The Seattle area continues to defy the national trend of a sharply slumping housing market. The result is fewer people can afford homes, especially anywhere near their work. So what to do about it?
A thoughtful commentary by a realtor ran in the Seattle Times Wednesday, making the case that the affordable housing cruch was caused by the state's Growth Management Act. That law required counties to figure out how to focus development in order to curb sprawl. It also upset a lot of rural landowners, and spurred a rollback measure this fall called I-933.
Though he doesn't take a stand on I-933 -- which many business groups support -- he suggests five sensible policy steps:
• Require that growth-management plans under the GMA result in no net loss of housing opportunities;• Require that growth-management plans balance projected job growth with growth in the housing supply, to ensure employees can live in communities where they work;
• Ask communities to increase affordable-housing opportunities. Some strategies include flexibility in lot sizes and allowing detached "accessory dwelling units," such as those proposed by Mayor Greg Nickels;
• Establish performance measures for growth-management plans, to measure whether they actually accommodate growth and to verify that municipalities are adjusting plans to accommodate growth, as they are required to by law;
• Make the funding of critical infrastructure projects — such as roads, sewers and water — a priority in state and local budgeting.
Voiding current growth laws is a big mistake. But there are critical missing links. The Seattle area should follow examples of its Cascadia neighbors Vancouver and Portland in fixing them. Encourage more dense in-fill development and build the infrastructure necessary to make living in built-up areas attractive.