The appendix to the housing element presents information and analysis necessary to aid the City’s elected officials in making policy decisions related to housing. The Housing Section of the 2001 – 2004 Consolidated Plan also serves as an annually updated resource of housing information. meet the requirements of the Growth Management Act and analysis that shows how the City will meet goals established in the Countywide policies.

Seattle's existing housing stock is currently distributed almost evenly between single-family houses and multifamily apartment structures (see Housing Figure A-1). In 1990 As of 2000 there were are a total of 249,032269,128 housing units in the city. Of these, 135,284 2,330 units (53.150 percent) were in single family structures, 113,146130,288 units (45.4 48.5 percent) in multifamily structures and 3,556 (1.5 percent) were in mobile homes or other structures. Since 1960, multifamily units have been increasing as a proportion of the total housing stock. Today mMultifamily units accounted for 37 48 percent of all units in 1960 compared to 37 percent in 1960 and more than 45 percent today in 1990.

Seattle now has more renters (51 percent) than owners (49 percent). The city's owner-occupancy rate is at its lowest point since 1940 (see Housing Figure A-2). Eighty percent of the single-family homes are owner-occupied, with the remaining 20 percent renter-occupied. Multifamily units are 89 percent renter-occupied and 11 percent owner-occupied.

Rental units tend to be much smaller than owner-occupied units. Only 13 percent of renter-occupied units had three or more bedrooms, whereas 63 percent of owner-occupied units have three or more bedrooms (see Housing Figure A-23). Housing unit sizes and household sizes are not well matched. While owner-occupied households are larger than renter households (2.4 persons per owner-occupied household compared to 1.8 for renter households), 67 percent of the owner-occupied units in the City (mostly single-family houses) are occupied by only one or two people.

Seattle's share of King County's housing stock has been steadily declining over the last thirty years. In 1960, 65 percent of the housing units in King County were in the City of Seattle. By 1990 Seattle's share had dropped to 39 percent. King County continues to have a significantly higher proportion of single family units, 61 percent compared to Seattle's 53 percent (see Housing Figure A-4). Mirroring the trend in Seattle, the proportion of units that are multifamily units in King County is increasing over time.

While In 1990 Seattle's housing stock wasis divided almost evenly between single-family and multifamily buildings, 30 percent of the total units that comprise Seattle's total housing stock are located in buildings of 10 units or more. In contrast, only 16 percent of the total housing stock is in smaller multifamily buildings containing two to nine units. Seattle has a large number of single-family houses, a significant number of apartment houses, but relatively few units in ground-related housing types, such as townhouses, duplexes and triplexes. New housing units built or permitted between 1994 and 1999 continue the trend observed from the 1990 division of Seattle’s housing stock. The housing stock continues to be dominated by single-family houses and larger multifamily buildings (see Housing Figure A-3).

Housing Figure A-1

Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, 1990.

The relative lack of ground-related multifamily housing is attributable to many factors. Seattle developed as a city of neighborhoods of single-family houses. Major periods of growth and expansion occurred after the time that the streetcar and the automobile made a dispersed low-density development pattern possible. Neighborhoods of row houses and triple-deckers that today provide affordable alternatives to single-family houses in many older U.S. cities were never developed in Seattle. The character of Seattle's single-family neighborhoods has always been highly valued by residents, resulting in the adoption of land use regulations that have reinforced and protected the existing single-family character. Another factor is that single-family housing was relatively affordable in the Seattle area prior to the late 1970s. As a result, the demand for and need for alternatives to single-family homes was relatively low.

Seattle, as of 1994, currently has an estimated unused zoned residential development capacity of 101,520 new units (see Housing Figures A-53 and A-64). At the time the capacity figure was developed Seattle had 252,748 housing units, so the total housing stock would be about 354,268 housing units if all this capacity were used.

Residential development capacity includes vacant land in residential zones, underutilized sites in residential zones, some of the vacant land in commercial zones, and some of the underutilized sites in commercial zones. Underutilized sites are sites where the existing developed density is low compared to the allowed developed density, or where the value of the improvements on the site is low compared to the value of the land. A full discussion of the methodology used to estimate residential development capacity can be found in the Comprehensive Plan Background Report Zoned Development Capacity, City of Seattle Office for Long-range Planning, November 1991.

Housing Figure A-35

Housing Figure A-46

Source: City of Seattle Planning Department, 1994

During the 1980s Seattle averaged a net addition of 2,460 residential units per year, according to City permit records (see Housing Figure A-7). Development activity increased in the second half of the decade, with an average of 3,294 units permitted per year in the years 1987, 1988 and 1989. Twenty percent of the units were built in single-family zones. Strong demand for single-family housing continues to encourage infill on existing vacant lots, redevelopment of existing lots and short-platting of larger parcels. Eighty percent of the new residential development was multifamily housing in Multifamily, Commercial and Downtown zones. The proportion of housing built in neighborhood commercial zones increased during the last three years of the decade, reflecting strong demand for multifamily housing and the less restrictive land use regulations in Neighborhood Commercial zones.

Under the preferred The Comprehensive Plan alternative (60,000 households, 63,000 housing units over the plan's twenty year timeframe), twenty year housing target is 50,000 to 60,000 dwelling units. Tthe City will needs have to average 3,150 units per year in order to meet this target. Average annual production will need to be higher in coming years than is has been in the past five (see Housing Figure A-5). , an increase of 28 percent over average production rates evident in the 1980s, but comparable to the level of development

Both single-family home values and residential rents increased faster than household incomes and inflation during the 1980s. (see Housing Figure A-8) Adjusted for inflation, Seattle home prices increased by 38 percent and residential rents by 19.5 percent (U.S. Census) during this time period. Over the same period, median household incomes increased by 8.5 percent in real terms, while per capita incomes increased by 18.5 percent. In 1990 the median house price in Seattle was $137,000 and the median contract rent was $425. (The rent figure reflects the moderating effect of subsidized rents paid by tenants of subsidized housing.)

Housing prices over the last thirty forty years have been heavily influenced by the growth cycles in the regional economy (see Housing Figure A-9). . Periods of rapid economic growth in the mid-60s, late-70s, and late-80s, and the 90s led to significant increases in immigration into the region, which in turn led to rapid increases in house prices due to an imbalance between supply and demand. Real house prices have tended to decline during periods of recession or economic stagnation. However, the overall trend has been for single-family home prices to increase faster than inflation and incomes. This is probably due to the fact that, as a region, we are running out of easily developable, accessible land for single-family development.

Housing Figure A-9

Housing Figure A-12

TThe overall vacancy rate in the City of Seattle in 1990 was 4.9 percent (1990 census). The vacancy rate for single-family units was 3.2 percent and the rate for multifamily units was 6.9 percent. Rental vacancy rates in the Seattle area have been relatively low over the past decade. After peaking at about 7 percent during the 1982 recession, the King County rental vacancy rate has since hovered between 4 and 6 percent (Cain and Scott Apartment Vacancy Report). Rental vacancy rates in Seattle tend to be slightly lower than the King County average.

The Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan must balances the objectives of being responsive to the housing consumer, enabling people to live in the kind of housing they prefer and other competing goals and needs such as the need to use land in an environmentally sound manner, the need to create cities that can be effectively served by transit, and the need to provide people with housing they can afford.

Most Americans express strong preferences for living in single-family houses. National surveys typically find that single-family houses are the preferred housing type for about 80 percent of American households (see Housing Figure A-17). While it may be possible for 80 percent of households to live in single-family houses in small towns and rural areas, this percentage would be impossible unrealistic to achieve in a major metropolitan areacity like Seattle, where land prices are high. and the only way Seattle and other jurisdictions can accommodate the number of people wanting to live here is to build aby enabling a portion of the housing stock as in the form of higher-density multifamily housing.

In 1970, 73 percent of the households in King County lived in single-family houses. By 1990 this percentage had dropped to about 64 percent, and over the next twenty years it is likely to drop further. The City has zoned land for a wide variety of housing types to try to ensure that the greatest proportion of households possible can find acceptable and appropriate housing with characteristics they desire. This is what this plan attempts to do, through the combined policies of the land use and housing elements.

What sort of housing should the City encourage, acknowledging that there is very little land left for new single-family housing and that the price of single-family housing is too high for many households ? The City of Seattle/Puget Sound Regional Council Residential Preference Study (December 1993) shows that, if housing type is the only attribute of housing and neighborhood considered, then housing consumers tend to prefer ground-related housing types, such as townhouses and duplexes, if single-family houses are not available or are too expensive. This type of housing shares many of the attributes of single-family housing, such as yard space and privacy, but uses much less land than single-family housing.

However, the Residential Preference Study also reveals that for a significant share of the regional housing market, higher density condominiums and apartments are also a competitive alternative if they are well designed and built, and are located in attractive neighborhoods with amenities and services. An executive summary of the findings of the Residential Preference Study may be found in Housing Appendix D.

Publicly-assisted housing is housing that is either owned and operated by government, or housing owned by private parties or nonprofit organizations that is affordable to low-income or special needs households as a result of government subsidies. Assisted low and moderate-income housing in Seattle currently accounts for about 10 percent of Seattle's total housing stock -- 25,794 28,142 assisted units out of 251,761 269,128 total units (see Housing Figure A-18). The greatest share of Seattle's assisted housing stock, 8,420 units, is owned and/or managed by the Seattle Housing Authority (SHA). Other agencies which produce housing include Another 4,593 assisted rental units have been produced with funding through the City's Department of Housing and Human Services (DHHS)Office of using a number of funding sources including from the federal, state, county and local sources. and 4,942 units are assisted through federal Section 8, Section 202, Section 811, Section 221 funding (see Housing Figure A-19). Federal tax credits have funded another 3,436 units. In addition to assisted housing projects there are 3,481 tenant-based Section 8 Vouchers and Certificates which provide rent supplements for renters in private projects throughout the city.

The existing distribution of assisted housing in the City of Seattle is highly uneven (see Housing Figure A-207). Some neighborhoods, such as Downtown, the Central Area and parts of Southeast Seattle have very high concentrations of assisted housing, in some cases over 25 percent of all housing units in the area. A number of factors have contributed to the existing pattern including: the location of large public housing projects; lower property values (and therefore lower production costs) in many of the areas with high concentrations; the tendency to locate subsidized housing in areas where potential residents currently live and where human services are available; and community resistance to subsidized housing in many parts of the city.

Funding for the production and preservation of low-income housing comes from numerous sources, including federal, state, county and local sources. Historically the federal government has been the primary funding source for low-income housing, supporting most of the housing currently owned and operated by the Seattle Housing Authority. In the early 1980's federal funding for housing production was significantly reduced, requiring the City and the State to assume a greater role in funding low-income housing. According to the City's 1986 Housing Assistance Plan, federal funding for new housing production dropped from an average of 699 units per year during the 1970s to an average of only 227 units per year during the period between 1980 and 1985.

In 1981 the citizens of Seattle passed a $50 million senior housing bond issue, and in 1986 Seattle voters approved a $50 million low-income housing levy. Funds from the senior housing bond issue were fully committed by the mid-1980s and funds from the low-income housing levy will have beenwere fully committed by 1994. In 1995, Seattle voters approved a $59.211 million property tax levy to provide seven years of funding for housing preservation and production. The City expects to work to renew the housing levy when it expires in 2002. During the past year the City has committed $2 to $3 million per year for publicly-owned low-income housing from Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) funds dedicated to funding public facilities and infrastructure.

Housing Figure A-196

Notes:

Source: Seattle Department of Housing and Human Services, 1994. Totals may differ from those in the City of Seattle's 1994 CHAS due to different criteria used.

The characteristics of the U.S. population have changed tremendously since the 1950s. The population is aging, households have become smaller and more diverse, and birth rates have dropped. The Seattle metropolitan area has not been immune to these changes. Both Seattle and King County have been following the national trends.

Since 1960, married couples with children in Seattle have declined by over 50 percent, from 65,106 households in 1960 to 31,624 households in 1990 (see Housing Figures A-821 and A-922). At the same time the number of single-parent families with children, single-person households and households with unrelated persons living together have all increased. Households composed of single parents with children have increased by over 100 percent from 7,648 in 1960 to 15,736 in 1990. Single-person households, which were not counted separately until 1980, have increased by 14 percent from 83,799 in 1980 to 94,179 in 1990. Households with unrelated persons living together have increased by 41 percent from 21,006 in 1980 to 29,554 in 1990. During the 1990s these trends have continue and are expected to continue during the life of the Comprehensive Plan.

In Seattle today, families composed of married couples with children account for only 13.4 percent of all households, and only 20 percent of all households include children (see Housing Figure A-821). About 40 percent of the city's households are single-person households, 12.5 percent are households with two or more unrelated persons, and 6.7 percent are single-parent households.

Seattle's average household size has declined from 2.7 persons per household in 1960 to 2.09 in 1990. This decline in average household size is again a national and regional phenomenon, and is not unique to Seattle.

Similar trends are occurring in King County as a whole. For example, the percentage of households with children in King County declined from 46 percent in 1960 to only 30 percent in 1990 (see Housing Figure A-1023).

These trends of increasing diversity of household types and smaller households are expected to continue over the next twenty years, for the nation, and for Seattle and King County. The demographic forecast for Seattle is discussed in greater detail under "Future Housing Needs" below.

Housing Figure A-218 (a)

Housing Figure A-821 (b)

HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE - PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION

PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD

* Prior to 1980, the census reported data for families with own child, as opposed to any child.

Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, 1990; Puget Sound Regional Council; Seattle Planning Department, 1992.

The magnitude of the unmet housing need in the City of Seattle is significant. According to the census, the City has over 60,000 low-income households that meet the federal definition of households in need of assistance with the cost of housing -- about one quarter of the total number of households in the city. Over the next twenty years, forecasts developed by the Seattle Planning Department Strategic Planning Office (SPO) show that, under existing trends, about a quarter of the net new households in Seattle will be low-income households unable to afford the cost of the new market rate-housing built to accommodate growth.

Estimates of housing need are based on several measures available from the Census of Population and Housing. These include: the number of low-income households that spend more than 30 percent of their income for housing; the number of households living in overcrowded conditions; the number of households living in substandard conditions; and the number of homeless households. In addition to these quantitative measures, there are many special housing needs (such as persons with physical disabilities and refugees) that are more difficult to quantify. Some households with special needs are probably counted in the needs estimates from the census. Others may not appear as needy in the census data, but are housed in housing that is inappropriate or are unable to obtain critical housing support services.

Assessments of housing need are usually limited to the section of the population that is determined to be low-income. The federal low-income household definition is 80 percent of the area median income. Very low-income households have incomes below 50 percent of median income. While households with higher incomes may also have difficulty in affording housing or may not be able to purchase the kind of housing they desire, these households are assumed to have more options and alternatives than low-income households.

The above federal definitions of low-income housing can cause problems in communicating with the general public about low-income housing issues. Often members of the public perceive that all low-income housing is intended for households receiving public assistance. In fact, many low-income and very-low-income households are headed by persons who are employed in jobs that pay a low or modest wage. Some of these households might be very surprised to discover that they are considered low-income. Housing Figure A-24 below shows how wage levels in selected occupations match up with the standard low-income housing definitions.

According to the 1990 Census of Population and Housing, the City of Seattle has 60,189 households with incomes of below 80 percent of the King County median income and paying over 30 percent of their income for housing costs (see Housing Figure A-1225). This amounts to 25 percent of the City's households. Of these, 46,659 households had incomes under 50 percent of the King County median income.

Most of the households that pay too much of their income for housing are renters. Seattle has 47,855 low-income renters paying more than 30 percent of their income for housing, meaning that about 40 percent of all renter households living in the city are paying too much for housing. Detailed demographic analysis of households in need of assistance is presented below.

A number of caveats need to be raised about determining housing needs through census data. The City is using census data and standard definitions of low-income households in need in order to be consistent with federal requirements, the Growth Management Act procedural criteria, and other jurisdictions in King County planning under the Countywide policies. However there are reasons to believe that the census data overstates real need in a number of ways:

• household incomes reported in the census seem low compared to other more reliable sources -- this would tend to distort the number of households that are paying over thirty percent of their income for housing. Recent census department studies have shown that some households that are already living in assisted housing still show up as paying more than 30 percent of their income for housing, because they report their income incorrectly. Also it appears likely that many households that receive food stamps fail to report this as income.

• some households in the 50 to 80 percent of income category, particularly single-person households, may be able to find more affordable housing but choose not to do so.

• some elderly homeowners are "house rich and cash poor" -- they might not need assistance if they chose to sell their homes and rent.

A second measure of housing need is overcrowding. The federal government considers a household to be living in overcrowded conditions when the number of persons per room exceeds 1.0. In 1990, 8,829 Seattle households were living in overcrowded conditions, amounting to 3.7 percent of all households. Most of these households are also low-income, and are therefore included in the figures for households overpaying for housing.

Housing Figure A-1225

Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing - 1990, City of Seattle Planning Department, 1993.

Households living in substandard housing is another measure of housing need. The Census of Population and Housing evaluates housing condition by the lack of complete plumbing facilities. Less than 1 percent of Seattle housing units are substandard on this measure. While forty years ago the lack of complete plumbing facilities was a useful measure of housing condition (a significant percentage of units did not have complete plumbing facilities), this measure is almost irrelevant to Seattle in the 1990s.

Recent surveys of housing condition conducted by the City of Seattle indicate that Seattle generally has a well-maintained housing stock (City of Seattle Department of Community Development: Seattle Housing Condition: 1989 Survey and Trends). The survey evaluated a 10 percent sample of Seattle's housing units, rating buildings based on their exterior appearance. The scoring system used ranked structures on a scale of 1 to 4, where: 1 = sound; 2 = basically sound; 3 = deteriorated; and 4 = dilapidated. The overall average score was 1.68 with almost all units surveyed (98.6 percent) having no defects or only minor maintenance defects.

While appearing to be sound from outside, residential buildings often have code violations. The pilot study for Seattle's Rental Housing Inspection Program found that about ten percent of the city's housing in buildings with three or more units had code violations serious enough to warrant intervention by the City.

A fourth component of housing need is the homeless population. The homeless were enumerated in the 1990 census as part of the "group quarters population", and were therefore not counted in the household data used to determine households in need of assistance. In January 1993, the City of Seattle estimated that on any given night there are an average of between 3,800 and 4,300 homeless persons in the city. This estimate was developed from data collected by homeless shelter providers.

In addition to households that need housing assistance solely for income-related reasons, there are a number of special populations whose need for housing and housing-related services is not met by the private market. These groups include: the frail elderly; single-parent families; persons with physical disabilities; substance abusers; persons with mental illness; persons with AIDS; refugees; victims of domestic violence; and runaway and parenting youth. The homeless population is also considered a special needs group. Homelessness is a complex problem that is only partially related to the cost or availability of housing. Other contributing factors include: increases in the number of families and individuals in poverty or at risk of poverty; lack of adequate treatment and support services for people who are alcoholic, chemically-dependent, or mentally ill; family instability from drug abuse and related activities; and domestic violence.

Some of these groups need specific types of housing that are unavailable or in short supply in the existing housing stock. For example, people with physical disabilities need affordable housing that is physically accessible. Other special needs groups, such as single-parent families, need specific services, such as affordable child care and job training and placement, along with affordable housing.

Needs which have been identified by the City as most critical are transitional housing and support for homeless families and individuals (especially youth) and persons with AIDS, and long-term housing and community support services for families and persons with seriously disabling conditions, including chronic alcoholism, chronic mental illness, developmental disabilities, and physical disabilities. The provision of services and support in conjunction with housing built for special populations is essential. The provision of housing alone is often insufficient to solve the problem.

Quantifying the number of special needs households needing assistance and reconciling these figures with data on low-income households in need is difficult. Because many of the households with special needs are also low-income households, many are already counted in the estimates of low-income households in need of assistance obtained from the Census. A more complete discussion of special needs households, including estimates of the number of households in some of the categories, may be found in the City's Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS).2001-2004 Consolidated Plan.

A more detailed analysis of housing need is possible through statistical cross-tabulations produced from 1990 census data available through the Public Use Micro Sample (PUMS). For this section of the needs analysis, households in need were defined as households with incomes of less than 80 percent of the area median income, who were paying more than 30 percent of their income for housing cost or were living in overcrowded conditions (more than 1 person per room). The total number of households determined to be in need through this measure in 1990 was 61,704.

Most Seattle households in need of assistance are small households (see Housing Figure A-26). Over half of Seattle's households in need are single-person households, and nearly 80 percent are households of two or less. The neediest households also tend to be very small. Most of the city's households in need that have extremely low-incomes (below 30 percent of the area median income) are single-person households.

Most low-income households in need in Seattle have very-low-incomes. Over 75 percent have incomes below 50 percent of median and 44 percent have incomes of less than 30 percent of median income (see Housing Figure A-27). .Many of these households are spending very high percentages of their income on housing. Nearly half of low-income households in need spend over 50 percent of their income on housing, while 25 percent spend over 70 percent of their income on housing. For these households, most of whom earn less than 30 percent of median income, the cost of housing seriously impairs their ability to meet other expenses, such as food, utilities and transportation.

(c) Housing Need by Household Type

Household types in need of assistance with housing costs are diverse, reflecting the full range of households living in Seattle (see Housing Figure A-28). Over half of the households in need (57.5 percent) are single people. Of these, over half (or 30.9 percent of the total) are single people under the age of 62 with no disabilities. Households with children account for 19.4 percent of households in need, a share that is about the same as the percentage of all households in Seattle that have children.

The type of housing assistance needed varies by household type:

Single persons:

The largest subgroup of households in need-- about 31 percent -- are single persons below the age of 62 with no disabilities. These individuals could be housed in studio or one-bedroom housing units.

Single persons with disabilities comprise approximately 7 percent of households in need. Some members of this group are mobility impaired, and require physically accessible housing; others have limitations on the amount or type of work they can do, or need assistance with personal care. Housing needs vary by type of disability.

Single-persons over 62 years of age comprise nearly 20 percent of households in need, with more than three-quarters of these being female. However, 34 percent of these elderly households (6.6 percent of the total) are "house-rich and cash-poor." This means they are living in owner-occupied homes, but have very limited incomes in relation to the cost of mortgage payments, property taxes, insurance and maintenance. These homeowners could benefit from legal accessory units, the existing senior property tax deferral, or reverse annuity mortgages.

Couples With Children:

Two-parent families with children represent nearly 9 percent of households in need. These households need units with at least two bedrooms, and may need as many as five, depending on age and sex of the children. These families also need access to secure outdoor play space.

Single Parents With Children:

Over 10 percent of households in need are single-parent households, and most of these are headed by a female. These households require units with between two and five bedrooms, and may have a stronger need for proximity to day care, in addition to the need for secure outdoor play space.

Couples Without Children:

Married and unmarried couples who do not have children make up over 11 percent of households in need. This group includes elderly couples. One bedroom units would accommodate these households.

Adult Group Households:

Accounting for 11.5 percent of households in need, these households are composed of groups of two or more adults, none of whom are partners. Each household member typically requires his or her own bedroom.

Housing Figure A-1329 below provides a summary of the type of units needed by household type. These figures do not necessarily represent new housing units that the City needs to build. Households in need can be served through existing housing that is acquired and rehabilitated by non-profit organizations or public development authorities, or through certificates or vouchers that can be used to pay for housing available in the private market.

Housing Figure A-2913

*A support package could include repairs, weatherization or other rehabilitation assistance which allows a homeowner to remain in his or her home. In some cases, installation of an accessory unit would be appropriate.

Source: 1990 U.S. Census of Housing and Population, Public Use Micro-Sample (PUMS)

Another indicator of the type of households most in need of assistance is the Seattle Housing Authority waiting list for subsidized housing (see Housing Figure A-30). This data can be misleading because some households, such as single non-elderly households with no disabilities, are ineligible for public housing. In 1993, a total of 12,627 households were on the waiting list. Of these, over half (6,769) were small family households needing two and three bedroom units. The large number of families on the waiting list reflects past success in developing small units for the elderly and disabled, and the fact that most of the Seattle Housing Levy funds allocated to build small family units are among the last to be spent, meaning that many new units for small family units will be built over the next two years.

Future housing needs will reflect the amount of residential growth the City will accommodate over the next twenty years and expected demographic changes.

Income forecasts developed by the Planning Department SPO predict show that, under existing trends, about a quarter of the additional 50,000 to 60,000 households the City expects has targeted to add in the next 20 years will be low-income households unable to afford the cost of the new market-rate housing built to accommodate growth (see Housing Figure A-1431). Some of these new households may be able to afford older existing housing units available in Seattle. However, Seattle's existing low-cost housing is already occupied by our current low-income households. These households are also unable to afford the cost of the new market-rate housing.

The demographic forecast prepared for this plan predicts a continuation of trends that have been evident over the past twenty years. The average household size is expected to continue to decline but at a slower rate than in the past. Household sizes are expected to drop from 2.09 in 1990 to 1.93 in 2010. The mix of household types is expected to continue to change, with families with children declining as a percentage of all households, and single-person households and non-family households with two or more people increasing their proportion (see Housing Figure A-21). Single-person households are predicted to account for 46 percent of the net added households over the next twenty years, while another 21 percent will be non-family households with two or more persons. National forecasts are predicting big increases in the numbers of elderly single people and single adults over the age of 45. Only 12 percent of the new households are expected to include children.

Changing housing needs related to age are revealed by the population forecast by age (see Housing Figure A-1532). Significant numbers of people will be moving into the 45 to 64 age cohort over the twenty years, possibly indicating an increase in demand for smaller housing units and for different types of housing. Another important expected change is the increase in the number of elderly people over 85 years old. The number of people 85 years or older will increase by 80 percent over the next twenty years, reflecting increasing life expectancy. More frail elderly people will mean an increase in demand for assisted living or congregate-care facilities, and housing support services that allow the elderly to live independently.

The small percentage of future Seattle households that are expected to have children, and the growing numbers of "empty-nesters", other couples without children and single-person households, have significant implications for City land use policy over the next twenty years. Given consumer preferences for ground-related housing, demand for small-lot single-family houses, townhouses, small cottages, and condominium units in small buildings is expected to increase. In addition, a growing number of households will likely be interested in converting a portion of their homes into an accessory housing unit.

Housing Figure A-1431

Source: City of Seattle Planning Department 1992

Housing Figure A-1532

Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, 1990; Puget Sound Regional Council; Seattle Planning Department.