Erica Barnett at Publicola reported today on City action on an appeal to last year’s legislation on microhousing. Smart Growth Seattle weighed in on that proposal pointing out that the design review process would add needless costs, time, and process to microhousing development, costs ultimately born by renters who are currently getting good deal from their rent dollars. We asked then, “why subject a good thing like microhousing to a bad process like the current design review regimen?”

Here’s what the hearing examiner had to say about design review in her rejection of the appeal:

 “The evidence fails to show that the proposed legislation would spur new development of micro-housing or congregate residences, compared with what occurs under existing regulation of micro-housing. Clearly, the Appellants fear that this will occur but the record does not demonstrate that this impact would likely occur. If anything, as DPD notes, it would seem more likely that the proposal’s addition of new requirements, such as design review for certain projects which are currently not required to undergo design review, … would tend to discourage new development.”

You might think the we filed the appeal. We didn’t. Ironically it was the opponents of microhousing that filed the appeal which ultimately slowed down the legislation we really didn’t support in the first place. I guess we should be grateful opponents got this decision. The hearing examiner read the legislation and agreed with us: more process and review would keep more projects from moving forward, denying people a great housing option. And the added bonus to this whole thing is the Department of Planning and Development, on the record, admits their own design review process would hinder microhousing! 

You can read all the documents here.