Crown Hill upzoning could be scaled back to reduce development in single-family zones

City council is looking at reducing the proposed upzoning of Crown Hill.

The original proposal would extend the low-rise upzoning into areas of single-family zones, but the trimmed-back plan would make those areas residential small-lot zones, or keep them as single-family zones. Other areas considered for the amendment are West Seattle Junction, Mount Baker, Ravenna, and Wallingford.

A Seattle Times report highlighted the fact that while scaling back upzoning would mean fewer affordable-housing units being created, it could “address ‘livability concerns’ raised some constituents.”

Upzoning proposals for Lake City, South Park and Columbia City wouldn’t be scaled back.

The Times reports that Councilmembers Mike O’Brien and Rob Johnson (representing Wallingford) want to allow as many as four housing units per building in areas zoned as residential small-lot.

The city council will vote in committee later this month and pass any upzone plans in March.

 


11
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Andrew Daisuke
Member
Andrew Daisuke

Boooooo

Valhalla
Member
Valhalla

It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out.

aselznick
Member
aselznick

Look at the amendments carefully. The Times did not report the additional amendment (#6-17) allowing 7 story building (75ft) instead of 55ft at the intersection of 15th Avenue & 85th. This is a HUGE “up”zone of development capacity, especially considering that the current zoning is 40 feet and the existing structures are only one story (or parking lots.)

Paintking
Member
Paintking

I will never figure out why people put so much faith in these theoreticians, such as MOB + Sawant. I guess so many here are big government people it’s all they know. While builders “get away” with what they’re allowed to, I do not trust these idiots who wet their fingers and thrust them into the air and THEN tell us how it’s going to be and or what to do. And when the S hits the fan they take little to zero blame. Dense IS the root word of density. And why is it so many want to live right the F on top of each other then bitch about the crappy city they themselves created? Does anybody like trying to negotiate traffic anywhere today? At any time now?

Pedestrian
Member
Pedestrian

So you’re anti-government. What’s your solution then? No zoning? Or you’re okay with government so long as you agree with their zoning?

And your against density. Well, I’ve got news for you — the people that are moving here aren’t going to stop coming. And not you, I, nor our state or local government can stop them from doing so. So the alternative to density is to cut down trees and pave over farms in what are now rural areas. And now that you’ve created more housing out on the fringes of the urban areas those people will need to get into the city for jobs. That means more cars and more traffic. Oh, and since the supply of housing in the city will continue to be limited that means further increases in the cost of housing and increasing property taxes to go along with it.

Toad (of Toad Hall)
Member
Toad (of Toad Hall)

I hope you are wrong in your assumption/wish that the supply of jobs and the need for new housing are infinite.

jlisbin
Member
jlisbin

The flawed MHA upzone plan is starting to show why when Council members try to curry favor by offering amendments on one hand while taking away on the other. At the end of the day the plan will not provide the affordable housing the City of Seattle desperately needs because it does not even count into the equation the naturally affordable houses that will be demolished to build market rate housing with minimal affordable housing requirements. Not to mention, the affordable housing does not have to be built on site. Rather, developers can pay into a fee that the city will grant to non profit developers who likely will build where land cost is cheaper (read not in Crown Hill). Instead the plan will likely result in re-segregation of neighborhoods, increased displacement of vulnerable citizens and further impacts on our already over-stressed infrastructure. And why do we need to do it when our Urban Villages have more than enough building capacity with current zoning? Feel free to go to http://www.scaleseattle.com to learn more. Jon LIsbin. Member of SCALE and Candidate for City Council D6.

Roget That
Member
Roget That

I want to thank you for protecting the value of my single family home!

Roget That
Member
Roget That

Weepy Mike O’Brien buckles. The man has no spine.

Uncle Buck
Member
Uncle Buck

Haha “livability concerns” indeed!
How about not being able to use parks and libraries because bleeding heart idiots think it is “ethical” to feed criminal junkies and “tolerate” their campsites everywhere?

fluggermutation
Member
fluggermutation

we tolerate you, don’t we?