Thread by @MBAKS_Voice

Did everyone see the @SeaTimesOpinion piece on housing + state Legislature? Great. We have some thoughts we’d like to share. seattletimes.com/opinion/editor… #waleg

First off, @SeaTimesOpinion, it is absolutely an appropriate role for the Legislature to take action to address our critical housing shortage. We are in a housing crisis because the status quo isn’t working. Continuing down the same path is not the answer. #waleg

The WA State Legislature passes laws on criminal justice, education, transportation, labor, etc. that impact local government. Why not housing? 🤷‍♀️#waleg

While it’s true upzoning has happened in *limited* places in Seattle, and the city has been adding housing, there is still MUCH MORE WORK left to do.

The @SeaTimesOpinion says, “The state Legislature should not micromanage growth in cities, especially not in ways that destroy neighborhoods and override local land-use planning.”

But, the fact remains, since 2010, our region has added over three jobs for every housing unit.

We are still falling WAY short of what is needed to meet the strong demand for housing or to keep pace with growth. Credit: PSRC

What is happening on a local level is NOT WORKING.

3 jobs per 1 housing unit
commute times
housing prices

Forcing people to drive hours for housing is not equitable. seattlepi.com/local/transpor…

Currently, there are simply not enough housing options to accommodate all residents near job centers. Period.

On top of this, @SoundRegion is forecasting 1.8M additional residents + 1.2M new jobs by 2050 in King, Snohomish, Pierce and Kitsap counties.

More people coming to the Puget Sound region is not up for debate.

The need for housing is not up for debate.

Where are our new neighbors going to live?

Credit: PSRC

Re: The Seattle Times editorial's point “Lawmakers wanting to tweak growth-management rules must hear from all sides…”

We already agreed years ago, with the GMA’s passage, to the fundamental principle of directing growth to our urban areas.

Yes, it's important to hear from all sides, but it's still an appropriate role for the legislature to ensure the GMA, their law, is working as intended.

The changes being proposed this session would provide practical tools for cities to make this work. #waleg

If we fail to add enough housing, this will only continue to drive people farther away from job centers which means:

added traffic congestion to our roadways=
people spending hours a day commuting=
creating demand for billions in new roads=
contributing to climate change

Did we mention @SoundRegion is forecasting 1.8M additional residents & 1.2M new jobs by 2050 in King, Snohomish, Pierce & Kitsap counties?

🔸We need to make room for neighbors who want to live here
🔸Working together, we can do so in a way that makes for better neighborhoods

The Times notes surrounding cities have a key role to play in accommodating growth as well. We couldn’t agree more.

Re: need for comprehensive GMA reform, we agree it’s time for a fresh look at the nearly 30-year old law.

One shortfall of the GMA is that it does not define urban density or a minimum residential density standard.

This is a problem because cities are often stymied by political pressure from current residents who reject growth in their own communities.

What’s the result?

New polices restricting growth and zoning limits that preclude building more housing.

We’ve tweeted about our study before, but it bears repeating:

@MBAKingSno recently reviewed the 80 jurisdictions in King, Snohomish, and Pierce counties and found 46 have at least one zoning designation that limits residential density to fewer than 4 homes per acre. (‼️)

Again, why is this concerning?

4 dwelling units per acre is the bare minimum planning standard for being considered “urban.”

That’s STILL more than 10K sq ft per lot. And many cities planning under GMA STILL don’t allow it.

In every case, this low-density zoning falls within UGAs that should be required to follow all environmental regs, including critical areas, no matter what the underlying zoning happens to be.

Many cities have woefully under zoned. And been allowed to do so. Let’s not cherry pick the GMA goals that most suit us.

Here’s one example of a city within the UGB with significant portions zoned ONLY for one house per acre.

When certain cities fall short in doing their part to allow smart growth, it makes it harder for all other jurisdictions.

A great example: City of Bothell and Southern SnoCo have experienced & continue to deal with significant growth.

Establishing a minimum residential density standard, streamlining short plat thresholds, and allowing cottage housing/ADUs, would create MORE HOUSING CHOICES, increase AFFORDABILITY, and ENHANCE NEIGHBORHOODS. #waleg

These legislative changes would also improve our region’s ability to accommodate the tremendous growth we know is coming in a way that is healthy, sustainable and just.

🔹CITIES OUTSIDE OF SEATTLE designated for urban growth have a key role to play in ensuring housing needs are met…

🔹THE CITY OF SEATTLE has a key role to play in ensuring housing needs are met…

🔹AND the STATE has a key role to play in ensuring housing needs are met. #waleg

Having an adequate supply of housing lets individuals and families of all economic segments work, live and play in our cities, together.

Having an adequate supply of housing enables people to live closer to jobs, essential services, and transit, which diminishes the need to drive and lowers carbon emissions.

.@SeaTimesOpinion, the status quo won’t work. Credit: PSRC #missingmiddle

Oh, and by the way, our region will be growing by 1.8M additional residents by 2050.

Let us work together to make sure we have enough housing for our neighbors.