Affordable-housing plan OK'd, but will it work?

The affordable-housing program approved 6-3 by the Seattle City Council on Monday may be diluted past the point of effectiveness. And, in a recession, it could take years to know.

Opponents and supporters agreed on that, at least, after a yearlong process to hash out the details of the new "incentive zoning" program.

Developers who opt to use the program can build taller residential buildings in Seattle's neighborhoods, but they have to devote 17.5 percent of the additional space to homes for middle-income people. A similar program is already in place downtown.

The business community is questioning the council's vote at a time when a locked-down credit market has stalled local building projects. Last week, 23 developers signed a letter to the City Council, saying they will ignore the program because it doesn't provide any real incentives to add affordable units.

"Once the markets recover in the next couple of years, that's when we have the true test," said Councilmember Sally Clark, chairwoman of the Planning, Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee.

The program is aimed at helping people who make less than $43,000 annually, which is 80 percent of median income.

As developers build, the city wants to use one piece of leverage it has: negotiating building heights. So council members, housing advocates and some developers worked for the past year to develop a program they hoped would benefit everyone.

In the end, no one was happy, and council members acknowledged that before their vote Monday. They also stressed that the guidelines for the new zoning are flexible, the program is a compromise, and the council will revisit the whole issue in two years.

"It is not the final answer in how to provide affordable housing," said Clark. "It is one modest answer."

Housing advocates, for the most part, grudgingly supported the measure. But they said it doesn't ask enough of developers, who stand to profit by adding height to their projects.

Councilmembers Nick Licata, Jan Drago and Bruce Harrell voted against the measure.

Licata said he was opposing the proposal "reluctantly," in large part because he didn't think it would work.

"If anything, it may be ignored by developers," he said.

Harrell said a single proposal couldn't work for every neighborhood in the city. Developers proposing rezones could opt to apply it to specific projects neighborhood by neighborhood.

Both Harrell and Drago said they worried the new proposal could actually hinder development.

"I'm not convinced it's an incentive. It may be a disincentive," Drago said. "In a sense, I think it's just rolling the die right now."

The nearly universal unhappiness actually is a good sign, said council President Richard Conlin.

"It's a compromise, and it's a compromise that's based on our best judgment," he said.

Emily Heffter: 206-464-8246 or eheffter@seattletimes.com