These anti-aPodment signs appeared suddenly just off 15th Ave E this summer. The Reasonable Density Seattle group has since claimed responsibility.
The Capitol Hill Community Council will consider a resolution at tonight’s October meeting that will call for an emergency moratorium on “apodments or micro housing in the Capitol Hill Neighborhood, or anywhere else in the City.” The full text of the resolution is below. UPDATE: An updated version of the resolution has been added.
The community group is asking the City Council to put a stop to the developments that circumvent Seattle’s design review and environmental review processes until zoning laws and definitions are shored up to close the loophole.
The loophole as we’ve explained it in the past:
The loophole
Seattle’s zoning restrictions in residential areas are based on the number of dwelling units — unit occupancy and building size aren’t considered. The loophole has allowed developers to bypass the Design Review Board and environmental review as these buildings technically come under the dwelling unit threshold for many residential zones on Capitol Hill.For instance, in lowrise, multifamily areas, design and environmental reviews are triggered for building proposals larger than 8 units (the residential swath from 10th to 15th between Denny and Roy is almost entirely zoned LR3). In areas zoned mid-rise, review boards are triggered at 20-unit proposals (Most of Capitol Hill west of Harvard, aside from Olive and Denny corridors, is MR or LR3). Environmental review is also triggered in LR3 and MR zones for 30-unit proposals within urban centers or station areas.
There’s no telling what actions the city will take if the community council resolution is approved. In September, the Seattle City Council approved a moratorium on “tall skinny” construction that was taking advantage of loopholes allowing multistory construction on relatively small residential lots. Council president Sally Clark told CHS this summer that the first action for the Department of Planning and Development may be to simply document how many of the loophole microapartment projects exist.
In September, CHS mapped 15 of the projects in the Capitol Hill area alone. We know a few more have come along since and will be updating our map soon. Tiny and available at a price point that may not make them a bargain but definitely makes them unique, we also took you on a brief tour of one aPodment unit to show you what life looks like inside.
The microapartment push-back is part of a new wave of activism on the Hill that differs from anti-development activity of the past. Many community efforts involve re-shaping development — not bringing it to a halt. The anti-aPodment moratorium would be a little more old school. More may be on the way. A plank of the Reasonable Density Seattle group’s efforts to curtail area development is reportedly also on the minds of the Capitol Hill Community Council. Whether it has any luck pushing back on lowrise height zoning across the Hill will remain to be seen.
It is perhaps ironic that the sign is on a large modern development, built pretty much lot line to lot line, that I recall being opposed by at least one member of the Capitol Hill Community Council at the time, that replaced a single family house.
No it isn’t ironic. It isn’t about replacing single family homes. You should be able to figure that out on your own.
I sometimes think the folks in townhomes with pedstrian architecture are just happy we have something new to hate on.
Great, so the Hill’s single-family housing contingent is advocating against affordable housing now? If the argument is about preserving neighborhood character, shouldn’t they be encouraging housing that doesn’t price out lower and moderate income residents?
This is about proper review for SEPA and Design. Development will happen, but the community wants the proposals reviewed for design and environmental impact just like the rest of the buildings.
NO. This is about proper review for SEPA and Design. Development will happen, but the community wants the proposals reviewed for design and environmental impact just like the rest of the buildings.
It is not about the units themselves, the rent paid, the interior square footage per tenant, or even the size of the kitchen or who would want to live there. It is about proper community review.
Yeah I noticed the same thing. These large multifamily buildings, many without adequate parking and limited green space are the buildings that seem to object the most to object the most to buildings without adequate parking and limited green space. NIMBY’s all.
apodments ARE encouraging pricing low and moderate income people out of the neighborhood.
They’re redefining what “affordable” means, and helping encourage skyrocketing of rents for the old “affordable” units in the neighborhood.
I already pay ~$1k for a small “affordable” apartment on the hill. With the new baseline being set by these apodments, my rent will surely continue to rise.
DaveRoise you are wrong. As has been pointed out numerous times in the past, there are projects that these groups define as “micro housing” that have gone through full design review and SEPA. These groups have a much broader agenda. You need to take a deeper look. To simply parrot their talking points makes you either stupid or a liar.
@read between the lines, smartypants
Same boat as me. I’m not looking forward to starting my apartment hung in a few months.
@smarty, Is your presumption based on actual economic theory or just your impression of how markets works?
@pragmatic
Economic theory? Are your blinds down or something? Pragmatic? Hardly.
Landlords have no compunction about raising rent in response to nearby properties, and mine has freely admitted as much.
If you seriously believe that a typical apartment building situated near apodments and the new upper-middle income mixed-use buildings springing up all over the place isn’t going to be affected by the neighboring rental rates, you’re on some janky crack.
Or, how about you just spend five minutes on craigslist?
Shorter article: the NIMBY nuts are at it again.
Is it too much to ask that these developments, whatever they are called, conform to the same thresholds for Design Review and SEPA review as other multifamily developments with the same amount of units have to? That’s all the resolution is asking for and I think, as well as many others, that this is perfectly reasonable. Why should these buildings, which have 7 to 8 TIMES the number of individual units than the developer claims to be creating, be allowed to be be built using a different set of rules? City Council, DPD, and the developers using this loophole have this coming and I am glad someone is doing something about it.
Thank God we have the CHCC to protect us from this horrible scourge. If left unchecked these evil buildings will certainly destroy our way of life on Capitol Hill and perhaps even bring about an end of civilization. There is not a single bigger threat to us all!
Just last week I was walking past one of these disgusting pod projects and was crippled by a sense of sadness. What has Capitol Hill become that we would allow buildings that are so tall? Since when is it alright to build with wood, metal and glass? What does it say about us that we’d provide shelter to so many people on such a small amount of land? It runs counter to everything that Capitol Hill has stood for. If we don’t stop this it will ruin our lives!!!
And Smarty above is so right about how these buildings cause rents to skyrocket for the rest of us. You’re a dummy-head if you don’t understand that basic piece of economics. It’s just like how the Farmer’s Market causes food prices to spike on the Hill when they’re open in the summer. If we ever get serious about lowering food prices in our neighborhood, the first step is to shut down all of the grocery stores. It’s an economic fact – look it up!
So thank you, thank you CHCC for tackling this most important issue. Hopefully once you’ve saved us from the pods (and those nasty pod people) you can address the other critically important issue facing our neighborhood – the color of Metro buses. That blue, yellow, green and red color scheme is a rolling nightmare that is honestly ruining lives. Please consider proposing a moratorium to stop all of the suffering!
So CHCC, keep up the great work representing us and making our city a more contextually pure place. NOTHING is more important!!
I am so glad to hear that an influential community group is advocating a moratorium, because the City Council is not yet interested in doing this. I have written to Richard Conlin (chair of the committee which oversees this issue) about the concerns many have about apodments, and his response was basically that the Council is “aware” of the issue and that they are “monitoring” it for any problems. How about a little leadership now and not waiting until more and more such buildings go up before changing the land use codes?
It is almost laughable that developers can avoid design/environmental review by legally claming that their buildings will have 6 “dwelling units” when in fact there will be 48 units. This is a major loophole and needs to be closed asap!
Dear Capitol Hill Community Council,
I am writing to defend the rights of construction of the small micro apartments called Apodments that are owned and managed by Calhoun Properties (www.apodment.com) regarding the proposal by the Capitol Hill Community Council to possibly prevent future construction of such units, I am not seeing when your meeting time is tonight but I want my voice heard on this matter. I just moved into my first Apodment this month and so far I like it. I live at the Apodment Complex on 23rd & John called The Videre. The complex was completed in 2010 and still looks and feels like new. The management is friendly and the housing is well kept up and maintained. It is true that the Apodments are small, like dorm rooms, each one is a room with a bed and small bathroom with just a shower and kitchens are sharedI moved into the Apodments because my rent is only $600 per month which includes all utilities and free Internet – love having that. I couldn’t be happier. These Apodments provide affordable housing on Capitol Hill in an area with about a 2% vacancy rate and where rents are among the most expensive in the city. As a 43 year old Seattle native who has always enjoyed living on Capitol Hill but suffered unemployment or as now, having a job now that doesn’t pay what I made pre-recession this is a good deal for me and others like me. The Apodments provide affordable housing for those of us who were displaced or are young and are just starting out. We get to live in nice areas of Capitol Hill that are on bus lines and close to shopping.
The neighbors in my complex seem nice and are quiet. Of importance to the Community is how do the people who live in these places behave? While I can only speak to my less than a month of living in my Apodment complex, people are quiet and respectful but will smile and say “hello”. I haven’t observed anything going on that might be suspicious or criminal activity. The Apodment management discloses in resident leases that heavy financial penalties, along with eviction will result for any criminal activity such as drugs. Additionally, signs are posted all over my complex reminding residentsthat we are not even allowed to smoke tobacco products on the properties or face a $250 fine. Apodment residents are also encouraged to recycle and signs are posted regarding that as well. The complex that I live is gated and there are closed circuit surveillance cameras as well. So as far as being good neighbors in the Community it seems that we are doing that? That’s why I am not clear on what the opposition to the Apodments is or why?
Prior to living in the Apodments I was on Capitol Hill over by Summit and Olive south of Howell and Denny in an older pre war building in an equally small unit yet paid more rent and among other things lets just say that I didn’t get free Internet there – units weren’t even wired for cable or internet. On Summit and Olive there is constant noise from the bar scene, sirens, noisy and inconsiderate neighbors -there were even people who thought that it was perfectly acceptable to play volleyball outside my apartment in the middle of the street at 3:30 AM in the morning and on more than one occasion an no one said anything. After an aquaintance of mine moved into an Apodment he encouraged me to do the same and provided himself as a reference to facilitate my moving in so I left behind the more lively side of Capitol Hill. That being said why isn’t the Capitol Hill Council concerned about such issues as noise and crime on areas like Summit and Olive? In moving into an Apodment I went from living in “a Hood” to living in a regular neighborhood again.
Then while we are discussing Apodments I have to bring up how there are the big behemoth apartment and condo projects that are in various phases of planning or construction on The Hill, while I support progress the concern among people that I know that these developments are anything but affordable, come with hard to fill retail space – again due to high leasing costswhich means that the original pre construction tenants often don’t return if their businesses have even survived. I have felt that while progress is necessary and support some of this construction I worry that Capitol Hill is losing its charm and character that is well known for and is becoming less and less affordable all around – classic gentrification.
People have clammored for years about affordable housing and Calhoun Properties/ The Apodments are offering that to the community without disrupting their surroundings. The Apodments are small complex structures as far as apartments are concerned but they don’t come with retail space that sits vacant for months to years after completion. Apodments are typically built to fit in with other militia illy housing that’s already there as opposed to being built next to single family dwellings, they are quiet and un intrusive structures. That being said let me conclude by saying that I hope opposition to Apodments is dropped and instead I hope that the Community of Capitol Hill and the City of Seattle will welcome them as good neighbors and partners in affordable housing.
Thank you for your attention.
Michael A. Luck
NIMMMMBAYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Let’s see how long before that influence disappears. From what I’m hearing around the 2nd floor lately, the Cap Hill activists are starting to get lumped in with the the Laurelhurst NIMBY nutters who fought Children’s Hospital and violent psychopaths like Chris Leman who is fighting microhousing in Eastlake and previously assaulted a City Staffer. Not exactly the path to likely success.
I didn’t have time to read your rather lengthy treatise. I promise I will get back to it when I have a free afternoon. Have no fear and stop your tears, apodments will still most likely get built. The resolution only asks that they are subjected to the same review process, SEPA and Design Review as other similarly unit numbered buildings are. PLEASE READ THE RESOLUTION! It’s about fairness in the development process. We want the “loophole” closed. We want these developments to undergo the same process that other buildings have to undergo before they are approved for construction. Get it?
Funny, sort of.
So come to the meetings if you’re that incensed.
As usual, most commentators utterly miss the point.
It is about consistent process and design and environmental review.
Im sure everyone is lovely and I’m happy it works well for you and others.
Many of us feel strongly there is a real place for this kind of housing.
But that’s all quite irrelevant to the resolution at hand.
It is NOT anti micro housing, it is about loopholes which allow some builders to utterly skirt neighborhood involvement, design review, and environmental review. In other words, it allows them to skip a significant part of democracy’s checks and balances in a civil society.
Let’s find a good niche for creative micro housing, but let’s do it equitably.
Michael, do you know how many of the residents in your apodment own vehicle(s)? What do the surrounding neighbors think about the increased difficulty of finding a street parking spot because of your building?
Yes, apodments work for some…but they have alot of negative effects on the nearby neighborhood.
There’s no irony in the signs or where they are placed. The sign in the photo is certainly not on a large multifamily building without parking – it is in the front yard of one unit of a 4 unit townhome project with homes averaging about 1200 square feet each with underground parking and set back from the street by at least a small yard or garden space. The other dozen or so signs are also on yards of single family or multi-unit residences with similar set-backs and a somewhat cohesive style. But the real point is that the builder of the unit in the photo followed the zoning regulations and constructed the project with notice to and input from the neighbors and a design review process involving the City Planning Dept., the builder, the architects and a community design review board so that the result was something everyone felt would fit in with and add to the community. On the other hand builders of many (but not all) micro-housing projects use a loophole in the zoning to by-pass all those processes and have crammed in more than a dozen high-density (40-60 unit projects) in Capitol Hill alone. The signs reflect the views of neghbors who just want the City to impose a moratorium on issuing more permits for such projects until the zoning regulations can be updated and the loophole closed.
CapHill”Designer”
The call for a moratorium is about design review. Yes, some projects did go up for design review. When you go over a threshold or seek departures, there is a design review. What is being sought is CONSISTENCY. Do you have a problem with consistency? Why do you think these projects should avoid design review? Stop trying to change the subject.
If you seriously expect that every new building in Capitol Hill (or most of Seattle for that matter) needs to aspire to a 1200 SF per unit townhome on top of underground parking with yard setbacks, then you are basically saying the only people who should be able to live on Capitol Hill are the well-to-do. Period.
[…] District apparently making room for the bulk of the projects. The Capitol Hill Community Council has called for a moratorium on the projects until better reviews can be put in […]