A community for news and discussion of Seattle, Washington and the surrounding area
If approved, property owners in the city would pay 45 cents per $1,000 of their property’s assessed value. That amounts to about $385 a year for the owner of a median $855,000 home, an increase of about $260 a year from the present levy rate.
……..median price? 😬
Bellevue across the lake has a median price of over $1.3 million. The prices are currently down YoY for both cities.
Hence why Seattle needs more affordable housing. Now that HB 1110 allows denser housing in formerly single family zones Seattle Needs to become a city of fourplexes
I’d argue more than four. Since the population is spiraling out of control, we should expect a need for large towers. It’s also an efficient use of space and if they are dense enough, could have all the shopping one needs to live in a few blocks. And it should be affordable assuming “market rate” goes down with supply, and that the owners don’t prop up the rental market
Tue but smaller.buildings have lower coat per SQ ft and Seattle is mostly single family homes at the moment so even fourplexes would hypotheticallyincrease supply by 3x
At this point, all the people who can't afford to live in these cities, while providing all the services that a city needs to run and the entertainment, should just abandon them enmasse. If we could find a way to organize something like that, it would be incredible.
That would mean at least one house at 250k and at least one at 1.5m. that's not exactly crazy.
There are no houses in the 250k range. Not even a townhome.
Then there are also few houses in the 1.5mil range. Yay median!
It could also mean every house is the median price except for one that's fifteen trillion dollars.
Over the next 20 years, Seattle is expected to need 3,500 new homes every year for people with low and moderate incomes. The levy is expected to fund 3,200 new homes in that income range over seven years.
Am I stupid or is this saying the program is literally 1/7th as funded as it needs to be (if passed)?
No, no, no, you misunderstood...
... See, it's slightly less than 1/7th.
The wording is awful. Whoever wrote this didn't break down the numbers very well. My wife and I struggled to comprehend exactly how much would be paid at the end of the seven years. Is it a flat rate each year, or is it ramping up each year until it hits a peak at year seven?
It says over, not after, so I'd assume it's not the latter.