Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgendaPacket_Merged_SKHHP_ExecutiveBoard_2024_5_17SKHHP Executive Board May 17, 2024, 1:00 – 3:00 PM Virtual Meeting Video conference: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/99857398028?pwd=eXFiMmJpQm1abDZmMmRQbHNOYS8 ydz09 OR by phone: 253-205-0468 Meeting ID: 998 5739 8028 Password: 085570 I. CALL TO ORDER 1:00 a. ROLL CALL b. INTRODUCTION OF JEFF TATE, INTERIM SKHHP EXECUTIVE SUPPORT; INTRODUCTIONS OF STAFF WORK GROUP MEMBERS AND ADVISORY BOARD REPRESENTATIVE II. PUBLIC COMMENT 1:08 III. APPROVAL OF APRIL 19, 2024 MINUTES 1:10 Motion is to approve the April 19, 2024 SKHHP Executive Board meeting minutes. IV. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS 1:11 V. BOARD BRIEFING 1:12 a. Meet the Developer: Mercy Housing Northwest Presenter: Obinna Amobi, Project Developer I; Christopher Bendix, Project Developer Purpose: Provide an opportunity to hear and learn from developers working in South King County. Background: Founded in the 1980’s, Mercy Housing is a national nonprofit organization with six regional offices. Mercy Housing Northwest owns and operates 52 properties throughout Washington, Oregon, and Idaho, providing over 5,000 families and seniors with an affordable place to call home. SKHHP has committed funding towards two Mercy Housing projects. In 2023, SKHHP jurisdictions approved funding for the Burien Family Housing project to support the development of an 89-unit multifamily mixed income affordable rental housing project. In 2024, SKHHP jurisdictions approved funding for the Kent Multicultural Village project to support the development of a 199-unit multifamily residential rental project. For review, discussion, no action proposed. VI. BOARD BUSINESS 1:40 a. 2024 QUARTER 1 REPORT Presenter: Jeff Tate, Interim SKHHP Executive Support Purpose: Presentation of the 2024 quarter one budget and progress report for the Executive Board review. Background: Staff provides quarterly budget and progress reports consistent with the SKHHP Interlocal Agreement. The report serves as an accountability and progress update as well as a tool for Board Members to update their member Councils and other interested parties. Staff presentation followed by Board discussion provides the opportunity for feedback prior to finalization and distribution to member jurisdictions. For review, discussion, and Board feedback only, no action is proposed. VII. UPDATES/ANNOUNCEMENTS • Habitat for Humanity – Burien Miller Creek 1:50 VIII. ADJOURN 2:00 SKHHP Executive Meeting April 19, 2024 MINUTES I. CALL TO ORDER Dana Ralph called the meeting to order at 1:03 PM. ROLL CALL/ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM Executive Board members present: Dana Ralph, City of Kent; Kristina Soltys, City of Covington; Traci Buxton, City of Des Moines; Brian Davis, City of Federal Way; Sunaree Marshall, King County; Sean Kelly, City of Maple Valley; Eric Zimmerman, City of Normandy Park; Carmen Rivera, City of Renton; James Lovell, City of SeaTac; Thomas McLeod, City of Tukwila; Colleen Brandt-Schluter, City of Burien. Others present: James Alberson, City of Renton; Victoria Schroff, City of Maple Valley; Xochitl Maykovich, King County; Claire Goodwin, SKHHP Executive Manager; Dorsol Plants, SKHHP Program Coordinator; Laural Humphrey, City of Tukwila; Nicholas Matz, City of Normandy Park; Nicole Nordholm, City of Des Moines; Kaelene Nobis, City of Kent; Dafne Hernandez, City of Covington; Matt Torpey, City of Maple Valley; Angie Mathias, City of Renton. II. PUBLIC COMMENT No public comment was provided. III. APPROVAL OF MARCH 15, 2024 MINUTES Thomas McLeod moved to approve the March 15, 2024 minutes as presented, seconded by Sean Kelly. Motion passed (10-0) Kristina Soltys joined the Executive Board meeting at 1:10 PM. IV. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS No modifications to the agenda were made. V. BOARD BRIEFING a. SOUTH KING COUNTY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRESERVATION STRATEGIES Claire Goodwin introduced the South King County Affordable Housing Preservation Strategies by providing the historical background. The desire of the SKHHP Executive Board to address housing preservation as a subregion has been a high priority going back to at least 2021 and has shown up on SKHHP’s work plans since at least 2022. You may recall that SKHHP worked to develop an Affordable Housing Inventory Dashboard for jurisdiction long-range planners to use internally. The dashboard allows planning staff to see where known naturally occurring affordable housing is and where it's predicted to be in South King County. It was the beginning of SKHHP's subregional effort to address affordable housing preservation. Efforts to begin the development of the Subregional Affordable Housing Preservation Strategies started in the fall of last year when the connection was made on the timing of our work coinciding with the required 10-year periodic update of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. This work includes a requirement to address the preservation and displacement of vulnerable residents. This was great timing because preservation has been a high priority of the Executive Board for many years, and our timing is in alignment with each of your jurisdiction's development and adoption of the Comprehensive Plans, which are due at the end of this year, though many of your jurisdictions have already submitted drafts for review to the County. Board Members serving last year might recall that last September, as part of the in-person monthly meeting, planning staff were invited from each of the SKHHP cities to discuss the preservation needs of their respective jurisdictions. Executive Board Members also completed a survey, which provided some great insight and helped define your jurisdiction's preservation challenges. The information exchanged at that meeting kicked off the development of the Subregional Affordable Housing Preservation Strategies, which is being discussed today. The planners and SKHHP staff met at least every month and, in some cases, multiple times a month, throughout the fall to develop the document included in your agenda packet. The Preservation Strategies provide a guide for each jurisdiction to consider incorporating into their Comprehensive Plan. It is designed so that jurisdictions can use it in a way that best suits each individual city. Planners are welcome to copy and paste what works and leave out what does not apply to their city. SKHHP's goal was to encourage as much alignment as possible across the diverse subregion while fully understanding and appreciating the autonomy of each jurisdiction’s legislative bodies in determining what gets adopted in their Comprehensive Plans. Each jurisdiction likely has a small handful of items that align with the Preservation Strategies and some cities may consider attaching the strategy in their Comprehensive Plan. Some items may be phrased differently in your jurisdiction’s final plan, but the concept is the same. We would consider this alignment with the strategy. SKHHP staff are committed to facilitating the implementation of any policy or action that all or most cities adopt in their comprehensive plans related to preservation or displacement and where subregional coordination is required. The South King County Affordable Housing Preservation Strategies are organized by goals, policies, and implementing actions. This is based on terminology regularly used by planners and is how the Department of Commerce wants to see the Comprehensive Plans formatted. Goals are the higher-level objectives; policies are the high-level ways of achieving the goals, and the overall policy of jurisdictions on the topic in question, and implementing actions are those actions that will be done to advance the policies and goals. The Strategies include three goals. Claire Goodwin reviewed each goal and one policy and one implementing action for each due to the length of the document. The entire document is available in the agenda packet (and can be found on the SKHHP website after the meeting). Goal 1: Preserve the existing supply of affordable housing. This goal has six policies and six implementing actions. Policy 1.2 example: Develop strategies to preserve naturally occurring affordable housing at risk of redevelopment and rehabilitate units when they don't pose a health or safety risk. Implementing action example: Explore incentives to landlords, such as tax relief, for the preservation of naturally occurring affordable housing. Goal 2: Ensure rental housing stock is safe and habitable. Goal 2 has four policies and five implementing actions. Policy 2.2 example: Ensure that rental housing units comply with life and fire safety standards and provide a safe place for tenants to live, including renters with disabilities. Implementing action example: Support the development or continuation of a rental licensing/registration and inspection program. Explore options for establishing a program on a subregional level. Goal 3: Keep people in their homes and protect communities at risk of economic, physical, and cultural displacement. This goal has seven policies and eight implementing actions. Policy 3.1 example: Explore opportunities to implement a Community Preference policy or a first right-to- return policy that prioritizes community members in new housing developments. Implementing action example: Build relationships with various partners (non-profit developers, faith-based organizations, philanthropic organizations, local businesses, and community-based organizations) to collaborate on solutions that keep people in their homes and prevent displacement. Other parts of the document include an introduction that describes the document’s purpose, a glossary of definitions, and a table that shows alignment with the required Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs), which the planners must show as a requirement of the State and County. Claire Goodwin invited the long-range planners responsible for developing the strategy to speak for three to five minutes about how the content of the strategies will be/has been incorporated into their draft Comprehensive Plans, the unique aspects of preservation or anti-displacement that their jurisdiction is addressing, how the strategy aligns with those aspects, and their feelings on the overall process of developing this collaborative subregional document. Not everyone who participated in this work was available today. Claire Goodwin acknowledged the leadership and collaborative nature of Kristen Holdsworth, the Long-Range Planning Manager of the City of Kent, and Chaney Skadsen, the Senior Planner of the City of Federal Way, who both saw the alignment early on between what the cities were required to do through their comprehensive planning processes and SKHHP's work plan item. Claire Goodwin extended gratitude to all the planners who made the work possible. Josh Steiner, Senior Long-Range Planner for the City of Auburn, explained that Auburn had developed a Housing Needs and Characteristics Assessment as part of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan work, which provided policy and technical analysis to comply with state, regional, and county requirements regarding housing capacity and affordability. Auburn staff thoroughly reviewed existing goals and policies to identify policies that may need to be amended to meet those agency requirements. They discovered that many of the goals and policies were still applicable, and there were opportunities to introduce new content, such as the preservation of existing affordable housing, identifying communities at risk of displacement, and identifying mitigation strategies. Displacement was recognized as a concern as most of Auburn’s renters have household incomes at or below 50% AMI, especially BIPOC renters. The Preservation Strategies and the guidance that SKHHP and other cities provided generated a great list of policies, goals, and actions to include in Auburn's Housing Element. It was helpful to know that there was consensus on several preservation policies, as housing is a regional challenge. Auburn's Housing Element was accepted by the Planning Commission on April 16, with the intention of the Auburn City Council adopting the plan in early July. Dafne Hernandez, Associate Planner for the City of Covington, is primarily responsible for the Comprehensive Plan update. Covington is unique compared to other SKHHP cities, incorporated in 1997, most of the housing stock is still newer and not in need of preservation. It was important for Covington to point out the partnership with SKHHP as part of its Comprehensive Plan development. As part of developing the Preservation Strategies, Covington discovered that housing maintenance was not explicitly called out as part of its Housing Element. The city would use language related to Goal 2 of the strategies to encourage maintaining the current housing stock, focusing on high-level policies to prepare the city as the housing stock ages. Dafne Hernandez found the collaborative process helpful, and it provided an opportunity to learn more about what the other cities in SKHHP are doing to preserve housing. Kaelene Nobis, Long-Range Planner for the City of Kent, informed the Executive Board that as part of a previous collaborative effort with SKHHP, Kent had adopted a Housing Option Plan in 2021. This laid the groundwork for Kent to establish nine anti-displacement and housing preservation policies in the city’s plan. Since the adoption of the plan, significant changes have been made with state laws, Countywide Planning Policies, and the Puget Sound Regional Council’s Vision 2050 planning policies, which has necessitated a revisit of all policies the city had in place. The City of Kent appreciates that SKHHP has taken the lead in identifying options to meet these requirements on a subregional scale. Over several months, planners would share ideas and resources while trying to navigate each city's unique character to find some alignment. While there were common challenges and goals, the implementation differed across each city. Kent added its unique experience and expertise, including a study of the city's mobile/manufactured home parks. Kent found that it was essential to talk about housing health and safety along with the preservation of affordability. Kent appreciated learning from other cities about programs like rental housing inspections that operated differently or the results of implementing housing action plans. The City of Kent will use the Housing Options Plan alongside the Preservation Strategies when developing a draft Comprehensive Plan. Kaelene Nobis highlighted the usefulness of the matrix at the end of strategies, demonstrating how action ties directly into implementing the policies. Matt Torpey, Community Development Manager for the City of Maple Valley, said Maple Valley is like Covington, with mostly newer housing stock stemming from the city's incorporation in 1997. The city has a high amount of market-rate housing with some naturally occurring affordable housing, such as mobile home parks and income-restricted units. Maple Valley has seen most of its single-family zones built out and anticipates a shift to more multi-family and mixed-use sites as the city grows. Trying to get ahead of the growth, Maple Valley implemented a policy a couple of years ago that requires a minimum of 10% of all units to be affordable to households making 70% AMI or less with no sunset clause. The city has 400 available units coming online in the next couple of years. Maple Valley is also ahead of some of the other jurisdictions and was the first to submit its Comprehensive Plan to King County for review, and the reaction from King County has been primarily positive. While the Comprehensive Plan was submitted before the final version of the Preservation Strategies, Maple Valley worked to incorporate it into its plan during the drafting process. Several of the policies in Maple Valley's Comprehensive Plan align with the goals described in the Preservation Strategies, including preserving existing housing stock that meets the affordable needs of the community, supporting mobile/manufactured home parks, and working collaboratively with groups such as SKHHP. Maple Valley has also designated significant SHB 1406 funds to support rental assistance through local non-profits. Matt Torpey believes the city will have an amazing Comprehensive Plan and Housing Element as part of SKHHP’s collaborative efforts. Nicholas Matz, Community Development Director for the City of Normandy Park, explained that the city has a smaller population and housing stock when compared to other SKHHP cities. Mayor Eric Zimmerman's support has been an essential element of the housing work Nicholas Matz and his team have done on behalf of the city. Normandy Park has been focused on meeting its housing needs by income band, and the Preservation Strategies has been helpful to the city's focus on the naturally occurring affordable housing in their community. Nicholas Matz said the city intends to include policies 1.2, 1.5, 2.2, and 3.4 from the Preservation Strategies in the draft Housing Element with tactical implementation around them. An example related to Goal 1 is how the city is not identifying capacity in the multi-family zones because that is where the naturally occurring affordable housing is located. Under policy 2.2, the city will continue to bring forward the SKHHP Housing Capital Fund Resolutions and support the capital fund, which includes a preservation project in 2023. Finally, under Goal 3, the city is excited to discuss new partnerships with affordable housing providers and religious organizations that hold buildable land. The Preservation Strategies were developed collaboratively, which made the final product stronger. For Normandy Park, it's a cookbook the city can update for its own needs, knowing that the region uses the same cookbook. Angie Mathias, Long-Range Planning Manager for the City of Renton, appreciated the opportunity to collaborate with SKHHP and the other cities as part of the development of the Preservation Strategies. The City of Renton is older, with some housing stock close to one hundred years old, including some housing built during World War II. Renton also experienced a lot of upward market pressure, with one townhome recently selling for roughly $900,000. The city already has several policies related to preserving existing housing, but the policies need to be strengthened, and the Preservation Strategies will undoubtedly help. Neil Tabor from the City of Tukwila was scheduled to present, but he had a family emergency and wasn't available. Claire Goodwin read a letter on behalf of Chaney Skadsen from the City of Federal Way, who could not attend the meeting but wanted to speak about the work to develop the Preservation Strategies. “By 2044, Federal Way is expected to accommodate 11.,260 new housing units 66% of which are needed above 80% AMI. The composition of the future housing need allocated to Federal Way is informed by the existing housing stock of which nearly four firths ( or 80%) was constructed between the 1960s and 1990s. The majority of existing housing in Federal Way serves households within the 50-80% Area Median Income (AMI) bracket. These units, totaling over 13,000, are essential contributors to the city's housing landscape, providing affordable options to low-income households. However, this segment of the Federal Way housing stock faces challenges and at risk of vanishing amidst an increasingly competitive market. Federal Way and neighboring South King County cities have historically experienced lower property values compared to metropolitan cities like Seattle and Bellevue, the public investment in regional transportation and the siting of future light rail stations through South King County is expected to accelerate housing prices in South King County adding additional pressure. While some units remain affordable due to income-restricted covenants and agreements, many are approaching term limits with pending expirations or have no protections at all. A majority of Federal Way's affordable housing is attributed to Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH). NOAH represents unsubsidized housing that remains affordable due to factors like age, location, amenities, and building condition rather than income restrictions or government subsidies. In light of these challenges, preserving existing affordable housing ensures a range of housing options for residents with varying income levels. Moreover, preservation also promotes equitable housing related outcomes as certain racial groups are disproportionately cost burdened and severely cost burdened leading to increased vulnerability to displacement and more likely to be affected by housing instability. While planning to meet the future housing need in Federal Way, one primary focus is stimulating residential development for market rate housing to meet the largest share of housing need. These efforts can be paired with the preservation of existing affordable units for a time efficient and cost-effective approach to supporting and maintaining a balanced housing stock when compared to focusing on developing new affordable housing alone. Preserving these units presents its own set of challenges. Programing and funding to control fading conditions from deferred maintenance, monitoring impending expiration of income- restricted covenants, and developing tools to address rising costs may be best studied and addressed at a subregional level with neighboring cities sharing demographic and market realities. Over the last 6 months SKHHP has hosted a series of meetings with the South King County Housing Planners (SoKiHo) to discuss the Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update and compliance with the Growth Management Act, VISION 2050, and the King County Countywide Policies.” Claire Goodwin thanked all the planners for their efforts to develop the Preservation Strategies and for being available to present at the meeting today. SKHHP will share the Preservation Strategies on our website, and SoKiHo will take an inventory of where the thru-lines and overlap are across the jurisdictions in the completed and adopted comprehensive plans. Based on that information, SKHHP staff will determine if there are items where the majority of cities align and where subregional coordination is required. Claire Goodwin envisions that the points of alignment will be where SKHHP can provide coordination and resources to support implementation. Dana Ralph thanked SKHHP staff and planners for the work that went into the Preservation Strategies. Each of the SKHHP cities has significant differences, and the idea that everyone should do the same thing is not where SKHHP goes. Instead, the focus is on finding alignment in the work we share across the region, building a stronger collaboration. Sunaree Marshall appreciated the work and acknowledged that preservation has long been a concern for South King County and SKHHP. She was excited to see the document's specific nature and the collaborative effort that went into it. Brian Davis appreciated Dana Ralph’s comments on the difference between jurisdictions and the introductory statement, which allows flexibility by stating that jurisdictions can select what policies and actions work best for their community. Brain Davis asked for clarification that when the document says, “identify, monitor, or evaluate city actions” that it is in a city’s voice that cities can choose and it’s not a SKHHP thing to evaluate and monitor. Claire Goodwin confirmed that the voice of the goals, policies, and implementing action is in the city's voice and that SKHHP would jump in where there was alignment across most cities, but SKHHP would not monitor or oversee implementation. VI. BOARD BUSINESS a. 2025 SKHHP WORK PLAN & BUDGET Claire Goodwin informed the Executive Board that they were in the final stretch of adopting the 2025 Work Plan and Budget per our Interlocal Agreement requirements. The final draft was provided as part of the meeting agenda packet. The process of developing the work plan started this year with a survey of the Executive and Advisory Boards. SKHHP staff developed a draft work plan based on that information and shared it with the Staff Work Group. The draft was revised based on feedback, and those revisions were shared at last month's Executive Board meeting. The Executive Board provided direction that they were comfortable with the draft and the proposed changes. The Executive Board also provided direction on using the interest earnings accrued on the capital funds towards the operating budget to allow for a cushion in future years should SKHHP need it. The interest earnings have been incorporated into the budget, and there is an estimated beginning and ending fund balance for next year in the 2025 draft budget reflecting that addition. Additional direction was provided that the Executive Board wanted to ensure that SKHHP coordinated with the respective jurisdiction when a property owner of affordable housing reaches out to SKHHP to connect to non-profits to potentially preserve the affordability. That clarification has been included. Finally, at the last meeting, there was a good discussion about adding a few action items to the work plan. One stood out as an item of general interest and received five votes to support adding it: Discuss how best to honor homelessness in SKHHP's work. Claire Goodwin inquired about the opinions of the two board members absent at last month's meeting on whether to add this item. Based on their answers, the Executive Board continued to have a split vote and therefore it was not included in the work plan. Claire Goodwin consulted with Chair Nancy Backus since the item continues to be brought up. It is Claire Goodwin’s understanding that Chair Nancy Backus would like to bring forward a conversation about homelessness over the summer and that the discussion will likely take place in July or August. Should the Executive Board adopt the 2025 Work Plan and Budget today, the next step will be for the legislative bodies of each of your jurisdictions to adopt it. Due to Claire Goodwin's maternity leave, the staff work group members will shepherd the Council materials and present them to your Councils in her absence. SKHHP staff will develop the Council materials to inform the legislative bodies on the 2025 Work Plan and Budget before her leave begins May 13. Traci Buxton stated she was ambivalent about the topic of homelessness out of concerns for staff capacity, but she appreciates that it will be discussed since it is in SKHHP’s name. Dana Ralph added that it was very important to the Chair to wrangle what does it mean and how is homelessness a part of the work we are doing while being aware we are a small, but mighty team and there are other organizations doing the work, and it should be a good conversation. Traci Buxton moved to adopt the 2025 Work Plan and Budget as read, seconded by Eric Zimmerman. (11-0) b. 2024 HOUSING CAPITAL FUND GUIDELINES Claire Goodwin was excited to announce that SKHHP is entering its third annual funding round of the Housing Capital Fund. SKHHP members pool resources from SHB 1406, HB 1590, and the general fund for affordable housing construction and preservation/rehabilitation in South King County. The Interlocal Agreements for pooling sales tax receipts to administer funds under RCW 82.14.530 and RCW 82.14.540 require that for each funding round, the Executive Board identify funding guidelines that include funding priorities, the amount available, eligible activities, geographic areas, and more. The Executive Board adopts the funding guidelines every year and makes minor adjustments. The finalized draft proposal for the 2024 Funding Guidelines and the redline version were included in the meeting packet. Today's intent is to review the changes in the draft and adopt the updated 2024 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines. A few changes were made to the draft based on the feedback from the March meeting. The funding priorities had language added to clarify they are in alphabetical order. Clarification was also added to clarify the eligibility for homeownership projects serving up to 80% AMI dependent on the adoption of any amendments to enabling legislation for SHB 1406 on eligible uses of funds by some of the SKHHP partners. Language around the preservation priority was added to include income-restricted properties. The Intent to Apply form is now required as part of the pre- application meeting process so that all parties in the pre-application meeting can have the same information. Language was also added related to the general funds available as part of the funding round, allowing flexibility to determine the most effective use of the funds in relation to project applications received. Claire Goodwin prepared information based on the frequently asked questions by developers relating to the SKHHP contracts and added it under the "Other Award Terms" section of the guidelines. This content includes information about the reimbursement process, a 5% retention held until the construction of a project is complete, and that SKHHP requires competitive bidding and prevailing wages as part of our contracts. The application review process was also updated to reflect last year's process. Jurisdiction staff were removed from the initial review of the application, which was requested by the staff due to capacity concerns. Clarification was also added that the recommendation process goes to the Advisory Board first and then the Executive Board. A reference was removed asking a jurisdiction where a project is to be located who hasn't contributed to the Housing Capital Fund to write a letter of support. This was based on the experience of reviewing an application in unincorporated King County and understanding that the County was supportive of the project based on their financially supporting that project. Language elsewhere in the guidelines empowers a jurisdiction to notify SKHHP if a project is not desired for their community. Dana Ralph spoke on the language and the importance of hearing from a mayor or city manager before a project proceeds too far down the development process. Cities should maintain a step in the process before it becomes a broader conversation to prevent using funds against the desires of a partner city. Claire Goodwin acknowledged the concern and that it was discussed extensively during the drafting process of the 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines and highlighted the language remaining in the draft guidelines, which states, "Staff from the project location jurisdiction shall notify the respective SKHHP Executive Board Member and administration of the applicant’s intent to apply and may consult with their legislative body on the project proposal. Within two weeks of the pre-application meeting, a jurisdiction may submit a statement on the project proposal to SKHHP staff as part of the project’s Housing Capital Fund application. Should the jurisdiction not be supportive, the proposal shall not move forward for consideration in the current funding cycle." Claire Goodwin confirmed that imposing a project on a jurisdiction is not SKHHP's culture. Traci Buxton stated that the language from 2023 addressed the concern but could have been more substantial because it was addressed in other language in the guidelines. If that language is to be removed, having a stronger version of the statement might make more sense. As the discussion on homelessness and affordable housing morphs in our subregion, some unique or interesting projects have come to a jurisdiction that the elected officials were not informed about. The voice of the elected body should be protected as the touchpoint for the citizens, and often, the staff is less connected to the community. The elected officials will ultimately bear the brunt of any unaddressed concerns or needs in their community. Traci Buxton recommended modifying the language,” “Staff from the project location jurisdiction shall notify the legislative representative… “ Claire Goodwin responded that the language was flexible since King County is a partner and notifying the County Council would be complex. Sunaree Marshall confirmed that the language needed to be flexible as King County has its own internal process for handling project notifications, and a requirement to notify the County Council would add challenges. Colleen Brandt-Schluter asked where a typical project is when applying to the SKHHP fund since SKHHP tends to be the last funder, so it might not be news to a city. Her experience with the City of Burien projects in 2022 was that the projects were well-known to the city. Dana Ralph responded that the city staff may often be aware of it, and the mayor usually knows in a strong mayor form of government. In other forms of government, this may only sometimes be the case, and there is a difference between the code and permit review that staff are responsible for and the perspective of an elected official. Traci Buxton responded to Colleen Brandt-Schluter that since SKHHP is not a primary funder, alerting the elected officials may not be a priority like when SKHHP is the sole or primary funder. As SKHHP grows and the funding process becomes standardized, ensuring that the elected officials related to SKHHP continue to be informed about potential projects is essential. Using the language "shall notify" would not require that a project be placed on a council agenda; just ensure the elected officials are aware through a committee or department report. Dana Ralph asked if adding "legislative or executive branch" would address the concern. In a strong mayor form of government, the mayor would be notified, and in a council form, it would be the city manager. Providing an update for the City of Kent would be an agenda item and may create additional challenges. Thomas McLeod asked if the two weeks provided to the jurisdiction to weigh in was enough time to review and report on the project's details. Claire Goodwin responded that the process described in the draft guidelines reflected the process from 2023. Pre-application meetings were allowed until the application deadline, and SKHHP needed time to update the developer before they submitted a complete application. It is helpful for the applicant to know sooner if there is a concern or a city is not supportive of a project. Thomas McLeod added that, like Kent, the City of Tukwila would have to put a project on the agenda for discussion. Due to the meeting schedule of the Tukwila City Council, there is a scenario where they would not be able to respond within the two-week deadline. Claire Goodwin described the process from last year as a more direct conversation to identify any concerns a city might have, and it didn't require formal council action. SKHHP attempted to design a less administrative process, and projects with issues are often already on the radar of the elected officials. Thomas McLeod responded that he felt it was important for his legislative body to weigh in on a project. Dana Ralph replied that last year intended to ensure an elected official was informed about a project rather than a formal process, which may add complexity. Brian Davis stated that this was an essential issue for Federal Way and appreciated that the conversation continues to evolve. He concurred that staff are not ultimately responsible as representatives of a city and suggested adding a requirement to notify the city's chief executive, which would address both styles of city government. He also wanted more time for review and communication and suggested increasing the response time from two weeks to thirty days. Sean Kelly added that for cities with a Council-Manager form of government, the notification language should include the mayor or elected officials so that they can help keep the process moving. Eric Zimmerman agreed that requiring the mayor or city manager to be notified would mirror similar notifications at the state and county level. Claire Goodwin modified the language based on the feedback: "For projects located in cities, SKHHP staff shall notify the Mayor and City Manager (if applicable) of the applicant’s intent to apply. For projects located in unincorporated King County, SKHHP staff shall notify the County’s SKHHP Board Member. Within thirty days of being notified, a jurisdiction may submit a statement on the project proposal to SKHHP staff as part of the project’s Housing Capital Fund application. Should the jurisdiction not be supportive, the proposal shall not move forward for consideration in the current funding cycle.” Claire Goodwin informed the Executive Board that between 2023 and 2024, SKHHP has pooled over $10 million to support affordable housing in our region. Traci Buxton moved to adopt the 2024 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines as read, seconded by Sean Kelly. (11-0) VII.UPDATES/ANNOUNCEMENTS Claire Goodwin reminded the Board that this was her last Executive Board meeting until October as she will be on maternity leave beginning May 13 and returning September 23. Jeff Tate of the City of Auburn, who served as the SKHHP Manager before the role existed, will fill in for Claire Goodwin during her absence. After May 13, don't hesitate to contact Jeff at jtate@auburnwa.gov and Dorsol Plants, SKHHP Program Coordinator, at dplants@skhhp.org. Claire Goodwin confirmed that Executive Board meetings would continue in her absence and that there was a good outline of agenda topics and outside presentations over the summer months. The "Meet the Developer" series will continue, and there will be other briefings based on the topics requested by the Executive Board. The Program Coordinator has also been working hard to organize an affordable housing tour for the September in-person meeting. Logistics will be forthcoming, but the overall plan is to meet in Auburn and tour the SKHHP- funded Habitat for Humanity homeownership project in Burien, then head to Victorian Place II in Des Moines and hear from MSC on the work happening there, then go to the Sunset Neighborhood in Renton and visit the Homestead Community Land Trust Willow Crest homes and hear from Renton's planning staff on the neighborhood plan in that area. Several Advisory Board members will be present on the tour as well. Claire Goodwin stated that the only significant pause in work would be the contracting aspect of the Housing Capital Fund and wanted to provide an update on the status of each contract. Contracting for the Habitat for Humanity Burien homeownership project will occur in the next two weeks, and contracting will close with Victorian Place II by May 1. Pacifica Law Group was hired to assist in the development of contract and funding document templates, and an expenditure related to this work will be reflected in the Q2 progress update and budget report. Claire Goodwin informed the Executive Board that it had been brought to her attention that two conferences conflict with our regularly scheduled June meeting on June 21. To avoid a lack of quorum, Claire Goodwin suggested rescheduling it to June 14 from 1 PM-3 PM if that date would work for most of the Board. This would likely be an in person meeting in Auburn as the June 21 meeting was scheduled to be in person, and we only meet three times a year in person. The Executive Board confirmed that June 14 would work for most of the Board in attendance. Claire Goodwin extended hearty congratulations to Carmen Rivera, who is getting married shortly and wished her all the best during this exciting time. VIII. ADJOURN Dana Ralph adjourned the meeting at 2:46 PM. ABOUT MERCY HOUSING NORTHWEST •At Mercy Housing Northwest, affordable housing is a platform for transformation. •For over 30 years, Mercy Housing Northwest’s mission has been to create stable, vibrant, and healthy communities, now serving over 6,000 people everyday •Mercy Housing Northwest has developed 1,300 units of family housing in the last ten years, including over 700 units in King County. •Mercy pairs long-term affordable housing with supportive service programs focused on education, health & wellness, housing stability, economic empowerment, and community building. •Since the start of 2020, MHNW staff have provided over 175,000 services to residents •A focus on program partnerships allows residents to access services on–site that are culturally -relevant and based in the languages they speak at home – 11 different languages are spoken by MHNW service staff. •MHNW’s education programs are site based and focused on ensuring academic success for school aged residents, culminating in on time high school graduation and opportunities for post secondary learning and career success. BURIEN FAMILY HOUSING AFFORDABLE HOUSING + SHELTER Two high -capacity partners focused on serving families, working together on a better, more integrated solution to family homelessness BURIEN FAMILY HOUSING & MARY'S PLACE SHELTER BUILDING ON A STRONG PARTNERSHIP •This innovative concept builds on the existing partnership between two experienced organizations to provide a progressive continuum of housing and services for families facing housing insecurity and other challenges •Mary’s Place and Mercy Housing Northwest seek to serve families by building on the foundation of partnership created on: •Allen Family Center: the two organizations partnered to create a Family Resources Center in the Mount Baker neighborhood to help families struggling with housing insecurity •Cedar Crossing: Mercy Housing Northwest is co-developing 254 units of housing at the Roosevelt Light Rail station, including 20 units set aside for families who have children with complex medical challenges, including families from Popsicle Place. CREATING HOME FOR FAMILIES Affordable HousingShelter CREATING HOME FOR FAMILIES To create and operate sustainable facilities that provide permanent affordable housing alongside family shelter and services for families and children experiencing homelessness •Center equity and opportunity to address the crisis of family homelessness •Innovation and use of best practices to create a well-planned community for residents, including children and families, as well as the broader Burien community •Ensure long-term financial and program stability plan •Concept and program formed with input from the community and people with lived experience VISION AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES •Problem: 35,000 homeless children enrolled in Washington State schools, whose families face significant challenges accessing housing resources •Families are left behind by new funding programs that serve people who have been homeless – families with children don’t typically qualify for these resources •PSH placements often require families to leave their communities, disrupting education and other support networks •Solution: Innovative partnership to create a campus of housing and services to serve families from homelessness to safe, stable housing •A new solution to allow families and children to remain in their community as they transition in their journey from homelessness •New affordable housing and services, with mostly 2-, 3-, & 4-bedroom homes for 90 families; 34 of the homes set aside for families transitioning from shelter. •New shelter facility with capacity to serve 75 families (up to 200 persons a night), including medically fragile and infants •Mercy Scholars and Mary’s Place Kids Club programs to support educational success INNOVATIVE YSTEMS HANGE BURIEN - SCHEDULE Predevelopment studies, design work: Shelter &Housing 2021-24 Project funding secured: Housing Shelter early 2025 mid 2025 Start construction (funding dependent): Shelter & Housing early 2025 Project completed: Housing Shelter Mid 2026 End 2026 Kent Multicultural Village Mercy Housing Northwest & Open Doors for Multicultural Families (ODMF) Kent-based ODMF served over 2,500 clients in 2022 at three locations in King County To create a welcoming, inclusive community for people of all abilities that reflects the diversity of Kent, activates the public realm, and serves as a gateway to transit users. •Center accessibility (20% of units set aside for intellectual and developmental disabilities [IDD]); ODMF offices and program spaces •ODMF will relocate offices to the project and will include community-serving spaces •Neighborhood retail will activate the corner with Pacific Highway •Inclusive early learning center will be operated by ODMF and focus on serving the needs of children with IDD •Activate the Sound Transit station area with public plazas and recreation space VISION AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES CREATING SPACE FOR COMMUNITY Kent Multicultural Village will be a center for the diverse Midway neighborhood of Kent. The design and program components of the project will meet the needs of the community. •240 affordable housing units, for households earning between 30% and 60% of AMI •25,000 square feet of community-serving space and non-profit office •10,000 square feet of inclusive early-learning center •4,500 square feet of neighborhood retail, with emphasis on dining and culinary skills training •Emphasis on multicultural design and public art •Public plaza spaces adjacent to Sound Transit public space to maximize public benefit and enhance the transit experience KENT MCV - SCHEDULE Predevelopment + Design Present – mid -2025 Project funding secured Early 2025 Start construction Q3 2025 Project completed Q3 2027 EXAMPLES OF OTHER RECENT MERCY HOUSING NORTHWEST PROJECTS IN KING COUNTY •Includes a set-aside for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) families •Mixed use with community-serving office tenant in ground floor (the Arc of King County •Maximizing transit access for residents, guests, and employers CONTINUING INCLUSIVE MIXED-USE TOD IN SOUTH KING COUNTY Angle Lake Family Housing SeaTac, WA 130 Units of affordable housing Adjacent to Angle Lake Light Rail Station Developed and operated by MHNW Broke Ground in fall, 2023 Mercy Othello Plaza Seattle, WA 108 Units of affordable housing Adjacent to Othello Light Rail Station Developed and operated by MHNW Opened in spring, 2016 CATALYZING OMMUNITY EVELOPMENT WITH Cedar Crossing Seattle, WA 254 Units of affordable housing Adjacent to Roosevelt Station Developed by MHNW and Bellwether Housing Opened in spring, 2022 FOCUSED ON RANSIT RIENTED EVELOPMENT DISCUSSION OF OPPORTUNITIES/CHALLENGES DEVELOPING IN SOUTH KING COUNTY 1 SOUTH KING HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS PARTNERS 2024 Quarter 1 Progress Report (January-March). Quarter 1 was a time of building a stronger foundation by adding the City of SeaTac as SKHHP’s newest member and pooling funds from new sources of revenue and from every member city to support the Housing Capital Fund to fund the creation and preservation of affordable housing in South King County. GOAL 1. Fund the expansion and preservation of affordable housing. New Member to SKHHP – The City of SeaTac formally joined SKHHP in February bringing the total member jurisdictions to 12. New Revenue Sources – Two new sources of revenue were committed towards the 2024 Housing Capital Fund: City of SeaTac committed $300,000 from the general fund and the City of Maple Valley committed $500,000 from HB 1590 revenues. The SKHHP Housing Capital Fund is now financially supported by every SKHHP member city. 2024 Housing Capital Fund – $4.1 million has been confirmed by member cities to be available for the 2024 funding round of the SKHHP Housing Capital Fund for the construction and preservation of affordable housing in South King County. 2023 Housing Capital Fund – Presented to nine City Councils and received concurrence on the Executive Board’s recommendation to support four affordable housing projects in the subregion. Contracts – Developed set of templates for housing contracts and funding documents to be used when initiating contracts for awarded projects through the Housing Capital Fund. GOAL 2. Develop policies to expand and preserve affordable housing. Subregional Affordable Housing Preservation Strategies – Finalized the South King County Affordable Housing Preservation Strategies in collaboration with long -range planners (SoKiHo) and prepared presentation to the SKHHP Executive Board on April 19, 2024 and available here. South King County Joint Planners and Developers – Presented the variety of ways to identify vacant, developable land in South King County to seven developers and housing providers. Executive Board Briefings – Coordinated two presentations to the Executive Board including on Tax Increment Financing and an introduction to a South King County developer, the Multi -Service Center. GOAL 3. Serve as an advocate for South King County. South King County Advocacy – Met with State Representative to inform about South King County cities work to pool funds to support building and preserving affordable housing to bring awareness of subregional actions that are addressing the housing crisis. Participation in Local Meetings and Forums – Represented SKHHP at 40+ regional meetings representing 20 unique groups. Attended the 2024 Affordable Housing Symposium. Advisory Board – Appointed six new members to the SKHHP Advisory Board. Refined ideas regarding Advisory Board-led engagement opportunities for elected officials and community members. GOAL 4. Manage operations and administration. ILA Requirements – Developed drafts of 2025 work plan and budget and 2024 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines for adoption by Executive Board on April 19, 2024. Parental Leave – Developed coverage plan for Executive Manager parental leave to ensure SKHHP operations continue uninterrupted through September 2024. WHO WE ARE Formed in 2019 by an Interlocal Agreement, we are a collaboration between 11 South King County cities and King County united under the common goal to ensure the availability of housing for all income levels of residents in South King County. We achieve this through a focus on the production and preservation of affordable housing, partnership with public and private organizations, pooling and sharing resources, and advancing housing policies. PURPOSE Create a coordinated, comprehensive, and equitable approach to increasing housing stability, reducing homelessness, and producing and preserving quality affordable housing in South King County. CONTACT Claire Vanessa Goodwin Executive Manager Website: http://skhhp.org Phone: (253) 931-3042 Email: info@skhhp.org 2 South King Housing and Homelessness Partners Fund Status as of March 31, 2024 REVENUES OPERATING ACTUAL HOUSING CAPITAL FUND CONTRIBUTIONS 2024 Auburn $ 39,543 $ - Burien 22,814 - Covington 11,407 - Des Moines 11,407 - Federal Way 51,710 - Kent 51,710 - Maple Valley 11,407 - Normandy Park 6,084 - Renton 51,710 - SeaTac 10,456 - Tukwila 11,407 - King County 51,710 - King County additional contribution 23,290 - INTEREST EARNINGS 34,448 - Total $ 389,103 $ - EXPENDITURES OPERATING ACTUAL HOUSING CAPITAL FUND ACTUAL SKHHP Cost Reimbursement 53,174 - Administration Fee - - Total 53,174 - Beginning Fund Balance – January 1, 2024 398,395 7,292,705 Estimated net change in fund balance – March 31, 2024 335,929 0 Estimated Ending Fund Balance – March 31, 2024 734,324 7,292,705 SKHHP Cost Reimbursement Detail EXPENDITURES Wages 37,341 Benefits 9,876 Supplies 28 Professional Services 680 Interfund Allocations 5,250 Administrative fee - Total 53,174 SKHHP 25 W Main Street Auburn, WA 98001 Office: (253) 804-5089 skhhp.org TO: SKHHP Executive Board FROM: Claire V. Goodwin, SKHHP Executive Manager CC: Jeff Tate, Interim SKHHP Execuitve Support May 9, 2024 Summary: In late April, Habitat for Humanity requested that SKHHP’s 2022 Housing Capital Fund contribution of $300,000 to Phase 1 of the Burien Miller Creek 20-unit homeownership project be applied to fewer units than originally planned that would support homeownership opportunities for lower income households (between 40% AMI and 45% AMI). SKHHP’s funds were previously supporting households earning an average of 50% AMI, not to exceed 60% AMI. Background: In December of 2022, the SKHHP Executive Board recommended funding the Burien Miller Creek homeownership project at $300,000 to serve households earning up to 50% AMI across 20 town homes. In January through March of 2023, the legislative bodies of the participating cities approved the recommendation. On June 9, 2023, a memo was included in the Execuitve Board agenda packet from Habitat for Humanity explaining a revision to the AMI level, from “up to 50% AMI” to “average 50% AMI.” Habitat has communicated that the complexity of the project is clearer now than it was at the outset of the project. It is a large project across multiple undeveloped parcels. At the time of application to SKHHP, it was not entirely clear how the anticipated restrictions of the various public funders would affect the budget, nor how the necessary condominium structure may affect the phasing of the project. There was also additional infrastructure work that became necessary and some sound wall adjustments. Cost increases resulting from the pandemic and subsequent supply line issues will affect the construction bids as they move forward and the lower they are required to push the purchase prices, the harder it is for them to make up for those costs increases without additional funding. Spreading the SKHHP funds across all 20 units in Phase 1 of the project places additional restrictions on those units, in addition to the other public funders restrictions who have higher allowable AMI levels. Habitat’s goal is to still have the majority of units in Phase 1 at the average 50% AMI level, but other public funders (King County and Department of Commerce) have less restrictive funding sources and Habitat could go up to 80% AMI if necessary to ensure the success of the project. Habitat hopes that the SKHHP funds could be used on three units to achieve deeper affordability for those households earning 40%-45% AMI. Regarding risks, by reducing the number of units acting as collateral and reducing the AMI level, there may not be enough value in the three units to recoup SKHHP’s funds if a foreclosure occurred. Because SKHHP funds are some of the last awards to be made, there are already other funders that take priority in recouping their contribution should foreclosure occur. No matter if SKHHP funds 20 units or three units, there is always some risk of foreclosure as well as the risk that no foreclosure proceeds would be available for SKHHP after the senior loans were paid in full. Regarding benefits, supporting homeownership at a deeper affordability level allows SKHHP to support the highest need households in the project and provide an opportunity for lower-income household to become a homeowner when that would not be possible otherwise. SKHHP’s required monitoring of resales on three units will also require less administrative capacity than monitoring of resales on 20 units. King County and the Department of Commerce would remain funders on all the units, including the SKHHP funded units. Due to this change in SKHHP’s use of funds, the Executive Board’s position is requested prior to executing the contract and funding documents (to happen in October after the Executive Manager returns from maternity leave). Since the Housing Capital Fund process is relatively new, when changes such as these arise, the Board’s interest level in being informed is requested. Recommendation: Support the project however is financially needed so long as eligibility on the use of funds is in- alignment with the governing laws of the fund source (RCW 82.14.540) and in-alignment with the Housing Capital Fund Guidelines adopted in 2022. This change appears administrative in nature. In the future, changes such as these that don’t change the footprint of a project and are making only minor adjustments to AMI level, number of units, or population served, a memo could be shared with the Board informing of the changes. Questions for the Executive Board: 1. Does the revised use of SKHHP’s funds to fewer units at a deeper affordability work for the Board? 2. When changes to projects such as these occur (which is likely in future projects as well), how informed or involved does the Board want to be? Does the Board want to approve these types of changes or are these administrative changes that can be handled by the Executive Manager when contracting? 3. What outstanding questions do you have about this topic? 1 5 6 7 4 3 2 Rising housing costs increasingly put homeownership out of reach for low- and moderate-income households. Fortunately, city leaders can support simple reforms to help increase affordable homeownership options in their communities. Each strategy below can help, but combined they will be even more effective. Policy Brief for Local Elected Officials Reduce Minimum Lot Sizes Middle Housing Code Audit Embrace Unit Lot Subdivision Invest in Permit Desk Staffing Seven strategies to create more affordable ownership housing in your city: Adjust Parking Requirements Go Easy on Impact Fees Allow Clusters Local Regulatory Reform for Affordable Homeownership Middle housing: modern starter homes Housing costs are high for two key reasons: 1) there aren’t enough homes, so the price of those on the market becomes inflated, and 2) the homes that are built tend to be oriented towards the wealthiest customers. It’s hard for a city to address #1 on its own because scarcity is a statewide problem. But cities do get to influence #2 by choosing what types of homes to allow and encourage in their city limits: high- cost housing aimed at wealthy households, or more economical housing aimed at the working and middle class. Around the country cities are looking to middle housing — buildings like townhouses, cottages, duplexes, and small-lot houses — to create modern starter homes for a new generation of first-time home buyers. These types of homes have been illegal in most neighborhoods for decades, as housing costs have spiraled upwards. Middle housing spreads costs out over multiple units, creating more affordable ownership and rental options in a variety of formats that can be well-suited to parents with kids, single adults, couples, or multi-generational families. Stability. A mortgage payment is a consistent cost that a household can plan around. While rents can be more affordable in the short-term, they rise unpredictably with inflation and changes in the housing market. Wealth building. The opportunity to invest housing payments into a long-term investment is the most feasible way for many working and middle-class households to build wealth. Household wealth creates a safety net that can blunt the impact of emergencies and provide the foundation for retirement. Anti-displacement. Too often, when communities invest in urban amenities like high-capacity transit or parks, vulnerable populations that would benefit the most are displaced by rising rents. Homeownership enables community members to remain in place and enjoy the benefits of improvements they helped to bring about. Why support homeownership? Homeownership offers a few unique advantages to middle and working-class households that are not available through the rental market. Black Home Initiative Duplex Cottages Townhomes Parking Fire code Building code ZoningZoning Fees Zoning is just the tip of the regulatory iceberg. 1 2 3 4 Seven strategies to create more affordable ownership housing Reduce Minimum Lot Sizes One zoning rule that can significantly increase the cost of owning a home is minimum lot size. Since land makes up a big part of the cost of any home, requiring a large amount of land with the purchase can only inflate that cost. Reducing the required minimum lot size in low-intensity (i.e. single-family) zones creates flexibility for lower cost homes. Middle Housing Code Audit There are often unseen barriers that make it difficult or impossible to build middle housing, even if it is technically allowed under your city’s zoning. Talk with local builders and planning staff about barriers your code creates like extra fees, complex public works standards, burdensome permitting requirements, or other potential barriers that could stymie middle housing construction in your city. Embrace Unit-Lot Subdivision “Unit lot subdivision” allows a household to buy one of several homes that share a “parent lot”. This lot must be developed under normal development regulations like setbacks and minimum lot size, but these rules don’t apply to the subsidiary “unit lots”. Because unit lot subdivision helps reduce the land costs for each home, it is an excellent tool to support affordable homeownership. It works well for townhouses and cottages and offers an alternative to condominiums, which have become less popular with builders due to lawsuit risk. Black Home Initiative Invest in Permit Desk Staffing Before building a home a developer must get planning, public works, fire, and utilities permits. This process is essential to ensure the project is safe, but it can be slow, and it often prioritizes single-unit projects at the expense of more affordable multi-unit projects. Cities should make sure permit desks are well staffed to avoid expensive delays, consider lower permitting fees for more affordable projects, and review processes for undue preference given to higher-cost housing types. Unit Lots Parent lot With two parking spaces per unit this triplex has almost no room left for open space. About Black Home Initiative Adjust Parking Requirements5There isn’t anything wrong with wanting it to be easy to park. But parking is expensive, so it helps home buyers to have the choice between convenient parking and a more affordable mortgage. When a city requires a set number of parking spaces with new housing it sends a message that parking is as important as the housing itself, while making it difficult to accommodate other amenities like trees or open space. Go Easy on Impact Fees6 Impact fees seek to make new development pay for the costs of expanded infrastructure and services. When impact fees are overused they have the effect of encouraging construction of high-priced homes, because the developer is more likely to be able to pay the fee and still make a profit. Cities should identify the types of housing that best help achieve housing goals and waive or reduce fees for those types. This can be a win-win, since affordable ownership housing, especially infill housing like townhouses, often helps reduce infrastructure costs in the long-term. It doesn’t make sense to penalize the types of housing we most want to be built. Allow Clusters7 On lots where four or more units are allowed, allowing multiple buildings will enable use of the residential (rather than the commercial) building code, which tends support more affordable construction. Allowing multiple buildings also makes it easier to add homes on a lot without tearing down an existing house. Clusters of buildings should generally not have open space requirements more stringent than the same number of units in a single building. Black Home Initiative (BHI) is a multi-year, regional effort from Civic Commons that targets the racial inequities at the core of the housing ecosystem to increase home-ownership among BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) households. BHI’s initial emphasis is to create opportunity for 1,500 new low- and moderate-income Black households to own a home in South Seattle, South King County, and North Pierce County within the next five years. The initiative convenes cross-sector partners who collaboratively act on local priorities ranging from homebuyer preparation to construction financing to policy reform. By centering those most affected by the work, BHI is creating a foundation for long-term systems change. The ultimate impact we seek is racial equity for everyone and an increase in intergenerational household wealth. “Detached duplex” with a new home built in the original home’s backyard. Black Home Initiative Tacoma - Pierce County Affordable Housing Consortium www.tpcahc.org info@tpcahc.org 253-627-0949 PO Box 8070, Tacoma, WA 98419 Affiliate Organization Scan this code toexplore BHI resources