‘Micropermitting’ - the zoning loop hole that lets you build more
There’s a really good discussion on WestSeattleBlog.com right now featuring a letter from West Seattle Design Review Board member David Foster talking about how micropermitting allows developments to be built without going through the ‘rigor’ of the Design Review Board process.
David mentioned that one reason this is happening is because,
But when I spoke to the manager of the Design Review program at DPD, he admitted that all too often the bureaucracy lets these projects slip under the radar - “it’s too hard to keep track of”
This was the same thing I heard when listening to Diane Sugimora talk, that the DPD is the administrative arm of Seattle’s land use plans, but that we need to make our mayor and council close these bad loopholes.
Personally, what this means to me is not so much that the Design Review Board will jump in to fix the project (because they’re not allowed to), but that these micropermitted projects are subject to lesser mitigation requirements.
It was interesting to note in a follow-up post on WestSeattleBlog.com (props to WSB on the active follow-up, you’re kicking the Times butt with your news), they contacted City Councilman Richard Conlin who said that he was unaware that micropermitting was happening as much as he thought.
Well, hopefully that will serve as a wake-up call for him and it is now something we can point to saying that Councilmember Conlin is aware of the situation. We’ll follow his progress as he looks into it.
Anyway, just wanted to add this as a final point, here are two other key ingredients that make it easier for this kind of development to go through:
1. Look for properties that are L2/3 zoned.
2. The development occurs in communities with weak community reaction.
9 comments
Kohary Construction has made a habit of doing this in Pinehurst and other neighborhoods in Seattle. They are planning a new project of 24 townhouses at 125th and Roosevelt (NE corner). They must go through SEPA review for demolition permits for the two apartment buildings on the site, but they found a loophole that allows them to not go through SEPA review for the 24 new townhouses and, most importantly to the Pinehurst neighborhood, they are not required to go through design review. We contacted Richard Conlin and Peter Steinbrueck last fall. They helped us get in touch with the right people at DPD who told us the unfortunate news that while the site appears to be one property, it technically is three plats - another loophole. Kohary submitted the project as three seperate applications (3 times 8 units) and therefore falls under the threshold for SEPA and design review on the townhouses. The SEPA review for the demolition doesn’t have much to grab onto. The Pinehurst solution to this extensive problem is to try to recruit developers who do attractive and green design to our neighborhood. We have a post on our Pinehurst blog about the Kohary project at http://pinehurstcommunity.blogspot.com/search/label/Kohary.
I should add that Pinehurst is very interested in for both neighborhoods and developers (well - that would work forworking with other neighborhoods to address issues related to townhouse design. The new proposed changes to multifamily zoning have some elements that are a good start. It seems that there are more steps that can be taken. I am an optimist, but I believe that we could reach a solution that works for most neighborhoods and most developers.
Diane Sugimura has mentioned that DPD would like to incent “good design” by having a contest for best townhouse design in Seattle. I think that this is a great start - and is nice in that it focuses on good outcomes.
Apologies - my last post should read as follows:
I should add that Pinehurst is very interested in working with other neighborhoods to address issues related to townhouse design. The new proposed changes to multifamily zoning have some elements that are a good start. It seems that there are more steps that can be taken. I am an optimist, but I believe that we could reach a solution that works for most neighborhoods and most developers.
Diane Sugimura has mentioned that DPD would like to incent “good design” by having a contest for best townhouse design in Seattle. I think that this is a great start - and is nice in that it focuses on good outcomes.
We’ve been affected by Kohary townhome designs here in Maple Leaf, several of which have taken out neighborhood businesses and weakening our business core. They, via the ubiquitous and VERY well connected permit consultant Brittany Ard, are experts in breaking up projects to avoid any sort of review.
They also purchase houses, let them deteriorate to eyesore status, and then aggressively offer to purchase neighboring homes in order to create more space for their developments.
We’ve received a similar response from Council and DPD as Renee has — but the loophole needs to be fixed.
working link:
http://pinehurstcommunity.blogspot.com/search/label/Kohary
To clarify… L-1 and L-2 never trigger Design Review, so most of the developments would never go through Design Review. If DPD can reduce permitting timing then we would not need to avoid Design Review/SEPA. Right now it takes almost 1 year to get a permit on a 6-Unit site. With Design Review that time is at least doubled. Those additional holding costs increase the final sale price, thus making affordable housing harder to achieve. Instead of just beating up the developers, try focusing on DPD to make permitting a quicker process. The majority of my clients will agree that Design Review is not a bad thing, the time it takes to go through Design Review is the problem. Also, with the changes to the Multifamily Code that are on the Mayor’s desk right now… things like setbacks, front porches, useable open space, reducing the requirements for that awful 5′ fence on the street are all being addressed. We as a development community are looking forward to being able to design something better. We have been constrained by the current code. It is DPD, not use that requires that 5′ fence, or private “unusable’ open space, or that same craftsmen style to keep it under the current 25’ height limit (thus not allowing for a modern-flat-green roof design). They also don’t allow us to put a porch in our front yard. These are all things that we want to see, that we want to build. I understand that there are builders that have no regard for the neighborhood, but as a whole, we are decent, hard-working people. So please stop just blaming the developer. There is a way for developers and neighbors to create an amazing city… this constant back and forth bashing… is never going to achieve that.
Brittani - Thanks for writing. It is great to hear developer perspective. I don’t think that all developers are bad. I also hope that the development community and neighborhoods can work through this issue. There is up side for all of us - affordable housing, good design, etc. I agree that the new multifamily changes are promising.
Portland went through a similar issue around townhouses a few years ago. Now, they have a great program for infill housing and they even give away free architechural drawings for an award winning townhouse design to encourage good design. And, they have an infill design program: http://www.portlandonline.com/planning/index.cfm?c=deace
The Kohary development at 125th and Roosevelt is in L3 and would meet the design review threshold for number of units. The other Kohary developments (50+ units) in Pinehurst are in L2 and I agree that design review is not triggered in L2.
Thanks for the info about Portland, I think that they have some amazing ideas.
One other I wanted to say… I have read and heard from a certain West Seattle Architect, over and over again that ‘Micro-permitting’ is illegal. That is simply not true, even the city has confirmed that though it is not an ideal practice, there is nothing illegal about it.
There are over 5000 building permits issued a year, with only a small number being a problem for neighbors, so instead of punishing all developers, let’s focus on code changes that help the entire city to achieve their goals.
I’d like to add that we do our fair share of DPD criticism here as well. And agree with the point that the DPD (and also want to add the mayor’s name to this list) are the ones who need to step up and fix our broken zoning codes.
Leave a Comment