HomeMy WebLinkAboutITEM VI-B11 1
Memorandum
~~x~~o~o~
To: Councilmember Lynn Norman, Chair, Planning and Community Development
Committee
Councilmember Nancy Backus, Vice- Chair, Planning and Community Development
Committee
Councilmember John Partridge, Member, Planning and Community Development Committee
From: Elizabeth Chamberlain, AICP, Planning Manager/ Kevin Snyder, AICP, Director of
Planning and Development
cc: Mayor Pete Lewis
Date: April 6, 2011
Re: City of Auburn Performance Based Option for Update to King County Affordable
Housing Targets
At the Committee's March 28, 2011 regular meeting, staff briefed the Committee on the recently
released draft proposal for the update of the King County Affordable Housing Targets During this
briefing, staff expressed its concern that this proposal failed to adequately address and recognize
the performance of jurisdictions such as Auburn that had substantively provided for regional
affordable housing within their municipal boundaries. Subsequent to this briefing, staff has
prepared an alternate option to the County's proposal that more equitably addresses the
provision of regional affordable housing (Exhibit 1). Staff has developed a performance based
approach that recognizes the positive performance of cities that have previously provided for regional affordable housing by reducing the total number of targeted affordable housing
units and
holds those jurisdictions that have not to a higher standard of future performance. This approach
components of the previously distributed draft proposal (Exhibit 2), but is intended to be more an
equity based and focused methodology.
At the Mayor's request, staff has distributed for review and comment the City of Auburn's option
to the Suburban Cities Association and the Mayors of the Cities of Burien, Des Moines, Federal
Way, Kent, SeaTac and Tukwila.
At the Committee's April 11 t" regular meeting, staff will provide a detailed briefing on the
performance based option.
Exhibits:
1. Proposed City of Auburn Performance Based Option for Update to King County Affordable
Housing Targets 2. Proposed King County Affordable Housing Targets- Memorandum and Table
~lJ~ O T~ SOU I~r~1~D
Exhibit 1
~
Hi'T
City of Auburn Performance Based Option
for
Regional Affordable Housing Unit Targets
Proposal Summary:
• Provide a more equitable distribution of regional moderate and low income affordable housing
target units by reducing or increasing the individual affordable housing unit targets for governmental
entities based on documented performance to date for the provision of affordable housing
• Modify the individual and combined total unit numbers for moderate and low income affordable
housing units to reflect the positive performance of multiple governmental entities
Composite Index:
• Report card on regional performance to date; cannot really use it any other way than as a read on
how cities have performed to date
Auburn Proposed Option:
• Rewards cities for positive performance for provision of affordable housing through reduced targets,
but places higher burden on cities that have not performed
• Is a policy based approach that offers a qualitative and equity based policy choice for elected
officials
• Still requires provision of moderate and low income housing, if applicable, but at equitable levels
relative to previous positive or negative performance levels based on Composite Index
City of Auburn, WA March 30, 2011 version 1 Page 1
Exhibit 1
Performance Based Measurement Table:
Composite Index No. Percentage Reduction
or Increase
Performance Based 0.85 to 1 5%
Reduction in
Affordable Housing 0.70 to 0.84 10%
Target 0.50 to 0.69 15%
0 to 0.49 20%
1 to 5.99 5%
Performance Based 6 to 10.99 10%
Increase in Affordable
Housing Target % 11 to 15.99 15%
16 and greater 20%
Performance Based Calculation Methodology (Examples):
Reduction in Moderate Income Housing Target:
Overall Housing Target X Moderate Income Housing Target % (16%) -Performance Based Reduction
(Composite Index No. =Percentage Reduction} =Performance Based Moderate Affordable Housing
Target
Increase in Moderate Income Housing Target:
Overall Housing Target X Moderate Income Housing Target % (16%) + Performance Based Reduction
(Composite Index No. =Percentage Reduction} =Performance Based Moderate Affordable Housing
Target
Reduction in Low Income Housing Target:
Overall Housing Target X Low Income Housing Target % (22%) -Performance Based Reduction
(Composite Index No. =Percentage Reduction) =Performance Based Low Income Affordable Housing
Target
Increase in Low Income Housing Target:
Overall Housing Target X Moderate Income Housing Target % (26%) + Performance Based Reduction
(Composite Index No. =Percentage Reduction} =Performance Based Low Income Affordable
Housing Target
City of Auburn, WA March 30, 2011 version 1 Page 2
Exhibit 1
Key Outcomes:
• Revised affordable housing target numbers that reduce total affordable housing units for 22
governmental entities, increase the total affordable housing units for 20 governmental entities and
do not change the affordable housing units for one governmental entity
• Performance based approach results in net reductions for individual and combined total unit
numbers for moderate and low income affordable housing units that is justified because of the
positive performance of multiple jurisdictions in meeting affordable housing targets through the
previous performance period. Reductions consist of:
0 6,268 total units reduction for moderate income housing target units - 37,292 to 31,024
0 6,069 total units reduction for low income housing target units - 53,498 to 47,429
0 6,066 total units reduction for combined moderatellow income housing target units - 84,519
to 78,453
Consideration Item -Regional Affordable Housing Market Exchange:
It is likely that certain jurisdictions, particularly those that are facing an increase in their affordable
housing targets, will be concerned about reasonably being able to achieve these targets. A potential
option to address this concern is to create a Regional Affordable Housing Market Exchange.
This concept would allow for jurisdictions to directly negotiate a financial arrangement forthe exchange
of moderate andlor low income affordable housing units up to a maximum of 50 percent of the required
target amount. Specifically, an offering jurisdiction could agree to pay a receiving jurisdiction a one
time/pre-determined per affordable housing unit fee for each unit to be transferred. ~ The purpose of the
fee would be to compensate the receiving jurisdiction for the "impact" of accepting additional affordable
housing units.
Any jurisdiction involved in these transactions would be required to report directly to King County the
exchange of affordable housing units and confirm either its transfer or acceptance of this additional
affordable housing unit responsibility.
In order to assure that all jurisdictions continue to seek to provide affordable housing for moderate and
low incomes, a 50 percent maximum cap on the number of affordable housing units that could be
transferred would be set and agreed to by all of the Cities and King County.
1 This value would need to be established prior to the implementation of the Exchange. In order to assure objectivity, an
independent third party such as a real estate economist should be retained to establish the value and the protocols for
monitoring and amending this value.
City of Auburn, wA March 30, 2011 version 1 Page 3
01 N 01 l0 W n O n rl N N N W c-I n N 01 O 111 m 01 c-I n lD rl n ~ Ifl c-I ifl ~ 01 <D CO ~ lD p ~ c-I rl (n c-I O
l0 01 U1 m ~ l0 n N n 0~ l0 Ol 111 n O ~ CO 01 01 N Ol O O Vl O 111 00 l0 O rl O m N m N ~ 41 ~ O O 01 O O N m 0 O rl 0 0 0 u1 m 0 0 0 O 01 c-I c-I N 01 O l0 O rl rl O rl to 0 0~ rl
N O rl O tr D O m~ rl O~~ C N X `i `i lN0 \ y 0 U) Q1 fl ~ O
~ p 3 U •6
Q N l0 01 rl W ~ v1 n n u1 ~ ~ m ul m O n O rl N m ra O N ra O ~ tP r6 N O ra n ~ m u1 m u1 ~ m ~ ra ~ W X ~ 07 01 a m a lD to D N tp ul lD l0 N O O N O M O \ \ O V \ D t0 u1 \ N O \
01 m 01 ~ \ 07 \ \ \ \ \ 00 O1 N° c C ~ C ~ c ~ ~ C C c C c c c own mo o~looo~~ooo 0~~~1~nmoa Flo loo oo~o m
~a m ~ ou v c _ c s 3 .3 ~
p ° o m 2 = v m m n m o~ to m to N~ m m N 01 01 N i!1 07 W l0 m ~a n o m 1D m~ ra a u1 m rl v ~n D m o~ m~ m~ X oe rl n W [0 ~ n CO OJ O OJ Ol OJ ~ ~ ~ lD n i!1 O O \ \ N O \ N ~ OJ
\ p~ rl \ rl m rl u1 \ p \ \ \ \ \ 0 ~ w c c C c c c ~ c s= c s=
C t>O N -C N M O O m 0 0 0 N l0 0 0~ O~ c-I N N u1 rl ~ rl rl M rl O O m N O rl O ~ ~ ~ rl m 3 °-a 3 pvL ~ 3 = ~ s
p ~ m ~ J Q ~ CD
C p ~ -
U = I I C OJ L N - CL K - CC CC C[ - - K tL' K K - - - - - K - CC - - CC - - K K \ - - CC - CC - K K - - K K tL' K ~ p a1 Z
N cC u II ~ ° O O O O O W c0 01 O u1 O tD 0 0 0 0 m N W lD u1 ~ u1 ~ O n N~ V N N l0 m O n 111 O~ u1 N c0 M
`p ~ W N n l0 n ~ O lD ~ I11 l0 ~ N ~ l0 N m ~ W O l0 ~ ifl 0~ N lD O c-I C ci c-I N rl ~ N N O N O m u1 ~ YO 0] O 41 n i!1 l0 ~ ~ m rl ~ M N N If) W Ol C N ~ 0] to 01 n N c-I N l0 ~
OJ M lD m N c-I V ~ ~ ~ 07 ~ N c-I c-I ~ n ~ ci N m ci c-I m c-I c-I ~ ~ m ~ oG N N m N c-I I~
Y
O O O m O 0~ n lD N N N l0 l0 N O O ul W O O O O m N rl O1 m m lD n O O n n 01 N N 01 l0 N rl ~ tr M rl N rl i71 01 nN m mm~~ommaoNO~ o rlno~ulNaulo~ ~ m OWN ulmo a n m o N mmu1,~ m
N N l0 00 lD 01 V1 41 If1 rl N ~ tb n N O O Ifl [0 W W O Ifl 111 ~ rl c-I c-I m N 111 lD rl N c-I c-I l0 ~ i!1 ~ 41 N ~ N m N c-I c-I c-I 0~ N N N I~
N Y c-I rl ci a ~ v m ~ L
.N C C ~ 3 3 p
~ = 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0~ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o o~ o 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 = y O O O O O O O D O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W ~
O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O D O 0 0 0 0 0 0 a p c-I n n c-I N n N rl rl n n n n l0 ci ci c-I l0 n l0 n c-I c-I n rl rl N n 0 rl W n c-I N lD
N n ci c-I n n n n m U mil m rlm~~ mMma~~lm Nmm mm~l mm~lm m ~IMM ti~NN
•6 c `0 3 rl Q o
~ ~ m m
U 0 0 0 l0 O O c-I D N N N OJ 0~ n O 111 Ifl W O O O O M c-I c-I O1 m N O1 a0 X 0 0 i!1 l0 N O m 0 rl Ol M l0 N O O N V ~ •r~ C n l0 m 01 m CO l0 n lD m 111 N N m 01 m n N ~ 111 0] N
N 01 D l0 rl O V1 n m 01 N ul O n ~ N Ip by i!1 ~ O l0 ~ 0~ rl lp N u) ~ n m l0 ~ 111 n O m m c-I N rl m l0 ~ c-I c-I n O
C 3 m m ~ rl m ~ co ~ rl to rl rl rl m W ~ o a =
E v a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o a o 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O D D O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O D O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 ~ O O O O O
O O D O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O D O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O
Y c-I c-I c-I c-I O c-I lD rl rl ci ci ci rl lp ci ci c-I l0 c-I l0 c-I c-I c-I c-I rl rl l0 c-I O c-I l0 c-I c-I O lD D c-I ci ci rl ci ci ci ~ N c-I N N M c-I c-I N N N m m c-I N c-I
N N N N N N ci N N rl N N rl c-I c-I c-I N O
~ O O O l0 O N c0 v~~ n~~ m D u1 O tD 0 0 0 0 N rl M v1 ~ n m N O O W 01 a lD m W~ oa l0 v1 N n N 0 rl 01
f6 lfl W~ N lfl W n lD N 00 M O N c-I ~ c-I n Ifl ~ 0] O l0 l0 n Ol N rl m~ O c-I O V n O n V n ci 0~ l0 m rl - ~ lD rl D N ~ O 41 O N l0 N OJ V rl ~ ~ n [0 l0 Ol N ~ n c-I l0 ~ I11
N V1 N rl W ~ rl I11 m N m 111 f6 Y l0 N 41 m c-I c-I m N m ~ Ifl N c-I O1 rl N c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I ~ M m N c-I ~ ~ l0 W
Y Y N
O C 0 0 0 lD O 0~ N lD N N E lD lD N O 111 O W O O O O M N c-I v m m N c-I ~ O a i!1 c-I N l0 m M N 0~ CO M O1 n l0 V1 oG
3 Y ~ N lD c-I W IP CO ci n 111 l0 n Ifl n l0 Ol c-I lD N ~ O 07 n ~ 01 n 0~ If1 c-I N c-I c-I N n lD N Ol O 01 m I11 Ol Qt _ ~ N~ a n Ol l0 c-I n W n n 0~ l0 N N O m l0 ~ Ol ~ if1 O
c-I n Ol ~ m N m c-I m rl ~ l0 rl N N c-I n ~ m m N N c-I c-I rl N M c-I c-I n c-I c-I c-I lD N M m M ~ U N N ci N c-I I11
N C h0 p -6 - C 0 3~~a ~ p 3 N Q J p N
2 N p N O O O tP O~ lD c0 N N E o~ o] ti O O O M O 0 0 0 0~ O O V m N u1 N o7 O l0 m oa N d1 tD tD N o~ N c0 41 07 tD ~ l0 N 0 C Y N l0 00 m [0 N 01 V 111 M n N l0 ~ 00 N l0 W N~ O 07
0~ m O 111 m 00 N n 61 rl O~ 111 V l0 c-I ~ O m 01
C N n n ~ if1 ~ l0 N N E l0 M Ol n O ~ 01 I11 N m l0 0~ m N c- N c- r N n O N c-I c-I V1 N (L ~ ~ N m l0 c-I c-I c-I rl rl N N ~ c-I N N P U c ro rl rl rl M ~ hp t0
~ C c-I L N ~ 3 '6 p O =
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ul 0 0 111 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O m 0 0 0 0 0 u1 ~ ul 01 0 0 0 u1 u1 O ul ~ N O O O O O I~ D rl O O O N O O O O D O m 0 0 V) O ul 0 0 0 0 0 0 111 01 O m rl n~ N n rl
u1 O N lD W rl c-I c-I N m l0 ~ 111 V1 P
~ M O O O l0 O 01 ci CO N N OJ D7 D] N O n I11 D~ O O O O O c-I Ol m ~ rl ~ ~ N ci lD N l0 01 d1 m Ol l0 CO D O O C n l0 m O1 m m CO n n O ~ Ifl ~ 111 m Ifl m ci N ~ 111 M OJ c-I rl
c-I c-I c-I c-I O N c-I V1 M N •u' N c-I W O rl ci n N c-I rl ci M "6 p lD ~ N ~ = O
a D p - N ~ Y Q ;
~ Q N a ~ a U
v 0 a
m v Lo ~a °
m ~ ~ o ~ -p ~ o w v a~ H
H ~ N N ~ ~ ~ UJ N p Y d d -p Qf ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 ~ O ~ ~ N d ~ ~ - c ra Io V •0 ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ U Q ~ = Y LL p m ~ c m ~ Io ~ _ ~ ~ j y U C C O C U- Y L p 0~~ Y N O Y h0 U LL C c N N ° E 3 Y
Y
v Y ° v ° s w v Y f6 E ° ~ •3 ° ~ ~ s E a ~ £ v a ° ~ a ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ v ~ ° " ~ ~ w y s ° ° ~ v ~ U-~, ~ ~ cy - m a L a Y ~ -p c ~ -p ° m Y a L~ 1rs c m v~ p p a oo ° L ~ v- 3 ~u > o L
a a Y ~ a C 07 (aj Upj U Q 07 07 li Y Y tL' K f!1 ~ ~ J O Y ~ ~ In 1=11 ~ M VI Q D7 [0 U U U O W = J ~ ~ Z Z Z LL (Y!1 Upj } U3j ] t° Z m ~ ~ H
Exhibit 2
KING COUNTY CPPS UPDATE: SUMMARY OF DRAFT AFFORDABLE HOUSING TARGETS
Updatingthe Kin~CountyAffordable Housin~Tar~ets
The Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs) provide amulti-jurisdictional framework for implementing the
Growth Management Actin King County. Goal 4 of the GMA calls on local governments to "encourage
availability of housing that is affordable to all economic segments of the population." The CPPs currently
call for all jurisdictions to share the responsibility to meet countywide affordable housing needs by
incorporating Affordable Housing Targets in their comprehensive plans. As part of an update of the CPPs
currently underway, the Growth Management Planning Council is considering updates to those targets. This
memo and attached table briefly describe a draft recommendation under development by GMPC staff.
Current Affordable Housing Targets and Evaluation Principles
CPP AH-2 currently sets 1) targets for housing that is affordable to moderate income households (earning
50%-80% of the area median income) at 17% of each jurisdiction's overall housing growth target and 2)
targets for housing affordable to low income households (earning less than 50% of AMI) at 20% or 24% of
each jurisdiction's housing target. The targets are based on analysis of data on income from the 1990
Census. CPP Appendix 3 sets the target levels for low income housing using a formula that is intended to
further disperse affordable housing to high cost areas of the county.
Staff have evaluated the Affordable Housing Targets based on the principles that the targets should:
• Meet the future countywide need for housing affordable to moderate and low income households
• Set the bar high for meeting that need while remaining within the reach of any jurisdiction
• More widely distribute the stock of affordable housing within the county
• Be perceived as fair, equitable, and rationally derived
• Be simpleto understand and communicateto policy makers, stakeholders, andthegeneralpublic
• Provide for monitoring progress on housing affordability in the furtherance of policy implementation
Recommended Update to Affordable Housing Targets
Staff have recommended to GMPC retaining the broad policy basis for the Affordable Housing Targets in
the CPPs, including the general approach to setting targets for each jurisdiction, while at the same time
making updates to the technical methodology based on recent data. Results of the updated methodology1
are shown in the table attached to this memo and its major steps are summarized as:
1. Moderate Income Housing Targets. Based on the most recent census bureau estimates, which
shows that approximately 16% of households in King County have incomes between 50% and 80%
of AMI, the target for housing units that are affordable to these moderate income households is set
at 16% of each jurisdiction's overall housing growth target.
2. Lowlncome Housing Targets. Census bureau data also indicatethattheproportion of households
in the county with incomes of 0 to 50% of AMI has risen to about 24%. This includes a rising number
of very low income households with incomes no more than 30% of AMI. While responsibility to
provide for housing that is affordable to these income groups is shared among all jurisdictions, the
1 Staff are completing review of technical details associated with the ACS datasets and may propose percentages for
the 0-50%AMI and 50-80%AMI targets that are very slightly different (e.g., by a percentage point).
InterjurisdictionalTesm Housing CPPs Working Group 2/14/11
KING COUNTY CPPS UPDATE: SUMMARY OF DRAFT AFFORDABLE HOUSING TARGETS
targets are adjusted for each city, up (to 26%) or down (to 22%), in order to more widely distribute
housing that is affordable to households with low incomes and to provide housing for low-wage
workers near their workplaces.
3. Adjustment to low Income Housing Targets. The level at which each city must plan for housing
affordable to low income households is determined using a combination of two indexes:
a. low Wage Job-Housing Balance Index is based on data from the 2000 census and identifies
cities with a high proportion of low-wage jobs combined with a low proportion of low-cost
housing, compared with the county as a whole. For each city, the index is calculated as
follows: % of total county jobs located in the city earning less than $20,000 per year divided
by % of total county rental units affordable at < 50% of AMI. An index value of > 1 suggests
a greater need for housing for local workers earning low wages.
b. low Income Housing Index is based on housing market data published in the King County
Benchmark Report for 2009. The index identifies cities with a relatively low proportion of
rental units affordable to households with incomes > 50% of AMI compared with the
county as a whole. It is calculated as follows: % of county's rental units affordable at < 50%
of AMI divided by % of city's rental units affordable at < 50% of AMI. An index value of > 1
suggests a greater need for low income housing in that city.
Finally, a Combined Index incorporates the Low Wage Jobs-Housing Index weighted at 25% and the
Low Income Housing Index weighted at 75%. If a city's Combined Index value is > 1, then it is
assigned a target of 22% of its housing growth target that must be affordable to households with
incomes < 50% of AMI. If the Combined Index has a value that is > 1, then the city is assigned a
target of 26% of its housing target that must be affordable at < 50% of AM1.3
Moving Forward with Affordable Housing Targets
Targets quantify the need that local plans, regulations, and programs should address for housing and
housing affordability and are intended to complement each jurisdiction's housing needs assessment. As
defined in the draft CPPs, the targets are oriented toward future growth and capacity:
"H-2:...Progress toward affordable housing targets may be accomplished through the addition of new
affordable units or existing units newly preserved or acquired and rehabilitated with a regulatory
agreementfor long-term affordability."
"H-3: Provide residential capacity, including a range of housing types and densities, within each
jurisdiction in the Urban Growth Area, that is sufficient to accommodate both its overall housing target
and its affordable housing targets."
Guidance for achieving the targets is contained in the updated CPPs and appendices, including guidance on
a countywide housing market monitoring program. Questions about the draft proposed Affordable Housing
Targets should be directed to Michael Hubner, SCA, at (253) 856-5443 or at mhubner~ci.kent.wa.us.
2 Due to data gaps, Benchmark data for 2008 was used for several cities.
3 Note on data gaps. Sufficient data were not available for all cities to generate one or both indexes. Where one index could be calculated, the other indexwas given a neutral value
of 1. Where neither index could be calculated, the city's
combined index was set at 1.01 for cities in East County and .99 for cities in South County.
InterjurisdictionalTesm Housing CPPs Working Group 2/14/11
Attachment: DRAFT Proposed Affordable Housing Targets for King County Cities
Targets Low-Income Housing Target Adjustment
CPPs Adopted 2010 Proposed Affordable Housing Targets
Moderate Income Low-Income Low Wage Low Income
Overall Housing Job-Housing Composit Housing Target Housing Target Housing Index Target 2006-2031 Balance Index Index
X16%) X22% or 26%) Weighted 75°° Weighted 25°°
Metropolitan Cities
Bellevue 17,000 2,720 4,420 3.19 3.85 3.69
Seattle 86,000 13,760 18,920 0.79 0.96 0.92
Subtotal 103,000 16,480 23,340
Core Cities
Auburn 9,620 1,539 2,116 0.87 0.49 0.59
Bothell 3,000 480 780 3.89 1.31 1.96
Burien 3,900 624 858 0.48 0.48 0.48 Federal Way 8,100 1,296 1,782 0.76 0.64 0.67
Kent 7,800 1,248 1,716 0.83 0.65 0.70
Kirkland 7,200 1,152 1,872 2.86 6.07 5.27
Redmond 10,200 1,632 2,652 6.02 16.27 13.71
Renton 14,835 2,374 3,264 0.84 0.85 0.85 SeaTac 5,800 928 1,276 0.93 0.51 0.62
Tukwila 4,800 768 1,056 1.83 0.61 0.92
Subtotal 75,255 12,041 17,372
Larger Cities Des Moines 3,000 480 660 0.42 0.63 0.58
Issaquah 5,750 920 1,495 4.19 11.55 9.71
Kenmore 3,500 560 910 1.19 1.03 1.07
Maple Valley 1,800 288 468 2.62 1.00 1.41 Mercer Island 2,000 320 520 2.75 16.27 12.89
Sammamish 4,000 640 1,040 5.58 358.00 269.90
Shoreline 5,000 800 1,100 1.08 0.91 0.95
Woodinville 3,000 480 780 14.06 4.02 6.53
Subtotal 28,050 4,488 6,973
Small Cities
Algona 190 30 42 n/a n/a 0.99
Beaux Arts 3 0 1 n/a n/a 1.01
Black Diamond 1,900 304 494 1.27 1.00 1.07 Carnation 330 53 73 1.00 0.42 0.56
Clyde Hill 10 2 3 n/a n/a 1.01
Covington 1,470 235 382 19.26 1.00 5.57
Duvall 1,140 182 251 1.43 0.64 0.84 Enumclaw 1,425 228 314 0.84 0.59 0.65
Hunts Point 1 0 0 n/a n/a 1.01
Lake Forest Park 475 76 124 0.84 1.25 1.15
Medina 19 3 5 33.15 1.00 9.04
Milton 50 8 11 n/a n/a 0.99 Newcastle 1,200 192 312 2.11 0.97 1.26
Normandy Park 120 19 26 0.34 0.39 0.38
North Bend 665 106 173 1.16 11.93 9.24
Pacific 285 46 63 0.50 0.45 0.46
Skykomish 10 2 2 n/a n/a 0.99 Snoqualmie 1,615 258 420 1.00 3.85 3.14
Yarrow Point 14 2 4 n/a n/a 1.01
Subtotal 10,922 1,748 2,698
Urban Uninc. Total 15,850 2,536 3,795
Total 233,077 37,292 54,178
InterjurisdictionalTearn Housing CPP Workgroup 2/14/11