March 23, 2006

By ADAM HYLA
Editor

The land-use code changes that will usher in newer, bigger buildings in downtown Seattle are nearing a full vote in City Council, and the outcome is still uncertain.

The new rules will allow property owners to reap greater profits from premier office and residential properties. In exchange, Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels and the City Council want developers to pay into a city fund for affordable housing, open spaces, and child care for downtown workers.

The controversy arises in setting those fees: while Nickels initially proposed a $10 per square foot fee on new high-rises, Councilmember Peter Steinbrueck doubled that amount to $20. The mayor’s staff aver that $20 is too high.

Steinbrueck released a compromise plan on March 20 that cuts a small portion of the area to which the $20 tax applies — decreasing the average tax from $20 for housing to $18.94. Council staff estimate that the fee would help create about 2,600 units of housing over 20 years.

The new rules also allow three floors of above-ground parking garage, so long as parking also extends below ground. Although above-ground garages are banned in Vancouver , B.C. (a frequent model for these zoning changes), developers say it’s too expensive to build all parking below ground as Steinbrueck had originally proposed.

A resolution to study the economic effects of high-rise development in the downtown area may still see the light of day, says Steinbrueck. A labor-faith coalition called the Seattle Alliance for Good Jobs and Housing for Everyone (SAGE) is pushing for a council resolution calling for an assessment of the jobs created in the course of downtown development. “Good jobs and affordable housing need to go hand in hand,” says SAGE director Michael Ramos.

A 2005 economic analysis shows that for every 100 new condo owners, 17 new low- and moderate-wage jobs are created in the downtown area — where affordable housing is scarce. To help offset those housing needs, the study suggested setting the fee at $22.25 per square foot.

The compromise proposal looks good to Ramos. “So long as the emphasis is on ensuring the building of low-income housing, I’m fine with it,” he says. “I’m hopeful that there will be a majority of votes that ensure that a substantial number of low-income units is built.”

Already banking on the support of councilmembers Nick Licata, Richard Conlin, and Tom Rasmussen, Steinbrueck needs to sway one more colleague to get a five-to-four vote. And since the mayor hasn’t come out to support the compromise, he’s aiming for a veto-proof six-vote majority. Nickels’ stance is confounding, says Steinbrueck: the mayor and his staff “haven’t come out to publicly support anything we put up,” he says.

Nickels spokesperson Mariane Bichsel says Steinbrueck’s latest proposal is “generally pretty good. It tweaks what the mayor proposed.”

The sticking point is still the fee for affordable housing, she says. “At what point do you create disincentives [to development]?” $18.94 “may still be a bit too high.”

Councilmembers get their first chance to vote on the proposal Wednesday afternoon. A final vote before the full council will likely take place April 10. n