AN ORDINANCE establishing the Demonstration Program for Innovative Housing design and adding a new Section 23.40.050 to the Seattle Municipal Code to implement the Demonstration Program.

WHEREAS, the City's Comprehensive Plan, originally adopted in 1994 and most recently amended in 1997, includes housing goals for accommodating growth and maintaining affordability, and for encouraging housing diversity and quality; and

WHEREAS, the cost of owning or renting housing continues to increase faster than the rate of inflation, making it increasingly difficult for many of the citizens of Seattle to afford housing in the city; and

WHEREAS, on March 21, 1998, more than 800 citizens, including community activists, developers, attorneys, small business people, architects, elected officials, lenders, tenants and landlords, attended the Mayor's Community Conference on Affordable Housing to discuss possible solutions to the rising cost of housing; and

WHEREAS, on April 13, 1998 City Council, with the Mayor concurring, adopted a resolution that established the City's top budget priorities for the 1999-2000 biennial budget and the 19992004 Capital Improvement Program, which resolution stated that the "City is committed to developing and implementing an affordable housing action agenda for both home ownership and rental housing;" and

WHEREAS, on May 5, 1998, Mayor Paul Schell published the Housing Action Agenda, which includes a goal to "increase our community's supply of moderate income housing and preserve existing affordable housing," including providing opportunities for innovative housing designs, and evaluating zoning to find opportunities for new housing; and

WHEREAS, AIA (American Institute of Architects) Seattle's Housing Action Task Force sponsored the "Housing Seattle, Design Demonstration Projects," seeking entries for a competition of real projects that demonstrate neighborhood-appropriate approaches to increasing the inventory and quality of affordable housing in Seattle; and on September 10, 1998, announced the top eleven entries identified as "Should Be Builts," selected by an interdisciplinary jury representing a broad range of public and private housing interests and expertise; and

WHEREAS, detached accessory dwelling units are a type of housing that several neighborhood planning groups are considering as an option to accessory dwelling units only within principal structures; detached units could provide additional flexibility to accommodate such a unit on a site, allowing limited additional density without significantly changing the appearance of the neighborhood, and could help home owners afford to stay in their homes or be able to afford to purchase a home; and

WHEREAS, cottage, tandem and small lot single family housing are types of in-fill housing that several neighborhood planning groups have recognized as providing a housing option not readily available today that would fit with their neighborhoods' desire for affordable, home ownership opportunities for a variety of household types; and

WHEREAS, when the Design Review process was being developed in the early 1990s, the issue of allowing additional height through Design Review departures was discussed at length, but height was eventually determined to be a standard that could be included in neighborhood-specific guidelines rather than in the citywide program; however, since that time, Design Review has had four successful years as an operational program and neighborhoodspecific guidelines have yet to be adopted, so that there has not yet been an opportunity to test the concept of height departures through design review; and

WHEREAS, some neighborhoods, as part of their neighborhood planning effort have requested that the City consider allowing the Design Review process to be used to allow existing structures (in addition to the new construction that Design Review is currently limited to) to use development standard departures available in Design Review if they are to be redeveloped for residential use; and

WHEREAS, the Department of Construction and Land Use will continue to review whether the Demonstration Program should include demonstration projects to test whether to allow further flexibility for cottage housing developments in an effort to encourage such developments and will propose possible amendments to the Demonstration Program by mid-January 1999;

NOW THEREFORE,

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SEATTLE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Establishment of Demonstration Program.

This ordinance establishes the Demonstration Program for Innovative Housing Design, subject to the conditions established below.

Section 2. Purpose.

The purpose of this Demonstration Program is to use a limited number of projects to test innovative residential design solutions using alternative development standards and processes. The Demonstration Program will allow a limited number of projects that use certain specified housing types, development standards, and processes that are not currently allowed under existing land use regulations, while continuing to be consistent with the City's land use, housing and neighborhood goals. These projects will be evaluated to determine whether and to what extent each of the changes did or can accomplish the goals contained in Section 3 of this ordinance, and therefore, whether amendments should be made to the City of Seattle Land Use Code to allow these housing types, development standard changes and process changes generally.

Section 3. Goals.

The goals of the Demonstration Program are to test new or more flexible regulations and processes in an effort:

1. To encourage housing production, particularly types of housing that are not readily available in Seattle, or are not currently being produced.

2. To stimulate innovative housing design that is consistent with the housing goals of a neighborhood, and that fits in with or improves the character of the neighborhood.

3. To encourage the development of housing that will serve as a catalyst to stimulate housing production, particularly in neighborhoods where new or rehabilitated residential development has been limited.

4. To serve as a model for other neighborhoods, demonstrating housing solutions that could have broader application in other neighborhoods.

5. To increase the diversity of housing types and levels of affordability to meet the varied needs and goals of a neighborhood.

Section 4. Types of Housing, Development Standards Changes and Processes to be Tested.

In order to meet these goals, through the Demonstration Program the Director of the Department of Construction and Land Use will be allowed to modify certain existing Land Use Code requirements in order to test projects in the four categories listed below. In addition, all demonstration projects will be required to go through the Design Review Process. All other regulations and requirements of the Land Use Code will continue to apply except as modified in Section 8 below.

1. Detached Accessory Dwelling Units: A maximum of five units per submittal period for a total of up to ten such units may be allowed in Single Family zones under the Demonstration Program, according to the development standards for accessory structures and accessory dwelling units, some of which standards may be modified through the citywide Design Review Guidelines (adopted by Ordinance 116909) used in the administrative Design Review process. Additional height above the current height limits for accessory structures may also be requested and approved through the administrative Design Review process in order to test the concept of developing accessory units, limited to a single story, above garages.

2. Cottage Housing, Tandem Housing or Small Lot Single Family Development: A maximum of three projects per submittal period for a total of up to six such projects that will test these concepts may be allowed under the Demonstration Program in any of the Single Family zones. Such projects will be developed according to the development standards for cottage housing, tandem housing or residential small lot single family development contained in SMC chapter 23.43, except as those standards may be modified as provided in the citywide Design Review Guidelines used in the Design Review process. Additional height, up to a maximum of 15 percent over the maximum height allowed for cottage housing, tandem housing or small lot single family development, may also be granted through the Design Review process. Under no circumstances, however, may any height departure be granted that would result in a structure that is higher than the maximum allowed for single family structures in single family zones other than RSL.

3. Height Above Current Height Limits through Design Review Departures: A maximum of three projects per submittal period for a total of up to six projects that are either multifamily development in multifamily zones or are part of a mixed-use development in commercial zones, additional height up to 15 percent over the maximum height limit allowed in the zone may be approved through the Demonstration Program, as long as no additional floors are constructed as a result of this additional height; the overall scale of development as viewed from the street front has generally not changed; and the structure remains compatible with the neighborhood and scale of development allowed in the zone. This departure is to be used to accommodate unusual site or development conditions such as topographic depressions or design elements that affect height measurement toward the center of the development, but which generally does not change the height of a structure along the street front.

A height departure under the Demonstration Program cannot be combined with a height exception for mixed use structures under SMC 23.47.008C3 or C4, nor will a height departure be granted under the Demonstration Program if the departure requested would block the views protected by SMC 23.47.008C4c more than an exception granted under that section would.

4. Design Review Process for Development Standard Departures for Existing Structures: In an effort to encourage the reuse of existing structures, a maximum of three projects per submittal period for a total of up to six projects that include residential development in existing structures in multifamily or commercial zones (including mixed-use development) may be allowed to use the Design Review process to request development standard departures that are currently only allowed for new development.

Section 5. Individual Project Selection Process.

1. Submittal Deadline: There shall be two project submittal periods:

a. Applications submitted by January 15, 1999; selection decisions by February 12, 1999.

b. Applications submitted by July 1, 1999; selection decisions by August 1, 1999.

2. Neighborhood Support and Consistency with Comprehensive Plan and Neighborhood Plan Goals: The demonstration project must be consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. A brief statement of support from a neighborhood organization or neighborhood planning group, and opinions from a sizable sampling of adjacent neighbors and property owners, must be submitted with the application. No project shall be expected to show 100 percent neighborhood concurrence, but shall demonstrate how and when the proposed project was discussed with community organizations and neighbors adjacent to the project. If located within a neighborhood planning area, the applicant shall indicate how the project would further the goals of the neighborhood plan.

3. Project Selection Committee: The Department of Construction and Land Use shall convene a selection committee to include at a minimum, an Urban Design Planner from the Department of Construction and Land Use and a representative from the Planning Commission's Housing subcommittee.

4. Project Selection Criteria: The following criteria shall be used to rate and select individual projects to be a part of the Demonstration Program.

a. The extent to which the proposed project fulfills the purpose and goals of the Demonstration Program.

b. The extent to which the proposed project furthers the goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan, the Mayor's Housing Action Agenda and the City's Housing Framework.

c. The extent to which the proposed project supports the goals of the neighborhood in which the project is located, and the neighborhood plan goals, when applicable.

d. The general level of support from the community organizations and the neighbors surrounding the proposed project.

e. The extent to which the proposed project reduces the per unit costs, is proposed to result in affordable units, or proposes to add to the diversity of affordability in the neighborhood.

f. The rating given to the project in AIA Seattle's Design Demonstration Project competition, or other similar competition of innovative housing and quality design selected by a jury of design professionals and other housing experts.

In addition a proposed project should include a description of the extent to which the project proposed serves as a good test of future code amendments, either for specific types of neighborhoods or citywide. Projects that may be approved through existing processes and regulations shall not be accepted as a demonstration project.

5. Public Notice. Immediately following the close of each submittal period, DCLU shall post notice and provide mailed notice to owners of real property within 300 feet of a proposed demonstration project site, indicating receipt of an application for a demonstration project. The notice shall also explain the two week public comment period, the selection process and the process for permit approval for demonstration projects.

6. Project Selection Process. The project selection committee shall recommend to the Director of DCLU proposed projects to be included in the demonstration program. The final decision whether to include any individual project in the demonstration program shall be made by the Director. The decision whether a proposed project is included in the demonstration program is not appealable, although any final decisions on any demonstration project's MUP application, including design review are appealable as provided in SMC 23.76. In the Director's discretion, the Director may decide to approve fewer than the maximum number in each category, but may not approve more than the maximum number specified in each category.

Section 6. Design Review Required.

Once selected to be a demonstration project, each project shall be subject to the Design Review process contained in SMC Chapter 23 and specifically at Chapter 23.41, except as the process is modified by this ordinance. Category one, detached accessory dwelling units, shall be reviewed through the administrative Design Review process at SMC 23.41.016; all other demonstration projects shall be reviewed through the Design Review Board process. The adopted citywide design guidelines, which were originally developed to apply only to new multifamily and commercial development, will also be used for the demonstration projects in the same manner that they are used for other projects subject to Design Review. No departures shall be granted from the minimum number of parking spaces required; no departures shall be granted from the maximum density limits allowed for the types of housing being demonstrated.

Section 7. Program Reporting and Evaluation.

At the end of each project selection period, DCLU shall report to City Council on the types of projects being submitted and selected for the Demonstration Program and the responses to the neighborhood notice and comment provisions. Within one year of adoption of the Demonstration Program, DCLU, in conjunction with the Selection Committee, shall prepare a report to City Council, summarizing the types of projects submitted, types selected, and an evaluation of how well the proposals have met or are meeting the purpose and goals of the Demonstration Program. A full evaluation of the program shall be conducted within 24 months of the end of the second selection period, or as soon after 24 months that the demonstration projects have been completed and are occupied so that the effectiveness of demonstration projects in achieving the goals of the ordinance can be evaluated.

Recommendations for code amendments that result from the demonstration projects, whether to be applied citywide or to carry out the goals of specific neighborhood plans, may, if appropriate, also be submitted to City Council at that time. If, however, the evaluation of a portion of this Demonstration Program (e.g., evaluation of one of the four test categories included in this ordinance) can be completed earlier than the evaluation of the full ordinance, then that evaluation and any recommended code changes may also be submitted to City Council at an earlier time.

The evaluation of the four categories of projects will include:

1. Detached Accessory Dwelling Units:

a. What are appropriate development standards for detached ADUs that "fit" on a single family lot and within a single family neighborhood, but still allow the development of a livable unit? Is there a minimum lot size that would be appropriate?

b. Are ADUs above garages a viable option in terms of cost to construct and fit in single family neighborhoods?

c. What was the cost of construction, whether a new structure or an addition or remodel of an existing structure?

d. What do the neighbors think of this type of housing? What is the reaction of the residents of the detached ADU in terms of livability of the unit and how it could be improved?

e. Was administrative Design Review cost effective for this type of small project?

f. If Design Review is to be used for this type of development, are additional design guidelines needed to address more directly the issues relevant to detached ADUs?

g. Did this project provide a design concept that would likely be applicable and acceptable in other neighborhoods?

h. What were the positive results of this project? What were the negative results?

i. Were there any unintended consequences that need to be resolved?

j. Are there certain neighborhoods or types of neighborhoods that are more appropriate for this type of housing than others?

2. Cottage Housing, Tandem Housing or Small Lot Single Family Development:

a. Do the development standards that are already in the code work for this type of development? Should some standards be modified and if so, how?

b. What was the cost of construction? Does this type of development result in affordable units? What are the factors that help or hinder the affordability of this type of development?

c. What do the neighbors think of this type of housing? What is the reaction of the residents of the housing in terms of livability of the unit and how it could be improved?

d. If Design Review is to be used for this type of development, are additional design guidelines needed to address more directly the issues relevant to this type of single family development?

e. Did this project provide a design concept that would likely be applicable and acceptable in other neighborhoods?

f. What were the positive results of this project? What were the negative results?

g. Were there any unintended consequences that need to be resolved?

h. Are there certain neighborhoods or types of neighborhoods that are more appropriate for this type of housing than others?

3. Height Above Current Height Limits through Design Review Departures:

a. Should height departure be allowed through Design Review in all zones? For all types of residential development? If not, for which zones? For what types of residential development?

b. Is 15 percent the appropriate amount of departure? For all types of residential development? For which zones?

c. Does a maximum percentage need to be specified?

d. What were the circumstances or site conditions that prompted the requested departure?

e. Are there other ways (without having to go through Design Review) to address the height issue while still resulting in compatible development, such as an alternative height measurement technique or a general increase in height allowed?

f. Did the flexibility in height reduce the development cost on a per unit basis? Did it help the affordability of the units?

g. What is the neighborhood response to the allowed departure?

h. Did this project provide a design concept that would likely be applicable and acceptable in other neighborhoods?

i. What were the positive results of this project? What were the negative results?

j. Were there any unintended consequences that need to be resolved?

k. Are there certain neighborhoods or characteristics of areas where height departures would be more appropriate than other areas?

4. Design Review Process for Development Standard Departures for Existing Structures:

a. Did the process allow for enough flexibility to encourage or at least allow for the reuse of existing structures? If not, what other departures are needed?

b. Are additional design guidelines or departures needed to address more directly the issues relevant to the reuse of existing structures?

c. Are there changes in the process that are needed for existing structures since there isn't such a thing as a pre-design meeting?

d. Did the flexibility in development standards reduce the development cost on a per unit basis? Did it help the affordability of the units?

e. What is the neighborhood response to the remodeled development?

f. Did this project provide a design concept that would likely be applicable and acceptable in other neighborhoods?

g. What were the positive results of this project? What were the negative results?

h. Were there any unintended consequences that need to be resolved?

i. Are there certain neighborhoods or characteristics of neighborhoods where Design Review for existing buildings would be more appropriate than other neighborhoods?

Section 8. A new Section 23.40.050 is hereby added to the Seattle Municipal Code, as follows:

23.40.050 Demonstration Program for Innovative Housing Design

A. Purpose and Intent.

The purpose of this section is to establish a Demonstration Program for Innovative Housing Design. The goals of the Demonstration Program are to test new or more flexible regulations and processes in an effort:

To encourage housing production, particularly types of housing that are not readily available in Seattle, or are not currently being produced.

To stimulate innovative housing design that is consistent with the housing goals of a neighborhood, and that fits in with or improves the character of the neighborhood.

To encourage the development of housing that will serve as a catalyst to stimulate housing production, particularly in neighborhoods where new or rehabilitated residential development has been limited.

To serve as a model for other neighborhoods, demonstrating housing solutions that could have broader application in other neighborhoods.

To increase the diversity of housing types and levels of affordability to meet the varied needs and goals of a neighborhood.

B. Scope of Authority to Modify Land Use Code Requirements.

Demonstration projects shall be selected and reviewed in accordance with the Demonstration Program for Innovative Housing Design adopted by Ordinance _________. Each demonstration project shall comply with all of the requirements of the Land Use Code otherwise applicable to the project, except as specified below:

1. Each demonstration project, including single family development and redevelopment of existing structures, shall be reviewed through the Design Review process contained in SMC chapter 23.41 and in SMC chapter 23.76. Detached accessory dwelling unit projects selected in category one of the Demonstration Program shall use the administrative Design Review process at SMC 23.41.016.

2. A maximum of ten (10) detached accessory dwelling units may be allowed in Single Family zones contrary to the requirement in SMC 23.44.006(A). For purposes of this ordinance, a "detached accessory dwelling unit" means an additional room or set of rooms that are located within a structure accessory to an owneroccupied single family structure, that is not connected to the principal structure and is designed, arranged, occupied or intended to be occupied by not more than one household as living accommodations independent from any other household. Such units must be developed according to the development standards for accessory structures and accessory dwelling units in Single Family zones, Sections 23.44.040 and 23.44.041, except that:

a. Contrary to SMC 23.44.041(A)(4) the accessory dwelling unit may be located in a structure that is detached from the single family dwelling that is the principal use on the lot; and

b. Additional modifications to the development standards contained in SMC 23.44.040 and SMC 23.44.041 may be allowed as departures through the Design Review process under SMC Chapter 23.41.012; and

c. In addition to the development standard departures allowed in Section 23.41.012, a departure may be allowed for additional height if the accessory dwelling unit is a single story unit and will be located above a detached garage, provided that, no height departure may be granted that would result in a structure that is higher than the maximum allowed for single family structures in single family zones other than lots zoned Residential Small Lot.

3. A maximum of six (6) projects that include cottage housing, tandem housing and small lot single family development may be allowed in a Single Family zone, contrary to the minimum lot area requirements of SMC 23.44.010 and other development standards contained in SMC 23.44. Such development must comply with the Residential Small Lot development standards, SMC Chapter 23.43, except that modifications to the development standards contained in SMC 23.43 may be allowed as departures through the Design Review process. In addition to the development standard departures allowed under SMC 23.41.012, departures may also be allowed for:

a. Additional height up to a maximum of fifteen (15) percent over the maximum allowed by SMC 23.43.012 for cottage housing, by SMC 23.43.010 for tandem housing and by SMC 23.43.008 for small lot single family development, provided that, no height departure may be granted that would result in a structure that is higher than the maximum allowed for single family structures in single family zones other than lots zoned Residential Small Lot.

b. The maximum total floor area of each cottage as required by SMC 23.43.012D, as long as the maximum amount of total floor area for the entire cottage housing development is not increased.

4. A maximum of six (6) multifamily demonstration projects in a multifamily zone or as a part of a mixed-use development project in a commercial zone outside of downtown, may be granted height departures through the Design Review process, contrary to SMC 23.41 which, with one exception, does not allow height departures. A height departure of up to fifteen (15) percent over the maximum height limit of the zone, may be allowed as long as:

No additional floors are constructed as a result of this additional height;

b. The overall scale of development as viewed from the street front has generally not increased; and

height departure under the demonstration program.

5. A maximum of six (6) residential projects in an existing structure in multifamily or commercial zones outside of downtown, including mixed-use development, may use the Design Review process. Development standard departures currently allowed only for new development under SMC 23.41.012 may be granted for the redevelopment of these existing structures.

C. Vesting.

For purposes of the Demonstration Program, all projects selected as demonstration projects are subject to the vesting of development rights and Master Use Permit expiration rules applicable to projects subject to Design Review contained in SMC 23.76.026 C.

D. Master Use Permit Expiration.

For purposes of the Demonstration Program, all projects selected as demonstration projects are subject to the Master Use Permit expiration rules applicable to Master Use Permits with a Design Review component contained at SMC 23.76.032 A1f.

E. Master Use Permit Renewal.

For purposes of the Demonstration Program, all projects that are selected as demonstration projects are subject to the Master Use Permit renewal standards contained at SMC 23.76.032 B1 and 2 only; the renewal standards in SMC 23.76.032 B3 shall not apply to demonstration projects.

F. Cancellation, Renewal and Reestablishment of Building Permit Applications.

All projects that are chosen as demonstration projects must comply with all applicable provisions of the Seattle Building Code, except as follows:

1. Cancellation of Permit Application. For purposes of this Demonstration Program and for purposes of the cancellation of permit application standards contained in Section 106.6.4 of the Seattle Building Code, all projects selected as demonstration projects shall be considered to be projects that are vested to prior Land Use Code provisions and ones which do not conform to the codes currently in effect.

2. Renewal of Building Permits. For purposes of this Demonstration Program, Section 106.9.2 of the Seattle Building Code does not apply and building permits for projects selected as demonstration projects shall not be renewed unless:

a. The building official determines that the permit complies, or is modified to comply, with the code or codes in effect on the date of application renewal; or

b. The work authorized by the permit is substantially underway and progressing at a rate approved by the building official. "Substantially underway" means that work such as excavation, inspections, and installation of framing, electrical, mechanical and finish work is being completed on a continuing basis.

c. Commencement or completion of the work authorized by the permit was delayed by litigation, appeals, strikes or other causes related to the work authorized by the permit, beyond the permit holder's control; and

d. For any demonstration project in a landslide-prone area, the requirements of SMC 25.09.345 also apply.

3. Reestablishment of Expired Building Permit. For purposes of this Demonstration Program, no building permit that has expired and not been renewed pursuant to subsection F2 above, shall be reestablished. The exception to section 106.9.3 of the Seattle Building Code does not apply.

Section 9. The provisions of this ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any particular provision shall not affect the validity of any other provision.

Section 10. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its approval by the Mayor, but if not approved and returned by the Mayor within ten (10) days after presentation, it shall take effect as provided by Municipal Code Section 1.04.020.

Passed by the City Council the _____ day of ____________, 1998, and signed by me in open session in authentication of its passage this _____ day of _________________, 1998. _____________________________________ President _______ of the City Council

Approved by me this _____ day of _________________, 1998. ___________________________________________ Mayor

Filed by me this _____ day of ____________________, 1998. ___________________________________________ City Clerk V 3a

Building Code does not apply.

Section 9. The provisions of this ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any particular provision shall not affect the validity of any other provision.

Section 10. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its approval by the Mayor, but if not approved and returned by the Mayor within ten (10) days after presentation, it shall take effect as provided by Municipal Code