CITY
OF
SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL
Shoreline
Fire Department Headquarters
PRESENT: Mayor Ransom, Deputy Mayor Fimia, Councilmembers Gustafson,
McGlashan, and Way
STAFF:
PANEL
MEMBERS: Andrew Brand, Housing Developer, Lutheran
Alliance to Create Housing (LATCH) Robin Amadon,
Senior Housing Developer, Low Income Housing Institute (LIHI) Deborah Gooden,
King County Housing Authority, General Manager of Greenbridge
Redevelopment Project Allan Johnson, Affordable Housing Planner, King County Arthur
Sullivan, Director, A Regional Coalition for Housing (ARCH)
Jan
Dickerman, Director of Housing and Child Development,
Hopelink
1. WELCOME AND PURPOSE
At
2. WORKSHOP FORMAT AND INTRODUCTION OF
PANEL
Mr.
Beem elaborated on the purpose of the meeting and urged attendees to share
their recommendations on how the City can maximize its efforts in low-income
housing.
Participants
then introduced themselves, providing their backgrounds and experience in the
area of affordable/low-income housing.
3. REVIEW OF CURRENT HOUSING SITUATION FOR PEOPLE WITH LIMITED
INCOMES
Mr.
Smith reviewed the current housing situation in Shoreline as provided on the
blue handout. He noted that one in five
Shoreline residents live at or below the 50% of median income level (the
4. DISCUSSION WITH PANEL AND ATTENDEES OF THREE KEY ISSUES
Mr. Beem then led a group
discussion focusing on the following questions:
a) Is Shoreline’s situation mostly the same or different from the
housing situation of other smaller cities in an urbanized county? If you have attempted a project in Shoreline,
were you successful? What, if any,
obstacles did you encounter and could the city have done anything differently
to assist?
b) We have developed a list of strategies – based on your experience,
which ones are most likely to produce the most units of housing? Have we missed any options?
c) What’s needed to implement these strategies in Shoreline?
Panelists and participants
shared the following points:
1) According to census figures,
household size continues to decrease, as do the number of school enrollments (G.
Smith).
2) Higher enrollment levels at
private schools may partially account for the decrease in public school
enrollments. Some figures suggest that 25%
of school-age children in Shoreline attend private schools (Ransom).
3) There are a number of
federal housing options available, such as HUD Section 202 for senior housing. Housing built by non-profit developers can
free-up existing housing stock for others.
Shoreline could consider the option of accessory dwelling units(ADUs) (Amadon).
4) The City of
5) Shoreline is a community
that is fairly well developed; therefore, Shoreline’s GMA growth targets are
relatively small compared to existing housing stock and other
jurisdictions. However, owner occupancy
is relatively high. Shoreline has a high
percentage of single family housing (74%), versus 57% for
6) As median home prices
increase, housing choices for the less-than 30% of median income residents decrease
(Dickerson).
7) Shoreline is similar to
8) All communities need more
information on housing condition and land availability for new development. It is important to really know the dynamics of
your housing market. Jurisdictions need
interest, political will, knowledge of zoning, and a strong focus on strategy
and planning. Shoreline should commit to
a 5-year action plan that communicates its priorities. This should not be outlined in its
Comprehensive Plan, but it should be detailed elsewhere (Gooden).
9) Shoreline housing is
relatively affordable, but there is a possibility of market-rate inflation
problems in the future. As the value of
single-family housing increases, the private market will shift these units from
the relatively lower-cost rentals to higher-cost owner-occupied. Shoreline must take a close look at its
rental housing stock. Shoreline has a
disproportionate amount of single-family zoning. Shoreline could consider higher-density
development in the Aurora Corridor.
Cottage housing is controversial because it is difficult to predict
where it can be built (Brand).
10) Shoreline is somewhat
different in its mix of housing types and ownership profiles. The stated goal is housing strategies that
meet the need of households with less-than 50% of median income (Beem).
11) Meeting housing needs can
benefit the community by ensuring youth have a stable housing situation;
academic achievement is compromised when students have to move frequently. It is less expensive to build multi-family
housing on the east side of Shoreline.
Demographic data suggests more emphasis should be placed on the needs of
the elderly (Ransom).
12) Can Section 8 and voucher
programs benefit both landlord and tenant in terms of market value and
affordability? (McGlashan)
13) Section 8 and voucher programs are constantly
changing and under attack. Landlords
generally cannot get highest market value.
Landlords get a stable, predictable, flow of rents. Landlord philanthropy can make a difference
(Gooden).
14) Section 8 programs benefit
landlords in term of consistency of payments.
The City might explore ways to administer such programs on a local level
(Amadon).
Mr. Beem posed the question of how some specific
targets can be established and met.
15) GMA targets can be achieved
through multi-family density (Johnson).
16) Low-income earners are
surviving in a very unstable situation and pay a large portion of their income
for housing. This results in high rates
of turnover and neighborhood instability.
Preserving existing rental stock will create stability and decrease the
likelihood of rent increases due to redevelopment. Acquisition and rehabilitation have been used
effectively in
17) Preserving existing housing
stock essentially “takes a market-rate unit out of the game” and maintains that
unit at a relatively more affordable level (G. Smith).
18) Preserving existing housing
is a good strategy but it probably requires a change in ownership to maintain
an income-restricted situation (Amadon).
19) Shoreline should analyze all
the relevant information (zoning, ownership, demographics, etc.) while focusing
on the most critical needs, and then air the options politically. Create a constituency around affordable
development. It is important to engage
your community and then start your first development within the community’s “comfort
zone.” Some areas of
Mr. Beem asked for feedback
on effective strategies.
20) Shoreline should explore
partnerships between families who have been previously homeless and developers
to create a tiered system that addresses their particular needs (Dickerson).
21) Density bonuses can be a
volatile concept in suburban areas. The
City should consider gifting permit fees to provide incentives to
developers. The City could also
income-restrict a certain number of units in a market-rate development (Amadon).
22) Expedited permit processing
and other incentives can make a big difference.
If this is an issue, the City should explore new approaches to
permitting (Gooden).
23) There are ways to make
density bonuses work, such as linking the bonus to the size/scale of the house,
parking considerations, etc. Density
bonuses offered as a package are proven to more effective (Johnson).
24) There are a number of
incentives available, but affordable housing incentives are generally the last
alternative that private developers choose (Sullivan).
25) What is the right
combination of the things we want, and how do we proceed without degrading
quality? There are distinctions between
the east side and west side of Shoreline (Way).
26) A key question is how to
provide housing that is compatible with community values (Beem).
27)
28) There are places in
Shoreline, such as
29) Compatibility is not just a
design issue. The community’s “buy-in”
should be sought for an overall strategy on compatibility (Tovar).
30) Shoreline should have an
inventory of surplus sites and consider the potential to co-locate housing with
other uses, such as
31) The community should be polled
on who it thinks needs housing the most, as well as what the housing should
look like. There are ways to achieve
multi-family housing in single-family zones if there is community will. The City should try to understand the “why”
(Sullivan).
32) The City should start with a
needs-based analysis first, but the concept of neighborhood design review might
also be effective (Gooden).
33) The public wants
predictability, and a community conversation about target groups (seniors,
homeless, previously homeless) should lead that effort. The City should also consider its position in
the region (Cohen).
34)
35) There has been a stigma
surrounding affordable housing; the City should inform and educate the
community (Brand).
36) Noticing can be “the seed of
either a good process or a bad process.”
When neighbors are adequately notified of potential development, they
are more likely to support them (Way).
37) The City should consider
creative ways to co-locate housing. The
King County Library System is considering ways to incorporate housing in their
future designs (Dickerson).
38) Shoreline should look at
target groups and effective strategies, but it should not discount the density
bonus entirely. In order to ensure
healthy market cycles, housing should be viewed holistically. The City should explore ADUs
and the land-trust system, where the trust owns the land but the individual
owns the unit (Johnson).
39) Shoreline should consider
how the potential redevelopment of the Fircrest property might help address low-income
housing needs in the future (Fimia).
40)
5. WRAP UP AND SUMMARY
Mr.
Beem provided a summary of the dialogue and thanked panelists and attendees for
their participation. The meeting concluded
at
/S/