Citation
Linkage

Material Information

Title:
Linkage a case study analysis of implementation and effectiveness
Creator:
Tweedy, Kenneth R
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
xiii, 107 leaves : illustrations ; 28 cm

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Real estate development -- Social aspects -- Massachusetts -- Boston ( lcsh )
Real estate development -- Social aspects -- Washington (State) -- Seattle ( lcsh )
Real estate development -- Economic aspects -- Massachusetts -- Boston ( lcsh )
Real estate development -- Economic aspects -- Washington (State) -- Seattle ( lcsh )
City planning -- Massachusetts -- Boston ( lcsh )
City planning -- Washington (State) -- Seattle ( lcsh )
City planning ( fast )
Real estate development -- Economic aspects ( fast )
Real estate development -- Social aspects ( fast )
Massachusetts -- Boston ( fast )
Washington (State) -- Seattle ( fast )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
General Note:
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for thesis research and programming, Master of Urban and Regional Planning, College of Architecture and Planning ; Department of Urban and Regional Planning
Statement of Responsibility:
by Kenneth R. Tweedy.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
26345107 ( OCLC )
ocm26345107
Classification:
LD1190.A78 1992m .T83 ( lcc )

Full Text
LINKAGE:
A CASE STUDY ANALYSIS OF IMPLEMENTATION
AND EFFECTIVENESS
by
Kenneth R. Tweedy
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Master
Of
Urban and Regional Planning
The University of Colorado at Denver
Denver, Colorado
May, 1992


AN ORDINANCE
decadent or substandard areas for residential buildings a
public use and benefit and a necessity in the public interest;
and
WHEREAS : In many areas throughout the City of Boston there is a shortage of decent, safe and sanitary buildings for residential purposes, and this condition is most extreme in areas where decadent or substandard areas exist; and a*
WHEREAS: The critical shortage of housing, private ownership or rental, most greatly impacts those citizens with the least ability to acquire the necessary capital to rectify this shortage; and
WHEREAS: The aforesaid conditions have not been corrected by the ordinary operations of private enterprise in a regulated market; it is hereby
ORDAINED BY THE City Council of Boston, in accordance with the
provisions of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 43B, Section


AN ORDINANCE
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
13, and any other applicable law, as follows:
The Collector-Treasurer shall establish the "Neighborhood
Housing Trust, which trust shall be established in the form
and manner of the attached Declaration of Trust; and that,
subject to approval by the City Council and the Mayor, the
Neighborhood Housing Trust be and hereby is authorized to
accept and expend any and all funds contributed to it
consistent with the purposes of the Declaration of Trust
attached hereto and filed herewith.
In City Council May 21, 1986. Passed.
Approved by the Mayor June 6, 1986.


APPENDIX B
56


RULES AND REGULATIONS
FOR OPERATIONS OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING TRUST
OF THE CITY OF BOSTON
To be considered for adoption by th
on June 18, 1987


I. PURPOSE AND MANDATE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING TRUST
On June 6, 1986/ the Mayor of the City of Boston approved
an ordinance passed by the Boston City Council establishing
a Neighborhood Housing Trust. The ordinance and
Declaration of Trust establish the purposes of the Trust as
to, "promote the public health, convenience and welfare by
mitigating the extent to which Bostonls low or moderate
income households are-unable to afford decent, safe and
sanitary housing within the City of Boston. Toward that
end the Trust shall help to create and retain the supply of
housing for low or moderate lftcomer~esi<3ents of the City of
Boston, and shall, without limitation, acquire as -
appropriate real property to construct such housing
thereon..."
Articles 26 and 26A of the Boston Zoning Code create a
revenue source for the Trust to carry out these purposes. t
Pursuant to these articles, developers of certain
large-scale projects are obligated to help mitigate the
impacts of large-scale development on the available supply
of low and moderate income housing by malting a stream of
payments to the Trust (the Housing Payment Option) or by
directly aiding the creation of specific affordable housing
units (the Housing Creation Option).
These rules and regulations have been developed to clarify
the procedures and criteria which the Trust shall employ to
ensure that linkage funds and any other contributions to
the Trust are appropriately used.


II. BACKGROUND: THE LINKAGE REQUIREMENTS
Articles 26 and 26A of the Boston Zoning Code require
developers of certain projects over 100,000 square feet to
aid in, the creation of affordable housirxg fp.r low.and
moderate income households as a condition of the grant of
deviations from the Zoning Code or the grant of any
amendments to the zoning map or text. This requirement,
which has become known as the "linkage" requirement, is
also incorporated into contractual agreements called a
"Development impact Project Agreements" ("DIP Agreements")
which obligated developers sign with the Boston
Redevelopment Authority. The DIP Agreement describes the
project in detail and specifies the amount and term of the
linkage obligation.
Articles 26 and 26A, and each project's DIP Agreement,
afford developers two methods for fulfilling their linkage
responsibilities: a "Housing Payment Option" to be met
through payment of a Housing Payment Exaction to the *
Neighborhood Housing Trust, and a "Housing Creation Option
to be met through directly aiding the creation of housing
for low and moderate income people. Developers may select
one of these options or a combination of both options to
meet their linkage obligation.
A. THE HOUSING PAYMENT OPTION
Developers choosing to meet their full linkage obligation
through the Housing Payment Option are required to pay to
the Neighborhood Housing Trust a Housing Payment Exaction
equal to $5.00 for each square foot of gross floor area
(gsf) in excess of one hundred thousand (100,000) square
feet dedicated to office, retail, or other uses specified
in Article 26.
Article 26, effective December 29, 1983, required that
Housing Payment Exactions be paid in twelve equal annual
installments, the first installment being due two years
after the issuance of a building permit or immediately upo
issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever occurred
first.


Article 26A, effective February 26, 1986, changed these
payment terms for projects with DIP Agreements signed
after that date. Article 26A requires that developers
building Development Impact Projects downtown must now pay
the Housing Payment Exaction in fewer years (seven rather
than twelve), with the first payment due sooner (upon
issuance of a building permit) and with 10% of the funds
reserved for use in the neighborhoods impacted by the
development. Article 26A allows developers building
outside the downtown area to still pay over twelve years,
with the first payment due two years after building permit
issuance or upon, issue of a certificate of occupancy, but
20% of these developers' contributions must now be
reserved for use in the impacted neighborhoods.
Article 26B, which was enacted simultaneously with Article
26A, establishes an additional $1 fee per gross square
foot in excess of 100,000 square feet for "jobs linkage",
payable over twelve years to the Neighborhood Jobs Trust.
Receipt and expenditure of these funds are outside the
scope of responsibility of the Neighborhood Housing Trust!'.
B. THE HOUSING CREATION OPTION
Developers can also pursue an alternative course for
meeting their linkage obligation, the "Housing Creation
Option." In this option, developers may partially or
fully meet their linkage obligations by creating or
causing to be created affordable housing for low and
moderate income households of the City of Boston, at a
cost at least equivalent to the amount of the Housing
Payment Exaction otherwise due. Developers may pursue
this option only after approval from the Boston
Redevelopment Authority (BRA), and pursuant to Housing
Creation Regulations adopted by the BRa on April 17, 1986,
the BRA shall only consider housing creation proposals for
approval after the Neighborhood Housing Trust has had the
opportunity to review the proposal and recommend approval
or denial. The procedures and criteria to be used by the
Trust in fulfilling this role are described below in
Section VI.


III. DEFINITIONS
"Affordable Housing" shall mean housing, (i) the costs for
which shall not exceed a certain percentage of the income
for Low and Moderate Income Households in the Boston area,
such costs and such percentage to be set from time to time
by the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development ("HUD"), or (ii) as otherwise defined by the
Boston Zoning Commission through its adoption of the
definition of any state or federal agency, authority,
department or similar instrumentality providing financial
assistance to reduce the occupancy cost of housing to low
and moderate income residents. Affordable Housing shall
include specifically and without limitation rooming
houses, congregate housing, transitional housing, halfway
housing, public housing, emergency shelters, rental
apartments, cooperatives, condominiums, and single or
multi-family dwellings, as determined appropriate,
desirable, and feasible by the Neighborhood Housing Trust,
"Developer" the person or entity seeking to create one
or more new large-scale commercial real estate
developments in the City of Boston which are Development
Impact Projects as defined in the Boston Zoning Code
Article 26, or that person's or entity's successors or
assignees.
"Linkage Obligation" the obligation of Development
Impact Project developers to contribute to the supply of
affordable housing, which the Developers shall accomplish
by means of the Housing Creation Option and/or by means of
the Housing Payment Option. Also known as the DIP
Contribution, the DIP Exaction or the Affordable Housing
Exaction.
"Housing Creation Option" a means by which a Developer
may fulfill its Linkage Obligation through creating or
causing to be created Affordable Housing, at a cost at
least equivalent to the amount of the appropriate Housing
Payment Exaction, and in conformity with written
regulations adopted by the Boston Redevelopment
Authority. Developers may employ the Housing Creation
Option only after approval of a Housing Creation proposal
according to the procedures established in these
regulations and BRA Housing Creation regulations. Also
known as the Housing Creation Exaction and the In-Kind
Affordable Housing Contribution.
"Housing Payment Option" a means by which a Developer
may fulfill its Linkage Obligation through the payment of
a Housing Payment Exaction to and for the exclusive
benefit of the Neighborhood Housing Trust. Also known as
the Housing contribution Option.


"Housing Payment Exaction" the means by which a
Developer shall satisfy the Housing Payment Option through
the payment of a sum of money, the amount of which shall
be calculated pursuant to Articles 26 and 26A of the
Boston Zoning Code, which the Developer is required to pay
to and for the exclusive benefit of the Neighborhood
Housing Trust. Also known as the Housing Contribution
Grant, the Housing Contribution Exaction, the Affordable
Housing Exaction Payment, or the Affordable Housing
Exaction Money Payment.
"Low income Households" households where the total
income of the members thereof at initial occupancy does
not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the median income for
the Boston Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area'as set
forth in or calculated based upon regulations promulgated
from time to time by the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development pursuant to Section 8 of the
Housing Act of 1937, as amended by the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974.
i.
"Moderate Income Households" households where the total
income of the members thereof at initial occupancy does
not exceed eighty percent (80%) of the median income for
the Boston Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area as set
forth in.or calculated based upon regulations promulgated
from time to time by the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development pursuant to Section 8 of the
Housing Act of 1937, as amended by the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974.


IV. PROCEDURES FOR THE ORGANIZATION AND STRUCTURE OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING TRUST
A. STRUCTURE AND STAFFING OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING TRUST
1. Chair of the Neighborhood Housing Trust
Every other year, at the next annual Trust meeting after
the biennial municipal elections, the Trustees shall by
majority vote elect one of their members to serve as Chair
of the Trust for the next two years. The Chair shall
organize and schedule Trust meetings, and shall notify the
Trustees of such meetings, as functions delegated by the
Managing Trustee. The Chair shall chair Trust meetings,
shall distribute all funding proposals to the Trustees,
shall distribute all housing creation proposals to the
Trustees, shall oversee the work of the secretary, and
shall oversee the work of any staff employed by the Trust.
* -
2. Appointment of a Secretary
The Trustees shall appoint a secretary, who shall not be a
Trustee and who shall serve at the pleasure of the
Trustees. The secretary shall keep a record of the
proceedings of meetings of the Trustees and shall be a
custodian of book, documents, and papers filed with the
Trustees.
3. Other Staffing Needs
The Trustees shall determine the best method for carrying
out those responsibilities of the Trust which require or
could benefit from staff assistance, including but not
limited to implementing procedures to ensure all obligated
developers fulfill their linkage obligations, maintaining
current projections of linkage and any other funds due to
the Trust, developing requests for proposals, reviewing
housing payment and housing creation proposals submitted
to the Trust, negotiating disbursement plans, enforcement
mechanisms, and other agreements with parties awarded
Trust funds, monitoring projects to which Trust funds have
been allocated, and keeping all pertinent City agencies
informed.


The Trust shall attempt to minimize the amount of Trust
funds spent upon staffing or consultation services, so as
to leave the maximum funds possible for distribution to
projects which develop new or rehabilitated housing. To
this end, the Trustees may request assistance in their
duties as needed from the City of Boston Law Department,
the Boston Redevelopment Authority, the Public Facilities
Department, Mayor's Office, or such other City departments
as can aid in developing or implementing policies of the
Trust.
In no case shall the administrative expenditures of the
Trust, including the cost of staffing and an annual audit,
exceed $100,000.
B. PROCEDURES FOR MEETINGS OF THE TRUST
1. Meetings are Open Public Meetings
Meeting of the Trust shall be open public meetings in
accordance with the open meeting laws of the Commonwealth
of Massachusetts as embodied in MGL Chapter 30 s.23, as
amended.
2. Scheduling of Meetings
The Trustees shall hold an annual meeting on the Monday
following the second Friday in January of each year, and
shall also hold at least three other quarterly meetings
each year. The Trustees may also meet at such other times
as may be designated for Special Meetings by the Chair, or
by vote of the Trustees.
3. Notice Provisions
Quarterly or special meetings shall be called by written
notice from the Chair. Such notice must be received by
each other Trustee at least seven days prior to the date
scheduled for such meeting, unless such notice is waived
in writing by all Trustees and such waiver is filed with
the records of the Trust. Notices for Trust meetings
shall set forth the date, shall state the time and place
of the meeting, shall contain an agenda of actions to be
brought before the Trust, and shall also include any
appropriate background information for the meeting.


4. Actions Without Meetings
Any action required or permitted to be taken by the Trust
may be taken without a meeting if all Trustees entitled to
vote consent in writing to the taking of such action
without a meeting. Such written consents shall be treated
for all purposes as a vote at a meeting, and shall become
part of the permanent records of the Trust upon
announcement of the occurence of such a vote at the next
public meeting of the Trust.
5. Meeting Attendance
Should any Trustee other than those serving ex officio
fail to attend two consecutive quarterly meetings-, he or
she shall be deemed to have voluntarily vacated his or her
office as Trustee, and his or her office may be filled by
the Mayor as provided by the terms of the Trust.
6. Quorum
i.
A quorum shall be constituted at each meeting if at least
four of the Trustees are present in person.
7. Voting
Each Trustee shall be entitled to one vote on each matter
brought before the Trust. Except as otherwise provided
herein or by the terms of the Declaration of Trust
Articles I or II, the Trust shall act by majority vote of
the Trustees present and eligible to vote.
8. Minutes of Trust Proceedings
The secretary shall record minutes at each meeting.
Minutes shall be sent to each Trustee with the notice and
agenda of the next meeting. Minutes shall be accepted or
edited by Trust vote at said next meeting, and shall be
filed with the Trust records.


c. PROCEDURES FOR COLLECTING PAYMENTS DUE TO THE TRUST
The Managing Trustee shall implement procedures to ensure
prompt collection of housing payment exactions due to the
Trust.
1. Collection of First Housing Payment Exactions Due
In order to ensure prompt receipt of the first annual
housing payment exactions from developers obligated by
Article 26A to make such first payment at the time of
issuance of a building permit, the Inspectional Services
Department shall not issue a building permit until
satisfactory evidence of receipt of said first payment by
the Managing Trustee has been presented or a Housing
Creation Agreement has been signed with the Boston
Redevelopment Authority. Satisfactory evidence shall
consist of a true copy of the letter from the Managing
Trustee to the developer acknowledging receipt of the
payment.
Similarly, no developer obligated by Article 26 or Article
26A to pay the first annual housing payment exaction upon
issuance of a certificate of occupancy or two years after
issuance of a building permit, whichever is sooner, shall
be issued a certificate of occupancy by the Inspectional
Services Department until satisfactory evidence of receipt
of said first payment by the Managing Trustee has been
presented or a Housing Creation Agreement has been signed
with the Boston Redevelopment Authority.
2. Collection of Subsequent Housing Payment Exactions Due
In each subsequent year in which a developer is obligated
to make annual housing payment exactions to the Trust, the
Managing Trustee shall send a bill to the developer at
least fourteen days prior to the date on which such
subsequent payment shall become due. Such bills shall
indicate the amount owed and the date on which payment is
due.
3. Interest and Penalties
In the event that payments are not made in a timely manner
as provided in the Development Impact Project Agreement,
interest shall be charged the developer at the M.G.L.
Chapter 59 statutory rate. A statement regarding such
interest charges shall be attached to the letter
acknowledging receipt of the first annual payment.


4. Enforcement Actions to Collect Payments Due
The Managing Trustee shall, after a majority vote of the
Trustees, institute proceedings as allowed under law to
enforce collection of any payments due to the Trust,
including any unpaid first annual payment exactions or
unpaid subsequent annual payment exactions.
D. PROCEDURES FOR MANAGING TRUST CONTRIBUTIONS
1. Annual Account of the Managing Trustee
At each annual meeting, the Managing Trustee shall submit
to the Trustees an account of the Trust prepared by an
independent certified public accountant and shall submit
copies of it to the Boston City Council, Boston City
Clerk, and to the Division of Public Charities of the
Office of the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, or to such other office of the Commonwealth
as shall be authorized to receive accounts of public
charities. The account shall be the result of an
independent audit and shall be available to the public.
The Trust may charge the public a nominal fee for copies
of the annual account.
2. Records of Trust Property
The Managing Trustee shall keep a list of all names and
amounts of donors to the Trust, including the parties to
all signed Development Impact Project Agreements. All
Trust property shall be identified on the books, and all
such records and books shall be open to the public at
times and places identified by the Managing Trustee.
3. Procedures for Management of Money
The Managing Trustee shall establish the procedures for
the management of Trust funds, and shall report annually
on such procedures to the Trustees. Such report shall
explain how the Trust funds have been invested, the extent
to which the Managing Trustee has delegated financial
management responsibilities to an outside custodian, and
the extent to which the Trust may borrow against Trust
funds. The Trustees may at any time by majority vote
direct the Managing Trustee in the performance of duties
related to the management of Trust funds.


V.
PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA FOR DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS
A. DETERMINATION OF FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR DISTRIBUTION
Prior to the Trust's annual meeting each January, the
Managing Trustee shall prepare a report of the funds
currently available to the Trust and the funds expected to
become available to the Trust during that calendar year.
Funds currently available shall include funds'previously
accepted by the Trust but not yet expended, plus any
interest earned on these funds. Funds expected to become
available shall include all housing payment exactions
expected to become due in that year, plus any other
donations due to the Trust.
In preparing this report, the Managing Trustee may request
that the Boston Redevelopment Authority prepare a listing
of all development projects for which Development Impact
Project Agreements have been executed ("DIP Projects"),
and for each such DIP Project, that the Boston
Redevelopment Authority provide at least the following
information: the total linkage obligation due, the number
of years over which this project must pay annual exactions
if the Housing Payment Option is chosen, building permit
and certificate of occupancy dates, the year in which the
first Housing Payment Exaction is expected to become due,
whether a Housing Creation Agreement has been.approved or
proposed, and with respect to Development Impact Projects
with payments due in the current year, an estimate of the
month in which that payment shall become due.
At the annual meeting, or at a subsequent meeting of the
Trust, the Trustees shall determine what amount of these
funds it is in the best interest of the Trust to
distribute in that calendar year and how and when to
distribute such an amount, through request for proposals
funding rounds or alternative procedures, as set forth
below, in making this determination, the Trustees shall
consider, among other factors, the amount of funds
expected to be available in the current year and
subsequent years, any neighborhood restrictions on use of
these funds pursuants to the provisions of Article 26A,
the number of housing creation proposals expected in that
year, and the Trust's current ability to obligate funds
due to the Trust in future years.


B. AUTHORIZATIONS NEEDED PRIOR TO DISTRIBUTION OP FUNDS
In order to receive needed approvals from the City Council
and the Mayor, the Trustees shall at their annual meeting
request that the Mayor submit to the City Council a
proposed order approving the acceptance and subsequent
expenditure of all housing payment exactions which may
become due from developers of Development Impact Projects
which have executed Development.Impact Project Agreements
with the Boston Redevelopment Authority to date.
The Trustees may at any subsequent.meeting of the Trust
amend this request or make further requests for City
Council and Mayoral approval of funds to be accepted and
expended if needed due to the execution of further DIP
Agreements or amendment to current DIP agreements.
C. PROCEDURES FOR APPLICATION FOR FUNDS
1. Request for Proposals Procedures
The primary method for distribution of funds shall be
through "request for proposals* competitions. Such
competitions shall be initiated through issuance by the
Trustees of a request for proposals soliciting
applications for assistance from organizations or
individuals that wish to create or preserve affordable
housing in Boston.
The Trust may issue a request for proposals for general
housing development and preservation, or may issue a
targetted request for proposals, which requests proposals
featuring a particular minimum percentage of affordable
units, particular types of housing (e.g. handicapped
housing), particular uses of funds (e.g. loans versus
grants), or other purposes that the Trust determines are
of particular importance or need to the City at that time.
Request for proposals shall indicate the maximum amount of
funds expected to be distributed in that funding round,
where and in what format proposals can be submitted, the
date upon which proposals are due, whether a nominal fee
shall be due upon submission, the criteria which shall be
used for selecting among proposals, and a timetable for
the Trust's review of submitted applications. Requests
for proposals shall afford applicants a minimum of 45 days
to submit proposals to the Trust.
-/
n


The Trust shall advertise the availability of any request
for proposals in at least one daily local newspaper of
general circulation, and copies of the request for
proposals shall be made available at Boston City Hall and
through written request to the Trust.
2. Alternative Application Procedures
If necessary to best fulfill the purposes of the Trust,
the Trustees may in any year vote to utilize an
alternative to the request for proposals process for any
distribution of Trust funds. Alternative distribution
procedures may be approved only at the Trust's annual
meeting or' a scheduled quarterly meeting. Such procedures
shall comply with the advertisement and notice provisions
applicable to request for proposals competitions, and may
also be targetted to projects with particular uses or a
particular minimum percentage of affordable units.
D. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS FOR RECEIPT OF TRUST FUNDS
Private, public, non-profit, and profit development
entities or private individuals can be considered eligible
for.receipt of Trust funds if the applicants meet the
following standards:
1. Applicants are not delinquent in the payment of taxes
to the City of Boston nor are there taxes outstanding and
not yet under payment agreement with the City of Boston;
2. Applicants have not been convicted of arson or arson
related crimes, nor have arson-related charges pending;
3. Applicants have not been convicted of discrimination
in the sale or lease of housing or any other violation of
fair housing laws as applicable in the City of Boston, and
do not have outstanding unresolved complaints of violation
of fair housing laws;
4. Applicants do not have any outstanding unresolved
complaints regarding the City of Boston's rent equity,
fair housing, or condominium conversion laws; and
5. Such other standards as may be included in any request
for proposals or alternative application documents.
-13 -


E. ELIGIBLE PROJECTS. FOR RECEIPT OF TRUST FUNDS
Projects containing owner-occupied/ rental, cooperative, or
other forms of permanent, transitional, or temporary
housing may be eligible for receipt of Trust funds,
whether they are developed through new construction,
rehabilitation of abandoned housing, conversion of
non-residential property, or rehabilitation or
preservation of occupied residential property, if they
meet the following criteria:
1. The affordable units would not be created but forthe
Trust funds requested.
2. Trust funds shall be used solely to assist the
affordable units. Projects may contain units to be
occupied by households of various incomes, but Trust funds
may not be used to directly benefit households other than
those occupying the affordable units.
3. All Trust funds shall be used to assist the creation
or preservation of housing. A project may contain
non-residential uses, but Trust funds shall not be used to
assist non-residential uses.
4. Units for which Trust funds are requested'shall"remain
affordable for a minimum of fifteen years.
5. The project is financially feasible.
6. The project's applicant has site control.
7. The project shall be managed in compliance with the
provisions of the Boston Jobs Ordinance.
8. Housing units to be produced or rehabilitated shall
meet the requirements of the state sanitary and building
codes.
9. Housing units created or preserved shall be made
available in accordance with the City of Bosto-n Fair
Housing Plan and other applicable fair housing and equal
opportunity requirements as provided by law.
10. Such additional criteria as the Trust may establish
in a request for proposals or alternative application
procedures.


F. PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA FOR REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS
1. Review Procedures
The Trustees shall review all applications which are
appropriately submitted to the Trust. After initial
review, the Trustees may request further materials to
explain or modify any proposal and may upon request allow
proponents an opportunity to amend their applications.
The Trust encourages all applicants to actively solicit
community comments during the development of their
proposals, and will review all community comments
submitted with applications or separately to the Trust.
All proposals deemed finalists (or all proposals if the
Trust does not choose finalists) shall be afforded a
public hearing before each distribution of funds, and in
any case within 60 days after the deadline for receipt of
funding proposals. The public hearing shall allow
'proponents and opponents an opportunity to comment on tho.
proposals.
After accepting and reviewing applications, the Trustees
may vote to approve all, some, or none of the applications
they have received.
2. Review Criteria
The Trustees shall review the extent to which eligible
submitted proposals meet the following review criteria in
order to determine which, if any, best meet the purposes
of the Trust and the needs of the City.
a) The total number of affordable units to be developed in
the project.
b) The percentage of the project's units which are
affordable units.
c) The amount of Trust funds requested per affordable unit
to be developed.
d) The developer's capacity, determined through
consideration of the developer's past history in
completing projects of similar scale and nature, and
for developers proposing rental housing, the property
management history of the developer and management
agent.
e) The timeliness with which units shall be developed.
- 15 -


f) The number of years beyond the minimum fifteen years
that the project shall maintain units at affordable
rental or sales prices, and the strength of the
enforcement mechanisms offered to ensure this long-term
affordability.
g) The number of the affordable units that shall be made
available to low income households.
h) The extent, if any, to which the project provides
housing for special needs households including, but not
limited to: mentally ill and/or physically handicapped
persons, battered women and their children, homeless
individuals.
i) The extent to which the project shall provide
employment for local, female, and minority labor.
j) The extent to which the project shall provide financial
or managerial participation by minority business
enterprises or women business enterprises.
k) Any ongoing or reversionary financial or ownership
participation in the development offered to the Trust
which may enhance the resources available to the Trust.
l) The extent to which the neighborhood in which the
Project is located has not previously received linkage
funds or any other Trust distributions.
m) Such other criteria as the Trustees may establish in a
request for proposals or alternative application
procedures.
G. PROCEDURES FOR OBLIGATING AND MONITORING THE USE OF
TRUST FUNDS
1. Letter of Award
The Trust shall notify parties selected to receive Trust
distributions through a letter of award. Letters of award
shall indicate the amount of funds to be obligated, when
such funds shall be available, and the terms and
conditions which shall apply to the award. The letter of
award shall specify that no funds shall be released until
execution of a housing payment agreement between the Trust
and such grantee.


2. Housing Payment Agreement
Upon countersignature of the letter of award, the Trust
and grantee shall develop and execute a housing payment
agreement which specifies in greater detail how the
granted funds shall be disbursed and monitored. At a
minimum, such housing payment agreement shall specify the
timing of disbursements, the mechanisms required of the
grantee to ensure long-term affordability, and the
monitoring and enforcement procedures to be employed by
the Trust .to ensure compliance with the terms and
conditions of the award.
Where appropriate, Housing Payment Agreements shall be
supplemented by a loan and mortgage note or other
financial documents.
3. Certification of Initial Compliance
Within 60 days of completing the housing development or *
preservation project for which Trust funds have been
awarded, the grantee shall submit a certification of
compliance to the Trust indicating the grantee's current
compliance with all terms of the award. Failure to submit
such certification or demonstration of non-compliance
shall be grounds for revoking the award or taking such
other enforcement actions as the Trust deems appropriate.
4. Monitoring Procedures
Trust staff or another City agency through delegation by
the Trust shall monitor projects to which the Trust has
granted funds to ensure continuing compliance with the
conditions of award and to recommend enforcement actions
in the case of non-compliance.
H. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE IN DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS
In conformity with the policies established in Section IV
(A)(3) above, the Trust may request assistance from the
City of Boston Law Department, the Boston Redevelopment
Authority, the City of Boston Public Facilities
Department, the Mayor's Office of the City of Boston, or
such other agency staff or outside counsel or consultants
as the Trustees deem necessary and appropriate to prepare
requests for proposals, review applications for funds, or
otherwise aid in the establishment of funding rounds, the
distribution of Trust funds, and the monitoring of Trust
fund distributions.


VI. PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA FOR REVIEW OF HOUSING CREATION
PROPOSALS
The Housing Creation Option offers developers the
opportunity to meet their housing linkage requirements by
directly creating or aiding in the creation of affordable
housing. Regulations adopted by the Boston Redevelopment
Authority on April 17, 1986 establish that each housing
creation proposal must be submitted to the Neighborhood
Housing Trust for the Trustees' review and recommendation
before the proposal is considered for approval by the
Boston Redevelopment Authority.
A. PROCEDURES FOR REVIEW OF HOUSING CREATION PROPOSALS
Upon receipt of a completed Housing Creation proposal, the
Managing Trustee shall make copies available to all
Trustees, and the Chair shall schedule a public hearing on
the merits of the proposal, at which proponents and any
opponents of the project shall be afforded the opportunity -
to speak.
B. CRITERIA FOR REVIEW OF HOUSING CREATION PROPOSALS
The Trustees shall evaluate the appropriateness of any
housing creation proposal submitted for its review as
follows: First, the Trust shall determine if the proposal
is meritorious relative to the same eligibility and review
criteria established above in Section V. Second, the
Trust shall determine if benefits or circumstances justify
awarding funds to a meritorious proposal through housing
creation rather than the housing payment distribution
process described above. Active involvement of the DIP
developer in designing or building the housing creatidn
project, supplementary financial assistance being offered
by the DIP developer, a demonstrated need for the housing
creation project to receive funds before the next Trust
funding round will occur, or other benefits or
circumstances shall be considered by the Trust.
C. RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING HOUSING CREATION PROPOSALS
After review and public hearing, the Trustees shall make a
determination concerning the overall appropriateness of
the proposal and may recommend to the Boston Redevelopment
Authority approval, with or without conditions, or denial
of the housing creation proposal. If the Trust makes no
recommendation within forty-five calendar days of
receiving a housing creation proposal, the Boston
Redevelopment Authority may after public notice and
hearing take final action on the Housing Creation Proposal.


VII. AMENDMENTS OP RULES AND REGULATIONS
The Trustees may amend these Rules and Regulations by
majority vote at any .meeting of the Trustees. All
written rules, regulations, procedures and amendments
shall be published and recorded in the Office of the
Boston City Cleric, the Division of Public Charities of the
Office of the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, and the Office of the Secretary of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Any amendments shall take
effect when so recorded..


APPENDIX C
77


Framework Policies
Planning for downtown's future raises many
complex issues. Some, such as downtown's role
in the region, are general and area wide.
Others, such as growth and housing, have
general and area specific components. Still
others, such as the future of the retail core
and the waterfront, relate to a specific
feature of downtown but clearly have ramifica-
tions for the entire area.
Addressing these issues within a comprehensive
plan requires establishment of a framework
within which the details can be resolved. This
section presents a comprehensive set of policy
statements establishing such a framework.
Basic direction on the broad issues of down-
town's role in the region, growth, transpor-
tation, housing, and urban form are presented.
This is followed by policies which establish
the general function and character of each of
the many areas that make up downtown. For
each policy statement an explanatory discussion
and series of implications are presented. The
latter describe in conceptual terms the
detailed policies and implementing actions con-
tained in the fourth section of the plan to
carry out the overall vision for downtown.


20
Framework Policies
Preeminent Regional Center
A DOWNTOWN SEATTLE SHALL BE MAI N-
. TAINED AS THE MOST IMPORTANT OF
THE REGION'S ACTIVITY CENTERSA COM-
PACTLY DEVELOPED AREA SUPPORTING A
DIVERSITY OF USES MEETING THE EMPLOYMENT,
RESIDENTIAL, SHOPPING, SERVICE AND
ENTERTAINMENT NEEDS OF THE BROADEST
RANGE OF THE REGION'S POPULATION.
development will also help maintain the
character and vitality of Seattle's neigh-
borhoods .
However, the role of downtown Seattle within
the hierarchy of regional activity centers must
be recognizeddowntown, while the most impor-
tant, is only one of many areas which should be
encouraged to grow as compactly developed cen-
ters of commerce.
A consistent theme of existing goals and poli-
cies for downtown is the desire to maintain
downtown's business, commercial and cultural
importance in the region. Adopted city policy
statements including Goals for Seattle 2000 and
the Guidelines for Downtown Alternative Plans
all recognize this objective.
While downtown Seattle is basically healthy,
housing is the one area where downtown is very
weak. If downtown is to become an active and
vital area on evenings and weekends, as well as
during the workday, a substantial residential
population is needed.
IMPLICATIONS
A compact downtown will reduce sprawl, conserve
energy, and facilitate an efficient regional
transit system focused on downtown as the fore-
most activity center. This concentration of
To maintain downtown as the region's preeminent
center the plan proposes:
Land use policies and regulations to ensure
adequate capacity to accommodate projected
growth in office, retail, hotel, cultural/
entertainment and residential activities.
Housing policies and actions to preserve down-
town's existing housing stock and significantly
increase the supply of housing affordable to
residents of all income levels.
Land use policies, controls and incentives to
reinforce the concentrated shopping function of
the retail core and encourage street level
retail along important pedestrian routes.
Land use policies and incentives to encourage
the development of new cultural and entertain-
ment facilities downtown.
Transportation policies emphasizing transit
and ridesharing as the primary means of access
to downtown, and pedestrian and transit as the
primary means of travel between activities
within downtown. Construction of Metro Tran-
sit's adopted capital improvements for downtown
(electric bus tunnel, surface improvements and
circulation system) will be the most important
implementing action.


21
Framework Policies
*>. - '<<,' a, * " y > v' w* " ' / /<* >'*" % ' ' *v ^**/<* 'N 'y ''
-. :-:1 *.<>.<*..>>.-.vV.m*' . -.* '" .. V.'A'vm .v*w.-,w Land use policies, incentives and public
investments to increase parks and public open
space for recreational activities.
Policies and actions to direct public planning
and development resources to shape the character
of areas that are in transition, such as the
waterfront, the Belltown area of the Denny
Regrade, the Union Station corridor, the north
Kingdome and Westlake Avenue.
Growth
B ORDERLY DOWNTOWN GROWTH SHALL BE
. ALLOWED AND ENCOURAGED TO THE
EXTENT THAT GROWTH IS PROPERLY MANAGED
AND IMPACTS ARE SATISFACTORILY MITI-
GATED .
New development will bring changes to the down-
town environment. Impacts will be associated
with these changes and new demands will be
placed on downtown services and facilities.
Growth is consistent with policies that have,
over the years, established downtown as the
primary focus of the regional transportation
system. Downtown has acquired the necessary
public services and utilities to support a
large concentration of activity. As a healthy
established center, businesses already located
downtown will want to expand there, and new
businesses from outside the region will seek a
downtown location because of its recognition as
a center of activity.
Growth management is essential to maintain and
improve the quality of downtown. However,
growth management cannot rely on inflexible,
finite limits. Instead, growth should be per-
mitted that is consistent with an overall plan
and equitably shares in the mitigation of
impacts.
IMPLICATIONS
The plan proposes to manage downtown growth and
mitigate growth impacts through:
Land use policies, regulations, and incen-
tives based on a comprehensive plan for down-
town, which identifies the impacts of growth
and allocates direct costs in an equitable
manner.
Land use policies, controls and incentives
that are based on the capacity of individual
areas to support various uses and densities and
recognize the desirable features of the natural
and man-made environment.
Housing policies and actions that will main-
tain downtown's low income housing resource and
increase downtown residential opportunities for
the downtown workforce.
Transportation policies and actions to
increase transit use to 60 percent of rush hour
travel by the year 2000.
Transportation
C TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS SHALL
BE PLANNED AND BUILT TO COMPLEMENT
AND REINFORCE DESIRED LAND USE PATTERNS;
GROWTH IN PEAK HOUR TRAVEL SHALL BE
ACCOMMODATED PRIMARILY BY TRANSIT;
TRANSIT AND PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL SHALL BE



22
Framework Policies
is <<£' *'

ENCOURAGED AS THE PRIMARY MEANS OF
INTERNAL CIRCULATION; VEHICULAR TRAFFIC
PASSING THROUGH DOWNTOWN WITH A DESTINA-
TION ELSEWHERE SHALL BE DISCOURAGED;
AND, THE IMPORTANCE OF THE AUTOMOBILE AS
A MEANS OF ACCESS TO DOWNTOWN FOR NON-
WORK TRIPS SHALL BE RECOGNIZED.
Automobile, transit, truck and train traffic
passing through downtown on its way to other
destinations detracts from the quality of the
downtown environment and reduces the capacity
of the downtown system to meet internal cir-
culation needs. To the extent possible this
traffic should be routed around downtown.
Transportation proposals must be an integral
element of the Downtown Plan. Land use pat-
terns have and will continue to be influenced
by the existing transportation network, which
both facilitates and constrains different activ-
ities in different areas. Similarly, transpor-
tation network improvements can influence
future patterns of land use. Therefore, it is
critical that the land use policies are based
on sound proposals for transportation and that
the transportation proposals reinforce desired
changes in land use.
Due to the limited amount of land, the rising
cost of energy and the financial and environ-
mental costs of major expansion of the auto
network, transportation improvements should
emphasize pedestrian, bicycle, public transit
and carpool and vanpool modes of travel to and
within downtown.
IMPLICATIONS
The Downtown Plan proposes the following to
achieve these transportation objectives:
Land use policies and regulations which
encourage the most intensive activities to
locate where regional auto access is good and
they are within walking distance of existing
and planned major transit services.
Housing policies and actions to significantly
increase the opportunities for people of all
income levels to live downtown.
Major capital investments to increase the
capacity of the transit system to accommodate
growth in peak hour travel and significantly
improve the attractiveness of transit as a
means of travel within downtown.
Land use policies, regulations and incentives
as well as public investments to significantly
improve the pedestrian environment.
Completion of projects in the adopted
Regional Transportation Systems Plan which pro-
vide access to downtown Seattle and alleviate
serious downtown congestion problems.
Classification of downtown streets according
to their intended function and implementation
of selected improvements.
While other high occupancy modes such as car-
pools and vanpools are important to accom-
modate travel growth, the transit system is
by far the most critical component. To achieve
the objective of limiting the growth of peak
hour auto volumes, the percentage of rush hour
travellers who use transit must increase from
today's level of 45 percent to over 60 percent
by the year 2000.
Parking requirements which encourage transit
use and ridesharing.


23
Framework Policies
4, "Hb %, % % "V
V V -V V -V V ^
0£NNY WAY
Office
Retail
Mixed Use
Residential
Harborfront
1 Transit Tunnel and Surface
Improvements
......Tunnel Connection
"Major Vehicular Access Route
ruture Land Use Patterns
AN



24
Framework Policies
Housing
D HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES IN DOWNTOWN
SEATTLE SHALL BE SIGNIFICANTLY
EXPANDED FOR PEOPLE OF ALL INCOME LEVELS
WITH THE OBJECTIVES OF: 1) ACCOMMODATING
AN ULTIMATE POPULATION OF 40,000 RESI-
DENTS WITH AN INTERMEDIATE POPULATION OF
25,000 BY THE YEAR 2000; 2) MAINTAINING
THE EXISTING NUMBER OF OCCUPIED LOW
INCOME UNITS; AND 3) DEVELOPING A SIG-
NIFICANT SUPPLY OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
OPPORTUNITIES IN BALANCE WITH THE MARKET
RESULTING FROM THE GROWTH IN DOWNTOWN
EMPLOYMENT.
The preservation of downtown's low income
housing resource and development of strong
residential communities is one of the most
important objectives of the Downtown Plan.
While recent construction and rehabilitation
have reversed the long-term decline in down-
town's population, other actions must occur
before downtown can once again become a vital
residential community. Nearly all housing
growth has been in units affordable to a
limited market of very high income residents.
In addition, many of downtown's residential
areas lack the basic amenities necessary to
create a sense of community.
Downtown's low income housing is an irreplace-
able resource that must be retained to meet
pressing social needs. If lost to demolition
or allowed to deteriorate, this housing
resource will require tremendous public expen-
diture to replace.
Construction of significant numbers of new
housing units will help achieve the desired
compactness of downtown, mitigate some of the
impacts of employment growth, reduce develop-
ment pressures on other in-city neighborhoods,
better utilize downtown's infrastructure, and
provide a stronger social and aesthetic sense
of community. The concentration of residents
will provide a market to attract a full range
of desired residential services as well as
broaden retail, cultural, and entertainment
opportunities.
IMPLICATIONS
To achieve these aggressive housing objectives
the Downtown Plan proposes:
Policies and actions to discourage the demo-
lition of existing housing and gain replacement
of those units that are lost.


6- !
v

25
Framework Policies
Policies and actions to discourage the
neglect and deterioration of existing sound
housing.
Increased commitment of public and private
resources to the retention, rehabilitation and
construction of low income units.
Land use policies and incentives to tie the
production of affordable housing to the growth
in downtown employment.
Land use policies, regulations and incentives
to encourage housing development in key target
areas of downtown.
Public investments to reduce through-traffic
in residential areas, increase transit service,
provide landscaping and greater pedestrian
space along key streets, and provide additional
parks and open space.
Human Services
E ADEQUATE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
. SHALL BE PROVIDED TO MEET THE
NEEDS OF DOWNTOWN RESIDENTS AND WORKERS.
The downtown area of any large city attracts a
unique population, and Seattle is no exception.
Downtown ranks first among Seattle's neigh-
borhoods in the percentage of low income
elderly and in the percentage of disabled citi-
zens. Downtown also contains a substantial
population of individuals with social and men-
tal health problems. Concentration of these
groups in downtown will continue as the loca-
tion where they are most accepted by society
and where housing and other resources are con-
centrated .
As downtown and the region grow, this popula-
tion will increase, placing greater burdens on
existing health and human service providers.
The growing work force also will increase human
service demand for facilities such as daycare.
However, in recent years the financial base of
these agencies has been seriously eroded and it
has become difficult for these providers to
compete for space in the marketplace.
IMPLICATIONS
To maintain an adequate health and human ser-
vice system the Downtown Plan proposes the
following:
Commitments of public and private resources
to meet the critical needs of downtown resi-
dents and workers.
Land use policies and regulations which pro-
vide flexibility for the location of health and
human service facilities balanced with the need
to avoid over-concentration of certain types of
facilities in any specific area of downtown.
Land use policies and actions to provide eco-
nomic incentives for the inclusion of health
and human service facilities in new development.
Urban Form
F PUBLIC AND PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT
. SHALL MAKE A POSITIVE CONTRIBUTION
TO THE DOWNTOWN PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT BY:
1) ENHANCING THE RELATIONSHIP OF DOWN-
TOWN TO ITS SPECTACULAR SETTING OF
WATER, HILLS AND MOUNTAINS; 2) PRESER-
VING IMPORTANT PUBLIC VIEWS; 3) ENSURING
LIGHT AND AIR AT STREET LEVEL AND IN
PUBLIC PARKS; 4) ESTABLISHING A HIGH
QUALITY PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED STREET
ENVIRONMENT; 5) REINFORCING THE VITALITY
AND SPECIAL CHARACTER OF DOWNTOWN'S MANY
PARTS; 6) CREATHNG NEW DOWNTOWN PARKS
AND OPEN SPACES AT STRATEGIC LOCATIONS;
AND 7) PRESERVING DOWNTOWN'S IMPORTANT
HISTORIC BUILDINGS TO PROVIDE TANGIBLE
LINKS TO THE PAST.
As downtown grows, change must contribute to,
not detract from, the very qualities which
bring people and business to the area. The
relationship of downtown to its spectacular
natural setting of water, hills and mountains
must not be lost. Important public views,
light and air at street level and in public
parks must be retained.
Most important, however, is the relationship of
the built environment to the pedestrian through
a high quality street environment. From a


26
Framework Policies
jr* , A ,- : ; .A; a; A; A;A A 'AAAAA; AA- ~;a- A a;;;a;a; A : ->; A;.S. A a ;;;
transportation perspective, an inviting street
environment encourages walking as a means of
getting around. From a land use perspective, a
pleasant pedestrian environment promotes street
level activity and enhances housing and retail-
ing. Policies for the street environment must
be coordinated with land use, transportation,
building heights, open space and historic pre-
servation to ensure that future development
produces an overall urban form and environment
that is comfortable and human.
IMPLICATIONS
The Downtown Plan proposes accomplishment of
these urban form objectives through the
following:
Land use policies and regulations to control
the height of buildings in conformance with
criteria based on a comprehensive vision for
the form of downtown as a whole as well as the
roles of specific subareas.
Land use policies and development standards
to identify and preserve important public view
corridors.
Land use policies and development standards
providing flexible control over the bulk and
form of large buildings to reduce wind impacts
and protect the light, air and human scale
qualities of the street environment.
Land use policies, development standards and
incentives to create an active and pleasant
relationship between new development and
abutting sidewalks. Examples of such measures
include street level shops, standards for the
way the walls of buildings are placed next to
the street, overhead weather protection, and
prohibitions on blank walls.





27
Framework Policies
A comprehensive plan of public investment in
streetscape improvements, new parks and open
space.
Land use policies and incentives to create
new public open space in accordance with a
comprehensive open space plan for downtown.
Policies and implementing incentives to
encourage retention, restoration and re-use of
historic buildings.
Culture and Entertainment
G DOWNTOWN SHALL BE REINFORCED AS A
. CENTER OF CULTURAL AND ENTERTAIN-
MENT ACTIVITIES TO FOSTER THE ARTS IN
THE CITY, ATTRACT PEOPLE TO THE AREA,
AND MAKE DOWNTOWN AN ENJOYABLE PLACE TO
BE SHARED BY ALL.
Art and entertainment activities enhance the
cosmopolitan flavor of downtown. Because they
generate evening activity and support other
activities, such as restaurants and night
clubs, cultural and entertainment facilities
should be encouraged throughout downtown.
However, these facilities are not economically
competitive with other uses such as office and
retail space and will require either public
investment or incentives for private develop-
ment.
IMPLICATIONS
To foster the development of art, cultural and
entertainment facilities the Downtown Plan pro-
poses the following:
Public and private commitments to a high
quality urban environment that recognizes the
value of aesthetic features in non-economic
t e rm s.
Land use policies and actions providing an
incentive for the integration of art and
cultural and entertainment facilities in new
development.
Areas of Varied Character
Hthe varied character of the areas
. WHICH MAKE UP DOWNTOWN SHALL BE
RECOGNIZED AND ENHANCED. ACTIONS SHALL
BE TAKEN TO PRESERVE THOSE CHARACTER-
ISTICS DETERMINED DESIRABLE, COUNTER
TRENDS THAT ARE DETERMINED UNDESIRABLE
AND DEFINE THE CHARACTER OF AREAS WHICH
ARE EMERGING. DEVELOPMENT IN EACH AREA
OF DOWNTOWN SHALL BE GUIDED BY A COMPRE-
HENSIVE SET OF POLICIES WHICH RECOGNIZES
THE FUNCTIONAL IDENTITY, RELATIONSHIP TO
SURROUNDING ACTIVITY, EXISTING SCALE AND
CHARACTER OF DEVELOPMENT, DESIRED
CHANGES IN CHARACTER, TRANSPORTATION
CAPACITY, AND HISTORICAL PRECEDENTS
ESTABLISHED BY EARLIER PLANNING AND
STATEMENTS OF PUBLIC POLICY.
The vitality and special character of down-
town's many parts is one of its outstanding
qualities; many areas are characterized by a
specific activity. Usually, this activity
occurs because of factors critical to success-
ful operation, such as access to transpor-
tation, topographic conditions or the presence
of a particular amenity. Where it is deter-
mined desirable to protect or promote these
specific functions, the uses related to or com-
patible with that function should be
encouraged, while those that create conflicts
should be restricted.



28
Framework Policies

Different uses impose different demands on
downtown services and transportation. The per-
mitted amount of any single use or mix of uses
in an area should reflect conditions of
infrastructure and transportation capacity.
Employment growth should occur only where the
additional trips generated can be accommodated
by the planned transportation network. For
example, the location of 1-5 and the proposed
electric bus tunnel define those areas of
downtown with the best regional accessibility.
Within downtown are definable edges where one
area ends and another begins. Certain
features, such as major thoroughfares like 1-5
and Denny Way, or significant changes in
topography create abrupt, distinctive edges.
Many edges are softer, resulting from gradual
changes in the types and intensities of deve-
lopment. In other cases (such as Pioneer
Square, the International District, the Pike
Place Market and the waterfront) defined boun-
daries have been established by earlier
planning work and statements of public policy.
IMPLICATIONS
To recognize and enhance the qualities of down-
town's varied areas the Downtown Plan proposes:
Land use policies, regulations and incentives
tied to eleven different land use district
designations.
Development standards which vary among areas
and recognize the differing qualities and func-
tions of downtown streets.
Policies and actions to reinforce the
existing overlay districts for the Inter-
national District, Pioneer Square, the Pike
Place Market and the downtown shoreline.
Office and Commercial Concentration
I THE NEEDS OF A WIDE RANGE OF
. OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES
SHALL BE MET BY CONCENTRATING THE
DENSEST OFFICE ACTIVITY IN A COMPACTLY
DEVELOPED CORE AREA BOUNDED BY THE
GOVERNMENT CENTER, 1-5, THE RETAIL CORE
AND THE LOWER INTENSITY AREAS ALONG
FIRST AVENUE. CONCENTRATED OFFICE
AREAS OF MODERATE DENSITY SHALL BOUND
THE OFFICE CORE ON THE SOUTH, PROVIDING
A TRANSITION TO PIONEER SQUARE AND THE
INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT, AND TO THE NORTH
(EAST OF THE RETAIL CORE), PROVIDING AN
AREA FOR OFFICE EXPANSION. LOWER SCALE
OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL
BE ENCOURAGED IN A SERIES OF MIXED USE
AREAS SURROUNDING THE OFFICE AND RETAIL
CORES.
Office and
Commercial
Concentration
Concentrations of commercial activity provide
an efficient business climate, limit the
displacement of other desirable uses and pro-
mote the efficient use of transit and travel by
foot. Concentrations of office use should
occur: 1) where such concentrations already
exist; 2) where adequate infrastructure exists
or can be improved; 3) where the existing and
planned transportation system has the capacity
to handle increased demand; and 4) where
healthy concentrations of other desirable uses
such as retail and housing will not be
di splaced.


iiisiigiiiiiiia
29
Framework Policies

IMPLICATIONS
trations the Downtown Plan proposes:
Land use regulations allowing the highest
office densities in an area defined as the
office core, with lesser densities surrounding
the core in areas determined appropriate for
transition and office expansion.
More restrictive densities in areas where
dense office uses would conflict with the
objectives of this policy and the policy to
enhance existing character. These areas
include the International District, Pioneer
Square, the area west of the office core to the
waterfront, the Pike Place Market, Denny
Regrade and the retail core.
t Transit and other transportation improvements
designed to maintain the office core as the
area with the best regional access.
v, -V -V % % % -V -V
concen- / < Tj
\ \ VN i
V'

V 'V
v-
'i'
jffOOMT
I??*
III...
IrAemaHanal
*k -
Retail Concentration
International District, and the Pike Place
Market. Concentrations also should be
encouraged in neighborhood shopping and service
areas for existing and proposed downtown resi-
dential districts.
Retail Concentration
JTHE CONCENTRATED SHOPPING FUNCTION
. OF THE RETAIL CORE SHALL BE REIN-
FORCED; THE GENERAL FORM AND SCALE OF
THE AREA SHALL BE PRESERVED; AND THE
AREA SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM HIGH DEN-
SITY USES THAT CONFLICT WITH THE PRIMARY
RETAIL FUNCTION. OTHER CONCENTRATIONS
OF RETAIL ACTIVITY SHALL BE ENCOURAGED
WHERE THEY ALREADY EXIST OR WHERE SUCH
USES ARE DESIRABLE TO ENCOURAGE AN
ACTIVE PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT OR FOCAL
POINT OF NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITY.
Because retail activity is healthiest where
there is strong cohesion among individual
establishments, it should be concentrated in
identifiable retail districts. The most impor-
tant district is the retail core, which should
continue as the principal center of retailing
activity. Other important areas include
shopping along major downtown thoroughfares and
specialized retail areas in Pioneer Square, the
IMPLICATIONS
To reinforce the concentrated shopping function
of the retail core, the Downtown Plan proposes:
Land use policies and controls requiring
retail use at street level in the retail core.
Land use policies and regulations limiting
the density of office space in the retail core.
Large concentrations of office space could
significantly worsen traffic congestion, weaken
the critical relationship between the street
level environment and shopping activity, and
create demand for long-term parking that would
threaten the supply of short-term parking.
Retail core development standards to ensure
that new development is compatible with
existing building scale and maintains street
level qualities of light, air and visual
interest for the pedestrian.


30
Framework Policies
SO".. %: "V'.;
Incentives which encourage the development of
major new stores in the retail core.
Controls and incentives to ensure an adequate
supply of parking for shoppers.
Pedestrian and transit circulation improve-
ments to improve access and encourage walking.
Policies and incentives to encourage the
development of attractive interior public
amenities, such as atriums, tied to new retail
space.
Elsewhere, the Downtown Plan proposes policies
and incentives to:
Encourage retail development in the area
immediately surrounding the retail core to
strengthen connections with the surrounding
office areas, the Pike Place Market and the
Denny Regrade.
Encourage street level retail development in
concert with a comprehensive pedestrian cir-
culation system.
Encourage retail development in compact areas
of Pioneer Square, the International District
and the Denny Regrade to provide an active
pedestrian focus for these neighborhoods.
Residential Neighborhoods
K HOUSING SHALL BE THE PRIMARY USE
. IN DEFINED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBOR-
HOODS ON THE HILLTOP OF THE INTER-
NATIONAL DISTRICT AND THE DENNY REGRADE.
HIGH PRIORITY SHALL BE PLACED ON THE USE
OF PUBLIC RESOURCES AND INCENTIVES FOR
PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT TO STIMULATE PRODUC-
TION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THESE
NEIGHBORHOODS.
%> i %_- * p [ :* *- r * r.
I *V -V -v >
Both the Denny Regrade and the hilltop of the
International District are underdeveloped and
lack clear direction. Both areas have great
potential as residential neighborhoods, but are
likely to remain underutilized if land use
policies allow substantial amounts of commer-
cial development. Concentration of new affor-
dable housing in these areas, together with
investments in streetscape and open space
improvements are key to achieving the long
range housing objectives for downtown.


31
Framework Policies
IMPLICATIONS
To develop these two key residential neigh-
borhoods, the Downtown Plan proposes:
Land use policies and controls limiting non-
residential uses in the Denny Regrade and hill-
top of the International District to those
generally of a scale compatible with a high
density residential neighborhood.
Housing policies and actions committing
public resources to the preservation of
existing and development of new low and
moderate income housing in both areas.
Housing policies and actions targeting
housing produced by the affordable housing
programs to these two areas.
Public investments in amenities such as
street parks, widened sidewalks and landscaping
to improve the attractiveness of these areas.
e Targeting the Belltown area of the Denny
Regrade for a Community Development Program to
create an in-city neighborhood in the heart of
the Regrade.
other uses. However, each area differs sig-
nificantly in density and character of develop-
ment. Combined with the residential neighbor-
hoods on the hilltop of the International
District and in the Denny Regrade, these areas
should be the focus of actions to preserve and
expand housing opportunities.
The greater Denny Regrade is envisioned as
downtown's largest residential neighborhood
with an ultimate population of 20,000. The
International District is a mixed use neigh-
borhood that could ultimately support about
4,400 residents. The long range population
goal for Pioneer Square is 4,000 people, while
the First Avenue Corridor is expected to accom-
modate approximately 2,000 residents. Other
areas of downtown are projected to accommodate
approximately 10,000 people, for a total
target population of 40,000.
IMPLICATIONS
The Downtown Plan proposes enhancement of these
mixed use areas through:
Land use policies, controls and incentives to
encourage housing in single purpose as well as
mixed use buildings.
Mixed Use Neighborhoods
L HOUSING SHALL BE ALLOWED IN ALL
. AREAS OF DOWNTOWN EXCEPT OVER
WATER. A SERIES OF NEIGHBORHOODS CON-
TAINING A MIX OF HOUSING, OFFICE AND
RETAIL USES SHALL BE ENCOURAGED IN A
CRESCENT SURROUNDING THE OFFICE AND
RETAIL CORES. THESE MIXED USE AREAS
SHALL INCLUDE THE INTERNATIONAL DIS-
TRICT, PIONEER SQUARE, THE AREA ALONG
FIRST AVENUE, THE PIKE PLACE MARKET, THE
DENNY REGRADE SURROUNDING BELLTOWN AND
THE AREA ALONG WESTLAKE AVENUE.
The areas surrounding the office and retail
cores contain the majority of downtown's
existing housing supply and have been the loca-
tion of most new housing construction. These
areas share in common substantial quantities of
-v

Mixed Use
Residentlal

'torn dor
\
i-pTK ^LEB"y
J! t.'Eltk
1 |t I6*re r *'
It I. r r, s.ouo*
W f L v ; International
*t ttetrtct
Mixed Use
Neighborhoods


32
Framework Policies
tt;:,*:sitx. -:.: ie.
Land use policies, controls and incentives to
protect residential uses from other uses that
are incompatible In scale or character.
Land use policies and controls to maintain
the distinctive character of each mixed use
neighborhood.
Public commitment to and private incentives
for improvements such as open space, land-
scaping and pedestrian amenities.
Shorelines
Mthe harborfront shall be revital-
. I ZED AND UNITED WITH THE DOWNTOWN
TO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC
ACCESS AND RECREATIONAL ENJOYMENT OF THE
SHORELINE. ECONOMICALLY VIABLE MARINE
USES SHALL BE ENCOURAGED TO MEET THE
NEEDS OF WATERBORNE COMMERCE AND PROVIDE
AN ACTIVE, WORKING WATERFRONT CHARACTER.
THE HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE
OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE HARBORFRONT SHALL
BE ENHANCED. DEVELOPMENT OF UPLANDS
AREAS SHALL ENHANCE THE OBJECTIVES OF
PUBLIC ACCESS AND RECREATIONAL USE OF
THE SHORELINE. THE USE OF THE HARBOR-
FRONT AS A CORRIDOR FOR THROUGH VEHICU-
LAR MOVEMENT SHALL BE DISCOURAGED.
Historically, Seattle's waterfront was vital to
the city. Over time, the area has become iso-
lated from downtown, and the finger piers,
which once linked Seattle to the world, are no
longer functional for maritime cargo handling.
Basic to revitalization of the area is a clear
statement of public policy, which sets priori-
ties for the use of the shoreline and recogni-
zes economic realities. A major effort
combining public and private resources will be
necessary to meet these objectives and reunite
the waterfront with the downtown.
The close proximity of the harborfront to down-
town allows this shoreline to provide public
access opportunities for a great number of
people. Recreational access to, and enjoyment
of, the shoreline can be significantly enhanced
by developing active and passive pedestrian
spaces in place of portions of the under-
utilized rail tracks and roadway.
Water dependent uses such as vehicular and
passenger ferries, cruise ships, tour boats and
general transient moorage contribute to the
character of the waterfront and should be
encouraged. But development of water dependent
uses on the downtown shoreline is expensive.
To encourage the retention and addition of
these uses, economic assistance and new
approaches will be needed. One approach is to
allow other uses such as office and retail to
occupy significant portions of pier sheds.
IMPLICATIONS
The Downtown Plan proposes revitalization of
the harborfront through:
Land use policies and a basic system of regu-
latory controls designed to maintain the
existing scale of over water development and
gain moorage space on the perimeter of the
p iers.
The designation of an area of historic
character, where special development guidelines


33
Framework Policies
will encourage the retention of historic archi-
tectural forms. Incentives
Land use policies and incentives allowing
greater development densities when major water
dependent uses, in addition to moorage, are
determined economically viable.
Land use policies, regulations and incentives
for upland lot development in the area east of
Alaskan Way to encourage improvements in public
access and recreational use of the shoreline.
A major public/private planning and develop-
ment process to identify specific actions and
funding strategies to facilitate the stated
objectives for the downtown shoreline. The
first step is an environmental impact statement
to assess alternative mechanisms for:
- eliminating the rail operation along Alaskan
Way south of Bell street;
- reducing the width of Alaskan Way or relo-
cating the street beneath the viaduct;
- developing a major public open space near
the water's edge;
- revitalizing the area between Piers 62 and
.65;
- expanding moorage opportunities;
- incorporating other planned actions such as
reconstruction of the seawall, expansion of
the Washington State Ferry Terminal and
improved vehicular and pedestrian access to
the area.
Nland use incentives allowing
. GREATER DEVELOPMENT IN RETURN FOR
ACTIONS WHICH ARE DETERMINED TO BE OF
PUBLIC BENEFIT AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE
MITIGATION OF GROWTH IMPACTS SHALL BE
PROVIDED THROUGH A SYSTEM OF FLOOR AREA
BONUSES AND TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT
RIGHTS. THIS INCENTIVES SYSTEM SHALL BE
BASED ON A COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING
PROCESS WHICH ESTABLISHES APPROPRIATE
PRIORITIES, LOCATIONAL CRITERIA AND
DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA.
The downtown planning process has identified
many existing public needs, and impacts that
will require mitigation as downtown grows.
These needs include low income housing, housing
affordable to the average worker, pedestrian
improvements, cultural facilities, human ser-
vices and strengthening of retail uses.
Because new development will increase these


34
Framework Policies

needs, a key implementation action is the use
of floor area bonuses and transfer of develop-
ment rights to tie provision of public benefits
to increases in development rights.
IMPLICATIONS
The Downtown Plan proposes to carry out this
policy through:
To be effective such a system must be based on
a comprehensive assessment of need and state-
ment of public priorities. The mechanisms must
be structured in a way to provide a true incen-
tive, recognize economic conditions and be
responsive to conditions that may change during
the life of the Downtown Plan.
A downtown wide transfer of development
rights program, placing first priority on the
preservation of existing low income housing and
second priority on the preservation of historic
structures located in areas of greatest devel-
opment pressure.
Area specific transfer of development rights
programs to facilitate infill development in
historic districts, housing development in
mixed use areas and small site development in
the areas of highest allowed density.
A floor area bonus system structured to pro-
vide a variety of on-site public benefit
features and produce low income housing and
housing affordable to the average downtown
worke r.


APPENDIX D
94


CITIZENS GROUPS
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
1. Has your citizens group participated in the formulation
of linkage requirements in Boston or Seattle. If so,
which city were the requirements in?
Boston
Seattle
2. Are regulatory controls important in the location
decisions of new development?
5 Very Important
4
3 Important
2
1 Not Important
3. Do linkage policies influence location decisions?
5 Very Frequently
4
3 Frequently
2
1 Not At All
4. In comparison with the following location factors, how
would you rate the importance of linkage policies?
5 Very Important
4
3 Important
2
1 Not Important
_____Development Subsidies
_____Local, Regional Economic Growth
_____Public Transportation
_____Availability of Skilled Workforce
_____Wage Rates
_____Availability of Affordable Housing
95


5. Rank order the following forms of linkage exaction in
terms of their desirability.
______Affordable Housing
______Battered Womens Facilities
______Child Care Centers
______Employment
______Historic Preservation
______Job Training
______Open Space
______Public Transportation
6
Should linkage exactions be required before, during or
after completion of a project?
Before
During
After
7. Should linkage exactions be statutory in nature, or
open to negotiation?
Statutory
Negotiable
Combination
None Of The Above
If none of the above, please explain.__________
8. Are exaction fees passed on to commercial tenants?
Yes
No
9. Is the profitability of a development venture affected
by linkage exactions?
5 Significantly
4
3 Somewhat
2
1 Not At All
96


10. Do density bonuses offset the costs of linkage
exactions?
Yes
No
11. Are linkage policies...?
5 4 Straight Forward
3 2 Somewhat Hidden
1 Cumbersome
12. Do linkage exactions meet their established goals?
5 Yes, All The Time
4
3 Sometimes
2
1 Not At All
13. Do linkage exactions ameliorate the social costs of
development?
5 Significantly
4
3 Somewhat
2
1 Not At All
14. Are there social costs to development?
5 Definitely
4
3 Possibly
2
1 No
Thank you for your time and cooperation. If you have any
further comments or suggestions please feel free to include
them.
97


DEVELOPER
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
1. Has your development company negotiated projects in
Boston or Seattle which were subject to linkage
requirements? If so, which city were the developments
in?
Boston
Seattle
2. Are regulatory controls important in location
decisions?
5 Very Important
4
3 Important
2
1 Not Important
3. Do linkage policies influence location decisions?
5 Very Frequently
4
3 Frequently
2
1 Not At All
4. In comparison with the following location factors, how
would you rate the importance of linkage policies?
5 Very Important
4
3 Important
2
1 Not Important
_____Development Subsidies
_____Local, Regional Economic Growth
_____Public Transportation
_____Availability of Skilled Workforce
_____Wage Rates
_____Availability of Affordable Housing


5. Rank order the following forms of linkage exaction in
terms of their desirability.
_____Affordable Housing
_____Battered Womens Facilities
_____Child Care Centers
_____Employment
_____Historic Preservation
_____Job Training
_____Open Space
_____Public Transportation
Social Cost Fund
6
Should linkage exactions be required before, during or
after completion of a project?
Before
During
After
7. Should linkage exactions be statutory in nature, or
open to negotiation?
Statutory
Negotiable
Combination
None Of The Above
If none of the above, please explain.___________
8. Are exaction fees passed on to commercial tenants?
Yes
No
9. Is the profitability of a development venture affected
by linkage exactions?
5 Significantly
4
3 Somewhat
2
1 Not At All
99


10. Do density bonuses offset the costs of linkage
exactions?
Yes
No
11. Are linkage policies...?
5 4 Straight Forward
3 2 Somewhat Hidden
1 Cumbersome
12. Do linkage exactions meet their established goals?
5 Yes, All The Time
4
3 Sometimes
2
1 Not At All
13. Do linkage exactions ameliorate the perceived social
costs of development?
5 Significantly
4
3 Somewhat
2
1 Not At All
14. Are there social costs to development?
5 Definitely
4
3 Possibly
2
1 No
Thank you for your time and cooperation. If you have any
further comments or suggestions please feel free to include
them.
100


PUBLIC AGENCY
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
1. Has your public agency negotiated linkage reguirements
on developments in Boston or Seattle? If so, which city
were the developments in?
Boston
Seattle
2. Are the regulatory controls enforced by your agency
important in the location decisions of new development?
5 Very Important
4
3 Important
2
1 Not Important
3. Do the linkage policies enforced by your agency
influence development location decisions?
5 Very Freguently
4
3 Freguently
2
1 Not At All
4. In comparison with the following location factors, how
would you rate the importance of linkage policies?
5 Very Important
4
3 Important
2
1 Not Important
_____Development Subsidies
_____Local, Regional Economic Growth
_____Public Transportation
_____Availability of Skilled Workforce
_____Wage Rates
_____Availability of Affordable Housing
101


5. Rank order the following forms of linkage exaction in
terms of their desirability.
_____Affordable Housing
_____Battered Womens Facilities
_____Child Care Centers
_____Employment
_____Historic Preservation
_____Job Training
_____Open Space
_____Public Transportation
Social Cost Fund
6
Should linkage exactions be required before, during or
after completion of a project?
Before
During
After
7. Should linkage exactions be statutory in nature, or
open to negotiation?
Statutory
Negotiable
Combination
None Of The Above
If none of the above, please explain.__________
8. Do developers pass on exaction fees to commercial
tenants?
Yes
No
9. Is the profitability of a development venture affected
by linkage exactions?
5 Significantly
4
3 Somewhat
2
1 Not At All
102


10. Do density bonuses offered developers offset the costs
of linkage exactions?
Yes
No
11. Are the linkage policies enforced by your agency...?
5 Straight Forward
4
3 Somewhat Hidden
2
1 Cumbersome
12. Do linkage exactions meet their established goals?
5 Yes, All The Time
4
3 Sometimes
2
1 Not At All
13. Do linkage exactions ameliorate the perceived social
costs of development?
5 Significantly
4
3 Somewhat
2
1 Not At All
14. Are there social costs to development?
5 Definitely
4
3 Possibly
2
1 No
Thank you for your time and cooperation. If you have any
further comments or suggestions please feel free to include
them.
103


BIBLIOGRAPHY
104


BIBLIOGRAPHY
Andrew, Christine I., and Dwight H. Merriam. "Defensible
Linkage," Journal of the American Planning Association,
Spring 1988, pp. 199-206.
Bartlett, Bruce, and Timothy P. Roth, eds. The Supplv-Side
Solution. Chatham, New Jersey: Chatham House
Publishers, Inc., 1983.
Bennett, Larry. Fragments of Cities: The New American
Downtowns and Neighborhoods. Columbus: Ohio State
University Press, 1990.
Bratt, Rachel G., Chester Hartman, and Ann Meyerson.
Critical Perspectives on Housing. Philadelphia: Temple
University Press, 1986.
Burns, Leland S., and John Friedmann, eds. The Art of
Planning: Selected Essays of Harvey S. Perloff. New
York: Plenum Press, 1985.
Callies, David L., and Robert H. Freilich, eds. Cases and
Materials on Land Use. St. Paul: West Publishing Co.,
1986.
Corr, O. Casey. "Seattle in CAPtivity," Planning. January
1990, pp. 18-21.
Cummings, S., "Urban populism, uneven development, and the
space for reform," Business elites and urban
development. 1988.
Cushman and Wakefield. Annual Business America Real Estate
Monitor. 1983, 1985, 1988.
Davis, Perry, ed. Public-Private Partnerships: Improving
Urban Life. New York: The Academy of Political Science,
1986.
Dawson, Jon, and Charles Walker. "Mitigating the social
costs of private development," Town Planning Review.
Volume 61, No. 2, 1991, pp.157-170.
Drake, Alvin W., Ralph L. Keeney, and Philip M. Morse, eds.
Analysis of Public Systems. Boston: MIT Press, 1972.
Dreir, Peter, and Bruce Ehrlich. "Downtown Development and
Urban Reform: The Politics of Boston's Linkage Policy,"
Urban Affairs Quarterly. Volume 26, No. 3, March 1991,
pp. 354-375.
105


Feagin, J. R.. "Arenas of Conflict: Zoning and Land Use
Reform in Critical Political-Economic Perspective,"
paper prepared for Euclid Symposium, Cambridge, MA.
Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, 1986.
Frieden, Bernard J., and Lynne B. Sagalyn. Downtown. Inc.:
How American Rebuilds Cities. Cambridge: MIT Press,
1989.
Geddes, Mary. Personal interview. 06 Jan. 1992.
Hall, Peter. Great Planning Disasters. Berkeley: University
of California Press, 1980.
Hartman, Chester. The Transformation Of San Francisco.
Totowa, New Jersey: Rowman & Allanheld, 1984.
Hausrath, Linda. "Economic Basis for Linking Jobs and
Housing in San Francisco," Journal of the American
Planning Association. Spring 1988, pp. 210-216.
Hayes, Frederick O'R., et al. Linkages: Improving Financial
Management In Local Government. Washington, D.C.:The
Urban Institute Press, 1982.
Holmdel Builders Association v. Township of Holmdel, 583
A.2d277(N.J. 1990), 43ZD253.
Huffman, Forrest E., and Marc T. Smith. "Market Effects of
Office Development Linkage Fees," Journal of the
American Planning Association, Spring 1988, pp. 217-
223.
Johnson, William C.. The Politics of Urban Planning. New
York: Paragon Press, 1989.
Judd, Dennis R., The Politics Of American Cities: Private
Power and Public Policy. 3rd ed. Glenview, Illinois:
Scott, Foresman and Company, 1988.
Keating, Dennis W.. "Housing/CD Linkages: A Tested
Strategy," Journal of Housing. May/June 1986,
pp. 101-3.
Krumholz, Norman. "Recovery of Cities: An alternate View,"
Paul R. Porter and David C. Sweet, eds. Rebuilding
America's Cities (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers Center
for Urban Policy Research, 1984).
Logan John R., and Todd Swanstrom, eds. Beyond The City
Limits: Urban Policy and Economic Restructuring in
comparative Perspective. Philadelphia: Temple
University Press, 1990.
106


Lyons, Vince. Personal interview. 06 Dec. 1991.
McKenzie, Janet. Personal interview. 04 Dec. 1991.
Major, L. D.. "Linkage of Housing and Commercial
Development: The Legal Issues," Real Estate Law
Journal, Volume 15, 1987, pp. 328-352.
Meyer, Dennis. Personal interview. 06 Jan. 1992.
Patton, Carl V., and David S. Sawicki. Basic Methods of
Policy Analysis & Planning. Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1986.
Pierce, Steve. Personal interview. 15 Nov. 1991.
Porter, Douglas R. "Washington State Awakens To Growth
Management," Urban Land. January 1991, pp. 32-33.
Rein, Martin. From Policy To Practice. Armonk, New York:
M. E. Sharpe Inc., 1983.
Sabur, Mohammad. Personal interview. 10 Jan. 1992.
Smith, Herbert H.. Planning America's Communities: Paradise
Found? Paradise Lost?. Chicago: Planners Press, 1991.
So, Frank S., and Judith Getzels, eds. The Practice of Local
Government Planning. 2nd ed. Washington, D.C.:
International City Management Association, 1988.
Sugimura, Diane. Personal interview. 07 Jan. 1992.
The Conservation Foundation, Michael A. Mantell, Stephen F.
Harper and Luther Propst. Creating Successful
Communities: A Guidebook to Growth Management
Strategies. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1990.
van Vliet, Willem, and Jan van Weesep, eds. Government and
Housing: Developments in Seven Countries. Newbury Park,
California: Sage Publications, 1990.
Voget, Janet. Personal interview. 08 Jan. 1992.
White, Mark S. "Using Fees and Taxes to Promote Affordable
Housing," Land Use Law. September 1991, pp. 3-9.
107