By Warren Cornwall
Herald Writer
Trying to figure out the differences between candidates?
In the Snohomish County Council races, their positions on development and housing offer some of the strongest contrasts.
Republican candidates say growth-control has gone too far, driving up housing costs, overregulating property owners and hindering construction of new homes.
Democrats say they want to continue recent council actions to address growth, reining in development abuses and making sure development pays its share for impacts on the community.
With a majority of seats on the five-person council on the ballot, those differences could play an important role in defining the direction of county government.
Decisions at stake include:
Much of the debate revolves around the cost of growth and regulation, and who should pay for it.
Democrats argue the people benefiting from growth — such as developers — need to shoulder more of the cost that comes with growth, such as widening roads to accommodate more traffic drawn to new houses.
All three Democratic candidates support increasing the county’s traffic mitigation fee — money collected on new developments to spend on transportation projects. The fee, which averages $1,700 for a new home, hasn’t been changed in 10 years.
Growth has created more demand for road improvements, sheriff’s deputies and schools, said Dave Somers, the District 5 Democratic candidate. If the money to pay for them doesn’t come from new development, current residents will face rising taxes, or the projects won’t get done, he said.
"If you don’t get some of it out of mitigation fees, it goes onto the general taxpayer’s bill," he said.
Republicans say this, and other regulations, are driving up the cost of housing.
Mitigation fee increases will find their way into the final price of the home, they argue. That means higher costs for home buyers, said Republican District 4 candidate Dave Schmidt.
"If we don’t make some changes, my children are going to have to move to Skagit County to afford housing," he said.
Republicans say recent changes in the development code will also push housing costs up.
The county council in May stiffened regulations for a type of housing project popular with developers, but disliked by many neighborhood activists.
The developments, known as planned residential developments or PRDs, now can have no more than seven houses on an acre, compared with an earlier limit of 12. They also can’t go on parcels smaller than five acres. Earlier there was no acreage limit.
Building industry representatives blame regulations for a steep drop in 2001 in the number of new development applications to the county. Republican candidates warn that decline, and other regulations, could raise housing costs.
The changes in the PRD ordinance made such development essentially impossible, said District 1 Republican candidate John Koster.
"You take that away and there’s no reason for a developer to even walk into the county for a permit," said Mike Pattison, a lobbyist for the Snohomish County-Camano Association of Realtors.
The cost of mitigation fees and regulation can find its way into home prices, said Glenn Crellin, director of the Center for Real Estate Research at Washington State University. That, in turn, can prompt an overall rise in the cost of homes.
Regulation can also push up costs by delaying construction or limiting the amount of land open to development or the number of homes, he said. A recent study for the center concluded that the state’s Growth Management Act increased the price of a typical Clark County home by $20,000 between 1995 and the end of 1997.
Still, the chief cause of rising home prices in the Puget Sound area is more people seeking homes here, he said.
"The primary factor that has been causing the increases in values really has been the demand for housing," he said. "When you add to that very strong pressure some things on the cost side, you really are escalating the cost structure."
The cost of housing shouldn’t overshadow the public price of growth, said Eben Fodor, a nationally recognized land-use planner embraced by many local growth-control advocates.
If mitigation fees aren’t used, governments may need more property taxes to pay for new infrastructure to accommodate growth, he said.
"The situation typically throughout Washington state is that the taxpayers are underwriting or subsidizing new development," said Fodor, who is based in Eugene, Ore.
Democratic candidates also defend the new development regulations. Dave Gossett, the Democratic candidate in District 4, said the old PRD regulations allowed abuses by developers who built dense subdivisions with little open space.
"If we put 100 houses on an acre, it will be even more affordable," he said at a debate. "The question is, how do we balance our quality of life with affordable housing."
You can call Herald Writer Warren Cornwall at 425-339-3463 or send e-mail to cornwall@heraldnet.com.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.