The Shoreline council reviewed an update to the draft 2024 Comprehensive Plan at the Monday September 30 meeting. This year’s update to the comprehensive plan includes compliance with the state’s Middle Housing law, which requires cities to allow higher density housing in residential neighborhoods previously zoned for single-family homes only.
 |
| A rendering of a fourplex with surface parking on a standard Shoreline single-family lot shows how developers could cover 61% of the lot with hardscape |
Written by city staff and the Planning Commission, the draft comp plan would have allowed more hardscape (buildings and other hard surfaces like parking spaces) based on the number of dwelling units on a lot - allowing middle housing developers to cover over 60% of a lot with hardscape while single-family developers would be kept below a 50% limit.
Mayor Chris Roberts spoke against the plan to increase hardscape maximums based on the number of units.
“We know we are in a housing crisis… and we know as a city… we want to increase our tree canopy. And so when I look at this code… it’s not possible… We can’t increase our tree canopy and also take our hardscape from a maximum of 50% right now… and say you can build to 60% or higher than 60%,” he said. “If we are trying to preserve trees… We have to keep that hardscape limit down…. We have to encourage developers to build around trees,” he added, “So I’m not concerned about the number of units… To me, a six bedroom house is the same as a six unit sixplex.”
 |
| A map from the July draft of the comprehensive plan shows neighborhoods within walking distance of transit that could see parking minimums eliminated |
Under the new state law cities may not require on-site parking for middle housing developments located within a half-mile of a major transit stop. An earlier draft of Shoreline’s comp plan reviewed in July, ended minimum parking mandates in neighborhoods within walking distance of transit while still requiring property owners further from transit to pave parking spaces whether they want them or not. A map from that earlier draft showed most of the city within walking distance of transit.
“I have come around over the years, to being okay with parking limits being completely eliminated,” said council member Keith Scully at this week’s review. “We can’t have all three. We can’t have both density and hardscape limits and mandatory parking. And of the three, I would reduce parking. So I am okay with all the proposed parking limitation reductions. And I would be okay with going much further and making parking not mandatory on any new structures in these zones.”
If Shoreline removes all parking mandates, the city would join the cities of Spokane and Port Townsend who both removed minimum parking mandates in September.
Not everyone on the council is ready to end parking mandates in Shoreline.
At the July review of the earlier draft of the plan, council member Annette Ademasu said at the time, “I’m very concerned about opening the majority of the city to middle housing” and pushed back against the proposal to reduce parking mandates. “I am pretty upset with house bill 1110 that there are no parking requirements for half a mile of transit so I would urge the city to please, when ADUs are built, if there is no on street parking available, to require a parking space,” she said.
Many communities in Washington already have more parking spaces than residents - leading to more driving and greenhouse gas emissions according to the Municipal Research and Services Center. Planning experts say minimum parking mandates increase the cost of building residential real estate which contributes to less affordable housing. Parking spaces also make neighborhoods hotter through the heat island effect and can send dirty stormwater runoff into streams, lakes, and Puget Sound
Two things to add to this discussion. Eliminate transit desert in Briarcrest with electric vehicles and require percentage of permeable paving for parking
ReplyDeleteIronic that the reason given for Shoreline to incorporate as a city was to prevent exactly what is happening today. I remember the sales pitch well. It was a defensive move so Shoreline could remain Shoreline. The make up of the city council matters.
ReplyDeleteA lot has changed since 1995. Locally, regionally, nationally, internationally. I'm glad their adapting to those changes.
DeleteThe 20' wide driveway is pretty ridiculous. We really shouldn't REQUIRE any driveway or parking as this is just added hardscape that isn't being lived in. We could simply wave parking and hard scape limits if trees are reserved and protected? The more we regulate what can be built, the more every building will look the same, as we've already seen happen with townhomes. The render of the 4plex looks terrible because they've nixed the yard for a parking lot. There are many ramblers (and even plenty of 3 level homes) in shoreline that cover just as much area but still have gorgeous yards with trees and shrubs and sitting space. I would prefer beautiful homes and yards, with a few cars parked on the street, over a city of parking lots.
ReplyDeleteNot sure I understand "hardscape". Is that the same as tarmac? The same surface causing the extensive flooding in parts of North Carolina after Hurricane Helena?
ReplyDeleteWe want some land open to absorb rains that may come flooding into Washington State! Paved driveways and parking and who knows what cut down nature's ability to absorb the rain into the ground. Please - let's be smarter than North Carolina, and not pave all our land.
I can't say I agree with Ademasu at all in this regard. Let's get on board with what Roberts, Scully, Spokane, and Port Townsend are saying and doing.
ReplyDeleteYes!
DeleteFor people who think parking doesn't matter, drive through North City by the newer Arabella, Polaris, and Postmark apartments. All do have parking, but the side streets are all overflowing with residents' cars. Most families have a minimum of one car, and many have several. Its the reality.
ReplyDeleteYes, a lot has changed since 1995 but predictably it has changed in the wrong direction. We knew what was coming which is why we incorporated. Somehow we ended up with a city council who sold out the reasons for incorporation. People chose Shoreline instead of many other places who stack people on top of each other for a reason. Did you buy a home here for density? Did anyone say I sure wish we had more apartments and less parking for those who live in apartments? No. Sooner or later the residence are going to catch on and asked what on earth happened to the place I chose to live because of livability? I don't want to be Seattle and I'm betting that most of my neighbors don't either. The fact is that after these apartments get built they will be difficult to rent because all you have to do is go to MLT for cheaper rents. Everything is not always rainbows and unicorns. As the demographer has told the Shoreline School district that they shouldn't expect families with children to move into the apartments.
ReplyDelete