news-fol1-570.jpg
A coalition of several developers filed a lawsuit in King County Superior Court on January 15 that would make Seattle, already booming with construction cranes, more friendly for developers. Their issue? One of the city's affordable-housing programs.

Since 2006, the city has struck a deal with developers in the downtown core: In exchange for setting aside a few modestly affordable units or paying fees toward a city housing fund, developers get to build taller buildings. For example, developers could build a 400-foot tower where they'd otherwise have to keep it under 300 feet. The Seattle City Council raised those fees by about one-third in December 2013. In their lawsuit, which cites three Supreme Court decisions, the developers claim that fee hike is "an out-and-out extortion."

So they're asking a judge to invalidate that higher fee, making it cheaper and easier to build the tallest buildings allowed downtown—while throwing even fewer scraps to the city's growing affordable-housing needs.

"This just shows developers are not willing to do their fair share," says Rebecca Saldaña of Puget Sound Sage, an affordable-housing advocacy group. She says Seattle's taxpayers fund a housing levy, and politicians have eased other development requirements. This latest uptick in fees, Saldaña says, is "really just asking developers to come up to speed."

In many ways, this complaint represents the city's worst housing fears. For years, there have been whispers that this kind of program may not withstand a legal challenge. Washington State law is stacked heavily in favor of property owners. If the city loses, it could send lawmakers back to the drawing board to figure out how to keep building rentals that working-class people can afford.

A victory by developers could also change the landscape of who can live in Seattle, according to lawmakers at city hall. This program is intended to incentivize what's called "workforce" housing, for people who make around 80 percent of the area's median income, or about $49,000 a year. Lose this tool, says city council land-use chair Mike O'Brien, and you could see a dramatic shift. While other programs fund low-income housing and the market continues to produce high-rent units, the workforce in the middle could get squeezed out, "creating a city of really low-income and wealthy folks," says O'Brien.

Continue reading >>