(Image: CHS)
By Soumya Gupta, CHS Intern
When the governor and the mayor show up to cut the ribbon in front of a new affordable apartment building in the heart of Capitol Hill, it’s a big deal.
This week, YWCA Seattle King Snohomish celebrated the opening of the new permanent affordable housing at 800 E Denny Way, where Governor Jay Inslee, Mayor Bruce Harrell, and officials cut the ribbon symbolizing the opening of the 91 new affordable homes for residents at risk of homelessness.
“The future entails an absolute right to housing in Washington State, and YWCA believes [in helping] that”, Governor Inslee said. “We need to thank the citizens for putting their trust in this investment.”
The new building is one of the latest examples of community organizations acquiring planned market-rate apartment projects across Capitol Hill for affordable housing.
CHS reported in November on the $38 million deal for YWCA to acquire the development previously being planned as market-rate microhousing.
YWCA acquired the building under the Rapid Acquisition Notice of Funding Ability program made possible by the federal American Rescue Plan, allowing Seattle and the Washington State Department of Commerce to leverage local, state, and federal funding.
The new Capitol Hill location is also close to other YWCA properties in the Central District and downtown area like Angeline’s Day Center.
It has a long history in the area. CHS reported on the 125th anniversary of the organization’s presence in the state and 100 years in the Central District.
The purchase of the Capitol Hill property was supported by the Washington State Department of Commerce, the City of Seattle and Brawner & Company. The YWCA received $20 million from the City of Seattle as well as $1.2 million for the first year to cover operating costs.
The Washington State Department of Commerce invested $20 million into the project as well.
“Through the funds provided, YWCA is here for community and folks seeking housing and resources, and to build relationships,” Patricia Hayden, YWCA’s chief program officer of King County said at Tuesday’s ceremony. “We want residents to see us as excellent support navigators.”
YWCA says that the construction of the new building represented equity, as well as the conscious decision to eliminate racism, and empower women.
The new building will house at-risk individuals and low-income families, along with the provision of other resources for their financial and physical health. Most units within the building are one bedroom apartments, and 35 of the total have been occupied as of this week.
YWCA works towards providing effective housing to low-income groups of people, which include building emergency shelters, and transitional housing. In addition, they provide resources for economic advancement, such as financial literacy and job hunting classes, along with support for health and safety.
The YWCA acquisition changes the path for the E Denny project originally envisioned as market-rate microhousing from developer Karmiak and the architects at Workshop AD. The seven-story building was also designed with a small street-level commercial space that could serve as home to a small cafe or shop and add to the activity around Twice Sold Tales and Community Roots Housing’s affordable Pantages House apartments.
CEO Maria Chavez-Wilcox said that YWCA will soon be operating more than 1,000 units across the Puget Sound region, which would be used to provide shelter to approximately 2,000 women and girls.
On Capitol Hill, the new building “will be open to people of all genders,” YWCA officials say.
YWCA said in their plan that half of the units in the new building will be for households earning 30% or less of area median income (AMI), and half for households earning 50% or less of AMI. 54 units will provide permanent supportive housing, which combines housing placements without time limits with wrap-around services.
With more funding and support, there can be more new buildings like 800 E Denny Way to help Seattle address its ongoing homelessness crisis.
“In the next year, we plan to continue building out a strong advocacy and policy apparatus in collaboration with the communities we serve,” Margaret Gritten, YWCA’s Director of Public Policy said.
HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE
Subscribe to CHS to help us hire writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. To stay that way, we need you.
Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for as little as $5 a month.
YES! Actual solutions. Love to see it.
Indeed, I saw this building sitting nearly finished for so long, it was incredibly frustrating and disheartening to see and I can only imagine what that must feel like for those whom desperately need housing
Could have sworn I saw Sound and Fog signage go up (https://www.capitolhillseattle.com/2022/03/sound-and-fog-to-add-coffee-and-cocktails-at-e-denny-and-harvard/), any idea if that’s still happening?
Would be a nice replacement to the now gone Starbucks in the neighboring building.
Agree!
What is the basis for the claim, “Capitol Hill residents at risk of homelessness”? I am supportive of a new building to keep lower income residents from Capitol Hill from being displaced from the neighborhood where they live and work. Unfortunately, I doubt this is an accurate claim. Instead, it seems like Capitol Hill takes on way more than our fair share of the regional and national homeless and drug crisis. I would like to see the data on where the residents were living prior and some honesty.
Try spending the time searching for your answer online first next time: https://www.realchangenews.org/news/2022/11/09/myth-busting-five-misconceptions-about-homelessness-we-need-retire
Hmmm. Yes, there is an article that claims this is one of the myths of homelessness. However, the accuracy of the PIT counts due to they way these are done is somewhat up for debate. In the past, those who were experiencing homelessness were hired to conduct the survey, along with volunteers. I love the idea of helping these folks with work is a great idea. But do you think that there could be a bit of a bias baked into this? I do. From my own interactions with folks sleeping in the doorway of my business, I’ve found them to be most often from another part of our State or Country. Granted, my numbers are small, but to immediately claim the results of the PIT surveys as truth, seems a little dangerous. Just my opinion of course.
The article also references a professor and his peer reviewed book that cites work outside of the PIT, but sure, I’ll take your biased anecdotal evidence instead…
Seattle serves all sorts of medical needs from around the state, what makes mental health and drug addiction any different? I agree we should be doing more across the country, state, and county. We also are not doing enough in Seattle.
People are really eager to place blame on individuals, and lay the responsibilities on everyone else but themselves, but the reality is that this is a societal issue that will only be solved with a whole of society solution in which people actually care about other humans.
If we take that article as fact, 48% of the people who are homeless in Seattle come from elsewhere; this would mean that Seattle is pulling people from the communities where they originally experienced homelessness and is disconnecting them from their communities.
So roughly 1 out of every 2 homeless people we are seeing are being drawn to Seattle; we are obviously going about this in the wrong manner.
Before you jump to the truth of that article and assume that there is no bias, etc… ask yourself about what conclusions can be drawn from the article.
I agree it’s a societal issue that should be solved by society. Yes, the whole of society. Not a fraction of society.
Yes, this is a national problem. Could we do more? Sure. Although I’d say that we should do more with the hundreds of millions of dollars we are already investing. I remember the promise that we’d fund programs, but the next time we’d fund the ones that were proving effective. Sounded dandy, but of course they kept funding them in spite of not meeting their goals. Articles describing the dozens of tiny homes that aren’t being used don’t inspire increasing that investment.
Yes, the medical community in Seattle serves all sorts of needs from around the state. These people come here, pay a lot of money (or their insurance does) and then they leave—hopefully healthier, And their money stays. The equity of the relationship is a wee bit different when those with drug addictions and mental health challenges arrive.
And I clearly said that my interactions with folks represent a small number. I never claimed that it was statistically relevant. Nice inserting my “biased” anecdotal evidence. Sure, I have biases. So do you. I was merely stating my experience. I talked to these folks. Felt bad for them. Let them sleep undisturbed on my property. When one broke my window while sleeping there, I paid to repair it and let him keep sleeping there.
I care about other humans. I really do. I don’t believe I’m “laying the responsibilities on everyone else but me.” I think I’m merely asking us all to share in this responsibility. The article you quoted stated that something like a little over 50% of the people identifying as homeless were from Seattle. With a large number coming from King County and beyond. I’m fine with taking on more than our share, but when people in those other areas talk about how bad Seattle is, I wish they’d acknowledge that some folks who used to be their neighbors, are now ours.
Seattle and the state of WA also spends a lot of taxpayer money propping up our public medical centers in order for them to serve that need for our region because we see it as a public health need. It says a lot about society that were okay with people coming here for services as long as it’s the services we approve of and they have the money to pay for it.
Should we apply your logic to refugees applying for entrance to the US? Seems like a zero sum game to me…
Not that Real Change news has a particular perspective on this issue, i.e., bias.
They cite a peer reviewed book Glenn, so I’ll take that over anecdotal evidence.
Is this better for y’all 🙄 https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/homeless/where-are-king-countys-homeless-residents-from/?amp=1
60-70% had last stable residence in King County, even higher if you include all of WA, most common reason for coming is job-related…
Southeast section of West Seattle feels you. There is a 140 unit affordable housing proposal sandwiched between two condos near Westwood Village.
Does this building have a name? I see no mention of it whatsoever on the YWCA Seattle website. Some info on how to apply would be good to include.
Hopefully it doesn’t go the way of Buri Building in Portland…
https://www.wweek.com/news/2023/06/07/a-28-million-low-income-apartment-complex-descends-into-chaos-in-just-two-and-a-half-years/
Care to share some knowledge/insight into how it doesn’t? Otherwise this is just some NIMBY boogyman scare tactics, and I’m not here for it…
Sure – those in charge of buildings like these should carefully study and understand what went awry at Buri and why, then make conscientious efforts to do just the opposite.
Willamette Week is a pretty progressive publication. I applaud them for reporting on Buri’s issues, and not shying away from accusations of “NIMBY boogyman scare tactics”.
Speaking of which, “boogyman” suggests Buri’s problems aren’t real, but imagined. If the YWCA adopts such a dismissive “boogyman” perspective, I’ll bet money the building they’re overseeing will end up just like Buri.
“NIMBY boogyman scare tactics”? Nope. Cautionary tale? Absolutely.
Sure – those in charge of buildings like these should carefully study and understand what went awry at Buri and why, then make conscientious efforts to do just the opposite.
Willamette Week is a pretty progressive publication. I applaud them for reporting on Buri’s issues, and not shying away from accusations of “NIMBY boogyman scare tactics”.
Speaking of which, “boogyman” suggests Buri’s problems aren’t real, but imagined. If the YWCA adopts such a dismissive “boogyman” perspective, I’ll bet money the building they’re overseeing will end up just like Buri.
“NIMBY boogyman scare tactics”? Nope. Cautionary tale? Absolutely.
Again, bringing up the failings of a building in another state with other developers and management teams, without offering any sort of actionable advice is just some NIMBYISM against low income housing and I’m not here for it, try again…
Thanks for that great insight 🙄 Also, this is definitely boogyman tactics, for every Buri there are countless other buildings that do just fine. If you really care, volunteer with groups that are trying to make this work rather than these NIMBY boogyman scare tactics and absolutely zero helpful insight other than “don’t do what this one building I heard about did…”
I *have* lived in a low-income building and later in a mixed-income neighborhood with SHA neighbors for 20+ years (Rainier Valley), actively community-building and outreaching in both. So no problem here with low-income housing IMBY or even sharing walls/ceilings with them, as long as they’re as civil and considerate to me as I am to them. What I disdain are intentional low-barrier policies that create unsafe, hazardous conditions for tenants like the Nguyens at Buri. I’ve seen/known neighbors out of control like at Buri and have appreciated when management clamps down, enforces high-barrier rules, and evicts when necessary. I trust the YWCA will do likewise.
Yet another ugly, cheap-looking box of a building. Doesn’t Seattle have any capable architects?
How about you and the other commenters on here that love to complain about the aesthetics of these buildings get together and build one for yourselves, you all can have your own little perfect building 😉
I’ve spent $1.6 million on making multifamily housing in central capitol hill that doesn’t look like crap on the outside… how ’bout you?
I care more about the people inside and the ones whom can’t find housing outside… I spend my time volunteering trying to help the neighborhood rather than worrying about the aesthetics of buildings 👍
… buildings are useless without vibrant, active, and engaged communities. Throw as much money as you want at aesthetics, but that won’t make a neighborhood!
Also, hyperbole much… This building does not look like crap, there are plenty of crappy buildings around the hill and most were build a few decades ago…
Looks great to me. Funny how not all people have the same opinion when it comes to aesthetics…