Vertical Block Planning
At the Green Building Slam, I described several examples and ideas of creative use and reuse of urban infrastructure. A bit of back story. In another part of the Primer, I describe a land use tool with the name “block planning.” A block plan can be a way a group of neighbors can collaborate with each other to make changes on their properties they could not be able to on their own. A block plan allows for creative ways to use the properties identified in the block plan to benefit those involved. Regulations do not go away but compliance becomes more flexible, in land use speak, a block plan allows for performance compliance rather than the normal more rigid, prescriptive compliance.
At the Slam, during schmooze time, I was talking with a woman who told me about a fascinating project she knew of. She sent me the link to an article I read with great interest. After reading the story of this unusual development project, I thought to myself, this is vertical block planning.
The story goes like this. A property developer in Seattle was seeing some of his friends leave the city because they couldn't afford to buy the homes they wanted. Several friends and associates already co owned a rural property on nearby Whidbey Island for a rural retreat, a short ferry ride away. They thought, if we can own and enjoy a rural property together, why not an urban property.
The idea evolved. By joining financial resources, the group could afford the homes they wanted in town.
Most apartment buildings have investors. With this place, it happens that many of the investors live here, too. Financing took a while. Most possible lenders had never heard of such a project. Individual investments ranged from $50,000 to millions. The entire project cost was about fifty million. There are 18 owners and ten owner residents had their own apartments custom designed. The project also includes twenty additional market rate and below market rate apartments to provide more affordable housing that receives a financial incentive from the city of Seattle. There was outreach to nearby neighbors to let them know about the project and discuss any particular concerns.
The entire roof top of the 5 story building is a shared space with many shared features like a roof top green house, a rooftop outdoor fireplace with outdoor furniture, a tool share, trampoline on the roof top, a side property serves as a back yard for all the residents of the building. A vacant property next door was bought together and serves as a cooperative back yard. There is a shared gym they also rent to personal trainers who do not live on site. The complaint from some parents is the kids come home from school, ditch their books and head out to roam the complex with the other kids.
So the place is taken care of much better than a usual apartment building. Many residents are part owners and that adds to the social cohesion as well. There are [upscale] businesses on the ground floor including an Italian restaurant, a wine store, a bakery, a tap room and central courtyard. The place has energy saving features like heat pumps, solar panels and energy recovery ventilators.
This type of owner occupied share apartment is more common in Europe. Like co housing, this model of shared ownership and living is gaining a foothold in the US. With several units at 2000 square feet, the gym, roof top features and other amenities, this project could be considered up scale but there is no reason why owners of lesser means can't do something similar, just with less of a flourish. Much of paradigm shift will depend on sources of finance that are geared towards low income housing. Another part of the Primer touches on the issue of financing for projects and paradigm shift that are more focused on needs rather than profits. An important concept articulated in the Primer is how do we prioritize our time and money.
So reading about this apartment project made me think, this is vertical block planning. The investor/residents are not low income. A project with resident owners less well off would not afford the more expensive features but could design features more suitable for their needs and perhaps even plan for commercial mixed use tenants that could benefit the needs of the less affluent nearby neighborhood.
Features describe in this vertical block planning are remarkably similar to East Blair Housing Co-op in Eugene, also described here in the Primer. East Blair is decidedly less costly and caters specifically to low income residents. And again, the cooperative approach puts many useful amenities with reach because they are paid for and shared by more people.
At the Green Building Slam, I described several examples and ideas of creative use and reuse of urban infrastructure. A bit of back story. In another part of the Primer, I describe a land use tool with the name “block planning.” A block plan can be a way a group of neighbors can collaborate with each other to make changes on their properties they could not be able to on their own. A block plan allows for creative ways to use the properties identified in the block plan to benefit those involved. Regulations do not go away but compliance becomes more flexible, in land use speak, a block plan allows for performance compliance rather than the normal more rigid, prescriptive compliance.
At the Slam, during schmooze time, I was talking with a woman who told me about a fascinating project she knew of. She sent me the link to an article I read with great interest. After reading the story of this unusual development project, I thought to myself, this is vertical block planning.
The story goes like this. A property developer in Seattle was seeing some of his friends leave the city because they couldn't afford to buy the homes they wanted. Several friends and associates already co owned a rural property on nearby Whidbey Island for a rural retreat, a short ferry ride away. They thought, if we can own and enjoy a rural property together, why not an urban property.
The idea evolved. By joining financial resources, the group could afford the homes they wanted in town.
Most apartment buildings have investors. With this place, it happens that many of the investors live here, too. Financing took a while. Most possible lenders had never heard of such a project. Individual investments ranged from $50,000 to millions. The entire project cost was about fifty million. There are 18 owners and ten owner residents had their own apartments custom designed. The project also includes twenty additional market rate and below market rate apartments to provide more affordable housing that receives a financial incentive from the city of Seattle. There was outreach to nearby neighbors to let them know about the project and discuss any particular concerns.
The entire roof top of the 5 story building is a shared space with many shared features like a roof top green house, a rooftop outdoor fireplace with outdoor furniture, a tool share, trampoline on the roof top, a side property serves as a back yard for all the residents of the building. A vacant property next door was bought together and serves as a cooperative back yard. There is a shared gym they also rent to personal trainers who do not live on site. The complaint from some parents is the kids come home from school, ditch their books and head out to roam the complex with the other kids.
So the place is taken care of much better than a usual apartment building. Many residents are part owners and that adds to the social cohesion as well. There are [upscale] businesses on the ground floor including an Italian restaurant, a wine store, a bakery, a tap room and central courtyard. The place has energy saving features like heat pumps, solar panels and energy recovery ventilators.
This type of owner occupied share apartment is more common in Europe. Like co housing, this model of shared ownership and living is gaining a foothold in the US. With several units at 2000 square feet, the gym, roof top features and other amenities, this project could be considered up scale but there is no reason why owners of lesser means can't do something similar, just with less of a flourish. Much of paradigm shift will depend on sources of finance that are geared towards low income housing. Another part of the Primer touches on the issue of financing for projects and paradigm shift that are more focused on needs rather than profits. An important concept articulated in the Primer is how do we prioritize our time and money.
So reading about this apartment project made me think, this is vertical block planning. The investor/residents are not low income. A project with resident owners less well off would not afford the more expensive features but could design features more suitable for their needs and perhaps even plan for commercial mixed use tenants that could benefit the needs of the less affluent nearby neighborhood.
Features describe in this vertical block planning are remarkably similar to East Blair Housing Co-op in Eugene, also described here in the Primer. East Blair is decidedly less costly and caters specifically to low income residents. And again, the cooperative approach puts many useful amenities with reach because they are paid for and shared by more people.
