Seattle City Council’s land use committee could approve a new pilot program Wednesday afternoon linking community organizations with developers to create affordable “equitable development” in neighborhoods across the city.
The proposed “Connected Communities” legislation “aims to increase the supply of affordable housing, promote economic and racial equity, support community-led development, reduce displacement pressure on low-income residents, and revitalize neighborhoods,” a briefing from the council reads:
The proposal seeks to encourage partnerships between community-based organizations with limited development experience and more experienced non-profit and for-profit developers. Participating developments can take advantage of density bonuses and other regulatory incentives.
CHS reported last month on the Connected Communities proposal from land use chair Tammy Morales that would create a pilot program that would run through 2029 or create 35 housing developments — whichever comes first — by pairing “community-based organizations with limited development experience” with nonprofit and for-profit developers “for development of low- and moderate-income housing with neighborhood serving equitable development uses,” according to a council memo (PDF) on the plan.
Morales’s office says the program would also help solve some of the issues of funded equitable and affordable development getting bogged down by a regulatory environment “that can hinder, delay, complicate, and add cost to these projects.”
It could also extend multifamily housing development into more diverse swaths of the city. The pilot would be active in zones that allow residential uses throughout the city excluding downtown “with additional development capacity available in Office of Housing Community Preference area census tracts and areas with historical racially restrictive covenants.”
An example project that could benefit from the changes, the backers say, is the William Grose Center for Cultural Innovation and Enterprise, Africatown’s center for “economic empowerment and community-driven development” that transformed the former Fire Station 6 at 23rd and Yesler.
Proponents says the city’s existing code limits the allowed uses and development, adds costs due to fees and requirements, creates delays, and requires special expertise for the community organizations behind the projects.
Critics say the plan would only add to the city’s already burdensome development regulations and question the capacity of nonprofits to participate in the development.
In the early February session on the proposal, councilmembers asked for simpler explanations of the plan’s potential impacts on housing creation while discussing the potential for partnerships with organizations not typically involved in development, according to SCC Summary’s account of the meeting.
“We must be careful not to stifle development with overly burdensome regulation,” Councilmember Rob Saka said.
Wednesday’s session could include discussion of amendments to address more specific issues in the plan than Saka’s general concern including setting the stage for stronger partnerships.
“This program has potential if we structure partnerships equitably from the start,” Ketil Freeman of Council Central Staff said at the committee’s most recent session on the bill.
A presentation (PFD) prepared for Wednesday’s session and possible vote includes more details about the affordability requirements of the proposed program and the types of housing the pilot could enable including privately owned townhomes.
If the bill moves forward, it will represent one of the first significant pieces of legislation to be taken up by the full council under president Sara Nelson as the body has mostly focused on informational briefings during the first three months of 2024.
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.
The William Grose Center is considered a model for this? On opening day Wyking Garrett described it as a place that would teach biotech so that black people could get the higher paying jobs in that field. When asked how he envisioned it he said it would be like a hangout where people would come in and there’d be a band playing and people would be shooting the shit.
Soon after it opened it became a center for media. And now they’re giving classes on rudimentary computer programming and fashion design. None of their programming has been any different than what is taught at community colleges already.
So far we’ve seen no transparency or accountability. The Japanese community had wanted the Keiro building but was refused a loan from the city. Then the city gave the building to Africatown. Why is one organization getting so much property with so little accountability while the Asian community who makes up a larger percentage of the population is refused the land despite a greater history of it?
To ask the question is to answer it.
A working class gentrification project. Have fun!