Comments must be submitted by 5:00 PM tomorrow, Thursday November 16!
The City is proposing to change the Land Use Code to remove barriers to the creation of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in single-family zones. The proposal allows for two ADUs instead of one per lot, removes existing off-street parking and owner-occupancy requirements, and changes development standards that regulate the size and location of detached units (DADUs).
We urge you to express your concerns regarding what issues the City should study in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Your comments may address these topics:
- The objectives for this proposal are not clear. Better objectives might be more affordable housing, more family housing, preservation of tree canopy and yards, and development compatible with existing single-family housing.
- Only one alternative is presented for this proposal. At least two alternatives to accomplish the objective are required. You may suggest alternatives to be studied.
- The impacts of this proposal on neighborhoods, public services, and natural resources.
- Measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate the effects of this proposal.
Comments must be submitted by 5:00 PM on November 16 by:
- Email messages to ADUEIS@seattle.gov.
- The on-line comment form at http://www.seattle.gov/council/adu-eis#comment.
Further information is available at the City’s Accessory Dwelling Units EIS website. The City will produce a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). When the DEIS is released, you will then have a chance to comment on the specific conclusions in that document.
Martin Kaplan of the Queen Anne Community Council has submitted Scoping Comments that cover their concerns and provide a good discussion of the original intentions of the ADU program.
You may wish to submit these concerns:
- The objectives in the EIS of the proposal should be to increase affordable housing units, to increase family-size housing units, to preserve the tree canopy and green-space, and to require development compatible with existing single-family housing.
- The EIS should study an alternative that keeps the existing owner-occupancy requirements, while removing the parking requirements and changing the development standards for size and location of DADUs.
- The EIS should study an alternative that keeps the existing owner-occupancy requirements and parking requirements, while changing the development standards for size and location of DADUs.
- The EIS should study an alternative that keeps the existing owner-occupancy requirements and parking requirements and ADU size requirements, while changing the requirements for lot size and location of DADUs.
- The EIS should study an alternative that keeps the existing owner-occupancy requirements and parking requirements and ADU lot location requirements, while changing the requirements for size of ADUs.
- The EIS should study an alternative that keeps existing requirements for lots under 10000 SF, while changing the requirements for larger lots.
- The EIS should study an alternative that keeps existing ADU requirements, with the City financing the King County Sewer Capacity fee for a DADU in exchange for that unit being an affordable rental housing unit in the City’s Housing program.
- The EIS should study an alternative that keeps existing ADU requirements, with the City financing ADU “in-law apartment” redevelopment in exchange for those units being affordable rental housing units in the City’s Housing program.
- The EIS should study an alternative that keeps existing ADU requirements, with the City developing neighborhood pre-approved plans for DADUs on different lot sizes.
- The EIS should study the impacts of real-estate speculation in ADU rentals on affordable housing.
- The EIS should study the impacts of AirBnB type short-term rentals for ADUs on affordable housing.
- The EIS should study the impacts of the proposals on tree canopy, green space, play spaces, and recreation.
- The EIS should study the impacts of the proposals on parking for neighborhoods including residents and small businesses.
- The EIS should study the impacts of the proposals on sewers, sewage treatment, and water-quality.
- The EIS should study the impacts of the proposals on public services including fire and police.
- The EIS should study the impacts of the proposals on utilities including water and electricity.
- The EIS should study the impacts of the proposals on transportation including traffic congestion, and the adequacy and availability and cost of public transit.
- The EIS should study the impacts of the proposals on schools including overcrowding and playfield space.