Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Another local news outlet concludes that it's not entirely clear what their intentions are judging from only the wording, “In fact, [the committee] recommends we abandon the term ‘single family zone.’ ”
And replace it with the term “lower density residential zone” which would include single family homes....not sure why you are struggling to grasp this one, it states it in your own link....
It would required private landowners to decide what gets built on their property. In most cases, this will mean ADUs, and in some cases will mean duplex and triplex, but that would be up to that landowner to ultimately decide.
Much of what Seattle would see from this is a growth of ADUs, not really something to freak out about, especially if you don't live in Seattle or don't have any investment in Seattle.
Oh stahp.
This whole housing task force is completely and totally about social and racial justice.
And again, I'm not freaking out. Just reinforcing my future plans of never moving to Seattle.
You don't know what the rent will be for a subdivide multi-family rental dump. The hooligans only have to pay a couple hundred a month and HUD (tax payers) pays the rest!
So what you are saying is that you have no clue how much rents are in Seattle.....or you are just being obtuse for the fun of it.....either way, I don't buy your statements, but thanks for the laugh.
But if you are actually suggesting that someone is going to spend the money to build an ADU just to rent it out to someone for a couple hundred a month, then this is good news for renters in Seattle because that would mean the people building these ADUs are too stupid to realize that they could easily get $150 a night on AirBNB with an ADU, which means the month rate should be around $1500-2000. Obviously we both know this isn't true because I imagine people in Seattle who own property are much smarter than that.
This whole housing task force is completely and totally about social and racial justice.
And again, I'm not freaking out. Just reinforcing my future plans of never moving to Seattle.
Social and racial justice? So building something in your backyard for extra income is now about social and racial justice? That's a stretch if I ever heard one.....and last time I checked, no one cared if you ever planned to move to Seattle....you probably couldn't afford to buy there anyway, but at least now you would have the chance to rent an ADU there because mtl1 seems to think they will be renting for a couple hundred a month.
So what you are saying is that you have no clue how much rents are in Seattle.....or you are just being obtuse for the fun of it.....either way, I don't buy your statements, but thanks for the laugh.
YOU don't know what HUD rentals will rent for.
Quote:
But if you are actually suggesting that someone is going to spend the money to build an ADU just to rent it out to someone for a couple hundred a month
I didn't say anything of the kind. I said when they force the zoning of multi-family housing, HUD will fill them with hooligans who may only have to pay as little as a couple hundred a month while HUD (tax payers) pay the rest. This happens all the time. The government will even use tax money to pay for building the multi-family housing.
Social and racial justice? So building something in your backyard for extra income is now about social and racial justice? That's a stretch if I ever heard one.....and last time I checked, no one cared if you ever planned to move to Seattle....you probably couldn't afford to buy there anyway, but at least now you would have the chance to rent an ADU there because mtl1 seems to think they will be renting for a couple hundred a month.
Yes, social and racial justice.
I'd urge you to read the article as well as the attached draft letter and recommendations written by the committee.
And replace it with the term “lower density residential zone” which would include single family homes....not sure why you are struggling to grasp this one, it states it in your own link....
KIRO Radio is asking it. I guess you just can't trust mainstream media, can you?
After all, you're only assuming the committee plans to, in your words, "include single family homes." That was nowhere in the recommendations.
....
Low crime due to concentrated police presence.
Just because you increase the density in an urban area doesn't automatically mean you turn it into a crime infested ghetto. It's all in how you do it.
There's no worry about this policy turning Seattle into a crime infested ghetto, since it is already there. I moved out of Seattle 15 years ago after being a crime victim one to many times. The last one was a felony case, and I had the perp's name and evidence against him. I took maybe 6 trips downtown to various agencies--police, city attorney, ombudsman, victim's assistance, etc. to no avail. Finally when I wrote letters to the Mayor and Chief of Police threatening to peddle my story to media, I got some action. The perp was eventually convicted of a felony.
SPD has a tolerance policy towards criminality.
A Seattle Times columnist had his car broken into and used a 'find my iphone' ap to track down the thieves. Police declined to respond.
I didn't say anything of the kind. I said when they force the zoning of multi-family housing, HUD will fill them with hooligans who may only have to pay as little as a couple hundred a month while HUD (tax payers) pay the rest. This happens all the time. The government will even use tax money to pay for building the multi-family housing.
So you have zero clue what the rents in Seattle look like or you have some false notion that the government will be building low income housing in people's backyards...
I'd urge you to read the article as well as the attached draft letter and recommendations written by the committee.
I'll wait.
Yep, already read it when I first commented on this thread....I have been hearing news about this for a bit now, I tend to follow these things....and all it sounds like that will come out of this is a loose definition of low density which will give homeowners the chance to build rental units on their property if they like. Not sure what you think is going to happen, but whatever it is, I can bet you are wrong.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
