BREAKING: SCALE, an anti-development group represented by new council member Alex Pedersen's land use advisor Toby Thaler, just lost their case against the city's modest Mandatory Housing Affordability upzones at the Growth Management Hearings Board.
The board concluded that MHA, which increased allowable housing density in some parts of Seattle, complies with the Growth Management Act and State Environmental Policy Act.
SCALE's complaint claimed more housing density would lead to negative "environmental" impacts such as the loss of "traditional single family neighborhoods," impacts to "community aesthetics and land use compatibility," and trees.
One of the points the ruling makes again and again is that the "alternatives" proposed by SCALE aren't reasonable, in the sense that they will result in depressing housing development, which is contrary to the city's adopted goal of creating more housing for a growing population.
Many of the objections SCALE made had to do with the city somehow concealing the actual impact of the upzones proposed as part of MHA. The ruling dismisses all of those concerns.
Other objections are about things like shadows, views from single-family houses, and other aesthetic impacts—a set of concerns that belies the group's frequent claims (in the complaint) that their primary concerns are gentrification and segregation.
One of the things SCALE requested was a full survey of all pre-1940 houses in urban villages and urban village expansion areas. The GMHB ruling says that this demand is unreasonable and unnecessary.
The ruling says that SCALE provided no evidence (just "opin[ing]) to prove that demolitions of affordable units would increase dramatically if taller buildings were allowed in already dense areas or neighborhoods on the edges of those areas.
There's some stuff in here attributed directly to Thaler about "East Fremont's" potential tree loss. The board dismissed the concern that the environmental review didn't adequately consider trees, and pointed out that most trees in the city are outside the MHA expansion area.
There are a number of neighborhood-specific complaints as well, all of which were dismissed. Overall, the ruling is a vindication for the city on every legal issue at play in the challenge.
The complaint even takes a random swipe at former council member Rob Johnson, who got MHA over the finish line, for missing a single public hearing, suggesting that his absence invalidated subsequent votes. (The board rejected this claim). 
