Prepares to conclude moratorium on homeless housing sites in single-family neighborhoods
EVERETT — The Everett City Council voted 5-1, last week, in favor of continuing to allow supportive housing developments to be built on publicly owned land that is located within neighborhoods zoned R-1, for single family residential use only. Their decision is contrary to the recommendation provided by the Everett Planning Commission, in October, and should soon bring closure to a six-month emergency moratorium that councilmembers had unanimously approved this past June.
Approval of future construction projects will now require an adjustment to some of the current standards associated with such planned developments. The revised guidelines will comply applicants to provide outreach to neighborhood residents prior to filing their land use plans with the city. Additionally, the review process would begin examining development proposals to ensure that they fit in with the general character of surrounding residential buildings’ height, density and open space features.
Last week’s decision could potentially allow for a 34-unit multi-family supportive housing complex that was halted by the city’s moratorium. The proposed development would be built by nonprofit organization Housing Hope and accommodate up to 100 of the Everett school district’s homeless students and their families.
The school district owns the 3-acre site located at 36th Street and Norton Avenue. The Everett school board voted in May to approve a 75-year lease of the surplus land to Housing Hope for $1 a year.
The school district reported having 1,266 homeless students last year and had previously said their plan for the surplus property was chosen because it would be used specifically for the benefit of its students.
The fate of the proposal wasn’t completely settled by the council’s vote.
Everett Planning Director Allan Giffen said in an email, “The Housing Hope development is not vested under the previous code.”
The organization had submitted an application this fall to rezone the property from R-1 to R-3, which allows multifamily and medium-density developments. “That application has been moved back, at their request, to the 2020 docket cycle,” Giffen said.
Housing Hope wants to leave itself options, in hopes of completing the project. “For now, we will continue on both pathways until such time that it becomes clear that we can obtain a viable development permit using the Supportive Housing ordinance,” CEO Fred Safstrom said in an email. The organization will now begin inviting neighbors to join their design advisory committee for the project Safstrom said.
“Our plan is to design and arrange funding for the project concluding January 2021, with construction beginning in late summer 2021 and completion 12 months later.”
The moratorium is set to expire Dec. 12, but the council will consider extending it, at their meeting on Dec. 11, after press time for the Tribune. It would then allow the city’s planning and legal staffs adequate time to craft the proposed ordinance revisions, based upon the input provided, for the requirements of new supportive housing developments.
City Attorney David Hall told council members he expects that only a brief extension to the moratorium should be adequate, “We’re talking weeks, not months,” he said. Hall also requested that the council designate a couple of its members to participate in the process and help ensure that the results will reflect its desires.
The Dec. 4 meeting drew a large, engaged crowd that spilled out of the council chambers and into the lobby of the police department’s building at 3002 Wetmore Ave. The public comments portion of the hearing featured more than fifty speakers and lasted over two hours.
People in support outnumbered those who wanted a permanent ban. Support was expressed for continuing to allow the use of publicly owned land in single-family zones, for supportive housing developments. Those who spoke for the ban wanted it permanent, and focused on land uses.
Reasons provided for ending the moratorium stressed the area’s shortage of affordable housing, the social needs of vulnerable populations and the value provided in helping such people. Several who spoke to the need for supportive housing, reported having previously experienced homelessness themselves. Multiple representatives of city and county agencies or nonprofit organizations that are set up to study and address such problems also provided comments.
Those people in favor of a permanent moratorium generally spoke about the importance of preserving the existing character of neighborhoods, possible property value impacts, concerns with local infrastructure, losing open spaces and also historic overlay designations.
Several councilmembers expressed dismay, following public comments, with sentiments that they perceived to be calling into question the council’s empathy for people experiencing homelessness. Councilmember Scott Murphy cast the lone vote against last week’s motion.
Councilmember Jeff Moore, who works for the Everett school district as the director of finance, recused himself from all moratorium proceedings and votes to avoid a conflict of interests from his employer’s role in the proposed development on Norton Avenue.
To help address homelessness, the City Council approved a revision to zoning laws in 2016. It was meant to clear the way specifically for the development of supportive housing, based upon the housing first model. The ordinance allowed a separate category of land use for building the multi-family units in areas zoned R-1, with the stipulation that they must be built on publicly owned lands and also established a new lower off-street parking standard for such housing.
Since the code amendment in 2016, the city has approved three supportive housing applications. Clare’s Place, which began operating in July on Berkshire Road, had formerly been city owned and is the only property that is located in an R-1 zone.
Giffen reported this fall that there are only four possible undeveloped sites, throughout the city, that meet the ordinance’s specific criteria and would also be viable for supportive housing under the current land use code.
