• Remove requirements for off-street parking. A property
owner would still be able to provide an off-street parking space if desired.
“Removing this requirement will allow some properties who have insufficient
space for an additional off-street parking space to add an (ADU),” the city’s
website states.
• The new plan would require owner-occupancy for one year, and
then the requirement would expire. Current the homeowner must occupy the main
dwelling unit or the ADU.
• Reduce the minimum lot size for a site with a DADU from
4,000 to 3,200 square feet. According to O’Brien’s site, approximately 7,300
more lot would become eligible to build a DADU.
• Increase the maximum gross floor area of a DADU to 1,000
square feet, excluding garage and storage areas. Right now legislation caps
gross floor area in a DADU to 800 square feet. The maximum for an AADU is 1,000
square feet.
• Increase rear yard coverage to 60 percent for one-story
ADUs.
• Allow DADU entrances on any facade provided it is 10 feet
from the lot line if located on facades facing the nearest side or rear lot
line, unless abutting the right-of-way.
• Increase the maximum height of a DADU or an AADU by 1 to 2
feet, which would make two-bedroom DADUs feasible on more lots.
• Allow exceptions from height limits for projections (such
as dormers) that add interior space.
“What we don’t like is the fact that city hall says, ‘Because
we don’t believe there isn’t any impacts that you should believe there isn’t
any impacts,’” Kaplan said. “We have experts, witnesses and others who will
testify at the hearing that the EIS was not completed lawfully.”
Kaplan, who called himself an advocate for “respectful
legislation,” said the community council and other neighborhood leaders were
concerned about the lack of parking requirements, a perceived lack of research
done within neighborhoods near downtown, the one-year requirement of owner
occupancy in the proposal and the lack of affordability requirements.
“If you are going to
build a backyard cottage ... they are not cheap,” Kaplan said. “If you rent at
market value, you would need to get $2,500 to $3,000 a month. It has nothing to
do with affordability.”
About 30 people spoke during the meeting, asking questions
and expressing their support either for the appeal or O’Brien’s proposal.
Matt Hutchins, the founder of the grassroots organization
More Options for Accessory Residences, is against QACC’s appeal and fears the
appeal process is delaying a necessary change in the city.
“We are looking at how these nontraditional forms of housing
can help with our big housing crisis,” Hutchins said.
Hutchins formed the group a little more than a year ago, in
response to O’Brien’s proposal.
“We knew the ordinance was happening, and we wanted to bring
together people who felt strongly that this is a good solution,” Hutchins said.
Hutchins came to the Nov. 1 meeting with many other group
members, who wore bright blue buttons with “MOAR” on the front.
Hutchins said the EIS doesn’t state there is no impact, but that
there is no significant impact on the city.
“If you are going to build 4,000 little houses, yes, there
is some impact, but it doesn’t rise to the level where it requires mitigation,”
Hutchins said. “They continue to claim on (QACC’s) website and at meetings that
three houses will be allowed and that it’ll triple the density, but that’s not
true. Things like that, they are essentially trying to scare people, but it
doesn’t actually relate to the policy.”
Many residents at the meeting said they were more afraid of
“McMansions” being built in their neighborhoods rather than smaller housing
units.
Greenlake resident Tyler Smith said he lives in a
single-family home with three other minimum wage workers, and a duplex across
the street from his rental was recently demolished. Now a large home is being
built there.
“It is happening everywhere,” he said. “In comparison, my
next-door neighbors built a DADU. It’s cute and affordable. My landlord would
possibly build a DADU but can’t under current regulations, but he can build a
McMansion. I’d rather see a DADU.”
Queen Anne resident and MOAR member Leah Missik said she
can’t build a DADU for her elderly parents because she can’t provide parking.
If O’Brien’s proposal is approved, she would be able to build one and bring in
more income.
“It took three of us with a good income to buy a house,”
Missik said. “As a city, we should plan for the future, not today. Planning
around cars, which pollute, is not smart.”
Calvin Jones, a renter from a nearby neighborhood, said millennials
and people from low-income groups are being excluded from neighborhoods like
Queen Anne.
“We are locked out because of restrictive housing policies,”
Jones said. “This is a beautiful neighborhood with opportunities. In that EIS
there would be more housing, so I am bummed this is going to be delayed. I want
to be your neighbor; I hope you want to be mine.”
The Queen Anne Council will meet before the Seattle Hearing
Examiner for a pre-hearing meeting at 10 a.m. Thursday, Nov. 8. For more
information about the appeal, visit qacc.net.
Notice of Appeal ADU by on Scribd