City Builders: No, Angry Neighborhood Voices are Alive, but What’s Next?
Sometimes I think if you saw my forehead it would be bright red from slapping it and hitting it against a brick wall. As I pointed out yesterday, there are some stubborn myths out there about Mandatory Inclusionary Zoning (MIZ) and who it helps, hurts, and who was behind it in the first place. What’s ironic, is that angry neighbors are now raising their voices again against MIZ. I think that’s great even though they mostly don’t know what they’re talking about. Weirdly, neither do so called “urbanists,” a designation I still have yet to understand. The urbanists are mad at the neighbors in Wallingford because the neighbors say nobody is listening to them. I agree. But it’s a tangled mess. Here’s what they think in Wallingford, from a story on KOMO news:
“I believe they are not listening to us, they don’t want our input,” said Miranda Berner, President of the Wallingford Community Council. “This is a top down plan that’s being pushed on everybody and its being pushed on every neighborhood without talking to the neighborhoods individually.”
Wrong on the first part. But right on the second. The whole MIZ thing is a top down process. But neighborhoods wield a lot of power, just not as much as non-profit housing developers and big downtown developers like Vulcan. Confused? It would be a surprise if you weren’t; that’s the way supporters and pushers of the Grand Bargain want it. So I posted to Facebook’s City Builders page the following brief history.
————————
What’s remarkable about this sign [see above] anyway (“neighborhood voice killed”) is that it is entirely false.
Let’s look back.
1. In 2011 angry neighbors killed first floor retail in low-rise zones. Thanks Mike O’Brien!
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/council-rejects-mayors-plan-for-more-stores-in-neighborhoods/
2. Battle for more density at Roosevelt ended with a paltry 65’ for TOD thanks to angry neighbors.
Rough ride: Roosevelt rezone creates TOD opportunity
3. In 2012 Tom Rasmussen started a sustained campaign against microhousing at the behest of angry neighbors.
https://www.seattlemet.com/articles/2013/4/18/the-pitchforks-come-out-at-apodment-hearing-april-2013
4. In 2012 angry neighbors successfully got a moratorium on small-lot development in single-family zones.
https://www.seattlemet.com/articles/2012/9/5/city-could-prohibit-some-small-lot-development
5. In 2013 angry neighbors got Sally Clark to begin a war on low rise zones.
http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/cs/groups/pan/@pan/documents/web_informational/s047759.pdf
6. In 2014 small-lot Development was killed.
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/seattle-agrees-to-lower-height-limits-of-new-houses-on-small-lots/
7. In 2014 congregate microhousing was killed.
Microhousing: The City Council Eliminates Another Housing Option
8. In 2014 low rise zones were effectively downzoned (we appealed; where were you?)
Pro-growth group tries to halt height rollback in Seattle’s lowrise neighborhoods
9. Angry neighbors and non-profits collude on boosting incentive zoning fees and blocking development in SLU; Peter Steinbuck is hired by the Mirabella’s angry seniors to protect their view of the space needle (2011-2013)
https://seattle.curbed.com/2013/3/13/10264468/how-important-is-your-view-of-the-space-needle
9. When it’s demonstrated IZ doesn’t work, Seattle City Councilmember Mike O’Brien proposes a freewheeling tax on every square foot of development to fund non-profits; this is cheered by angry neighbors.
http://www.nwrealtor.com/2015/06/29/seattle-proposes-new-tax-linkage-fee-on-housing/
10. Angry neighbors screw up frequent transit service exemptions with an appeal. (2014)
City’s ‘no parking necessary if built near frequent transit’ rule proposed for a rewrite
11. Angry neighbors screw up DADU legislation with an appeal.
12. Angry neighbors screw up FTS more with another appeal (2017).
13. Angry neighbors collude with communists, socialists et al on “Tenants Rights” AKA rent control and get bad legislation passed (first in time, deposit caps etc; bad because it doesn’t work to achieve stated outcomes desired).
14. Design review remains an expensive and pointless muddle of process and waste
15. A myriad of code interpretations are being bent to goof up housing (trash rooms getting bigger, pointless water main extensions.
Mayor and Council: It’s Time to Assess How Much You’ve Pushed Up Housing Costs
16. Oh I forgot, over $75,000 had to be spent to over turn illegal abutting lot legislation (did you contribute?
😉) pushed by and supported by Councilmember Mike O’Brien.
https://www.seattlemet.com/articles/2016/4/11/lawsuit-against-city-raises-issue-of-density-and-affordable-housing
17. Somewhere in 2015 Danny Westneat wrote an op ed and some people got mad about single family people screwing up the city.
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/get-rid-of-single-family-zoning-in-seattle-housing-task-force-says-in-draft-report/
18. The Council is poised on passing the single most devastating legislation citywide, Mandatory Inclusionary Zoning, a scheme that will make many projects infeasible, will restrict supply and raise prices, prices will go up to absorb fees, and the Council will raise them to “create affordable housing”
19. Many people support MIZ because neighbors oppose it.
Did I miss anything? 
Now. If you’re still awake, here’s part two.
Clearly the “neighborhood voice” is alive and well.
But why, then, would the Council grind ahead with MIZ?
Follow the money.
The non-profits will wring millions in cash 
💰 from the imposition of MIZ. Why do they need the money? Because they suffer under the same limits imposed by Council I’ve described (ie design review, water main stuff etc). They also buy land at market prices and pay more for labor.
Non-profits 1 angry neighbors 0
Why would big shot developers support this? Well, there are only a few “big shots;” their clients got to pay a fee that was essentially the same as they’d pay anyway and they mostly build downtown and SLU. They all claim credit for the Grand Bargain. “We gave at the office!”
The “social justice” crowd wants and is getting more fees and will push for more inclusion. That’s already starting (see Lisa Herbold’s low opportunity fine).
Rob Johnson is an increasingly untenable spot. Alex Pederson, a more charismatic version of your favorite NIMBY, is in waiting. Johnson has two choices — stop the madness and end his pursuit of MIZ beyond where’s it’s been imposed.
Second, he can start dialing up Inclusionary fees and requirements. That would appease angry neighbors and the social justice crowd.
What do you think he should do?
What will he do?
What will the new mayor do?
And will anyone listen to people who actually build and develop housing?
