Growth choices have to recognize homebuyers’ preferences

In an Oct. 9 guest commentary in The Herald, Kristin Kelly of Futurewise stated, “We all deserve the opportunity to live and work in a great neighborhood where we all have a chance to succeed.” No one can disagree with that premise. However, Ms. Kelly’s proposal to channel the majority of our future growth to Lynnwood and Everett is not only deeply flawed but runs the risk of creating the very kind of sprawl our state Growth Management Act seeks to avoid.

Lynnwood and Everett are logical places for accommodating some of our future growth, especially those who prefer multifamily options. However, the reality is that land supply is scarce in those cities for new single-family homes, a housing choice that continues to be very popular among Snohomish County residents. According to the 2012 Snohomish County Buildable Lands Report, Everett’s urban growth area (UGA), areas where urban densities are allowed, has the capacity for only 3,205 additional single-family residences while Lynnwood has the capacity for just 321 such homes.

Fortunately, to comply with the GMA, Snohomish County, in collaboration with its cities and citizens, created several UGAs. Growth in rural areas is limited to no more than 10 percent of our county’s growth, and over the past decade has seen only 8 percent of our growth. Clearly, Snohomish County is succeeding in its effort to prevent sprawl. In fact, since the original adoption of our UGAs, there have been no major expansions, and no more are currently being considered. Ms. Kelly’s assertion that “special interests are pressuring the county to take the high-cost route” is simply not supported by facts.

Those buying new homes base their decisions on a multitude of factors, including housing type, proximity to work and family, desired school districts, price and more. Our existing UGAs afford future generations choices in where and how they live. Backtracking from our planning efforts that have proven successful would eliminate choice.

To prevent sprawl, protect the environment and best utilize limited infrastructure funding, we must make efficient use of all our existing urban areas. Largely planning for growth in only two of these areas will simply drive those who seek a variety of choice even further out of our urban core. Anyone who drives north from Everett for their evening commute can attest this is already happening.

We also cannot lose sight of the fact that employment is a major factor that determines our growth patterns. For example, people who work on the Eastside have been moving to the Bothell-Mill Creek corridor because housing is not affordable near their jobs. According to research compiled by Metro-study, the Bothell-Mill Creek corridor is the No. 1 new home sales market. By comparison, the Everett market ranks 36th. Simply saying growth should occur elsewhere won’t make it happen.

Rather than using the GMA to force housing choices that the market does not support, as a matter of policy, we should be focused on facilitating and incentivizing employment growth in those desired areas that are arguably under-utilized now.

Snohomish County is currently in the process of updating its 10-year Comprehensive Plan. In planning for future growth, we must be mindful of the choices people make and why. Our working families demand choices to help meet their housing needs.

As part of this update, Snohomish County has offered three future-growth alternatives to accommodate the expected 200,000 new people living here by 2035. The county’s first two alternatives are essentially status quo options with no UGA expansion, no up-zones and no new land designations.

Alternative three prevents sprawl by holding the line on our UGAs while providing for in-fill development and limited re-zones in certain areas to accommodate demand. In choosing between these three options, let’s be mindful of how real life circumstances drive the choices made by families and plan accordingly. Failure to do so will leave us unprepared for the growth we know is coming.

Shannon Affholter is the executive director of the Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties, www.masterbuildersinfo.com.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

toon
Editorial cartoons for Friday, April 26

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Solar panels are visible along the rooftop of the Crisp family home on Monday, Nov. 14, 2022 in Everett, Washington. (Olivia Vanni / The Herald)
Editorial: Federal, state program will put more roofs to work

More families can install rooftop solar panels thanks to the state and federal Solar for All program.

Schwab: From Kremlin to courtroom, an odor of authoritarianism

Something smells of desperation among Putin, anti-Ukraine-aid Republicans and Trump’s complaints.

Providence hospitals’ problems show need for change

I was very fortunate to start my medical career in Everett in… Continue reading

Columnist should say how Biden would be better than Trump

I am a fairly new subscriber and enjoy getting local news. I… Continue reading

History defies easy solutions in Ukraine, Mideast

An recent letter writer wants the U.S. to stop supplying arms to… Continue reading

Comment: We can build consensus around words that matter to all

A survey finds Americans are mostly in agreement about the ‘civic terms’ they view as important to democracy.

Comment: Raising stamp prices won’t solve USPS financial woes

The consistent increases in prices is driving customers away. There are better options for the service.

toon
Editorial cartoons for Thursday, April 25

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Roads, infrastructure won’t support Maltby townhome project

Thank you to The Herald for the article regarding the project to… Continue reading

Thank you local public servant during Public Service Week

Please join me in honoring the invaluable contributions of our nation’s public… Continue reading

Comment: Women’s health was focus of Arizona’s 1864 abortion law

Its author was likely more concerned by the poisons women took than for the abortions themselves.

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.