HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009 07 21 WS LDR3 District MEMOMEMORANDUM CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
DATE OF WORK SESSION: July 21, 2009
TO: Springfield Planning Commission PLANNING COMMISSION
TRANSMITTAL
FROM: Steve Hopkins, Planner II MEMORANDUM
Gary M. Karp, Planner III
SUBJECT: Land Use Efficiency Measure Implementation: Discussion of a proposed new residential zoning
district.
ISSUE:
At the June 2nd work session the Planning Commission and a Residential Lands Study focus group discussed
the concept of creating a new Low Density Residential (LDR) zoning district with an intermediate density range
between LDR and MDR levels. The zoning district would be applicable to new residential areas added to
Springfield’s UGB and later – after additional analysis, public involvement, adoption of Infill Design Standards,
and through refinement plan updates and specific neighborhood planning – the City could consider the
application of the new zone to infill sites within existing neighborhoods. The new zone implements one of
several land use efficiency measures prioritized by the City Council, Planning Commission and Residential
Lands Stakeholder Committee. The zone is tentatively named LDR-3 (“-3” refers to the proposed 3,000 square
feet minimum lot/parcel size).
DISCUSSION:
The results of Springfield’s Residential Land Study and Housing Needs Analysis indicate that the housing need
for the plan period 2010-2030 exceeds the available development and redevelopment capacity of land inside
the UGB and that Springfield has a different needed housing density and mix than it experienced in the 1999-
2008 period. ORS 197.296 requires cities to consider implementation of land use efficiency measures if the
need for housing exceeds the supply of buildable land, prior to any UGB expansion. On April 13th, the City
Council directed staff to work with the Planning Commission to continue development of Land Use Efficiency
Measures that could be implemented through the adoption of Springfield’s comprehensive plan policies and
plan designations. Most cities have more than one Low Density Residential (LDR) zoning district with varied
development standards to address the unique development patterns of different eras of neighborhood
development, rather than a “one size fits all” LDR standard. On June 2nd, staff introduced to the planning
Commission a proposed LDR zoning district with a density of 8 – 15 dwelling units per acre. The Planning
Commission raised a number of questions, and directed staff to develop draft code amendments.
Application of the proposed zoning district would create options and opportunities to expand available housing
choices responsive to changing demographics by: 1) allowing development of homes on a range of lot sizes,
including small lots; 2) permitting a mix of single family detached and attached homes within a neighborhood;
and 3) providing smaller lot sizes and a range of housing types to help meet the community’s need for
affordable housing.
ACTION REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is asked to conduct a work session to review the proposed LDR-3 draft language
and staff commentary, and provide feedback to staff. Staff will incorporate the Planning Commission’s
comments in a revised draft for review in September, combined in the Residential Lands Housing Needs and
the Commercial and Industrial Buildable Lands Analyses adoption packet.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Overview/Questions
Attachment 2: Density and Lot Size Comparison with Other Cities
Attachment 3: Examples of Attached Homes
Attachment 4: Proposed Language
Attachment 5: The Right Size Home – Examples of Small Lot Detached Homes
ATTACHMENT 1
OVERVIEW/QUESTIONS
Overview
1) Dwellings
a) A mix of attached1 and detached single-family homes is proposed. Refer to Figure #1 “Dwelling
Types”.
b) Duplexes are proposed to be limited to corner lots (see the explanation below).
2) Minimum lot size, coverage and frontage
a) A reduced minimum lot/parcel size of 3,000 square feet is proposed. No maximum lot size is proposed.
b) The minimum lot/parcel frontage is proposed to be reduced to 30 feet.
c) Lot/parcel coverage is proposed to be increased to 60 percent or lots/parcels less than 4,500 square
feet. The increased lot/parcel coverage allows a comparable amount of impervious surface - 3,000
square feet x (60%) = 1,800 square feet; 4,500 square feet x (45%) = 2,025 square feet
d) Panhandle lots/parcels will not be allowed in this zone.
3) Density
a) The proposed minimum density is 8 dwelling units per net acre and the maximum density is15 dwelling
units per net acre.
Questions for the Planning Commission
1) Should duplexes be restricted to corner lots/parcels as they currently are in the existing LDR District?
2) Should new design standards be applicable to duplexes? Currently, the City applies Multi-unit Design
Standards for buildings that contain more than two dwellings (SDC 3.2-240). The Planning Commission
and Council have expressed interest in allowing duplexes in more locations if design standards are applied.
The City Council has directed staff to prepare Infill Design Standards as part of Phase 2 Efficiency
Measures Implementation and this project will be added to Planning’s 2010 work program. Design
Standards for duplexes would be considered at that time.
1 Attached Single-family Dwelling. A dwelling, located on its own lot/parcel that shares one or more common walls with one or more
dwellings. The common walls may be any wall of the buildings, including the walls of attached garages. An attached dwelling does not
share common floor/ceilings with other dwelling units. Attached single-family dwellings include, but are not limited to zero lot/parcel line
dwellings, townhouses or row houses.
ATTACHMENT 2
Comparison with other cities
• Density can be manipulated with lot size, infill/redevelopment standards, minimum density standards
and housing type. This zone focuses on smaller lots and attached dwellings to increase density. Refer
to Table 1.
• When compared to other Oregon cities of similar size, Springfield is unusual because it has only one
low density detached single family zone. Refer to Table 2.
• There are 4 basic types of dwellings. Refer to Figure 1 for diagrams of these types.
o Single family, Detached
o Single family, Attached (zero lot line). This type is also called a townhouse.
o Duplex
o Multi-family (apartments)
A condominium is not a dwelling type, but an ownership type.
• The current minimum lot size of 4500 sf tends to discourage attached single family dwellings. A smaller
lot size will reduce housing costs and yard maintenance.
• The existing code tends to encourage duplexes because three or more attached homes must comply
with the multi-unit design standards (SDC 3.2-240).
• The proposed minimum net density of 8 units per acre is based, in part, on the minimum number of
homes needed to support public transit. Detached homes on 4500 sf lots cannot reach that net density.
Refer to Table 1.
Table 1
Lot size and corresponding density
Lot Size
Gross
density
(43,560 sf)
Net density
(35,000 sf)
43,560 1.0 0.8
8,000 5.5 4.4
7,000 6.2 5.0
6,000 7.3 5.8
5,000 8.7 7.0
4,500 9.7 7.8
3,000 14.5 11.7
Figure 1
Diagrams of dwelling types
Table 2: Density Comparison
Springfield LDR SDR MDR HDR
Min net density 1 8 10 20
Max net density 10 15 20 30
Eugene R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4
Min net density None 10 20 20
Max net density 14 28 56 112
Corvallis RS-1 RS-9 RS-12 RS-20
Min net density 2 6 12 20
Max net density 6 12 20 Unlimited
Bend RS RM-10 RM RH
Min gross density 2.0 6.0 7.3 21.7
Max gross density 7.3 10.0 21.7 43.0
Grants Pass Low Med High High Rise
Min net density 3.6 5.5 11.7 17.5
Max net density 5.4 11.6 17.4 34.8
Medford SFR (2-10)MFR-15 MFR-20 MFR-30
Min gross density 2 10 15 20
Max gross density 10 15 20 30
Gresham LDR-7 LDR-5 TR MDR-24
Min net density 4.35 6.22 6.2 12.1
Max net density 6.22 8.71 18.2 24.2
Hillsboro R10 R4.5 A2 A3
Min net density 3.5 8 17 23
Max net density 8 10 21.5 28.75
Net Density. The number of dwelling units for each acre of land in residential use, excluding, dedicated streets, parks,
sidewalks and other public facilities.
Gross Density. The number of dwelling units for each acre of land, including, but not limited to areas devoted to streets,
parks, sidewalks and other public facilities.
Table 3: Comparison of lot size
City Min Max Notes
West Linn 3,000 10,000
Bend 4,000 15,000 Require larger lots on perimeter, allow avg lot sizing
Salem 4,000 5,500 sf min for infill lots
Springfield 4,500 Some design standards
Eugene 4,500 1,600 for townhome lots; 3,600 for duplex
Medford 4,500 18,750 3600 sf possible, infill standards
Gresham 5,000 14,000 Design standards, Infill standards, avg density standards
Corvallis 6,000
Grants Pass 6,000
Oregon City 6,000
Albany 6,500
Florence 6,500
Veneta 8,000 Size based on location to Territorial Rd
ATTACHMENT 3
Examples of attached homes
These pictures are provided as examples of what can be built in the LDR-3 district. These homes can be
duplexes if on a single lot or zero lot line if on separate lots. Refer to Figure #1 for the definition of each term.
Two dwellings: zero lot line or duplex
Four dwellings: zero lot line or townhomes
Three dwellings: zero lot line or townhomes
PROPOSED LANGUAGE
Commentary: Text proposed to be added is underlined. Text proposed to be deleted is struck through. Yellow
highlighted text allows the reader to see some of the proposed language more readily.
Section 3.2-100 Base Zoning Districts
Subsection:
3.2-100 Base Zoning Districts
3.2-100 Base Zoning Districts
Commentary: The proposed LDR-3 District is added to the list of base zoning districts. The “-3” refers to the
proposed minimum lot/parcel size of 3,000 square feet.
The Base Zoning Districts implement policies of the Metro Plan and any applicable refinement plan or plan
district; regulate the use of land, structures and buildings; and protect the public health, safety and welfare. The
following base zoning districts are established consistent with applicable Metro Plan designations:
Section Base Zoning District Name Metro Plan Designation
3.2-200 Residential Zoning Districts
LDR Low Density Residential Low Density Residential
LDR-3 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential
MDR Medium Density Residential Medium Density Residential
HDR High Density Residential High Density Residential
3.2-300 Commercial Zoning Districts
NC Neighborhood Commercial Neighborhood Commercial Facilities(1)
CC Community Commercial Community Commercial Centers
MRC Major Retail Commercial Major Retail Center
GO General Office Community Commercial Center & Major
Retail Commercial Center
3.2-400 Industrial Zoning Districts
CI Campus Industrial Campus Industrial
LMI Light-Medium Industrial Light Medium Industrial
HI Heavy Industrial Heavy Industrial
SHI Special Heavy Industrial Special Heavy Industrial
3.2-500 MS Medical Services District (2)
3.2-600 Mixed Use Districts
MUC Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Uses
MUE Mixed Use Employment Mixed Uses
MUR Mixed Use Residential Mixed Uses
3.2-700 PLO Public Land and Open Space Public and Semi-Public
3.2-800 QMO Quarry and Mining Operations Sand and Gravel
(1) Low, Medium and High Density Residential
(2) Medium, High Density Residential, Community Commercial Center; Major Retail Center, and Mixed Use
LDR‐3 District
July 15 Page 2 of 10
Section 3.2-200 Residential Zoning Districts
Subsections:
3.2-205 Establishment of Residential Zoning Districts
3.2-210 Schedule of Use Categories
3.2-215 Base Zone Development Standards
3.2-220 Additional Panhandle Lot/Parcel Development Standards
3.2-225 Base Solar Development Standards
3.2-230 Cluster Subdivisions
3.2-235 Residential Manufactured Dwellings
3.2-240 Multi-unit Design Standards
3.2-245 Multi-unit Design Standards—Alternative Design Discretionary Criteria
3.2-250 Multi-unit Design Standards Variances
3.2-205 Establishment of Residential Zoning Districts
The following residential zoning districts are established where the minimum level of urban services is
provided:
Commentary: The existing LDR District is amended to differentiate it from the proposed LDR-3 District.
A. Low Density Residential District (LDR). The LDR District establishes sites for residential development
where primarily detached single-family dwellings are permitted with no minimum density and [the] a
maximum density of 10 dwelling units per developable acre [permitted is 10], consistent with the
provisions of this Code. Fractions will be rounded down to the next whole number.
Commentary: The description of the proposed LDR-3 District is added to the list of residential zoning districts
allowing a density range from 8-15 dwelling units per developable acre.
B. Low Density Residential District - 3 (LDR-3). The LDR-3 District establishes sites for residential
development where a mix of attached and detached single-family dwellings are permitted with a
minimum density of 8 dwelling units per developable acre and a maximum density of 15 dwelling units
per developable acre, consistent with the provisions of this Code. Fractions will be rounded down to the
next whole number. Land divisions shall not be used to diminish the minimum density standard.
BC. Medium Density Residential District (MDR). The MDR District establishes sites for residential
development where single-family or multiple family dwellings are permitted with a minimum density of
more than 10 units per developable acre and a maximum density of 20 units per developable acre,
consistent with the provisions of this Code. Fractions will be rounded down to the next whole number.
Land divisions shall not be used to diminish the minimum density standard.
D. High Density Residential District (HDR). The HDR District establishes sites for residential development
where single-family or multiple family dwellings are permitted with a minimum density of more than 20
units per developable acre and a maximum density of 30 units per developable acre, consistent with
the provisions of this Code. Fractions will be rounded down to the next whole number. Land divisions
shall not be used to diminish the minimum density standard.
LDR‐3 District
July 15 Page 3 of 10
3.2-210 Schedule of Use Categories
The following uses are permitted in the districts as indicated, subject to the provisions, additional restrictions
and exceptions specified in this Code. Uses not specifically listed may be approved as specified in Section 5.11-
100.
“P” = PERMITTED USE subject to the standards of this Code.
“S” = SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS subject to special locational and/or siting standards as
specified in Section 4.7-100.
“D” = DISCRETIONARY USE subject to review and analysis under Type III procedure (Section 5.9-100) at the
Planning Commission or Hearings Official level.
“N” = NOT PERMITTED
“*” = SITE PLAN REVIEW REQUIRED
Commentary: The proposed LDR-3 District uses are added to the residential districts use list. In the proposed
LDR-3 District attached single-family dwellings are permitted outright; in the existing LDR District attached
dwelling units other than duplexes on corner lots/parcels require Discretionary Review approval by the
Planning Commission. While there are a few differences between the current LDR and the proposed LDR-3
the proposed use list is based on uses allowed in the current LDR District. In the proposed LDR-3 District,
duplexes are proposed to be limited to corner lots/parcels; the same restriction applies to the current LDR
District. As stated previously, the Planning Commission should consider requesting staff to prepare design
standards so that duplexes may be allowed throughout the proposed LDR-3 District..
Use Categories/Uses
Zoning Districts
LDR LDR-3 MDR HDR
Residential Uses
Accessory Dwelling Unit P P N N
Attached single-family dwellings D* P P* P*
Cluster Subdivision (Sections 3.2-230 and 5.12-100)P P P P
Condominiums (Section 4.7-135) S* S P* P*
Detached single-family dwellings P P P P
Duplexes (Section 4.7-140) S S P P
Multiple family dwelling including triplexes, 4-plexes, quads,
quints, and apartment complexes over 4 units.
N N P* P*
Zero Lot Line dwelling P P P P
RVs as a permanent new use N N N N
RVs in existing RV or Manufactured Dwelling Parks P N N N
RV’s as a temporary use—Emergency Medical Hardship
(Section 5.10-100) P N N N
Prefabricated dwellings P P P P*
Group Care Facilities (Section 4.7-155)
Foster homes for over 5 children P* P* P* P*
Residential care facilities with more than 15 persons include:
Group care homes, congregate care facilities, nursing homes
and retirement homes D* D* S* S*
LDR‐3 District
July 15 Page 4 of 10
Use Categories/Uses
Zoning Districts
LDR LDR-3 MDR HDR
Halfway houses N N D* D*
Residential Facilities—6 to 15 persons P P P* P*
Residential Home—5 or fewer persons P P P P
Shelter Homes for abused and battered persons P P P* P*
Manufactured dwelling park (Section 3.2-235)S* N N N
Manufactured home P P P N
Manufactured home subdivision P P P N
Mobile home P N N N
Manufactured home as a temporary residential use (Section
4.8-105)
S* N N N
Child Care Home Facility—1 to 5 children P P P P
Child Care Group Home Facility—6 to 12 children P P P P
Child Care Center—13 or more children (abutting an arterial
street) (Section 4.7-125)
S* S* S* S*
Child Care Center—13 or more children (abutting a collector
or local street) (Section 4.7-125)
D D* S* S*
Adult Day Care—facilities up to 12 adults P P P P
Adult Day Care—facilities with more than 13 adults (abutting
an arterial street)
P* P* P* P*
Adult Day Care—facilities with more than 13 adults (abutting
a collector or local street)
D* D* P* P*
Bed and breakfast facilities (Section 4.7-120)S* S* S* S*
Boarding and rooming houses (Section 4.7-215)
1 to 2 bedrooms P* P* P* P*
3 to 5 bedrooms S* S* P* P*
more than 5 bedrooms N N P* P*
Public and Institutional Uses
Churches (Section 4.7-130) D* D* D* D*
Educational facilities—Public/Private elementary/middle
schools (Section 4.7-195)
1 to 5 students in a private home (in a 24-hour period)P* P* P* P*
6 or more students (Section 4.7-195) D* D* D* D*
Parks—Neighborhood and private (Section 4.7-200)D* D* D* D*
Commercial Uses
Home Occupation (Section 4.7-165) S S S S
Professional offices (Section 4.7-190) S* S* S* S*
Residential dwelling units as temporary sales offices (Section
4.8-130)
P P P P
Youth hostels N N D* D*
Miscellaneous Uses
Accessory structures (Section 4.7-105) S S S S
Agricultural structures P P P P
Cultivation of undeveloped land P P P P
Temporary sales/display of produce (Section 4.8-125)S S N N
Tree felling and removal (Section 5.19-100)P P P P
Public Utility Facilities
LDR‐3 District
July 15 Page 5 of 10
Use Categories/Uses
Zoning Districts
LDR LDR-3 MDR HDR
High impact facilities (Section 4.7-160) S* S* S* S*
Low impact facilities P P P P
Certain Wireless Telecommunications Systems Facilities Section
4.3-145
Section
4.3-145
Section
4.3-145
Section
4.3-145
(6238; 6211)
3.2-215 Base Zone Development Standards
Commentary: The proposed LDR-3 District:
Allows for a minimum lot/parcel size of 3,000 square feet and a reduced street frontage of 30 feet in order to
increase residential densities;
Does not allow panhandle lots/parcels because – 1) this configuration is impractical with the proposed reduced
lot/parcel size, and 2) developments on slopes over 10 percent the larger lots/parcels required for steep slopes
(10,000 – 40,000 square feet) negate the proposed reduced lot/parcel sizes.
Allows for an increased building coverage standard of 60 percent based on the proposed reduced lot/parcel
size, which will still allow for 1,800 square feet of building footprint on the first floor and a proposed building
height of 35 feet, rather than the current 30 feet height standard in the current LDR District
The following base zone development standards are established.
Residential Zoning District
Development Standard
Low Density
Residential (LDR)
Special Low Density
(LDR-3)
Medium Density
Residential (MDR)
High Density
Residential (HDR)
Standard Lots/Parcels
Minimum Area:
East-West Streets 4,500 square feet 3,000 square feet 4,500 square feet 4,500 square feet
North-South Streets: 5,000 square feet 3,000 square feet 5,000 square feet 5,000 square feet
Minimum Street
Frontage:
East-West Streets 45 feet 30 feet 45 feet 45 feet
North-South Streets 60 feet 30 feet 60 feet 60 feet
Corner Lots/Parcel(1)(2)
Minimum Area: 6,000 square feet 6,000 square feet 6,000 square feet 6,000 square feet
East-West Streets 45 feet 45 feet 45 feet 45 feet
North-South Streets 60 feet 60 feet 60 feet 60 feet
Panhandle Lots/Parcels (See Section 3.2-220 Additional Panhandle Lot/Parcel Development Standards)
Single Panhandle: Not permitted
Minimum Area in Pan 4,500 square feet 4,500 square feet 4,500 square feet
LDR‐3 District
July 15 Page 6 of 10
Portion
Minimum Street Frontage 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet
Multiple Panhandles: Not permitted
Minimum Area in Pan
Portion 4,500 square feet 4,500 square feet 4,500 square feet
Minimum Street Frontage 26 feet total, each individual frontage is based upon the number of panhandles.
Lots/Parcels on bulb portion of a cul-de-sac
Minimum Area 6,000 square feet 6,000 square feet 6,000 square feet 6,000 square feet
Minimum Street Frontage 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet
Lots/Parcels within the Hillside Development Overlay District (Section 3.3-500)
< 15 percent slope: Not permitted
Minimum Area 10,000 square feet 10,000 square feet 10,000 square feet
Minimum Street Frontage 60 feet 60 feet 60 feet
15-25 percent slope: Not permitted
Minimum Area 10,000 square feet 10,000 square feet 10,000 square feet
Minimum Street Frontage 90 feet 90 feet 90 feet
25-35 percent slope: Not permitted
Minimum Area 20,000 square feet 20,000 square feet 20,000 square feet
Minimum Street Frontage 150 feet 150 feet 150 feet
> 35 percent slope: Not permitted
Minimum Area 40,000 square feet 40,000 square feet 40,000 square feet
Minimum Street Frontage 200 feet 200 feet 200 feet
Lots/Parcels in the Urbanizable Fringe Overlay District (Section 3.3-800)
Lot/Parcel Area The creation of new lots/parcels in the City’s urbanizable area shall be either 10 acres, 5 acres or
shall meet the area standards of this Section when approved through the Partition process
specified in Section 5.12-100.
Maximum Lot/Parcel
Coverage (3) 45 percent 60 percent 45 percent 45 percent
Minimum Setbacks for Primary Structures(4)(5)(7)(8)(9)(10)
Front Yard 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet
Street Side Yard 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet
Rear Yard 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet
Interior Yard Setbacks 5 feet 5 feet 5 feet 5 feet
Front Yard Setback—
Garages 18 feet measured along the driveway from:
and Carports(6) 1. The property line fronting the street to the face of the garage or carport; or
2. The property line fronting the street to the far wall of the garage or carport where the face of the
structure is perpendicular to the street.
3. Where a garage or carport faces a panhandle driveway, the 18 feet is measured from the inner
travel edge (pavement or gravel) within the panhandle to the face of the structure; the setback
is 3 feet when the garage or carport fronts and alley.
LDR‐3 District
July 15 Page 7 of 10
Accessory Structures Accessory structures shall not be located between any front or street side yard of a primary
structure and shall be set back at least 3 feet from interior side and rear lot/parcel lines.
Panhandle and Duplex
Lots/Parcels
All setbacks for panhandle lots/parcels are based on the orientation of the front and rear of the
dwelling occupying the lot/parcel. All setbacks for duplexes on corner lots/parcels are based upon
the front yard of each unit established by the street or streets for address purposes.
Base Solar Standards Section 3.2-225.(11)
Maximum Building
Height (11)(12)(13) 30 feet 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet
Commentary:
There is a need for additional lot/parcel coverage due to the proposed smaller minimum lot/parcel size.
There is a conflict between solar protection and increased density, a City-wide issue that needs resolution
outside of the scope of this project. However, most dwellings in the proposed LDR-3 District will be two-story,
due to the reduced lot/parcel size. At this time, the only solar protection proposed for the LDR-3 District is for
LDR properties to the north because of the 35 foot height limitation which is 5 more feet than permitted in the
current LDR District. This standard is currently found in the cluster development standards (Section 3.2-
230E.3).
(1) 6,000 square feet in area for one duplex in the LDR District. This standard prohibits the division of the lot/parcel to create separate ownership
for each duplex dwelling unit.
(2) 10,000 square feet in area for one duplex in the LDR District as specified in this Section and Section 4.7-140. This standard allows for the
future division of the lot/parcel to create separate ownership for each half of the duplex.
(3) The 45 percent coverage standard applies to covered structures only. On lots/parcels with more than 15 percent slope or above an elevation
of 670 feet, the maximum impervious surface inclusive of structures, patios, and driveways, shall not exceed 35 percent, unless specified in
Section 3.3-500. Lots in the LDR-3 District that contain less than 4500 square feet shall have a maximum lot/parcel coverage of 60%.
(4) Determination of all yard setbacks for duplexes on corner lots/parcels are based upon the front yard of each unit as established by the streets
used for address purposes.
(5) All setbacks shall be landscaped, unless a setback is for a garage or carport.
(6) Accessory Structure Exceptions to Setback standards:
(a) Stand alone garages and carports shall meet the street side yard, interior side yard and rear yard setback standards of the primary
structure.
(b) Group C Accessory structures are permitted within setbacks as specified in Section 4.7-105E.
(7) Where an easement is larger than the required setback standard, no building or above grade structure, except a fence, may be built upon or
over that easement.
(8) When additional right-of-way is required, whether by City Engineering standards, the Metro Plan (including the TransPlan), or the City’s
Conceptual Street Plan, setbacks are based on future right-of-way locations. Right-of-way shall be dedicated prior to the issuance of any
building permit that increases parking requirements.
(9) Architectural extensions may protrude into any 5-foot or larger setback area by not more than 2 feet.
(10) General Exceptions to Setback standards:
(a) Attached dwellings (zero lot line) on individual lots/parcels; and
(b) A dwelling constructed over the common property line of 2 lots/parcels, where there is a recorded deed restriction.
(c) In multifamily developments, the setback standards in Section 3.2-240 shall take precedence.
(11) See Section 3.2-225 for residential building height limitations for solar protection. In the LDR-3 District, only solar protection for abutting LDR
properties north of the proposed development is required.
(12) Incidental equipment may exceed the height standards.
(13) Height limitations within the Hillside Development Overlay District may be removed provided the additional height does not exceed 45 feet and
the base residential solar standards are met.
(14) In the MDR and HDR Districts, the building height may be increased to 50 feet as specified in Subsection 3.2-240D.3.c.
Commentary: The intent is to limit duplexes in the proposed LDR-3 District as they currently are in the LDR
District – on corner lots/parcels. The rationale is that if not restricted other forms of attached dwelling units may
not be constructed.
4.7-140 Duplexes
A. A duplex may be located on corner lots/parcels of 6,000 square feet in the LDR and LDR-3
Districts, unless as may be permitted below. A corner duplex or duplex lot/parcel in any residential
district may be partitioned for the purpose of allowing independent ownership of each dwelling unit, if
each of the 2 resulting lots/parcels meets the size standards specified in Section 3.2-215. Duplexes or
LDR‐3 District
July 15 Page 8 of 10
duplex lots/parcels eligible for this type of partition shall meet the partition standards of Section 5.12-
100 and the following:
1. Utility service to each unit shall be separate.
2. All walls connecting abutting units shall be fire resistive walls as specified in the
Structural Specialty Code and Fire and Life Safety Code.
3. The property line separating the 2 units shall have not more than 2 angle points. The
angle points shall not occur within the wall between abutting units.
B. Duplexes on interior lots/parcels zoned Low Density Residential, approved prior to the adoption
of this Code, as part of a Planned Unit Development shall not be considered to be non-conforming
uses.
C. Duplexes on interior lots/parcels zoned Low Density Residential, approved prior to the adoption
of this Code on property previously zoned RG Garden Apartments shall not be considered to be a non-
conforming use.
D. Duplexes on interior lots/parcels zoned Low Density Residential, which meets the density
requirements of this zoning district, shall not be considered a non-conforming use. (6238)
Commentary: Below are revised and reorganized definitions (SDC Chapter 6) to assist us with the proposed
LDR-3 District. SDC definitions that are stand alone, such as “Accessory Dwelling Unit” as well as those under
topics such as “Manufactured Dwelling” and “Prefabricated Dwelling” are proposed to be combined under the
topic “Residential Housing Types”. This concept is from Portland. The Bend and Lake Oswego Development
Codes were also reviewed for proposed definition language.
RESIDENTIAL HOUSING TYPES
Commentary: This is the current definition found in the SDC. No amendment is proposed, the definition has
only been relocated to this place.
Accessory Dwelling Unit. A secondary, self-contained dwelling that may be allowed only in conjunction with a
detached single-family dwelling. An accessory dwelling unit is subordinate in size, location, and appearance to
the primary detached single-family dwelling. An accessory dwelling unit generally has its own outside entrance
and always has a separate kitchen, bathroom and sleeping area. An accessory dwelling may be located within,
attached to or detached from the primary single-family dwelling.
Commentary: The current definition is proposed to be amended as follows:
Dwelling, Attached Single-family. A building designed or used exclusively for the occupancy of 1 family
which is attached to one or more separately owned dwellings by common vertical walls. This definition includes
but is not limited to zero lot/parcel line dwellings, townhouses and rowhouses.
Attached Single-family Dwelling. A dwelling, located on its own lot/parcel that shares one or more common
walls with one or more dwellings. The common walls may be any wall of the buildings, including the walls of
attached garages. An attached dwelling does not share common floor/ceilings with other dwelling units.
Attached single-family dwellings are also called zero lot/parcel line dwellings, townhouses or rowhouses.
LDR‐3 District
July 15 Page 9 of 10
Commentary: The current definition is proposed to be amended as follows:
Dwelling, Detached Single-family. A building designed or used exclusively for the occupancy of 1 family
which is not attached to any other dwelling and is surrounded by open space and yards.
Detached Single-family Dwelling. A single family dwelling on its own lot/parcel that does not share a wall
with any other building. This dwelling may be either site built or a manufactured dwelling.
Commentary: The current definition is proposed to be amended as follows:
Dwelling, Duplex. A single building designed or used exclusively for the occupancy of 2 families living
independently of each other, sharing a common roof, wall or foundation at the garages, carports, and/or living
areas.
Duplex. A building on its own lot/parcel that contains two independent dwelling units attached by a common
wall.
Commentary: This is the current definition found in the SDC. No amendment is proposed, the definition has
only been relocated to this place.
Manufactured Dwelling.
A. Residential Trailer: a structure constructed for movement on the public highways that has sleeping, cooking
and plumbing facilities, that is intended for human occupancy, is being used for residential purposes and
was constructed before January 1, 1962.
B. Mobile Home: a structure constructed for movement on the public highways that has sleeping, cooking and
plumbing facilities, that is intended for human occupancy that is being used for residential purposes and
was constructed between January 1, 1962 and June 15, 1976, and met the construction requirements of
Oregon mobile home law in effect at the time of construction.
C. Manufactured Home: a structure constructed for movement on the public highways that has sleeping,
cooking and plumbing facilities, that is intended for human occupancy that is being used for residential
purposes and was constructed on or after June 15, 1976 in accordance with federal safety standards
regulations in effect at the time of construction. In addition, manufactured homes sited within the
jurisdictional boundaries of Springfield shall be of either Type 1 or Type 2 classification and shall comply
with the following standards:
1. Type 1 Manufactured Home:
a. Multi-sectional configuration enclosing a minimum floor area of 1,000 square feet;
b. Siding and roofing materials similar to the materials used in residential dwellings in the community
or which are comparable to the predominant materials used on surrounding dwellings;
c. Minimum roof pitch of 3 feet vertical in 12 feet of width;
d. Thermal efficiency equivalent to the Oregon One- and Two-Family Dwelling Specialty Code
excluding units built prior to the effective date of this Ordinance (5-1-94). These units shall meet or
exceed the HUD energy standards that were in effect at the time of construction.
2. Type 2 Manufactured Home:
a. Single-wide unit of not less than 12 feet wide enclosing a minimum floor area of 500 square feet;
b. Siding and roofing materials similar to the materials used in residential dwellings in the community
or which are comparable to the predominant materials used on surrounding dwellings minimum roof
pitch of 2 feet vertical in 12 feet of width;
c. Thermal efficiency equivalent to the Oregon One- and Two-Family Dwelling Specialty Code
excluding units built prior to May 1, 1994. These units shall meet or exceed the HUD energy
standards that were in effect at the time of construction.
LDR‐3 District
July 15 Page 10 of 10
Note: Multi-sectional units placed on lots/parcels eligible for Type 2 units shall comply with all of the
standards of a Type I manufactured home.
Commentary: The current definition is proposed to be amended as follows:
Dwelling, Multifamily. A building containing 3 or more dwelling units designed or used exclusively for the
occupancy of 3 or more families living independently of each other and separated by common vertical walls. A
Congregate Care Facility is not a Multifamily dwelling unit for the purposes of determining dwelling unit density.
Multi-family Dwelling. A building that contains 3 or more dwelling units that share common walls or
floors/ceilings with one or more units. The land underneath the building is not divided into separate lots. Multi-
family dwelling includes, but is not limited to garden apartments, apartments, and condominiums The latter is
a type of residential development offering individual ownership of dwellings and common ownership of open
spaces and other facilities, that is regulated in part by ORS 100.005 et seq. A Congregate Care Facility is not
a Multifamily dwelling unit for the purposes of determining dwelling unit density.
Commentary: This is the current definition found in the SDC. No amendment is proposed, the definition has
only been relocated to this place.
Prefabricated Dwelling. A building or structural unit that has been in whole or substantial part manufactured
at an off-site location to be wholly or partially assembled on-site, but does not include a mobile home, trailer or
recreational vehicle. Prefabricated structures are regulated under the State of Oregon Structural Specialty
Code.
Commentary: This is a new definition.
Zero-Lot-Line Dwelling. A single-family dwelling unit constructed in a group of attached units in which each
attached unit extends from foundation to roof with open space on two sides and each dwelling unit is separated
by a property line.
The Right Size Home
Housing Innovation in Washington
A Project of
The Housing Partnership
With the Support of the
Washington State Housing Finance
Commission
Contents
Introduction 1
Cottage cluster
Pine Street Cottages – Seattle 6
Poulsbo Place Cottages – Poulsbo 8
Cottages with carriage units
Ravenna Cottages – Seattle 11
The Treehouse – Port Townsend 14
Ashworth Cottages – Seattle 16
Small lot detached
Greenbrier – Woodinville 18
Kirkland Bungalows – Kirkland 21
Cherrywood Lane – Renton 23
Detached accessory housing
Woodside – Fairwood 25
Small multiplex
Malden Court – Seattle 27
Townhouse
Interlake I – Seattle 29
Triangle Townhomes – Tacoma 31
Auto Court
305 Bellevue Way – Bellevue 34
The Housing Partnership is a non-profit organization (officially known as the King County Housing Alliance) dedicated
to increasing the supply of affordable market rate housing in King County. This is achieved, in part, through policies of
local government that foster increased housing development while preserving affordability and neighborhood character.
The Partnership pursues these goals by: (a) building public awareness of housing affordability issues; (b) promoting design
and regulatory solutions; and (c) acting as a convener of public, private and community leaders. The Partnership's officers
for 2005 are: Rich Bennion, HomeStreet Bank, Chair; Paige Miller, Port of Seattle, Vice Chair; Gary Ackerman, Foster
Pepper & Shefelman, Secretary; Tom Witte, Bank of America, Treasurer. For more information about the Housing
Partnership, call 425-453-5123 or visit our website: wwww.thehousingparnterhip.org
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 1
The Right Size Home
Housing Innovation in Washington
Welcome to The Right Size Home.
The purpose of this catalog is to show examples of innovative ways to meet a variety of housing
needs in our state. The projects demonstrate how housing innovation can be a win-win-win: buyers
and renters have more choices, communities get new housing that fits well into existing
neighborhoods and we succeed in goals under the Growth Management Act (GMA). The projects
were selected to further all three of those objectives:
More choices: the right size for the customer. A large, growing, and underserved market exists
for housing types that lie between typical low-density subdivisions and high density multi-family
complexes. Examples show a net density (excluding roads, parks, etc) of mostly between 12 and
30 units per acre.
Community fit: the right size for the neighborhood. The emphasis is on housing types that
can work well in infill sites. Although some of the examples are part of larger subdivisions or
master planned communities, all can be adapted to fit on the small parcels that hold so much
potential for new housing.
Consistent with GMA: the right size for the future. In order to preserve rural and resource
areas and make the most effective use of infrastructure, as called for in the GMA, we need to use
land in the most efficient way possible.
A further criterion for selecting projects is the financial success of the development. If money is no
object, a developer can be highly innovative. These projects show how builders can innovate while
meeting the housing needs of their customers and the financial requirements of their businesses.
Innovative housing is often very site-specific, responding to the parcel itself, its neighborhood and
market, so these models may not be exactly replicable in many settings. We hope, however, that they
serve as an inspiration for imaginative builders and local governments who can adapt the underlying
principles to find the right size for their markets and communities.
A few things to note
What constitutes innovation?
Innovation does not necessarily suggest development that is radical or unusual. The goal is not to
provide “adventurous” housing: the vast majority of people are very conservative when they invest in
homes or income properties. Rather, the innovation comes from efficient and creative use of spaces,
features and amenities, both within the overall development and the individual homes. Innovative
housing seeks the right size for each market segment, offering just the things it needs. The result is
housing that costs less, uses less land, has lower impacts on the environment, and often provides
opportunities for social interaction.
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 2
These models are for targeted markets
These examples show choices. The dominant housing models of today – large-lot single family and
large multifamily complexes – will continue to be the most common housing types available: they are
the right size for many households. But both market research and experience shows that a large
number of individuals and families are looking for something different, and they have few choices in
today’s market. So while these models are not for everyone, they have all found eager buyers and
renters.
The challenge of affordability
The mission of The Housing Partnership is to promote housing affordability. In the absence of huge
increases in public subsidies, however, affordability will continue to be an outcome of the interaction
of supply and demand. Simply put, if we are to keep housing prices in Washington State from
continuing to rise at double-digit rates, we need a substantial increase in supply at all levels of the
market. And with the limitations on land availability – due to both urban growth lines and
infrastructure capacity – the only way to get that supply increase is through more efficient use of the
land that is developable.
Few of the projects shown here would be considered “affordable” by standard measures tied to
median incomes. They are all, however, more affordable than the lower density alternatives that
could have been built in their place. And by contributing more to the overall housing supply than the
low density alternatives, they do more to take pressure off the market.
The need for quality
When these housing types are allowed in infill settings, they will generally cause some change in the
look and feel of the neighborhood. An important way to mitigate the impacts of such change is to
ensure that the projects have high quality in design, construction, materials and landscaping. The
examples shown have been selected because they illustrate the care that builders and developers
should take when working in infill settings.
Quality vs. quantity of space
One of the trade-offs in the
residential real estate business is
the quality of space versus the
quantity of space. Figure 1
shows how many types of
housing typically fit within this
trade-off. The shaded boxes
indicate housing types described
in this catalog.
Quality
of
Space
Quantity
of Space
Mid-rise
apartment/
condo
HIgh-rise apartment/condo
Cottage/
carriage
Housing
Urban Walk-up apartment/
condo
Suburban
walk-up
apartment/
condo
Low income
singles - SRO
Low income
families
attached &
detached
Urban
entry level
townhouse
Single family
small lot
Single family
move up
Luxury
townhouse
City mansions, Gold Coast,
country estates
Moderate income single family
Detached
accessory
Figure 1
Suburban
entry level
townhouse
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 3
Housing types
Cottage cluster Cottage clusters typically feature between four and twelve units, often less than
1,000 square feet, but rarely larger than 1,200 square feet. The units are built
around common open space, with minimal private yards. Most have parking in
separate areas or structures near the entrance, in order to minimize space taken up
by driveways.
Cottages with
Carriage Units
Some cottage cluster projects build carriage units over the separate, detached
garages, to take advantage of the airspace above these structures. Carriage houses
are typically between two and four attached units.
Small lot
detached
When the lot size of subdivisions falls below about 4,500 square feet, the
development should become qualitatively different. The planning of the site, the
design of streets, sidewalks and parks, and the design of the homes themselves all
must adapt to the more compact layout.
Detached
accessory
These small apartments are often built over detached garages, but are sometimes
stand-alone cottages. Under the GMA, larger jurisdictions must allow accessory
housing, but only some jurisdictions allow those units to be detached from the
primary residence.
Small multiplex The strict separation between single family housing and multi-family can be
overcome by permitting small multiplexes with a design and scale that allows them
to fit into neighborhoods.
Adaptive reuse Old commercial buildings that can no longer serve their original purpose can be
adapted to accommodate housing.
Townhouse Townhouses, while not a new or unusual concept, have become the workhorses of
urban infill and affordability. The challenge is developing designs that provide
attractive street fronts and do not overwhelm their surroundings.
Auto court In compact developments where parking is attached to the units, an auto court
presents an attractive street front and saves paved space by clustering garage
entrances around a central court.
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 4
The data
The project descriptions follow the same basic template, although not all data points are relevant to
all projects. The templates include:
Unit Size Approximate size or range of sizes of the living spaces. Because this information
comes from a variety of sources, it will not consistently use gross or net square feet.
Density Where possible, density is shown as both units/acre and lot size. Net density
calculation excludes public streets, parks, and other public spaces. Gross density
calculation is based on the entire site, including public spaces. Lot sizes include
private driveways and areas available for community use through easements.
Parking This includes enclosed parking, on-site uncovered parking and, where possible, on-
street parking built as part of the development process.
Access Some projects have conventional access directly off public streets. Others have
unusual access, via driveway easements, auto courts, pathways, woonerfs or alleys.
Open Space A major feature of many of these innovative projects is the emphasis on community
open space in lieu of private open space. Private open space is noted, where
possible.
Spec level This provides an overall sense of the quality of the interior fixtures and finishes.
Prices &
Ownership
Prices shown are the original sales prices, with the dates noted. With “fee simple”
ownership, each home owns its own lot, even if just the strip of land under the unit.
Fee simple projects frequently have owners associations that care for tracts of land
(such as parks, private roads, stormwater ponds) owned in common. In
condominium ownership, all the land is held in common, as are common spaces
within the building. In order to control maintenance of exteriors and landscaping,
many cottage and small lot projects have condominium ownership even though the
units are not attached.
Market Because these projects emphasize some features over others, they tend to be aimed
at specific market niches.
Entitlement Many of the projects have been built under existing zoning and development
regulations. Others have needed zoning or regulatory changes or have been built
under demonstration programs. Some are part of planned unit developments or
master planned communities, where the developer was able to start from scratch.
Financing Because nearly all the projects are unrestricted, market-rate developments, they use
conventional equity and debt financing. A couple have used public subsidies.
Key Innovations These points of demonstration will vary by project. Some projects include a
number of unusual features, and some are simply very good examples of their type.
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 5
Please be courteous!
All of these projects show the homes and neighborhoods of real residents. While people tend to be
proud of their homes and often eager to show them off, no one likes to have their privacy and security
invaded. If you want to visit any of these projects, please stay on public spaces unless accompanied
by an escort or invited by a resident.
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 6
Urban High Density Cottages
Pine Street Cottages – 1916/1992
Developer: Kucher/Rutherford
Architect: Marcia Gamble Guthrie
Ten renovated cottages around a central green space in Central Seattle.
Unit Size Range from 501 to 521 sf
Density 28.5 units/acre gross, including off-street
surface parking area
Parking 12 spaces in on-site surface parking area
behind secured gate.
Access Parking area is accessed off city street.
Eight cottages have front doors on city
street and rear doors on courtyard. Two
cottages accessed only from courtyard.
Open Space All units have private porches facing
onto a shared 1,700 sf courtyard.
Prices &
Ownership
Condominium ownership. Units
originally sold between $85,500 and
$89,500.
Re-sales and
appreciation
All units have re-sold at least once since
1992. Average annual appreciation: 10.1
percent.
Market The small unit size makes the cottages suitable for singles.
Entitlement The current zoning is SF-5000, but the much higher density cottage project was grandfathered and allowed to
stay as a renovation project. It could not be built on the site from scratch..
Financing Conventional construction and mortgage financing.
Key
Innovations
High density detached housing. The density of the project is very high for detached housing, but the small
footprint of the units, combined with efficient use of the site, makes it very livable.
Trading interior space for amenities. This project was among the first to demonstrate the existence of a market
segment for detached housing that was willing to trade off interior space for interior and exterior amenities.
Affordability. Even with the high cost of renovation (it might have been more cost-effective to start from
scratch), the units were relatively affordable. This was achieved through low per-unit land cost and the small
size of the units.
Small but livable spaces. The units are quite small, but the use of vaulted ceilings and lofts gives an open,
spacious feeling.
Project located at 22nd Ave and East Pine Street, in Seattle’s Capitol Hill neighborhood. The entry is gated
– do not enter the property without an escort. Please respect the privacy of the residents and neighbors
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 7
Back porches all face
the community yard
With the site on a
corner, eight of the
ten cottages face the
street.
The land is in
condominium
ownership, ensuring
uniform care of the
landscaping.
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 8
Small Lot Detached Homes
Poulsbo Place Cottages – 2001
Developer: Security Properties
Architect: Mithun
Community of 45 cottages in six clusters, located near downtown Poulsbo.
Home Size Cottages range from 870 to 1,265 sf
Density Gross density, including private roads
and common greens, of approx. 12
units/acre
Parking One enclosed space per unit. 21 units
have attached garages, 24 have garages
in in separate buildings. On-street guest
parking.
Access Units accessed from public streets or
private road. Internal walkways provide
access on one side, and in some cases, on
both sides.
Open Space All units have a private front yard and
face a common green on the rear side.
Prices &
Ownership
Cottages sold between $140,000 and $180,000 in 1999, 2000. Ownership is fee simple.
Re-sales and
appreciation
A number of units have re-sold since 2001. Average annual appreciation: 8.5 percent
Market The primary target market was empty-nesters and retirees. Some younger commuters live in the project.
Entitlement The entire 17.3 acre Poulsbo Place development, of which the cottages are one part, was built as a planned unit
development on a former military/public housing site.
Financing Conventional construction and mortgage financing. No restrictions on buyers or ownership.
Key
Innovations
Affordability. Low per-unit land cost, efficient site design, and scale combined to make the units relatively
affordable. The typical empty-nest buyer could potentially pocket a significant amount of cash by selling a
larger home and moving into one of the cottages.
Large cottage community. The project shows how the cluster concept can be extended to a larger development,
offering the intimacy of a smaller cluster, but the economies of scale of a larger development.
Attached and detached parking. Where parking can be efficiently provided as an attached garage directly off
the street, that is provided. Units without direct street access use remote garages. Buyers had a choice of the
convenience of an attached garage, or being away from the street and having a detached garage.
Contextual detailing. Building design details and colors were chosen to fit with the Scandinavian heritage of
Poulsbo.
Poulsbo Place is located at Jensen Way NE and NE Sunset St., near downtown Poulsbo.
Please respect the privacy of the residents and neighbors
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 9
Clusters on common
greens range from
five to ten units.
Many units face
directly onto existing
public streets.
All units have
walkways on at least
one side.
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 10
Site Plan
Units off-street with
detached garages
Public Streets
Private road
Units on-street
with attached
garages
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 11
Cottages with Carriage Houses
Ravenna Cottages – 2001
Developer: Threshold Housing
Architect: Paul Pierce
Development of six cottages plus three carriage units on a shy quarter acre in North Seattle.
Unit Size Six cottages – 900 sf
Three carriage – 850
Density 37 units/acre
Parking One per unit. Separate structure
Access Gate on street. Garages off alley. No on-site
access required
Open Space Six-foot side yard for four cottages. 1500 sf
courtyard
Spec level Medium-high. Hardwood floors, tile counters,
tile tub, cat 5 wire.
Prices &
Ownership
Cottage: $288,000 to $310,000. Carriage: $258,000 to $258,000. Condominium ownership
Re-sales and
appreciation
Five units have re-sold since 2001. Average annual appreciation: 5.6 percent
Market Cottage housing is a niche market that appeals to those willing to trade quantity of space for quality of space.
Like most cottage projects, Ravenna was aimed at single professionals, although one unit was sold to a retired
couple. Cottages provide greater privacy than stacked flat condominiums or townhouses, and lower
maintenance than the older, detached housing in the neighborhood.
Entitlement The property is zoned for single family housing on 5000 square foot lots. The project was built under a
demonstration program sponsored by the City of Seattle. The exception to zoning was granted administratively
under the demonstration program, but the project still had to undergo SEPA review and Design Review.
Financing Threshold, although a non-profit developer, uses conventional financing in order to illustrate the for-profit
potential of its model projects. Ravenna Cottages was financed with private equity and bank debt. .
Key
Innovations
High density detached housing. This is very high density, for detached housing. 37 units/acre (or 31, if the
alley is counted) usually means stacked flats or townhouses. This project shows that the privacy of detached
structures can be had at high densities.
Economical access. By having all parking along the alley, no property was used for drives or access.
Detaching parking from units did not affect marketability.
Carriage units. Placing units over the garage structure made use of the airspace that would otherwise have
gone to waste. The carriage structure also blocks some freeway noise.
Small but livable spaces. The units are quite small for detached housing, but the efficient layout and use of
natural light makes them very livable. .
Common open space. The landscape and structures of the courtyard provide both private spaces and
community gathering space.
Neighborhood fit. Decisions about design, materials and colors were all made with the neighborhood context
in mind. Although obviously newer, the project fits well with its surroundings.
Project located at 6318 Fifth Avenue NE, Seattle. The entry is gated – do not enter without an escort.
Please respect the privacy of the residents and neighbors
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 12
Paved Alley
Garage with carriage units
Cottages
Courtyard
Street
Cottage elevation,
looking south from
courtyard
Southeast cottage
and entry gazebo,
looking east from
street
Ravenna Cottages
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 13
Courtyard and center
carriage unit, looking
east from entry
gazebo
South cottages and
garden area of
courtyard
North cottages and
courtyard, looking
west from south
carriage unit.
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 14
Cottages with Carriage Houses
Treehouse Neighborhood – 2004
Developer: QED Builders
Architect: Richard Berg
Planner: Buck & Gordon
Development of thirty cottages on a wooded three-block site in Port Townsend, near Fort Worden
Unit Size 28 cottages – 900 sf – 1400 sf
Two studios– 550 sf over garage
Density 7.5 units/acre, gross.
Parking One or two per unit. Parking next to or
under units.
Access Streets through the development are city
rights-of-way. Some public on-street
parking.
Open Space Cottages grouped into clusters of 7-10
cottages around common “back yard”.
Spec level Varies. Units were mostly pre-sold and
finishes determined by owners.
Prices &
Ownership
$175,000 to $300,000
Condominium ownership
Market Cottage housing is a niche market that appeals to those willing to trade quantity of space for quality of space.
In Port Townsend, the market for these units consisted mostly of empty-nest couples and single people. The
larger units were included to attempt to attract some families, which was successful in only one instance.
Entitlement The property is zoned for single family houses or townhouses on 3000 square foot lots. The project was
developed as a Planned Unit Development, under which the City of Port Townsend zoning code allows
modification of development standards in exchange for innovative design and features that further the goals
oulined in the Comprehensive Plan, i.e. increased open space or housing diversity.
Financing Conventional construction and mortgage financing. No restrictions on buyers or ownership.
Key
Innovations
Housing arranged to create shared open space. The overall density of the property as it was zoned was not
changed. The major innovation was that the houses were clustered together and pulled close to the streets, to
create larger, shared back yards or “commons” areas. Cottages were located to preserve existing mature fir,
cedar, and madrona trees as much as possible.
Narrow streets for multiple types of traffic. The streets were intentionally kept narrow (18’ to 20’) and
envisioned as shared circulation for use by cars, pedestrians, and bicycles. The narrow, winding streets keep
the car speeds quite low, usually 15 mph or less. Public or “guest” on-street parking is typically perpendicular
to the street in groups of 2-3 spaces.
Small but livable spaces. The units are quite small for detached housing, but the efficient layout and use of
natural light makes them very livable.
Neighborhood fit. Decisions about design, materials and colors were all made with the neighborhood context
in mind. Although obviously newer, the project fits well with its surroundings. There are numerous examples
scattered around Port Townsend of small houses and cottages from the 1910’s, through the ‘40’s, and exterior
treatment and details were modeled after these precedents.
Project located at Spruce and “W” Streets in Port Townsend. The streets in the neighborhood are
public. Please respect the privacy of the residents and neighbors.
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 15
Many large trees were
retained, and new
landscaping has
retained the woodsy
feel of the site.
Some units have
attached parking
directly off the street.
The site has four
distinct clusters, each
with its own central
green.
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 16
Cottages with Carriage Houses
Ashworth Cottages – 2006
Developer: Pryde Johnson Urban Environments
Architect: Runberg Architecture Group
Development of 12 cottages plus eight carriage units on three fourths acre in North Central Seattle.
Unit Size 12 cottages ranging from 1,100 to 1,400
sf, and eight carriage units, each
approximately 1,100 sf.
Density 1 unit/1,730 sf of lot area, including
internal circulation and common spaces.
Parking 28 on site parking spaces.
Access Six cottages face the streets, and four of
those have front garages. The remaining
units’ parking is accessed through two
driveways, one off each adjacent street.
Units facing onto the interior common
space are accessed via porches and
entries fronting the common space. .
Open Space Cottages have private side and front yards, and six cottages have private rear yards. Common open space in
two connected central courtyards of approx. 2,000 sf each.
Spec level High—Stainless steel appliances, aluminum/woodclad windows, hardwood floors, stained glass detailing, brick
fireplaces, etc.
Prices &
Ownership
Fee simple ownership. Prices TBD
Market Young professionals, “empty nesters”
Entitlement The project required a contract rezone from SF 5000 to Lowrise 1 zoning. The project was granted a DNS for
SEPA, and went through design review.
Financing Conventional construction and mortgage financing.
Key
Innovations High density detached housing. The project mixes cottages with attached four-plex carriage units and achieves
a density more typically found with townhouses.
Neighborhood character. Although the site will have more units than would be allowed by the original SF5000
zoning, the new houses will be much more consistent with the existing homes in the area. If the site were
developed to existing zoning, the resulting houses would be at least twice the size of the houses in the area.
Common open space. The open space is broken into two distinct areas. The eastern courtyard, with the
common house has a more formal feel, and the western courtyard, with a water feature and bird and butterfly
garden, has a more informal, natural feel. The two courtyards are linked, and the entire site can be traversed
from one street front to the other.
Efficient access. Four units have garages off the streets. The rest of the parking is clustered off two driveways,
minimizing the amount of site used for access.
LEED for Homes Pilot Project. The project has been selected to be a pilot project for the new LEED for
Homes Pilot Program, projected to achieve at least a silver rating. The project will also be applying for
certification from Seattle’s BuiltGreen program.
Project located at 8016 Ashworth Ave N, Seattle. The courtyard and drives are private -- do not enter
without an escort. Please respect the privacy of the residents and neighbors
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 17
The site plan takes advantage of the full block-width site to split the access and create a
continuous walkway from one street to the other.
The six cottages that face the streets (three on each street) are of a design and scale
similar to the homes in the neighborhood, presenting an uninterrupted streetfront.
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 18
Small Lot Detached Homes
Greenbrier – 2003
Developer: CamWest Development
Architect: Dahlin Group
Development of 70 detached homes and cottages in north Woodinville
Unit Size Houses range from 1370 sf to 1800 sf.,
with three & four bedrooms, two baths.
Cottages range from 510 sf to 990 sf
Density The 70 detached units of Greenbrier were
built on about six acres, for a gross
density of about 11.5 units/acre. Lot
sizes range from 1910 sf to 3645 sf for
the houses, and from 1415 sf to 1587 for
the cottages.
Parking Houses all have a two-car tandem
garage. Cottages share a surface parking
lot. Limited on-street guest parking.
Access The project contains private roads that
connect to a public road.
Open Space All units have private yards. A half-acre park is in the center of the development.
Spec level Affordable housing. Energy efficient gas fireplace with tile surround, wood floor entries, maple
shake-style cabinets
Prices &
Ownership
All houses and cottages on fee simple lots. All market rate houses sold for $230,580.
Re-sales and
appreciation
A number of units have re-sold since occupied in 2002 and 2003. Average annual appreciation of
about 16 percent
Market The houses were targeted at first-time buyers and families with moderate incomes. .
Entitlement Underlying zoning R-8 (8 units per acre/residential). Of the total 22-acre county-owned property, half
of the land will be developed, with the other half preserved in its natural state to preserve wetlands
and benefit salmon and other wildlife. Development team was selected by King County through a
competitive process.
Financing .Market rate homes used conventional mortgage financing. Affordable components managed through
A Regional Coalition for Housing (ARCH)
Key
Innovations
High density detached housing. The project shows how to create a new compact neighborhood that
works well for families. The houses are small, but very functional, and provide good value for
moderate income buyers on the Eastside.
Very small lot sizes. This shows that there is a market for homes on very small lots. Because many of
the very small lots back onto public open space, they feel more spacious. The park, easily accessed by
sidewalks, presents recreational opportunities for children who outgrow their small back yards.
Affordability. By starting with county-owned land and operating very efficiently, the developer was
able to sell the units for moderate prices. The spec levels were kept low, allowing owners the option
of improving them later.
Project located at N. Woodinville Way and 144th Ave. NE in Woodinville
Please respect the privacy of the residents and neighbors
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 19
Two of Greenbrier’s
500 sf cottages, seen
from their central
courtyard
The half-acre park is
easily accessible
from all homes in the
development.
20-foot streets
provide a more
intimate feel, but do
no allow on-street
parking.
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 20
Site Plan -- Greenbrier
Greenbrier Heights Senior
Apartments
Greenbrier Family
Apartments
Senior housing
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 21
Small Lot Detached Homes
Kirkland Bungalows – 2005
Developer: CamWest Development
Architect: Mithun
Community of 15 detached homes in Kirkland’s North Rose Hill neighborhood.
Home Size All homes are approx. 1500 square feet.
All have two bedrooms, two-and-half
bath, and single car garage.
Density Seven units/acre gross density, including
community open space and public street.
Lot sizes range from 2,350 to 4,100
square feet.
Parking One-car garages in each home. At least
one space on each driveway apron and
parking on one side of the plat road
serving the community.
Access The community includes a public street
that connects to existing streets on both
ends. Four homes have shared
driveways.
Open Space Three park areas are surrounded by four to six homes. The park areas range in size from 3,200 to 5,000
square feet. Other open spaces include open space/ landscape/ storm water tracts and equal approximately
6,500 and 7,899 square feet.
Spec level Exteriors include shingles, board & batten, lap siding, front porches, columns, brackets, and planter ledges.
The interiors include hardwood, granite tile bathrooms, and extensive wood millwork.
Prices &
Ownership
Fee simple ownership. Priced from $450,000 to $470,000, before custom upgrades.
Market With two bedrooms, a single car garage and small private yards, these homes are aimed primarily at singles
and couples.
Entitlement The community was developed as part of a Low Impact Development Demonstration Program sponsored by
the City of Kirkland, and was therefore given a 50% density bonus. With he underlying zoning of RSX-
7,200 the property would otherwise have accommodated eight or nine homes.
Financing Conventional construction and mortgage financing. No restrictions on buyers or ownership
Key
Innovations
Higher density detached housing. This community shows a neighborhood of smaller more affordable homes,
and common open space as an alternative to larger, more expensive homes built in the area.
Affordability. While not affordable in an absolute sense, homes are much less expensive than new
construction homes in the area (mid-$700,000s). Because they include the expensive parts (kitchens,
bathrooms) but less of the inexpensive space (bedrooms, bonus rooms),per-square-foot cost is somewhat
higher than the larger homes.
Sense of community. Fifteen homes on gently sloping, curved street with impressive architecture, ample
common open space and increased landscaping between the sidewalks and street has a distinct identity and
enough critical mass to create a true sense of community
Common open space. The small individual lot sizes mean less maintenance for the owners, while the
common areas provide recreation and a sense of openness.
The Kirkland Bungalows are located at 132nd Ave. NE and NE 97th St. in Kirkland
Please respect the privacy of the residents and neighbors
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 22
Landscape and
streetscape details
work to provide a
sense of community
Four units have
shared driveways off
the main road.
Half of the 40-foot
right of way is used
for sidewalks and
plantings.
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 23
Small Lot Detached
Cherrywood Lane – 1998
Developer: Northward Homes
Architect: John Lane
Development of 63 detached homes on small lots in Renton.
Unit Size Detached homes range from 1,490 sf to
1,960 sf.
Density 63 units on approx. 10 acres for gross
density of 6.3 units/acre. Lot sizes range
from approx. 3,100 to 4,100 sf. Net
density approx. 12.5 units/acre
Parking All units have two-car garages. Front-
loaded houses have parking on driveway
aprons. Guest parking spaces on street.
Access All homes on public streets within the
development. 25 homes have alley-
access, with the remainder front-loaded.
Open Space All homes have private side yards.
Front-loaded homes have rear yards. A
half-acre park, with play area, is in the
center of the development.
Prices &
Ownership
Fee simple. Prices ranged from $196,000 to $230,000 in 1998.
Re-sales and
appreciation
Many units have re-sold since 1998. Average annual appreciation: approx 7.5 percent
Market First time homebuyers. Empty-nest downsizers..
Entitlement The project was built through a demonstration program with the City of Renton..
Financing Conventional construction and mortgage financing
Key
Innovations
Family-oriented small lot housing. Although the private yards in the project are small, the park and
streetscapes are friendly for children. The loop road is efficient, but does not encourage pass-through
traffic, making the interior of the project feel safe
Community open space. The half-acre park is much larger and more functional than the typical tot-lot
that would be included in a development of this size. Its central location, with 20 houses either fronting
directly on it, or across the street, makes it very useable.
Narrow streets and right-of-way. The basic street width in the development is 20 feet, with some areas
30 feet wide to accommodate on-street parking. Total right-of-way is 40 feet. (A nearby development
with conventional cul-de-sac design has 55-foot right-of-way, 32 foot streets and no planting strips.)
Narrower streets provide a more intimate neighborhood feel, while allowing for landscaping in planting
strips, and encouraging slower speeds.
Project located at NE 6th Street and Duvall Ave. NE, Renton.
Please respect the privacy of the residents and neighbors
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 24
The half-acre park in
the center of the
development makes it
a child-friendly
neighborhood.
25 of the homes have
garages on alleys.
The rest are front-
loaded.
The basic street width
is 20 feet, but cut-
aways are provided
for on-street parking.
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 25
Detached Accessory
Woodside – 2003
Developer: Northward Homes
Architect: John Lane
A subdivision of single family homes in Fairwood where some homes have optional carriage units
above detached garages.
Unit Size Carriage units over two-car garages have
approx. 410 sf of living space
Density Overall subdivision density of about six
units/acre gross, including roads, parks,
stormwater facilities. Homes with
carriage units have lot sizes ranging from
about 3,800 sf to 4,200 sf.
Parking All homes have two car garages, some
have carriage units on top. No additional
on-site parking for carriage unit. On-
street parking in front of all homes.
Access All garages with carriage units are
detached from homes and are on alleys.
Open Space All homes have private yards. Because
carriage unit is over garage it does not
affect open space.
Prices &
Ownership
Homes with carriage units were priced
around $350,000 before custom
additions. The optional carriage unit
added about $19,000 to the price.
Market The neighborhood itself was targeted at move-up buyers. A variety of buyers chose the carriage unit option.
Entitlement The subdivision was created under the King Count subdivision code. King County’s code allows detached
accessory housing only on lots larger than 10,000 square feet, so these carriage units are not considered
separate residences.
Financing Conventional construction and mortgage financing..
Key
Innovations
Optional carriage unit. The carriage units were an option added on top of a two-car detached garage that would
be built in any case. Thus, site planning and development would not be affected by the later decision by the
buyer about whether they want the carriage unit or not. This kept the market for the subdivision as wide as
possible while providing dozens of additional living spaces.
Affordable housing in neighborhood setting. Carriage houses in a single family neighborhood offer an
opportunity to live in a small, affordable unit while enjoying the amenities of a quiet setting. Although these
particular units were not intended by the developer to be rented on the open market (the King County code
does not allow it), they do provide detached, private living spaces for extended family members. The model
could easily be adapted to provide inexpensive rental housing through a code change and the addition of
separate utility services.
The section of Woodside with carriage units begins at the corner of Parkside Way SE and SE 171st Place,
in the Fairwood neighborhood, SE of Renton. Please respect the privacy of the residents and neighbors
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 26
Some buyers chose
to add a carriage unit
during pre-sales,
while others chose to
simply have a two-car
detached garage.
All garages and
carriage units face an
alley, making them
invisible from the
streetside.
The units have
enough separation
from the main house
to provide ample light
and air.
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 27
Small Multi-family
Malden Court Condominium – 1996
Developer: Threshold Housing
Architect: Stickney, Murphy Romine
Ten townhouse units in two buildings over recessed parking in Seattle’s Capitol Hill neighborhood.
Unit Size Townhouse units from 777 to 1010
square feet
Density 43 units/acre
Parking 12 on-site spaces in recessed parking
area below courtyard.. On-street parking
in front of buildings
Access Project opens directly onto Malden
Avenue. Driveway between buildings
serves parking area.
Open Space Common courtyard between buildings,
partially covering parking area.
Prices &
Ownership
$153,000 to $169,000
Condominium ownership
Re-sales and
appreciation
Five units have re-sold since 1996. Average annual appreciation: 10.1 percent
Market Mostly single adults. Some couples. Wide age range..
Entitlement The parcel lies in an Lowrise-3 zone, and the density was permitted outright. The project did require a special
exception for height.
Financing Conventional construction financing and market rate condominium sales.
Key
Innovations Neighborhood fit. Although the project is located in a lowrise multi-family zone, it would fit very well into a
single family zone. The two buildings are designed to resemble the large, craftsman-style mansions of Capitol
Hill, and at 10,000 square feet, the site would accommodate two such houses if it were in one of Seattle’s
ubiquitous sf-5,000 zones.
Design. The units are generously sized for the neighborhood, but offer the residents an alternative to either
standard stacked-flat buildings or row houses.
Parking. The recessed parking area provides an alternative to either surface parking or expensive underground
parking. Individual direct-access garages would have been impractical for the layout of the units.
Project located at 414 Malden Avenue E, Seattle. Do not enter the property without an escort.
Please respect the privacy of the residents and neighbors
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 28
A central courtyard
spans the area
between the two
buildings over the
parking area
The parking area is
shielded from the
street, but mostly
open, eliminating the
need for ventilation.
The extra height
allowed for the
project permitted
both partially
recessed parking
below, and generous
ceiling heights.
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 29
Townhouse
Interlake I – 2004
Developer: Prescott Homes
Architect: Ron Novion
Sixteen townhouses, clustered around two auto courts, north of Greenlake in Seattle. A good
example of the most common form of urban infill development.
Unit Size 1,420 to 1,620 sf
Density 30 units/acre gross. The entire site is
platted, and auto courts are via easement,
so gross and net density and the same.
Parking Single car direct entry garage
Access All garages off auto courts, each serving
eight units.
Open Space Each unit has a patio/yard of approx. 200
sf, plus a balcony. Additional 100 sf per
unit of open space located on the site.
Spec level Medium-high. Hardwood floors, granite
counters, stainless appliances.
Prices &
Ownership
Sold in 2004 for between $260,000 and
$302,000. Units are on individual fee
simple lots of approx. 1,500 sf.
Re-sales and
appreciation
1 unit has re-sold since 2004, for $320,000.
Market Primarily single buyers, some couples. For many of the buyers this was their first home purchase..
Entitlement The project is in an L-1 zone, which allows about 27 units per acre, or a 1,600 sf average minimum lot size.
Because the project too place on three individual lots, the developer was able to round up the unit count and
gain a small amount of additional density..
Financing Conventional construction and mortgage financing..
Key
Innovations
Small scale infill. The project shows how to create a cohesive development on a small infill site. The entire
site consists of two distinct eight unit groups, each of which sits on approximately 13,000 square feet of land.
The developer is currently building an eight-unit townhome project on the same block.
First-time buyer affordability. This project shows how higher density, efficient use of land and economical
construction methods can produce well-appointed new-construction housing that is affordable at about 100
percent of the area median income. The same model could be priced and spec’ed lower in areas with less
expensive land.
Attractive streetscape. Exterior detailing and finishes, combined with a site plan that uses auto courts instead
of direct street access, create an appealing streetscape.
Project located on Interlake Ave. N. at N. 85th St. in Seattle. The auto courts are private property.
Please respect the privacy of the residents and neighbors
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 30
Architectural
detailing helps soften
the visual impact of
going to the full 35-
foot height allowed in
the zone
The central auto court
serves eight garages,
hiding access from
the street and
allowing each unit to
have a private yard.
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 31
Townhouse
Triangle Townhomes – 2005
Developer: Catapult Community Development
Architect: Johnston Architects
Development of 26 townhouses on a unique parcel in Tacoma’s Theater District
Home Size 26 townhouses ranging from 1692 to
2929 sf. All are 3-floor units.
Density 36.4 units/acre on a .7 acre site
Parking . 18 two-car garages, 7 single-car
garages, additional on-street parking
Access Garages off courtyards on street and on
project through-street (woonerf)
Street- and through-street ground-level
front-door access.
Open Space All 26 homes with roof decks or garden
patios
Spec level High. Hardwood floors, granite counters,
Prices &
Ownership
400,000 to $535,000 Fee simple.
Market Triangle Townhomes is the first townhouse project in the Downtown Tacoma Central Business District. While
condominium development is well established in the downtown area, residential projects that offer zero-lot-line
ownership and street-friendly designs are thus far nonexistent. Townhouses provide greater density than
traditional single-family detached designs without sacrificing the attraction of a single-unit-access front door
and discretionary entry..
Entitlement The property is zoned DCC – Downtown Commercial Core – with a height restriction of 400 feet.
Financing Conventional construction and mortgage financing. No restrictions on buyers or ownership
Key
Innovations
Built Green. The Triangle Townhomes are certified with the highest possible Built Green rating, a program of
the Master Builders Association of Pierce County. The project uses salvaged wood and counters made of
Richlite®, a paper-based material produced with phenolic resins, which are organic and non-toxic
Community orientation. All homes are designed to encourage interaction with the surrounding neighborhood.
The project creates a visual anchor for the neighborhood while encouraging investment and increasing security
Window treatments & natural lighting. Each home at Triangle features substantial natural daylight, utilizing
durable, double-hung wood windows. Energy-saving heating systems augment the open floor plans and
abundant natural ventilation. Translucent garage doors fill street-level courtyards with ambient light
Pervious surfaces. A concerted effort has been made to decrease impervious surfaces wherever possible by
employing pervious paving stones that facilitate stormwater management and enhance aesthetic appeal.
Pervious pavers are used in all garage courtyards and other landscaped areas.
Zero-lot-line Ownership. As opposed to conventional townhouse formats in which separating walls and land
are shared, Triangle utilized a double-wall system that allows lot-line to lot-line ownership of structure and
land.
Triangle Townhomes are located between 6th Ave., Fawcett Ave. and Baker St. in downtown Tacoma
Please respect the privacy of the residents and neighbors
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 32
Rendering, looking east from the corner of 6th Avenue & Fawcett Avenue
Site plan, showing woonerf through center of project
Alley, or “woonerf,”
through the project
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 33
Above: Woonerf elevation, looking north
from center of site
Left: Unit elevation
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 34
Auto Court – Duplex
305 Bellevue Way – 2006
Developer: Prescott Homes
Architect: The Hackworth Group
Six duplex townhouses and one detached house clustered around an auto court in downtown
Bellevue.
Unit Size Six duplexes from 1,470 to 1,620 sf.
One detached home 2255 sf
Density 21 units/acre gross. The entire site is
platted, and auto courts are via easement,
so gross and net density and the same.
Parking Two car garages in each unit. Two guest
spaces on-site
Access All garages off an auto court served by a
public street.
Spec level High
Prices &
Ownership
Prices expected to range from $490,000
to $660,000. Fee simple ownership
Market Project is expected to appeal to singles,
working couples and empty
nester/retirees.
Entitlement The site is zoned for up to 30 units/acre, so the project is less than the allowed density. A planned unit
development process was necessary to allow full platting of the entire property, which is not normally allowed
in this zone.
Financing Conventional construction and mortgage financing..
Key
Innovations
Maximize open space. The arrangement of duplexes on an auto court allows attached parking while
minimizing the space taken up by paving.
Maximize light and air. The use of duplexes allows units to have light on three sides. While the site could
accommodate higher density under the existing zoning, the duplex arrangement provides greater value for the
customer than a more traditional townhouse plan.
Project will be located at the corner of SE 3rd Street and Bellevue Way.
Please respect the privacy of the residents and neighbors
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 35
Elevations looking south from SE Third Street
Northeast duplex unit
Northwest duplex unit
Driveway
entrance to
auto court
Driveway
entrance to
auto court
Front doors
facing street
The Housing Partnership The Right Size Home Page 36
Site Plan
Financial support for research and production of The Right Size Home policy guide was
received from the Washington Association of Realtors
The Right Size Home
Housing Innovation in Washington
Part II: Policy Guide
This policy guide serves as a companion to the Right Size Home catalog, discussing in greater
detail the key features of innovative housing and the issues that communities must address as
they embrace new kinds of development. It also provides more detailed explanations of the
various housing types included in the catalog and the data used to describe them.
The Housing Partnership would like nothing more than to provide model ordinances and
regulatory templates that could be dropped into any municipal code in the state. We stopped
short of this approach for two reasons. First, these models continue to evolve, as both builders
and communities gain experience with them. Any model ordinance would soon be out-of-date.
Second, every market and every community is unique, and what works in one place may not
work in another.
Although drafting new codes represents a great deal of work, too many shortcuts and “cut-and-
paste” approaches risk creating codes that miss the critical balance between community
acceptance and business success for the builder. So, rather than provide exact figures for the
various parameters, this guide tries to illustrate the nature of each choice and offer a range of
measures. For example, we would contend that cottage housing requires clustering, common
open space and some remote parking, but we would suggest that sizes of cottages can range from
500 square feet to as much as 1,200 square feet.
The Right Size Home catalog features only a sample of the many good examples of housing
innovation in Washington. This guide can help the user evaluate other models to determine how
they might fit into a community’s housing strategy. As the resizing of the housing stock
continues, this guide too will evolve to capture new findings and new policy implications that
local governments will need to address.
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 2
Policy rationale: What is the wrong size?
Changes in public policy should aim to capture an identifiable opportunity or solve an
identifiable problem. In the case of the right-sizing of the housing stock, most communities have
plenty of room both to capture opportunities and to solve problems.
Opportunity: more choice
In most urbanized areas the vast majority of the housing stock built since World War II has
consisted of two product types. The for-sale market has been dominated by detached single
family houses on lots of at least 5,000 square feet, in neighborhoods that exclude commercial
uses. The dominant feature of the condominium and rental markets has been large complexes,
with garden-style walk-ups in the suburbs and stacked-flat buildings in central cities. Other
types of housing have been built, but in terms of numbers, large lot single family and large multi-
family complexes account for most housing.
These two types can certainly accommodate just about all needs to some degree. But to rely on
just two types of housing would be like offering just two types of automobiles: large SUVs and
compact cars. Just as the automobile industry produces a wide range of vehicle types – compact,
mid-size, full-size, vans, small SUVs, pickups, and a growing array of “crossover” vehicles – the
housing industry should be able to provide a range of housing types that can more closely fit the
needs of consumers. However, unlike the auto industry which can produce whatever its market
researchers say that buyers want, the homebuilding industry must work within the strict
parameters of local zoning and regulation.
The opportunity that the Right Size Home can capture, then, is to provide residents of a
community with a wider range of choices in housing so they can find something that matches
their lifestyle. As these new choices become available, the people buying and renting them are
often from the community itself, and are happy to find housing that meets their needs in a
neighborhood they know.
Problem: high cost of conventional housing
The problem that the Right Size Home can solve is the shortage of housing throughout much of
the state that is driving up prices. In larger and larger areas, the high price of land has driven up
the cost of conventional building lots to ridiculous heights, making large lot detached housing
unaffordable to all but the wealthiest buyers. In the fall of 2005, lot prices in conventional
subdivisions in East King County had reached $200,000 in East King County and $135,000 in
South King County.
The only way to address the high cost of land is to use less of it per home. And for many people
that is just fine. A very small lot still provides the privacy of a detached or semi-detached house,
at a lower price and with less maintenance.
Using the Right Size Home as a strategy to improve affordability has the added benefit of
allowing people to live closer to their jobs, thereby reducing commutes and traffic congestion.
Too many people have moved to distant, more affordable neighborhoods, because the areas
around their jobs offered too few affordable, appealing choices.
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 3
Lifestyle or affordability: getting the solution right
The two policy rationales just described – more housing types, more affordability – are distinct
issues and can lead to quite different solutions. The housing models described in The Right Size
Home catalog can apply to one or the other, and sometimes both. But communities adopting
these housing models must be very clear that they are doing so for the right reason.
The lifestyle market
The opportunity to provide more housing types requires a focus on lifestyles. The lifestyle
market typically involves people with enough money to provide themselves with a range of
options from which to choose. They may decide to trade in their large suburban home for an
urban center condominium, a cottage, a townhouse or other smaller dwelling. But they will not
feel they are giving anything up because they are trading quantity of space for quality of space.
The kitchen may be half the size, but the counters are granite and the appliances stainless steel.
A key ingredient to providing Right Size Homes to the lifestyle/choice market is the quality of
the neighborhood and the availability of amenities nearby. Lifestyle people like to walk, so there
should be pleasant sidewalks or trails, with a coffee house in easy reach. Successful lifestyle
developments also have their own common open space and/or parks nearby, to serve as a
substitute for the missing back yard. The lifestyle markets in urban centers need abundant and
interesting restaurants, and perhaps a farmers market.
To some degree, lifestyle builders compete for a pool of buyers and renters who can shop around
to find just the right ambience and combination of amenities that appeals to them. Builders who
aim at the lifestyle market will provide some of these amenities, but cannot create all of the
features needed for a neighborhood to attract these relatively affluent people. Therefore, the
lifestyle market requires either a high level of existing amenities or a substantial public and
private investment to create them.
The affordability market
Like the lifestyle market, the affordability market reflects a trade-off, but one done perhaps a bit
begrudgingly. People looking at the Right Size Home for affordability reasons would much
prefer the larger home and the larger lot, but simply cannot afford it, or are unwilling to put up
with the commute from less expensive large-lot subdivisions on the periphery. These buyers
have decided to trade off quantity of space for quantity of time. They would rather arrive at a
small house in a half hour than to a large house in 90 minutes.
The key to meeting the needs of the affordability market is to provide many of the features of a
large house in a smaller package. This means keeping the two-car garage, the master bath, the
third bedroom and the main floor powder room, while giving up the formal dining room, bonus
room and utility room. Careful market research is required to get exactly the right floor plan into
1,600 square feet.
Lot sizes in formal subdivisions and masterplanned communities have been shrinking steadily, to
the point where a 2,000 square foot lot is not unusual. But like the lifestyle market, the
affordability market depends on public spaces to make up for the missing private spaces.
Compact neighborhoods that target the affordability market do not necessarily need a nearby
coffee shop, but they need generous parks and play areas and safe streets. If the back yard
cannot fit a play structure, there had better be a nice one in the park just down the block.
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 4
Plan for the right market
Before undertaking a Right Size Home strategy, a community needs to understand the degree to
which is should use the strategy to attract the lifestyle market or to improve affordability, or to
try to serve both markets.
Most communities in the Central Puget Sound region, as well as areas of Whatcom and Clark
counties, have experienced substantial housing price increases in recent years, suggesting a focus
on affordability. In other areas of the state land prices have not yet made large lots unaffordable,
suggesting that an affordability strategy may not work. Where land is inexpensive and septic
systems will work, small lots can be a difficult sell.
Many areas have targeted the lifestyle market, although they may not know it. Urban Centers are
mostly lifestyle oriented, since mixed use buildings with underground parking are quite
expensive and cannot compete on price with garden-style apartments or condominiums in the
area. In any case, targeting the lifestyle market requires more than just a plan. It requires
substantial public investment in amenities, and if that investment is not forthcoming, lifestyle-
oriented projects are unlikely to get built.
Four key policy objectives
A Right Size Home strategy requires balancing of objectives among the key participants in local
housing market and local public policy. Policies need to aim at four key objectives:
The Right Size for the customer
Whether targeting the lifestyle or affordability markets, the Right Size Home offers just the
space that the customer needs – no more, no less. The Right Size Home is sought by households
that need more space, privacy and features than found in a typical apartment or condominium,
but less space, both interior and exterior, than found in a typical detached house. Important
parameters for Right Size Homes include:
Density and lot size. The examples in the catalog range from a net density of between 12
and 30 units per acre. This translates into per-unit land area of between about 1,500 square
feet and 3,600 square feet. This range of densities lies between single family developments
and typical multi-family complexes. Typical single family developments have no more than
8 units per acre, or lot sizes of at least 5,000 square feet. Multi-family complexes with
surface parking start at around 20 units per acre, and high rises with structured parking can
have several hundred units per acre.
Unit size. The catalog examples range from cottages and carriage units of 450 square feet up
to small lot houses with over 2,000 square feet. Although these sizes are within the range of
more traditional housing types, the configurations are quite different. For example, a 600
square foot cottage may have the same spaces as a typical one-bedroom apartment, but offers
a much different living experience.
Parking. The number and configuration of parking spaces can drive all other features of a
project. The Right Size Home does not waste space on unneeded parking, with that space
used instead for living space or landscaping. Even in suburban settings where parking is
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 5
usually abundant, Right Size projects have the minimum necessary. And to save circulation
space, Right Size projects often have parking separated from the living spaces.
As noted above, policies governing unit size, density and parking must acknowledge the target
market. For example, a cottage ordinance that places a size cap of 1,000 square feet will allow
units that attract the lifestyle market, but will fail to meet the needs of the affordability market.
Homes aimed at the lifestyle market can usually get by with less parking than homes aimed at
larger households.
Success in serving the affordability market begins with controlling the price of finished building
lots, so policies need to aim at minimizing land development costs. Development regulations
such as lot size, setbacks, street widths, parking requirements and on-site open space will
determine the degree to which a developer can offer a more affordable product. In the
affordability market, the customer looks for the Right Size mortgage payment!
The Right Size for the neighborhood
By restricting development on the periphery, the GMA pushes the housing market into the
undeveloped or underdeveloped spaces in existing neighborhoods. This means introducing Right
Size homes into areas with more traditional, low density development patterns, raising concerns
about the impact of higher densities on existing residents. With care on the part of both
developers and local governments, Right Size Homes can fit well into existing neighborhoods.
A Right Size Home strategy should take a new approach to evaluating projects that depart from
existing zoning. Rather than the usual measures of density – unit counts or lot sizes – the focus
should be on the impacts that emanate from the envelope of the project. After all, not every
housing unit has the same activity going on inside or the same impact on its surroundings.
The idea of “performance zoning” makes particular sense in conjunction with a Right Size
strategy that targets the lifestyle market. Lifestyle-oriented homes rarely have children at home,
and the residents lead relatively quiet lives. As such, noise, trip generation and automobile
ownership are all typically far less than in more family-oriented developments. As such, a
lifestyle-oriented development can meet the needs of more households while having no greater
impact than a more standard single-family development.
The scale of Right Size Homes can also provide a better fit with existing neighborhoods. Many
close-in neighborhoods feature the smaller homes typical of the 1950, and 1960s, and a new
development of larger structures can easily overwhelm the neighboring homes. If a builder in an
infill setting must conform to existing single family zoning, the resulting homes will typically be
large, but given an opportunity to use smaller lots, a builder can build smaller homes that fit
better with the surroundings. The catalog shows examples of this approach.
The Right Size for the future
The Growth Management Act aims to channel future growth into more compact neighborhoods,
relieving pressure to expand urban development into rural and resource lands. Although this
means that fewer new homes will be built on large lots, the alternative does not have to be high
density multi-family complexes. Most people still prefer detached housing, and many will
commute long distances to have homes they can afford.
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 6
A strategy that presents a stark choice between long commutes and large multi-family buildings
will fail. The Right Size Home strategy, as a component of larger growth management
strategies, promotes compact development that meets the needs of a variety of households. It
does this in two principal ways.
Lifestyle products free up single family houses. Many households have far more space than
they need or want, but do not feel they have attractive alternatives. Many people stay in their
large homes because they do not like the idea of moving from the privacy of their home in
their familiar neighborhood to a condominium in another neighborhood. More empty nesters
and retirees will make their large homes available to larger families if they have attractive
alternatives in their neighborhood that meet their new lifestyle needs.
Affordability products cut commutes. For those who cannot afford a traditional detached
house near their job, the alternative is often a long commute from an affordable area. Not
only does this create more traffic, but it also pushes demand in that distant neighborhood to
an even more distant one. This phenomenon, which has been moving up and down Interstate
5 for many years, can be alleviated by providing attractive alternatives to unaffordable
detached housing. As noted above, a household that cannot afford a traditional detached
house may give up certain features if they can find other key features in a smaller, more
affordable product.
Because a Right Size Home strategy has such a strong customer focus, communities that employ
it will have much better success meeting their GMA-mandated housing targets, and providing a
strong base of housing to support local employers and retailers. Over time, communities will
develop a housing stock with a variety of choices that will allow both a higher level of turnover,
and more stable demographics. In other words, a Right Size Home strategy helps create stable,
diverse, healthy communities that can sustain schools and other institutions over time.
The Right Size for homebuilders.
Homebuilding is an inherently conservative business, where success comes from consistently
meeting market needs with quality products and maintaining disciplined business practices. Few
homebuilders can take large financial risks with radical new products, so the Right Size Home
must not depart too far from established housing models. Builders have experimented with
different models for the past 10 or 20 years, and continually refine site designs and floor plans to
take advantage of experience.
For most builders, the Right Size Home represents an alternative to the more traditional products
they have been accustomed to building and selling, so they need a strong sense that their
business will succeed after they shift to a new direction. In general, the financial results of the
Right Size Home should be better than the financial results of building more traditional homes,
since the new products will carry a slightly higher risk.
The challenge for local governments is to make it easier to build the Right Size Home than to
build more traditional products. This is counterintuitive, since most alternative forms of
development often carry extra reviews and safeguards that make permitting more difficult. If
those extra processes – PUDs, PRDs, design review – remain in place, their impact should be
balanced by incentives that outweigh the added costs.
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 7
To encourage Right Size Homes in infill settings, local governments need to simplify and
remove costs from their permitting processes so they do not burden small projects. Often small
projects carry the same permitting requirements as larger projects, but with fewer units to spread
those costs onto. As the GMA pushes development onto smaller and smaller sites, the cost of
developing those sites needs to drop.
Building a Right Size Home strategy
The Right Size Home strategy puts local governments and communities in more active roles with
respect to the local housing market. A program like the Housing Partnership’s Community
Housing Strategies provides a framework for governments, builders and communities to work
together to promote Right Size Homes. As this process looks at various models of the Right Size
Home, participants will confront a series of important issues.
What constitutes innovation?
The whole idea of the Right Size Home is to introduce new types of housing into the local
housing stock, departing from typical practices. This does not, however, suggest overly radical
or unusual forms of housing. In fact, many of the models shown in the Right Size Home catalog
take a step back in time to housing forms that were common in the past but have fallen out of
favor. Some of the models shows innovation in a number of different ways, and some of them
are relatively conventional, but show innovation in some key aspect of the development that
makes a major difference.
All of the projects fit within a range of densities described above. The innovation comes in
creating practical and enjoyable living spaces, as well as good investment values, within those
higher densities. The Right Size Home can demonstrate innovation in:
Unit size. The floor areas and spaces shown in various Right Size Homes can be found in
more conventional products, but the departure comes in applying a size of unit to a model of
housing. For example, cottage homes often have the same floor area as stacked flats, but
feature full detachment and light on four sides.
Site plan. Allowing much less land per unit requires a more careful use of exterior space.
Many projects emphasize common open spaces over private open space. Parking and access
can be arranged to minimize the amount of site taken up by driveways, leaving more of the
site for building or landscaping.
Streets and rights of way. In conventional subdivisions rights of way occupy a significant
amount of the site. This provides ample parking and emergency access, but uses land
inefficiently and presents an unattractive streetscape. Many innovative developments feature
narrow streets, less parking, planting strips and other techniques to provide an efficient,
attractive streetscape.
Child-friendly. Large-lot subdivisions, with big back yards and low-traffic cul de sacs
provide a very friendly environment for families with children. Several Right Size Home
models show how more compact, affordable developments can also work well for children,
so their parents do not have to make the choice between a safe neighborhood and a long
commute that gives them less time at home.
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 8
Neighborhood fit. Housing styles change dramatically over time, and new housing often
does not fit well into older neighborhoods, in terms of both scale and design. Several Right
Size Home models emphasize a close fit with the existing homes in the area.
There will always be a place for a few truly radical projects in any community – idiosyncratic
homes and apartments that catch the eye. But the Right Size Home strategy needs to move
beyond demonstrations and one-off projects and bring innovation to the mainstream of the
market. The vast majority of homebuyers and investors are very conservative when they invest
in homes or income properties – they do not want risky properties that depart too far from the
norm. Right Size Homes provide the features and ambience that buyers want, while using
innovation both to create attractive new living environments and to mitigate the impacts of
higher densities on both residents and neighbors.
These models are for targeted markets
Even with a very aggressive strategy, Right Size Homes will make up only a fraction of new
housing. And since the overall housing stock increases only between one and one and a half
percent each year, innovative housing types will not constitute a substantial portion of the
housing stock for decades. Because of the huge base of traditional housing models already in
place, the vast majority of homes available for occupancy at any one time will continue to fall
into the two major types: large lot single family and multi family in large complexes. For those
seeking those types of housing, there will be ample supply.
Many of the models of Right Size Homes will not appeal to most buyers or renters. But that is
not important. The whole idea is to get away from the one-size-fits-all approach of housing
markets and provide a wider range of housing types that can more closely fit the needs and
desires of targeted niche markets. If builders know that they will have the regulatory flexibility
to build a variety of different types of products, they can study the preferences of various market
segments and produce homes closely tailored to those segments.
The first step in the Community Housing Strategies process is to undertake a market research
process that will identify underserved markets. With those markets identified, communities and
builders can zero in on the specific models of Right Size Homes that will meet market needs.
Over time, experience with various models will help local governments and builders adjust both
regulations and products to keep pace with evolving market demand.
The models shown in the Right Size Home catalog are not for everyone. But those models have
also proven successful in the market, indicating that demand for alternatives remains strong.
The challenge of affordability
Affordability of housing depends on two factors: the price or rent of the home, and the income of
the household. The Right Size Home strategy does not address income issues, which can really
only be helped with public subsidies to those households that cannot earn enough to operate in
the marketplace.
The price side of the equation depends on the relationship between the supply of housing and the
demand for it. In recent years, the supply of housing in the Puget Sound area and elsewhere in
Washington State has not kept up with strong demand. Even with the sagging economy of the
early 2000s, prices continued to rise, as buyers and investors chased a limited supply of homes
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 9
and apartment buildings. With the anticipated expansion of employment in the state over the
next several years, the market will come under even more pressure.
A Right Size Home strategy can address rising home prices in several ways:
Overall housing supply. The most important determinant of housing prices is the overall
supply of homes for sale or rent. By fitting more housing units on a given piece of land, Right
Size Homes expand the housing supply and take pressure off prices.
Relieve pressure on traditional single family housing. With a limited choice of products on the
market, traditional single family housing becomes the default choice for many buyers who
might otherwise choose something else, if it were available. Alternatives that provide some of
the advantages of traditional neighborhoods will attract some buyers away from those markets.
For example, a couple without children for whom privacy is important, might choose a small
lot house or cottage, rather than a large lot house, but would not choose a stacked flat
condominium.
Increase turnover. A couple can find themselves with an empty nest while in their late 40s or
early 50s, and look forward to another 30 or 40 years of independent living. A lot of people in
this position would like to move into a smaller home while staying in the neighborhood.
Providing lots of choices for empty-nesters and retirees increases the turnover of large-lot
single family housing, making it available for younger families that need all the bedrooms.
Lower prices for new construction. Smaller homes on smaller lots will be less expensive than
the larger homes in the neighborhood. This does not mean that Right Size Homes will meet
any definitions of “affordable,” with respect to income criteria. They will, however, be
affordable in a relative sense, offering buyers a chance to live in a neighborhood they
otherwise would not have access to. Right Size Homes play a critical role in efforts to achieve
a balance of jobs and housing, allowing middle income households to live in areas with
abundant jobs but expensive housing.
A Right Size Home strategy will not contribute directly to the construction of “affordable
housing.” The vast majority of the low cost housing stock remains older homes with few
upgrades in less fashionable neighborhoods. Except for the limited production of new,
affordable housing by housing authorities and non-profit developers, high land prices prohibit
the private-sector development of new-construction low-cost housing. The Right Size Home
will, however, contribute powerfully to the challenge of keeping housing markets functioning
smoothly and reining in prices. With enough supply and choice on the market, older housing can
stay affordable and not get bid up to prices far beyond its value.
The need for quality
When communities confront the possibility of new types of housing, neighbors often fear that
higher density housing will degrade their surroundings and lower property values. Although
instances of such things happening with market-rate housing are quite rare (new housing is
almost always higher quality than existing housing, and density makes little difference in value)
perception counts for a great deal. To fit well into existing neighborhoods, Right Size Homes
should maintain a high standard of design and materials. In addition to design and scale
considerations mentioned above, developers of Right Size infill should pay attention to:
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 10
Exterior detailing and finish. Details such as façade articulation and detailing, high quality
siding, window trim on four sides, contextual roofing materials and contextual paint colors
can all cost more, but, at the same time, send a clear message of project quality.
Landscape. Both common and private areas need high quality landscape to mitigate higher
densities. Like exterior finishes, landscaping should mirror the dominant themes of the
neighborhood where appropriate.
Maintenance covenants. Many developments of Right Size Homes have condominium
ownership, ensuring that exterior finishes and common area landscaping receive consistent
maintenance. With projects under fee simple ownership, strong homeowners association
covenants can provide the same level of maintenance. Developers need to communicate the
existence of strong maintenance arrangements to neighbors. The examples in the catalog
note the ownership arrangements.
Quality vs. quantity of space
One key to understanding the Right Size Home strategy is the relationship between quality of
space and quantity of space. The lifestyle market, in particular, makes a conscious trade-off,
preferring smaller spaces with high quality design, fixtures and finishes. Figure 1 in the design
catalog shows how the quality/quantity relationship plays out in various product types.
Housing types
Right Size Homes fit into a number of basic categories, based on both their design and target
market. The categories are not rigid, and with experience the definitions can change. But the
basic descriptions provide some guidance in deciding which types to target in a Right Size Home
Strategy.
Cottage cluster
No type of housing innovation has received more attention in the past 15 years than cottage
clusters. Although the definition of cottage housing has become well-established, marketers
have not shied away from calling almost any small detached house a “cottage,” whether it meets
the definition or not. Imitations notwithstanding, cottage housing is characterized by two key
features:
Clustering. Cottage developments tend to deemphasize private exterior space and emphasize
common space. Cottage developments typically cluster between four and eight units around
a common green space or courtyard, with the front porch facing the common space. Units
will have minimal separations and rear setbacks in order to maximize the common space.
The common space itself can be either active, with furnishings and inviting spaces, or
passive, with grass and paths.
Remote parking. In order to create clusters and maximize the landscaped space, cottage
developments move all or part of the parking away from the units. Early cottage
developments, such as Pine Street and Third Street, moved all the parking away from units.
Some later developments have included attached garages where the site plan allows. In any
case, the site plan must minimize the space taken up by driveways and adjust the parking
arrangement accordingly.
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 11
Cottages range in size from as low as 400 square feet to as large as 1,200 square feet. Some one-
story cottages have lofts that add storage or guest sleeping space that does not get counted in the
square footage. Early cottages tended to have one bedroom, while later developments have
moved toward two-bedroom floor plans.
Cottage developments have proved successful in a variety of settings. Clusters can be found in
urban and suburban neighborhoods as well as masterplanned communities. Part of the attraction
of cottages comes from their location within single family zones. Cottages provide the quiet
setting of single family surroundings with the higher density typically found in multi-family
zones.
Most cottage developments have aimed at the lifestyle market. Their small size, lack of private
yards and high per-square-foot cost makes them less attractive to households with children.
Conversely, urban settings, efficient layouts, high spec levels and common exterior maintenance
make them attractive to singles, empty nesters and retirees.
Most, but not all, cottage projects have condominium ownership. The details of the
condominium can very, with more or less of the exterior spaces under individual control. Unlike
the weaker option of covenants and owners associations, condominiums provide protections for
the integrity of the exterior spaces, landscaping, and often exterior finishes.
Cottages with Carriage Units
When cottage developments cluster parking in multiple-space garages, there is an opportunity to
use the space above the garages for additional living units. These add to the population density
of the site, but only a fraction of the carriage unit is added to the site coverage (the carriage unit
itself will need a parking space, so that extra space is added to the site). Carriage units typically
add a more affordable component to the project.
The size of carriage units depends on the number of parking stalls underneath. A typical one-car
garage space measures about 12 feet by 20 feet, providing 240 square feet for living space above.
So, two spaces would provide a studio unit of 480 square feet, three spaces would provide a one-
bedroom unit of 720 square feet, etc. As shown in the Ravenna and Ashworth cottages in the
catalog, generous height limits allow a second story in the carriage units.
Small lot detached
The size of standard single family building lots in urbanized settings (defined, in this case, by the
availability of sewer service that eliminates the need for septic drainfields) varies, but rarely
drops below 5,000 square feet. Older cities were laid out with 50 foot by 100 foot lots in the first
half of the 20th century, with lots in post-war suburban subdivisions growing to between 7,200
and 10,000 square feet. More recently, subdivisions have moved back down to lots between
5,000 and 6,000 square feet.
But even lots at 5,000 square feet have become prohibitively expensive in many areas, with high
land cost and rising costs for infrastructure. Although the ratio of lot cost to home price has
shifted in recent years, the cost of the finished building lot still drives the cost of new detached
homes, so the only way to bring in a lower priced home is to start with a lower cost per building
lot. Shrinking lot sizes lowers cost by requiring less land and by requiring fewer feet of street
and utility pipe per lot.
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 12
Early small lot developments pushed lot sizes to the 3,500 to 4,000 square foot range. More
recent developments have gone as low as 2,000 square foot lots. Unlike cottage housing,
however, small lot developments do feature attached parking and distinct private open spaces,
even if very small. And whereas cottage developments can have condominium ownership, small
lot projects usually sell homes on a fee simple basis. Exteriors and landscaping are protected by
covenants and owners associations, although these arrangements can weaken over time.
When lots get much below 5,000 square feet, some things need to change from standard practice
used in traditional subdivisions:
Setbacks and building separations. These need to shrink in order to provide an adequate
footprint. Increased height limits can allow a third story on very narrow lots. Alleyways for
parking and access provide a more attractive streetscape while still permitting two-car
garages.
Open space. Since the homes will have little private open space, the development needs to
provide ample and attractive public open spaces. Two of the examples in the catalog –
Greenbrier and the Orchards – feature large parks in the center of the development, within
easy and safe walking distance from the homes.
Streets. The excessively wide streets and rights of way in standard subdivisions do not fit
well with small lots. Narrower streets with planting strips and limited parking provide a
more comfortable streetscape that does not overwhelm the houses that sit very close to the
curb. Narrow streets also encourage slower driving, making a walk to the park safer for
children.
Small lot developments appeal mostly to the affordability market. They should be child-friendly
and provide good investment value for first-time buyers, offering the opportunity to get new
construction homes in an area buyers could not otherwise afford. In making the trade-off of
space for neighborhood, these buyers will still look for the privacy and basic functionality of the
larger home they would ideally like to have. This distinguishes small lot developments from
cottage developments, in which buyers willingly give up many of the features of larger homes.
Detached accessory units
State law requires larger jurisdictions to permit accessory housing (separate apartments on a
single family parcel). But not all local governments allow accessory units in separate structures.
Having an accessory apartment as a stand-alone cottage or above a detached garage provides a
higher level of privacy for both the owner and the tenant, and permits the homeowner to retain
all spaces within the original house.
Single people make up the primary market for accessory housing. Most units are small, and
owners seek tenants with the least potential to disrupt the main residence. On occasion, the
owner of the property will occupy the accessory unit, and rent out the principal residence.
Although some accessory units do actually house a mother-in-law or other relative, most owners
build them for the added rental income. A few new developments – including the Woodside
development shown in the catalog – offer accessory units in new construction, allowing an
owner to capture some revenue from the land they have just purchased.
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 13
Small multiplex
Most jurisdictions draw a bright line between multi-family zones and single family zones,
prohibiting any multi-unit buildings from being built in single family neighborhoods. Since
multi-family zones often lie along arterials and near commercial areas, the choice to live in a
multi-family unit implies a choice to live in a setting with more traffic, noise, light and a
generally less-peaceful ambience. Just as accessory housing offers the chance to live in an
affordable unit within a quiet neighborhood, small, contextual multi-family buildings can fit into
single family zones.
Such buildings can often be found in older areas of cities that developed before strict zoning
regulations drew bright lines between building types. The same footprint that would
accommodate a single family house can support a four-unit building. The example in the catalog
– Malden Court – fits five townhouse units into each of two structures that resemble large
houses, with parking provided below-grade.
Duplexes and triplexes can also fit into single family neighborhoods almost unnoticed. One
technique allows duplexes on corner lots, as long as the front doors face different streets.
Neighborhoods in Vancouver B.C. allow front-and-back duplexes with only one entrance visible
from the street, and the other entrance behind.
This type of housing leans toward the lifestyle market. Small buildings with structured parking
will be expensive to build and cannot compete on price with larger multi-family complexes.
These buildings do, however, offer the opportunity for smaller spaces and lower maintenance
while staying in a quiet neighborhood.
Townhouse
Townhouses have become the workhorse of urban infill and affordability. This versatile style of
building can be adapted to a wide variety of settings and development sizes, and can meet the
needs of both the affordability and lifestyle markets. Most townhouse projects fall within a
range of 15 to 30 units per acre. They can be sold as fee simple, zero-lot-line homes or as
condominiums.
With the high cost of land and utilities, townhouses offer the affordability of higher density with
the privacy of direct-entry parking and individual front and rear entrances. Luxury townhouses
offer a lower-density alternative to condominiums in expensive urban settings. In lower cost
areas they offer a more affordable alternative to detached housing, especially for first-time
buyers.
As with small multi-plexes, townhouses have the potential to fit seamlessly into single family
neighborhoods. The key is to avoid a streetscape consisting of garage doors, by using alley
entrances or underground parking.
Auto court
This variation on townhouses moves parking and access to the center of the development,
minimizing driveways and maximizing open space to the rear. In some ways auto courts are the
opposite of cottage developments, which move parking to the side and maximize open space in
the center of the development. Auto courts provide a more attractive streetscape by moving
garages to the interior.
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 14
The data
Developing a Right Size Home strategy requires a common language and a set of measures and
descriptions to identify and evaluate various housing models. Following are descriptors used in
the catalog.
Unit Size
The approximate size or range of sizes of the living spaces is provided, as reported by the
developer or architect. The data given can mask two sources of inaccuracy.
First, it is not clear whether the data represents gross square feet (measuring to the exterior of the
building walls and including all interior walls) or net square feet (adding up the actual floor area
of each living space). The difference can be significant, especially since the width of walls
remains the same, regardless of the size of the rooms, making the difference between net and
gross larger in smaller units. For example, each Ravenna Cottage has 936 gross square feet but
only 815 net square feet.
Second, Both regulation and architectural practice dictate that spaces with low ceiling clearance
do not count toward living space. Since small units often employ lofts and low spaces under
rooflines, usable floor space can exceed the official measurement.
In writing regulations for a Right Size Home strategy, measurement of unit size must be very
clearly spelled out in order to avoid confusion and to ensure that builders can size units to meet
identified market requirements.
Density
Measures of density can create even more confusion that measures of unit size. It does not help
that local zoning codes use a wide variety of different zoning designations, making it difficult for
the layperson to visualize what is happening on the ground. The Right Size Home catalog tries,
where possible, to show density of a project in terms of both units-per-acre and lot size, since
both measures are commonly employed.
Lot size refers to just the land owned as part of a unit. It does not take into account rights-of-
way or tracts held in common ownership, such as tot-lots or stormwater ponds. Lot size will,
however, include areas used in common or by neighbors under an easement.
Like unit size, a density measure of units-per-acre can be either gross or net. The gross measure
divides all the land in the development by the number of units. The net density calculation
excludes stormwater ponds, public streets, parks, and other public spaces or commonly-owned
tracts. Net density equates to the average lot size, such that, for example, 7,200 square foot lots
have a net density of six units per acre.
These measures have different but equally valid uses. Net density and lot size are relevant to
understanding the marketability of a project: buyers want to know how close they will be to their
neighbor and how much space belongs to them. Gross density provides an indication of the
impact of the project on the surroundings. The distinction between gross density and net
density/unit size becomes very important in cases where projects cluster units to avoid sensitive
areas or to create large common open spaces. In such projects, the gross density can be low
while lot sizes are still quite small.
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 15
In many ways, however, these measurements of density miss the point of The Right Size Home.
By treating all housing units the same, these measurements say nothing about the actual impact
of a project on its surroundings. As part of a Right Size Home strategy, jurisdictions should
consider using an alternative measure such as floor-area-ratio (FAR – the combined floor area of
all units in the project divided by the total land area). Using FAR, three 1,000 square foot
cottages would count the same in a density calculation as a single 3,000 square foot home. Such
equivalence seems fair, considering that the cottages would likely have just one occupant and the
house would likely have at least four.
Parking
Parking represents perhaps the biggest challenge of the mid-levels of densities targeted in a Right
Size Home strategy. The homes and developments have little land to spare for excessive parking
or circulation, but cannot support expensive underground parking. Most have the minimal
amount of surface or direct-entry parking for each unit, plus whatever guest parking will fit in
driveways and on the streets.
Parking is another area where the lifestyle/affordability distinction comes into play. The urban
location of many lifestyle-oriented projects encourages lower car ownership and more use of
transit, walking, biking or services such as Flexcar, and the units themselves do not often lend
themselves to entertaining large numbers of guests. In contrast, projects oriented toward
affordability will tend to attract families with the possibility of multiple cars, and will need more
guest parking for soccer parties, scout meetings and other activities.
From a regulatory point of view, current parking requirements may not fit the new types of
development contemplated in a Right Size Home strategy. Rather than simply looking at the
form of the projects, planners need to take into account the target market when deciding how
much parking to require. Many of the projects in the catalog are old enough that residents and
neighbors can report the success of the parking formulas used in them.
Local governments and builders should consider using off-site and shared parking, especially in
urbanized areas. By contracting with commercial or institutional buildings with complementary
uses, residents can have extra parking available on evenings and weekends. Condominium or
owners associations can manage parking contracts over time.
Access
Roads and driveways provide another opportunity to save space while retaining essential
functionality. The Right Size Home is served by the right size street, or perhaps a path, alley or
woonerf (a street that also serves as a walkway, with cars and pedestrians having equal access).
Access rights-of-way can be publicly-owned or private, with private roads and driveways held in
tracts or arranged through easements.
As noted above, roads, sidewalks and paths serve as part of the open space of a Right Size
community. With smaller or non-existent back yards, residents will spend more time in front
yards and sidewalks, or strolling or biking through the neighborhood or to the park. As such, the
design and maintenance of rights-of-way must be more than strictly utilitarian. In fact, they can
be less utilitarian by having narrow lanes that encourage slower driving and having fewer
parking spaces that eat up pavement.
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 16
A central part of a Right Size Home strategy that includes townhouse developments, small lot
subdivisions and other large projects is the revisiting of street standards. Road widths and
sidewalk configurations that made sense for large-lot subdivisions in the 1950s and 1960s do not
make sense for more compact developments taking place today.
Open Space
As noted in several places, Right Size Home developments tend to stress community and public
open space over private open space. Although back and side yards may not disappear entirely,
they will shrink dramatically, providing enough space for privacy, but not enough for a ball
game.
Development regulations often contain specific requirements for minimum private open space
for each unit and a minimum per-unit community open space. Early versions of these
regulations involved some guesswork and references to more conventional development styles.
Like parking, the experience in developments completed in the past decade should provide
guidance for open space requirements.
The site plans and landscape plans of cluster developments need to make a clear distinction
between the community space and the private space of each unit. While cottages and other
cluster developments encourage sociability, each unit does need its own private envelope. This
can be accomplished through fencing, decking and plantings.
Spec level
This provides an overall sense of the quality of the interior fixtures and finishes. Decisions about
the quality of flooring materials, cabinetry, appliances, trim and other interior features depend on
the price and target market. In general, for-sale products are built with higher spec levels than
rentals, and lifestyle-oriented products will have higher spec levels than affordability-oriented
ones. Since the possible combinations of fixture and finish levels are nearly infinite, the
assessment of spec levels is rough.
Various non-discretionary cost factors can drive spec levels. When high land cost or
construction cost drive up prices, builders need to offer a higher spec level to justify the higher
overall home price. The difference between a $300,000 house built on a $90,000 lot and a
$750,000 house built on a $200,000 lot can be found mostly in the fixtures and finishes that
distinguish a luxury home from an entry-level one.
Prices & Ownership
The Right Size Home catalog shows original sales prices or a range of prices for the
development, along with the dates of sale. Projects will have one of two basic types of
ownership:
Fee simple. With fee simple ownership, the purchaser buys a legal parcel along with the
home. Most Right Size Home developments with fee simple ownership place covenants and
restrictions on the units, and require owners to help pay for maintenance of commonly-held
tracts like parks and stormwater ponds. Unlike traditional subdivisions in which building
lots are sold to individual builders, Right Size Home developments are usually planned and
built as a whole, requiring strong owners associations and close cooperation to maintain the
original quality over time.
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 17
Condominium. Many Right Size Home developments are under condominium ownership,
with all land held in common. Condominium rules will dictate the degree of control that
owners have over various aspects of maintenance and modification. In order to control
maintenance of exteriors and landscaping, many cottage and small lot projects have
condominium ownership even though the units are not attached.
Re-sales and appreciation
Re-sales and appreciation of property are key indicators of the success of a Right Size Home
development. Higher than average appreciation indicates that the project was underpriced in the
beginning or that it meets a significantly under-served market. Lower than average appreciation
indicates that the project has failed to compete against more conventional alternatives.
Many of the projects in the Right Size Home catalog have been around long enough to see re-
sales of units. The average price appreciation was calculated for all re-sold units in smaller
projects, and for a sample of units in larger projects.
Market
Marketing issues have been discussed extensively above, with respect to the overall concept of
the Right Size Home and the target markets for various housing types. The catalog identifies
markets that builders originally aimed for, but the reader should recognize that markets and
appeal can change over time.
Entitlement
The Right Size Home catalog features many projects that required some exception to the zoning
and development regulations that originally applied to the property. As noted, the great majority
of residential land is locked up in either low-density single family zones or higher density multi-
family zones in busy areas, with too little land available for mid-level densities in quiet settings.
Alternative entitlements (not all of which are represented in catalog examples) include:
Demonstration projects. Several projects in the catalog resulted from opportunities presented
by local governments to demonstrate innovative housing techniques. Unfortunately, few
demonstrations have resulted in permanent changes to development codes.
Masterplanned communities. With large tracts of land to work with, developers can toss out
the existing zoning code and start from scratch to create entire communities under a new set
of rules. Masterplanned communities account for a large amount of the housing innovation
in Washington State over the past two decades.
Rezones. The most straightforward, but often most difficult, way to create an innovative
development is to rezone the property to a higher density.
Conditional use. This procedure allows developers to propose an alternative to the existing
zoning, subject to strict criteria. Several ordinances that allow cottage housing have used this
technique, which is also used for neighborhood institutions like churches.
Planned Unit Development. Many cities and counties have procedures that allow developers
to negotiate alternatives to the underlying zoning. PUDs usually involve some set of trade-
offs between the developer and the local government that achieve a public purpose, such as
open space or environmental enhancements.
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 18
The whole point of the Right Size Home strategy is to get away from the rigidity of zoning and
allow developers the flexibility to meet market demand in creative ways. But zoning codes are
meant to protect communities from the unknown and the dangers that too much “creativity” can
bring. Zoning may create a monotonous, cookie-cutter built environment, but as the saying goes,
the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t know. So, the challenge for the Right Size
Home strategy is to find entitlement alternatives that allow cost-effective variation from zoning
while still maintaining essential community protections.
Financing
Nearly all the projects in the catalog used conventional construction financing and mortgage
lending. In a Right Size Home strategy, projects must stand on their own financially, and fit with
the business objectives of mainstream builders. Reliance on exceptional financing or public
subsidies, while understandable for demonstration projects and low income or special needs
housing, needs to be set aside as the strategy matures.
Conclusion
The great weakness of Washington State’s Growth Management Act is that it does not provide
positive tools to help communities shape growth and meet housing and economic development
needs. The GMA provides only tools for regulation, but no community can regulate its way
toward a desired result. Regulation can only stop bad things from happening. Attempts to use
regulation to create desired outcomes rarely works. The purpose of the Right Size Home
strategy is to use a positive force -- the energies of the marketplace – to move toward that
magical point at which people’s desires for living space correspond with the community’s
desires for its built environment.
The Right Size Home strategy, in keeping with traditional land use practice, begins and ends at
the local level. The guide and catalog can provide ideas and guidance, but the answers will
emerge from a cooperative local effort. To succeed at the local level, the strategy needs a much
higher level of trust than currently exists in most traditional arms-length, rigid regulatory
structures. Such systems provide safety and predictability, which are good things, but which do
not lend themselves to creative outcomes. Abandoning the safety net of rigid regulation requires
that:
Builders trust local government. Easing the rigidity of regulation implies that local
governments will have more discretion to approve – or disapprove – innovative projects.
Builders must trust that local officials will exercise this discretion fairly and without internal
agendas.
Local governments trust builders. Not every detail of a project gets spelled out up-front, and
projects do change after regulatory approvals. Local governments must trust that builders
will follow through on plans and stick to the quality of project they promised.
Communities trust everyone. Both local governments and builders must give neighbors
reason to believe that the devil they don’t know will be better than the devil they know.
The Right Size Home, Part II – Policy Guide The Housing Partnership Page 19
Fortunately, as the catalog demonstrates, builders in Washington State have established an
excellent track record of producing innovative Right Size Homes that meet a variety of needs.
Local governments, builders and communities can use the lessons learned in these projects to
find the Right Size Homes for them.