Seattle's 'micro-housing' boom draws criticism, support
»Play Video
SEATTLE -- Spitting distance from Seattle University, on 11th Avenue near E. Jefferson St., one tower rises above the others.
It's slim and compact -- channeling the colors of autumn -- and squeezes 56 living units into one small footprint.
The developer calls it an aPodment; Patrick Tompkins calls it unregulated.
"If they're a large-scale structure, they're supposed to go through design review, no matter what they're going to build," said Tompkins, who lives on Capitol Hill with his family. "I think the sense there is that this is something the city got backed into. They had no intention of creating this."
Tompkins, who heads up the Capitol Hill Coalition, lives about six blocks from a micro-housing development called Centro on East John Street. The building advertises furnished "suites," each with a kitchenette and bed, starting at $575 per month.
One local community college student who lives in the building showed off her loft with mini-fridge and private bathroom, all packed into about 200 square feet. At $850 per month, she said, it was becoming too expensive for the neighborhood given the amenities she has. (She shares a coin laundry and a larger kitchen in a small common area on the ground floor.)
City land use planners and private developers tout micro-housing -- popular on Capitol Hill and in the U-District -- as easy, affordable living in an otherwise pricey real estate market.
"Yes, (living) is pretty expensive," said University of Washington student Lydia Walsh, who lives near campus. "I work two minimum-wage jobs, so it's definitely a little hard to make ends meet sometimes."
On the flip side, critics argue the micro-housing trend is skirting city regulations -- and falling under the radar of neighbors -- due to a loophole in city law. Forty-seven micro-housing developments are currently permitted in Seattle, city planners say; most, however, do not have to go through a traditional design review process.
"For most of the micro-housing developments that we're seeing, they require only a building permit," said Mike Podowski, manager of land use and development at Seattle's Department of Planning and Development. "Design review is not required of all multi-family buildings either. The thresholds are based on the number of dwelling units."
Podowski points to city code which says that buildings that have nine or more "dwelling units" have to go through a design review. A "Dwelling unit" is defined by a shared kitchen or food prep area.
Tompkins, however, says this is the exact loophole that neighbors are trying to close.
"I think there's a general consensus that there's a need for this kind of housing," he said, "(but) I think they really want to have a careful, thoughtful hand in shaping how our neighborhoods get created."
Tompkins and others met with city councilmembers last week to talk to them about drafting a short-term moratorium that would limit construction on micro-housing units while the city studies the impacts of high-density living. A legislative aide in Councilmember Tom Rasmussen's office said there is discussion among city leaders about drafting something, but "nothing's on paper yet."
"I don't know if (the aPodment) would be something I'd be interested in," added Walsh, the UW student, "but they sound cool, and I think that those would work for lots of young professionals or college students."
KOMO News contacted the aPodment development company for comment. A building manager said, "we don't do media," and then refused to contact the company's main office.
It's slim and compact -- channeling the colors of autumn -- and squeezes 56 living units into one small footprint.
The developer calls it an aPodment; Patrick Tompkins calls it unregulated.
"If they're a large-scale structure, they're supposed to go through design review, no matter what they're going to build," said Tompkins, who lives on Capitol Hill with his family. "I think the sense there is that this is something the city got backed into. They had no intention of creating this."
Tompkins, who heads up the Capitol Hill Coalition, lives about six blocks from a micro-housing development called Centro on East John Street. The building advertises furnished "suites," each with a kitchenette and bed, starting at $575 per month.
One local community college student who lives in the building showed off her loft with mini-fridge and private bathroom, all packed into about 200 square feet. At $850 per month, she said, it was becoming too expensive for the neighborhood given the amenities she has. (She shares a coin laundry and a larger kitchen in a small common area on the ground floor.)
City land use planners and private developers tout micro-housing -- popular on Capitol Hill and in the U-District -- as easy, affordable living in an otherwise pricey real estate market.
"Yes, (living) is pretty expensive," said University of Washington student Lydia Walsh, who lives near campus. "I work two minimum-wage jobs, so it's definitely a little hard to make ends meet sometimes."
On the flip side, critics argue the micro-housing trend is skirting city regulations -- and falling under the radar of neighbors -- due to a loophole in city law. Forty-seven micro-housing developments are currently permitted in Seattle, city planners say; most, however, do not have to go through a traditional design review process.
"For most of the micro-housing developments that we're seeing, they require only a building permit," said Mike Podowski, manager of land use and development at Seattle's Department of Planning and Development. "Design review is not required of all multi-family buildings either. The thresholds are based on the number of dwelling units."
Podowski points to city code which says that buildings that have nine or more "dwelling units" have to go through a design review. A "Dwelling unit" is defined by a shared kitchen or food prep area.
Tompkins, however, says this is the exact loophole that neighbors are trying to close.
"I think there's a general consensus that there's a need for this kind of housing," he said, "(but) I think they really want to have a careful, thoughtful hand in shaping how our neighborhoods get created."
Tompkins and others met with city councilmembers last week to talk to them about drafting a short-term moratorium that would limit construction on micro-housing units while the city studies the impacts of high-density living. A legislative aide in Councilmember Tom Rasmussen's office said there is discussion among city leaders about drafting something, but "nothing's on paper yet."
"I don't know if (the aPodment) would be something I'd be interested in," added Walsh, the UW student, "but they sound cool, and I think that those would work for lots of young professionals or college students."
KOMO News contacted the aPodment development company for comment. A building manager said, "we don't do media," and then refused to contact the company's main office.
poor people, as a matter of economic necessity, often live in group houses. often an older rental house, one person usually holds the lease and rents out bedrooms to others. these houses are disappearing as new, bigger buildings take their place. pod apartments, expensive though they may be (perhaps $300/mo MORE than a room in a group house in Seattle), are the ONLY other option available to the minimum wage worker.Â
Here is a site you should check out: www.tinyhousetalk.com it has information about small house living and just think if the city split the lots again you could have two 500 sq ft homes on one lot instead of one 1000 sq foot home. if only i could get rid of my junk i too would live smaller.
It is bigger than the attic closet I slept in on QAH in the early 80's...Still  at $51/sq. ft. that is an two  times the Ocean Front Condo rent  rate in Palm Beach County, FL today.
Wow these people like to live like stacked up chickens in a coup! All I can say is the developers and landlords are laughing all the way to the bank. $850.... I guess people that live there like to live like that and also take it up the a** when it comes to throwing away rent.
@joe Renting isn't really throwing away money. If you don't intend to live in one place for at least 5-7 years there is really no point in trying to purchase. Plus if you don't have a good down payment or can't afford much you're going to end up buying a money pit anyway. Living out in the middle of BFE for those of us who enjoy the city or have jobs in the city or are going to university is just idiotic.
@joe Throw away rent, throw away a mortgage payment on an underwater house...what's the difference?
This is exactly what "City land use planners and private developers"Â wants, high density housing to raise the tax revenues, no parking to discourage people from owning cars (less road improvements needed) and medium cost small housing units so that when the cityscape is remade without the Alaskan Way viaduct the private developers will be able to charge premium rates further upping the tax revenues for the city and of course their own pocketbooks.
Future tenements gestating in the womb. Oops, I forgot. Most tenement housing has more square footage.
This is simply taking advantage of gullible young people who haven't yet developed the skills to understand that they're the victims of a real estate scam.Â
As long as it keeps the loophole open, Seattle will see more of these popping up further away from its university neighborhoods.
Someday, it's probably going to cost Seattle a small fortune to get rid of these after they've become largely abandoned, dangerous, vertical slums.
@Purrlie Honestly its just like a dorm and I know plenty of folks who wished they could have stayed after their 4 years.
@Purrlie
How is this a scam? Both parties are honest and upfront about what they are giving and receiving.
$850 a month for 200 square feet is too much. But the idea of a compact space in a city neighborhood and modern building has its place.
@Citizen#3457899654Â
I had looked at a new complex on Linden in North Seattle, The Tressa. It was advertised as "affordable living". What a total LIE! They are charging over $1000 for a STUDIO that is only $750 square feet, with an extra charge for parking. Wht a joke. There pretty much is NO "affordable housing" left in the Seattle Metro area.
@Citizen#3457899654 Go to New York and see what you'll get in the city for $850. The answer is something along the lines of "here, you can share a 10x10 bedroom with my sons." It's definitely way too much for one of those units, but other buildings they have are asking $495 or so for the pods, which is reasonable for what is basically a small studio in the city (heck, you pay that much for a full studio out of the city).
all the younger people are being charged so much for everything, and are pressured to goi into debt. If they ever have kids of their own, they're going to have a diminished lifestyle or opportunities because they're still paying off debt.
Do these things have more than one stairway? An elevator?
I'd hate to be on the top floor when the smoke alarm trips...
@OrcasThunder I'd get at least a rope if I lived in one of these multistory things.Maybe a very long rope ladder
@m9078jk3Â @OrcasThunder Indeed - always a good idea for anyone living above the first floor - even if just in a house.
@OrcasThunder Good point. But at least by code they have sprinklers.
@Goodwin @OrcasThunder Where does it say that?
Given the other exemptions they seem to have, I wouldn't assume that's the case.
"micro-housing" - oh for pete's sake stop with the cute jingo-istic phrases.
"Little boxes on the hillside,
Little boxes made of ticky tacky,
Little boxes on the hillside,
Little boxes all the same...."
@JLS1950 Perfect
@spacegoddess @JLS1950 Brings back distant memories: I was in 7th grade when this girl appeared in my music class mid term, having just returned from Denmark, took out her guitar and began belting out songs popularized by Pete Seeger and PP&M. Sigh... never found courage to talk to her even. Pretty well-known stage actress today, too.
"Little boxes made of ticky tacky..."
You can always tell it's a slow news day when the media tries to manufacture controversy out of nothing.
Ugly. Â Looks like Hong Kong where they cram people on top of each other, in the shadow of giant ugly high rise condos. Is THAT what you really want as the vision of Seattle's future? Â I'm grateful that some cities had hit an economic downturn when cities like Seattle were destroying their historic buildings. Places like Portland and Tacoma kept enough of their beautiful architecture because it was still standing when people suddenly realized the value. Â Hey.. if you want to live in a place that looks like Kowloon, go for it. Â I say it's hideous, and destroys neighborhoods because of the density.Â
@DTÂ Honestly though, Tokyo has places that are of a similar size and they are just fine. Its all about the over all furnishing levels and code levels. Â And some of us enjoy high density.
I don't necessarily have a problem with micro-housing, but the rent they are charging for it is insane. $500-$850 for 200 sq. ft? And people pay that? Last time we rented (temporarily while in the process of buying a house), we were paying $800 per month for 700 sq. ft on Queen Anne in 2008 and I thought that was bad...lol!
@chuckh0308 Microhouses are a good idea for single occupancy  home ownership (one per parcel of land) as they are extremely inexpensive to build and use much less energy to heat and simpler to maintain  however I agree that the $500 to $850 figure for a per unit in a complex idea is exorbitant.
So..where does the 80" flatscreen go?
@Ankle Biter On the ceiling!