DRAFT ZONING CHANGES to implement Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA) Admiral å å å å å å ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ 45TH AVE SW 46TH AVE SW 47TH AVE SW W S E V A H T 8 3 48TH AVE SW WALNUT AVE SW W S E V A H T 4 4 SW HILL ST 42ND AVE SW SW LANDER ST ALKI TRAIL SW WALKER ST SW HINDS ST W S E V A H T 7 3 SUNSET AVE SW SW SPOKANE ST FERRY AVE SW SW COLLEGE ST W S E V A T S 1 4 W S E V A H T 0 4 PALM AVE SW SW HOLGATE ST SW OLGA ST SW MASSACHUSETTS ST BONAIR DR SW SW WAITE ST 49TH AVE SW 50TH AVE SW SW HANFORD ST SW GRAYSON ST VICTORIA AVE SW SW STEVENS ST PRESCOTT AVE SW W S E V A H C R A SW FOREST ST SW PRINCE ST BROOK AVE SW SW SUMNER WAY SW STEVENS ST SW HILL ST W S E V A H T 7 3 SW HOLGATE ST BELVIDERE AVE SW 48TH AVE SW SW COLLEGE ST 50TH AVE SW 50TH AVE SW W S E V A D N 2 4 49TH AVE SW 44TH AVE SW WALNUT AVE SW 41ST AVE SW 48TH AVE SW SW LANDER ST 49TH AVE SW SW WALKER ST 47TH AVE SW 50TH AVE SW CALIFORNIA AVE SW SW ADMIRAL WAY 49TH AVE SW OR AVE SW HIAWATHA PLAYFIELD SEACREST PARK DUWAMISH HEAD GREENBELT FAIRMOUNT PARK BELVEDERE PARK CALIFORNIA PLACE COLLEGE STREET RAVINE Madison Lafayette West Seattle High School LR3 | L NC2P-40 | NC2P-55 (M) LR1 | LR1 (M) NC2-40 | NC2-55 (M) LR3 | LR Single Family | Residential Small Lot (M) Single Family | LR3 (M2) NC3-65 | NC3-75 (M) LR3 | LR3 (M) NC3P-40 | NC3P-55 (M) LR3 | LR3 (M) LR3 RC | LR3 RC (M) LR2 RC | LR2 RC (M) LR2 | LR2 (M) LR3 | LR3 (M) Single Family | LR1 (M1) Single Family | LR2 (M1) LR2 | LR3 (M1) Single Family | LR1 (M1) Single Family | NC2-40 (M1) Single Family | LR1 (M1) Single Family | LR1 (M1) NC2P-30 | NC2P-40 (M) Single Family | LR1 (M1) NC2P-40 | NC2P-55 (M) Residential Urban Village Solid areas have a typical increase in zoning (usually one story) Hatched areas have a larger increase in zoning or a change in zone type. Residential Small Lot (RSL) cottages, townhouses, duplexes/triplexes similar in scale to single family zones Seattle Mixed (SM) buildings with a mix of Lowrise (LR) proposed zoning white labels identify changes: MHA requirements vary based on scale of zoning change (residential proposal shown) zone categories follow the links below to see examples of how buildings could look under MHA urban villages areas designated for growth in our Comprehensive Plan Existing boundary Seattle 2035 10-minute walkshed Proposed boundary Open space å Public school Light rail Bus stop ! Á October 19, 2016 Midrise (MR) apartments with 7-8 stories Lowrise 3 (LR3) max height 50 ft. Lowrise 1 (LR1) max height 30 ft. Lowrise 2 (LR2) max height 40 ft. townhouses, rowhouses, or apartments Highrise (HR) apartments with heights of 240-300 ft. Industrial Commercial (IC) MHA applies only to commercial uses Neighborhood Commercial (NC) mixed-use buildings with 4-9 stories Commercial (C) auto-oriented commercial buildings seattle.gov/HALA Interactive web map existing zone | draft MHA zone HALA.Consider.it (M) 6% of homes must be affordable or a payment of $13.25 per sq. ft (M1) 9% of homes must be affordable or a payment of $20.00 per sq. ft (M2) 10% of homes must be affordable or a payment of $22.25 per sq. ft This is a harsh transition to adjacent SF neighborhoods. No parking zone for school bus access is needed. Some thought that the UV boundary could be expanded here, to provide more transition. Concerns about how to buffer adjacent neighborhoods from redevelopment along CA. Consider stepping down the heights of buildings next to the playground. Protect view corridor Zone LR3 to take advantage of school play ground Higher density Valuable open space Proposed heights are okay here Crosswalks and through-block connections across California Ave are needed, due to long blocks. Also, better sidewalks are needed in this area. DISCUSSED AT MULTIPLE TABLES: Upzoning along California makes sense, though there is some concern about the height increase. Need better transition around LR3/SF edges Senior housing feels disconnected Some felt 55’ is an appropriate height here. Others wanted to keep NC-40 and preserve small businesses. Upzone for more affordability. Traffic bottleneck concerns. Some wanted to Rezone this to RSL if California height limit is reduced, but others disagreed. Another table thought LR2 could work here. DISCUSSED AT MULTIPLE TABLES: Expand UV boundary here Concerns that California is becoming a cavern, even under existing zoning. Some requested lower heights. Some felt this is too big a jump in scale. Lower to LR1 or RSL. School Park ADMIRAL URBAN VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOOD WORKSHOP February 11, 2017 FEEDBACK ON PROPOSED URBAN VILLAGE ZONING CHANGES* Zone change opportunity noted at discussion Existing feature noted at discussion Potential adjustment to the Urban Village boundary Additional Commercial Areas (Future Opportunity) Zone Change Feedback Boundary Adjustments / Other Feedback Key Neighborhood Assets Opportunities or concerns expressed at discussion * Please also see table discussion notes and summaries.