Matt will be presenting at a ADU conference put on by Portland State’s Urban Sustainability Accelerator.

Public Support Strategies: NIMBYs, YIMBYs and Decision-Makers

A recent column in the New York Times described research showing that opposition to infill and redevelopment in single family neighborhoods was bi-partisan and pervasive and was playing an important role in limiting housing supply in expensive housing markets. That opposition can often be decisive for decision makers as they consider changes to land use regulations or reviewing permits. Yet progress on this front has been made using different public support strategies, including responsible journalism and the formation and effective advocacy by Yes In My Backyard organizations. This session will hear from advocates with YIMBY groups Portland for Everyone and MOAR Seattle (More Options for Accessory Residences) and the roles these groups have played in pushing for reforms to single-family zoning. Teams will share what they have observed as the most effective responses to neighborhood opposition to ADUs and other forms of infill and redevelopment.

Small scale courtyard apartments like these would be allowed in urban centers and villages

I'll be giving a couple of seminars on the potential and pitfalls of the Residential Small Lot Zone, a feature of the MHA ordinance, set to replace single family zoning in urban villages.  It make be a new zone, but it harkens back to very traditional housing forms of gentle, low rise 'missing middle' housing that was downzoned out of existence over the last couple generations.  

1) August 8th @ 6-8pm at 12th Avenue Arts. Sponsored by the Capitol Hill Renter Initiative

2) October 2nd from 6-8 at South Park Hall. Register Here:

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/envisioning-south-parks-new-residential-small-lot-zoning-rsl-tickets-48677525790

We are very excited to be involved in a fantastic affordable housing project in collaboration with the Methow Housing Trust.  We are going to to be rolling out two and three bedroom houses along Canyon Street in Twisp, perfect for workforce housing or elderly residents--two demographics that are often the first to lose out when demand for housing is running up prices.  

RSL Walk ups and cottage developments create a neighborhood within a neighborhood. 

Seattle is facing a housing shortage, a climate crisis, and an increasingly inequitable city. Allowing more dwelling options, at various sizes and price points, is a great strategy to combat all three. Enter the Residential Small Lot Zone, Seattle’s attempt to add less expensive dwellings in dense, amenity rich urban centers without disrupting the historical fabric of single family detached houses. 

As part of Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA), Seattle is rezoning many of the Urban Village parcels currently zoned ‘Single Family’ to ‘Residential Small Lot‘ (RSL). RSL exists under the code right now, but is applied to only 7 acres of zoned land in Seattle and has narrowly defined housing types and restrictions that have kept it from wider acceptance. Under MHA, RSL will be expanded to 768 acres and include about 6200 Single Family Lots. The proposed code has been rewritten from the ground up, so let’s dig in and see what it is likely to produce for Seattle’s neighborhoods. 

Function

Reading the definition of RSL, it is hard not to feel sorry for this hard working zone.

It has to be a little of everything to everyone. It is uncommon for a zone description to get into issues of affordability, children, and the desires of its residents. We don't expect the description of General Industrial 2 (IG2) to make judgments about dockworkers’ life choices. Or Downtown Office Core-1 (DOC-1) to wonder about whether people in Downtown Office Core 2 (DOC-2 ) feel development there is appropriate.

Nevertheless, it exposes a question. What is the mission of RSL? Is it a transition between Residential zones? Is it meant to capitalize on the proximity to urban centers by putting residents close to amenities, jobs and transit? Is it fighting displacement, or fostering density? What need does it serve, and what is the positive vision of that zone? Right now, it is formulated with a little of everything, including some new stuff, and takes elements from single family, multi family, bridges residential and building code with a dash of high minded mission to address family housing and affordability.  It is a little like this: 

RSL.  Not elegant, but adapted to its environment.

The Nitty Gritty: What does it look like on paper? 

What does RSL look like? 

Before RSL zone, this Single family zoned street has 28 dwellings. 

And again, after a generation of development doubles the number of dwellings:

57 dwellings on the street, double the current density, but not much change at street level. 

Prototypes for RSL Zoning

We've taken the liberty to suggest some prototypes, based on traditional 'missing middle' multifamily, optimized for this zoning.  

Bungalow Court (or the Walk Up Model) 

For lots greater than 11,699 sq.ft, this bungalow court has (6) 3BR 1466 sq.ft. primary units, and (6) 733 sq.ft. 1 or 2BR ADUs.  This walk up is really a module that can be arranged into twos, threes, any grouping based on density limitations. 

Double Up Duplex

Our idea is for a stacked duplex, 1500 sq.ft. configured for an ADU, optimized for the allowable FAR on a minimum 4000 sq.ft. lot. We'd target Passivhaus green building standard, integrate green roof, pv, and rainwater catchment.  

Alternative configurations for ADUs, or future co-housing options. 

Recommendations for code tweaks!

Here are fourteen ways we can improve the Seattle’s MHA’s totally rewritten Residential Small Lot zone, BEFORE it goes into effect:

1.Exempt RSL from MHA fees. New dwellings created in the RSL zone will be subject to MHA, but will anyone built a rent restricted house? No. Therefore, fees due at permit issuance could be as high as $45,650. It will have a dampening effect on any homeowner looking to build a second house on the back of their lot. Many of those homeowners will build an ADU instead (not subject to MHA fee), eliminating the upside of more smaller homes in the marketplace. 

2. Allow ADUs to function as MHA performance! MHA performance is 50% for lots under 5699 sq. ft.. Meanwhile ADUs are by definition limited to a smaller size, and making them affordable would be closer in spirit to the original intent of the ordinance.

3. Eliminate new Maximum Net Unit Area limit. Maximum Net Unit Area is a new, unique limitation that only applies to this zone, and nowhere else. It is Floor Area per Unit, and it is often in conflict with the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for the parcel. There are no MNUA exceptions for existing houses or additions, meaning many of Seattle’s classic bungalows in RSL zones will suddenly become non-conforming, unable to do a ‘bump out’ or even a SECOND story addition. Because basements count toward MNUA, but not FAR, expect a lot of new buildings with basements apartments. 

A basic RSL block reveals surprising inflexibility unless you want to add a second dwelling

The owners could only do a 230 sq. ft. addition. Not a second story. They could however build a new dwelling behind it up to 2200 sq. ft.

4. Start FAR at 1, give .25 bonus for more dwellings. The FAR is .75, lower than any Low Rise zone, and effectively lower than Single Family zoning (only governed by height and lot coverage). If RSL is meant as a transition between multifamily and single family, it is more restrictive that both.

5. Lower the density ratio to 1 to 1500. Fourteen percent of the newly minted RSL lots will not even support a second dwelling. Why go through this process then wipe the development capacity of 900 lots off the table? Rounding up for density at 1.85 * 2000SF means any lot under 3699SF is still a single family lot, but MNUA effectively limits all dwellings to an FAR as low as of .59.

6. Allow more than one Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU). All these lots are in urban centers, where we are planning to put almost all our growing population. Many lots or owners aren’t going to want to built a full second dwelling. Meanwhile, SFZ will soon allow two ADUs per primary residence. This flexibility will preserve many existing houses, and provide homes for new residents right in the urban villages.

7. Exclude ADUs from MNUA. An accessory dwelling unit counts against the MNUA, meaning many average houses wouldn’t be able to build a cottage without sacrificing square footage in the primary house.

8. Resist the urge to Design Standard. The two Design Standards for RSL are ridiculous. Different color walkways to the house in back? Why? We don’t expect such ham fisted wayfinding in multifamily zones where there’s likely more front doors. One of the great strengths of the proposed code is that it did away with the many of the restrictive types, like ‘tandem housing.’ Let’s not dilute it with well meaning micro management, only to find out that we’ve created a less than graceful solution (remember the platypus!).

9. Allow exceptions from MHA when preserving existing houses. Subdividing existing houses into multiple units will be penalized by the Design Standards, and be subject MHA fee, at the full price for the area of units. The MHA fee calculation is gloss floor area/total units X net increase of units. A 3000 sq ft house, converted into a triplex from single family, would pay MHA on 2000 sq ft as if new, or up to $41,000. That neither incentivizes preservation or the creation of more affordable housing. 

This is a triplex.  Converting it under the MHA regime would cost tens of thousands of dollars in MHA fees in addition to the requirements of retrofitting.

10.Take out limit on number of apartments. The stigma of apartment living results in one of the most efficient (and revered) forms being outlawed. The code is clear: RSL outright outlaws more than three apartments regardless of lot size. No cute Capitol Hill fourplexes.

This fourplex is not allowed under the new RSL zone. 

11. Eliminate owner occupancy requirements. We don’t require owners to live on site in other multifamily zones, owner occupancy requirements will severely limit the number of accessory dwelling units and they reinforce a fundamentally class based stigma against renters.

12. Change all residential zones to ‘Residential’. We now have three titles for zones where residences are the only use; Single Family, Lowrise, Residential Small Lot. While RSL is being treated as a unique bridge between SFZ and LRZ, it should be part of a continuum of dwelling per square foot. Streamline!

13. Amend Seattle Residential Code to cover up to four apartments. Building codes switch to the more demanding SBC for anything more dense than a duplex and ADUs are considered as such. When buildings should be getting more efficient, like stacking a third apartment on top of a double decker, there is a quantum leap in construction cost, driven by code compliance.

14. Allow Live Work and Corner stores. In midrise zones, having residential suites at the street level seems forced. Two blocks from the center of an urban village, having an office space legible from the street makes total sense. Allowing corner stores would expand the walkshed so more people will walk to pick something up, rather than drive to a supermarket.

Neighborhood institutions start with entrepreneurial neighbors. Give them a place.

Regulation isn’t the only issue keeping ADUs from widespread adoption.

This past weekend, I attended the Build Small Live Large 2017 conference, a national meetup for policy makers, builders, architects and advocates involved in Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). People came to share ideas, learn from industry leaders, and see how to jump start more accessory dwelling units in their own neighborhoods. I’d like to distill a couple of themes I heard over and over.

Reducing regulation works.

Portland has incrementally reduced regulatory barriers to ADUs, allowing them without owner occupancy since 1997, yet only a handful were built every year. It wasn’t until they waived impact fees (up to $15000) and relaxed size and design limitations that production took off. (1)

In California, a new state law mandated local jurisdictions allow ADUs. Under the new rules, San Francisco’s building permits jumped from one or two a month to twenty five or more the first month. In Los Angeles, permits have jumped tenfold. They now are projecting nearly 2000 next year (vs. 142 in 2016). (2)

But reducing regulation isn’t enough.

Many jurisdictions allow ADUs but they haven’t taken off. After eight years of legal use, Seattle is just starting to see a slow uptick. Perhaps because their location makes them less visible, many people don’t know what they are, where they are, and if they’re allowed.

Part of the Portland success story has been education. For years, advocates like Kol Peterson have been hosting public tours. When a thousand people sign up and you have to turn people away, you know your community has reached a critical mass where everyone knows someone who has one or has lived in one.

Nearly all ADUs are created by homeowners, and nearly all of them are amateur developers, in that they have never build anything before. In other communities, they need resources to understand the process, cost, etc. Cities can step in here and give a giant hand by creating ADU specific webpages, checklists for permits, tips. Stock plans and prefab may be options (although in my experience are of limited use once unless the site, access and owner needs are a good fit).

ADUs are expensive, but less expensive than anything else.

While Accessory Dwellings are the most cost effective way to add households to existing neighborhoods, that doesn’t make them automatically affordable. They are only less expensive in comparison to other housing options, mostly because they are either smaller than other options, or are carved out of existing housing. Unless we support steps to make their construction less expensive, or their financing less risky, we’ll continue to see only a few built.

Making construction and permitting less expensive is another article, but I want to focus on just one statistic by Jake Wegmann, Assistant Professor in the Community and Regional Planning program at the University of Texas at Austin. In a study of 414 ADUs in Portland, Seattle and Vancouver, about 85% of homeowners used equity, cash or other personal resources to finance construction, whereas less than 5% were able to borrow against future value (or rental income, unlike any other rental property type). Today’s new ADU is almost exclusively the providence of those with significant resources at hand. Limited financing options and high construction cost are still insurmountable barriers for those who otherwise would like to build an ADU.

Towards a system that supports ADUs

It isn’t enough to tweak the code and assume it will be followed by a groundswell of new ADUs. And that’s a big problem for those like me, who’d like to see ADUs have a widespread impact on our housing shortage and affordability crisis. It is going to require more pro-housing policy, public education, new resources for financing, and breaks on construction cost and permitting working together to cultivate an environment where ADUs are viable option for our housing reality.

1. Jake Wegmann, data from presentation slide, 11/3/17
2. ADU permits in LA, http://www.buildinganadu.com/adu-blog/building-an-adu-in-la-part-ii . An the conference, another speaker provided the more current projection of 2000.
3. Jake Wegmann, data from presentation slide, 11/3/17

By More Options for Accessory Residences (MOAR), a group of citizens concerned with the future of the city, housing availability and affordability. We have diverse backgrounds, experiences and housing situations, but we’re all Seattleites who want our city to allow more options for accessory residences. For us, our neighbors, and future generations.

For the last decade, backyard cottages — also known as Detached Accessory Dwelling Units, or DADUs — have been popping up all over Seattle’s neighborhoods. Based on their success, making backyard cottages and mother in law apartments easier to permit and build was one of the important recommendations of the City’s 2015 Housing Affordability and Livability Agenda (HALA) Final Report (labled SF1 in the report).

After Councilmember O’Brien introduced land use code revisions to open the door for more of this important housing type, a small, wealthy group of Queen Anne homeowners successfully derailed the ordinance. Now the City of Seattle is now starting over and plans to study in depth the impact of accessory dwellings.

Because of their size and location, backyard cottages are an almost invisible form of increasing neighborhood density. They have many other benefits:

• They begin to undo past exclusionary land-use wrongs by opening up our city’s parks, schools and other amenities to people that could never afford to rent or buy a multi-bedroom single family detached home in the same neighborhood
• Many older Seattleites who want to age in place see backyard cottages as a solution. Backyard cottages help people finance their retirements, or facilitate multi-generational living arrangements, or downsize while maintaining neighborhood connections.
• They are a perfect size for our smaller households (2.1 people according to the latest demographics) and are relatively more affordable
• An investment in DADUs is a powerful disincentive to future tear downs and the greater environmental, visual and noise impact of out of scale McMansions.

Given the scarcity of housing and astonishing escalation of rents and home prices, the very minimum is to allow more accessory dwelling units into Single Family zoning. This is a perfect opportunity to look beyond the backyard cottage at what more we could do to solve our housing shortage.

1. Change zone name from ‘Single Family’ to ‘Residential.’ Our current ‘Single Family’ has a long history of duplexes, triplexes, corner stores and apartments, prior to downzoning, and renaming the zone removes a mental roadblock about what residential areas are for: people.
2. Waive building permit fees for 5 years for AADUs and DADUs. Portland uses this incentive to permit nearly one per day, 6 times the rate of Seattle’s accessory dwelling unit production.
3. Use Green Building incentives similar to other permit types: Allow 10% increase in size and height for projects on lots over 4000 SF. Allow 20% increase for lots over 5000 SF.
4. Housing Opportunity Overlay. Create a ring overlay within 10 minute walkshed of schools, parks, urban villages, arterials and frequent transit, where additional housing is desired. Allow Residential Small Lot zoning without MHA in Overlay. Make parking requirements for additional units voluntary
5. Upgrading non-conforming housing types and uses, such as duplexes, established before 1995. There are 4300 grandfathered duplexes and triplexes within SF zones and they are subject to different rules such as continuing use and limitations on expansion/upgrades. They should have the same flexibility under the code that applies to their neighbors in SF zones.
6. Buffering detached houses from higher zones: If adjacent zoning is not SF 5000 zoning, allow flexible increase in height, or setbacks to help with transition to other zones (LR, NC)
7. Make accessory dwelling units easier to built. Allow exceptions for handrails and parapets over height limit. Decks over 18” and covered areas should not count toward accessory use square footage, but should have stand alone total. Allow separate metering of utilities. When expanding a garage/existing non-conforming use, allow vertical expansion in line with existing structure, rather than to setbacks. Allow extra height for flat roofs when used as a green roof.
8. Study using Floor Area Ratio to restrict size of development and incentivize additional housing units. Currently we are seeing many new single dwellings that dwarf the house that was torn down. On a 5000 SF lot, with lot coverage at 35%, and a height limit of 30’, we currently allow a house to be 5250 SF. Using a .5 FAR for single dwelling unit properties, allowing .7 for two dwelling units and .8 for three dwellings per lot, the same property would allow 2500 SF, 3500 SF or 4000 SF. Restricting maximum FAR will make teardowns/McMansions less viable, put a break on gentrification, and insure that many more housing units and options are built. FAR limitations will create many lots with dwellings with mix of sizes and prices.
9. Double Ownership. Allow split ownership of lots with existing house and new cottage, like a fee simple subdivision, provided the cottage was legally established. Create template for condominium-like agreements to share lot ownership between existing house and new cottage. Seattle has no starter homes and this would create new opportunity for ownership. If we agree ownership is an aspiration, creating more affordable options such as this would be desirable.
10. Allow homeowners to qualify for small loans from Office of Housing from pool of MHA payments when creating additional dwellings. One of the key criticisms of MHA is whether affordable housing created will be well distributed, and by making the available loans applicable at residential scale, on a parcel by parcel basis, there will be new affordable housing integrated into every neighborhood. The other difficulty most people face when creating a DADU is securing financing, and having an additional source would help many owners create their own.

A Call to Action:

Here are 5 ways to participate in the vital discussion around backyard cottages and the future of Seattle's neighborhoods. 

1. Sign this petition: 

More cottages!

2.Email the City:

 ADUEIS@seattle.gov

3. Email PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE MEMBERS: 

mike.obrien@seattle.gov, lisa.herbold@seattle.gov, rob.johnson@seattle.gov lorena.gonzalez@seattle.gov

4. Attend a meeting: 

 EIS Public Scoping Meetings/Open House, October 26, 2017, 6:00–7:30 p.m. Location: Hale’s Ales (in the Palladium), 4301 Leary Way NW, Seattle, WA 98107

5. Join the conversation on Facebook: 

Backyard Cottages

Congratulations to the whole Team and a huge thanks to Historic Seattle for the the recognition of the Robert Reichert House and Studio with the 2017 Outstanding Modern Preservation award last night!

Project team:

Clients : Reichert Studio
Heidi and Darin

Contractor: Dboone Construction
Dave Boone Project manager, Luke Marcum Site super

Architect : CAST architecture
Stefan Hampden, principal  & Brian Campbell, associate.

Structural Engineer: TSE Engineering
Keith Ryan PE

Envelope Engineer: RDH building Science inc
Dan Rundle

Historic Seattle - 2017 Outstanding Modern Preservation Award

Abridged project team at the awards left to right : Luke, Dave, Stefan, Darin, Heidi and Jeffrey 

Historic Seattle Dinner and awards ceremony at Washington Hall.

New stucco facade of the Reichert House & Studio complete with shadow paintings

Interior stairs with view of "door to heaven"

Retooled entry of completed project

We're almost done with a believe it or not historical renovation of a mid-century architect's own house--more to come! 

There is a certain ethereal, minimal quality to a room without walls, without columns, without visible support. 

At Rainier Beach, our classroom building has a 24' x 24' covered outdoor space, with a translucent roof components, cantilevering off the building. Last week, they put up the trusses and now the skeleton of the space is taking shape, and I'm pretty excited.  The Big Cantilever can be absolutely magic on a visceral level, where the structure's logic defies gravity.  

Now can you be begin to perceive the core of the design: heavy elements buttressed into a hillside, between two groves of trees, with a translucent wedge floating over a simple gathering space, out of the rain, with the farmland stretching out, uninterrupted.  

We are hiring again, this time for a Project Architect position.  If you want to join our team, here is the job description: 

The candidate will work under the direct leadership of a principal/project manager and will assist with all aspects of the design and production of residential, commercial and public architectural works. The candidate will be tasked with collaborative design with a principal through Schematic Design, then be responsible for Design Development, Construction Documents, Permitting and Construction Administration. Additional duties may include some production of marketing materials as needed.

Qualifications:
•    First and foremost you are an exceptional designer who excels working in a collaborative and creative environment
•    A ‘can do’ work attitude on all tasks from the mundane to the extraordinary
•    Solid verbal, written, and graphic communication skills in order to evenly manage day to day affairs with clients and contractors
•    A well rounded understanding of the technical aspects of materials use, construction techniques and details, especially light wood framing and building envelopes.  
•    Able to reliably estimate design time required for a project, and meet promised schedules. 
•    A firm grasp of Seattle’s Land use and building codes, as well as permitting requirements. 
•    Ability to complete a single family residential construction document set with minimal oversight. 
•    Ability to successfully navigate Seattle’s DCI with minimal oversight. 
•    A Bachelors or Master’s degree in architecture from an accredited university is required.  
•    Architectural license preferred but not required. 
•    Experience with BuiltGreen, LEED or Passive House would be beneficial.
•    5+ years of experience.

Technical skills:
•    Highly proficient with architectural drafting software, preferably ArchiCAD  (Note – we do not use AutoCAD).  We will train if you don’t have ArchiCAD experience but are ready to learn. 
•    Highly proficient with Sketchup
•    Highly proficient with Adobe creative suite, with an emphasis on Photoshop and InDesign
•    Familiar with Microsoft Office suite, emphasis on Word and Excel

CAST architecture is a small full service architectural firm specializing in residential design and small scale public and commercial works. Our office is friendly and low-key. We enjoy working collaboratively, have a tradition of Friday afternoon design crits, and actively foster a team approach in all of our endeavors. We pride ourselves in promoting a healthy work/life balance and passions and interests outside the office. 

Submit a cover letter, resume and samples of design work digitally to employment@CASTarchitecture.com. We will review and respond to everyone by October 30th at the latest. 

No phone calls or hand-delivered applications please.