Growth blueprint must be balanced for housing

The debate over how Snohomish County will manage future growth is about to take center stage as the county embarks on the public hearing phase of its 10-year comprehensive plan update. The outcome will impact everyone's quality of life.

At issue is how the county is going to accommodate the approximately 300,000 new residents state forecasters say will live here in the next 25 years. This expected level of growth is significant and raises many questions. One that must be addressed is: How are we going to house 300,000 more residents in Snohomish County?

Unfortunately, the "preferred alternative," or blueprint for growth, put forth by the county fails to adequately address our current shortage of land on which new housing could be built, forcing us to rely heavily on "infill housing."

To be sure, there are communities in which this type of housing, which occurs in already established neighborhoods, is appropriate. Infill housing also helps accomplish the Growth Management Act's important goal of directing growth into urban areas to help preserve the environment in our rural areas.

However, the extent to which the preferred alternative relies on infill housing is unrealistic. The preferred alternative calls for only a modest expansion of the urban-growth area, adding a mere three square miles. Currently, less than one-tenth of Snohomish County is designated as an urban-growth area. In other words, the preferred alternative envisions accommodating a 50-percent increase in our population by expanding the urban-growth area by less than one half of 1 percent of the county's total land area.

What is more, two-thirds of this land would be designated for commercial and industrial uses, not housing. Such a modest increase in new land available for housing would drive up home prices and require a significant number of new homes to be built in or adjacent to existing neighborhoods.

A significant portion of this undeveloped urban land is simply unusable. It is very expensive and difficult to build homes on this land due to a lack of utilities, steep slopes, environmentally sensitive areas or other constraints. The critical-areas ordinance now making its way through the county could potentially take even more urban land off the table for development as wetland buffers are increased. This only raises more questions about the feasibility of relying on infill to house 300,000 new residents.

As debate on the 10-year update moves forward, the county needs to be realistic about the viability of relying so heavily on infill housing. More importantly, there needs to be a better balance between the Growth Management Act's goal of preventing sprawl and the desire to maintain livable neighborhoods. Urban-growth boundaries were never intended to be permanent fixtures.

The reality is that, as we grow, we may need to consider reasonable expansion. That does not mean abandoning the Growth Management Act or creating sprawl. Another alternative under consideration would expand the county's urban area by eight square miles. This more-balanced approach, which still represents only a moderate expansion of our urban area, would create much-needed land for non-existent affordable housing.

We also need to remember the critical role that housing plays in our lives and in our region. Housing affordability is an important factor for families seeking to become homeowners, and it is an important factor in ensuring our work force can live in Snohomish County. As the saying goes, a home is where a job goes at night. But if our housing supply fails to keep pace with the demand for new homes, then already-high home prices and rents will soar even higher.

Housing also provides countless economic benefits to Snohomish County and our region as a whole. A report prepared by the National Association of Home Builders estimates that the one-year local impacts of building 100 single-family homes in Snohomish County include $18.1 million in local income, $2.8 million in taxes and other revenue for local governments and 311 local jobs. Homebuilding also generates ongoing local benefits that result from the new homes being occupied and the occupants paying taxes and otherwise participating in the local economy.

The debate over Snohomish County's future is important. For the 10-year update to succeed, the plan must provide a better balance between preventing sprawl and maintaining livable neighborhoods. We must also consider the impacts on housing affordability of any plan that is adopted.