Mill Creek City Council members are heading into the new year with several goals to improve resident’s quality of life. Among the council’s top priorities are encouraging state lawmakers to address the adverse effects of Washington’s Growth Management Act and improving communication with county leaders.
“Everything I hear from residents tells me people don’t like the Growth Management Act; they don’t like the density and they don’t like infill development,” Mill Creek Mayor Pro-tem Terry Ryan said at a planning meeting earlier this month. “I’m really hoping we can convince the Legislature in the upcoming session to take a serious look at growth management.”
The Growth Management Act was adopted in 1990 to protect rural communities and farmland from urban sprawl.
It requires higher density development in municipal growth areas, often forcing developers and builders into existing neighborhoods. In some cases, as many as 50 house have gone up on sites previously occupied by a single structure.
Many cities, including Mill Creek, have design standards in place to protect the integrity of neighborhoods.
It’s construction outside the cities — approved by the county — that generates the most complaints from residents and city leaders.
“Right now it’s almost impossible to get in and out of Mill Creek without avoiding a traffic backup,” Mill Creek City Councilman Mike Todd said. “The really frustrating thing is it’s not our traffic. It’s the result of development in the county, but we’re not getting much in the way of cooperation there (from county leaders).”
Mill Creek leaders fear the County Council’s plans to designate a segment of the 164th Street corridor at ultimate capacity will devastate economic development efforts in the city and further extend residents’ commute time to and from work.
A temporary ban was placed on development along the corridor while the county developed a plan to reduce traffic on the roadway, but, once the ultimate capacity designation is made, building permits will continue to be issued along with traffic mitigation fees to support public transportation programs.
County Councilman Dave Gossett defended the county’s development policies in a phone interview on Dec. 4.
He contends the county has put more effort into reducing traffic around the Mill Creek area than the city’s own leaders have.
“I think it’s worth mentioning that Mill Creek has not stopped issuing building permits,” Gossett said. “I think it’s also worth mentioning that they have no fee structure in place to fund programs that encourage people to utilize public transportation.”
Ryan, a vocal opponent of ultimate capacity, says the designation allows the county to profit from development without investing any more resources into infrastructure.
“It leaves the cities holding the bag, because we’re the one who’ll eventuall have to provide services to these areas,” he said. “It is painfully clear that the county is not interested in helping us. Their idea is to hand out discounted bus passes — discounted — they’re not even free. They (the County Council) just truly don’t get it.”
Council members hope with help from local lawmakers and groups like the South County Cities Alliance the Legislature will adopt revisions to the Growth Management Act that address these development related problems.
“I don’t know if the Legislature will get it or not,” Ryan said. “But, we’re not getting anywhere with the county.”
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
