After declaring a housing emergency in Jefferson County, public officials have now taken action to make the situation worse. On October 4 the Board of County Commissioners declared a new emergency establishing a moratorium on processing housing applications, then on October 11 repealed and replaced it. What’s up with all that?
Our county was already under a housing emergency declared by the BoCC on July 31, 2017 under Resolution 35-17. It has been over 4 years since this declaration, and we still have a dire lack of housing. Even as the BoCC empaneled a task force to “look into it,” we are still lacking housing for both the well-off and those needing affordable housing.
We certainly do not have a lack of land. We do not have a lack of talk. But we do have a lack of action. Let’s look at the talk:
OlyCap talks about constructing an apartment building in Port Townsend next to the Permit center, on land basically donated by Jefferson County. That property acquisition was more than two years ago (September 9, 2019). They even had a ground-breaking ceremony. However, nothing has happened there as yet.
The Legislature allowed some religious organization to install temporary housing on their property. So some “wooden tents” were built. They provide temporary housing to a few.
The County and City engineered the tent camp on the Fairgrounds. That turned out to be a debacle. Now, they have built another tent city on Mill Road.
But aside from these baby steps, the reality has amounted to just talk.
Now the County has declared another housing emergency under Moratorium Ordinance No. 06-1011-21… not to allow more housing, but to prohibit more housing!
That’s right, the County has acted to prohibit housing at the same time as they have a declared housing emergency.
Why have they done this? According to the BoCC’s proclamation, they “enacted a moratorium for one year to pause on certain types of development that could result in densities incompatible with zoning in rural areas.”
But what is meant by incompatible? The minimum lot size in Jefferson County is 5 acres per the zoning regulations. If a lot was in existence prior to the county adopting the Growth Management Act (GMA) it is a legal lot. But now it appears the county might try and make any lot created prior to 1971 unbuildable if it is less than 5 acres.
So the question has to be asked; why is there a 5 acre standard?In the zoning and legal industries it is called a 5 acre bright-line standard.
Under a court case called Thurston County v. W. Wash. Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., No. 80115-1, the State Supreme Court ruled that there is no 5 acre minimum “bright-line” standard under the GMA. This was remanded down to the Western Washington Growth Management Board and under Case No. 05-2-0002 Order On Remand Finding Compliance (Rural Lands) stated that:
In the Final Decision and Order of July 20, 2005 the Board observed that densities that are no more than one dwelling unit per 5 acres “are generally considered ‘rural’ under the GMA”, and that “Densities that are not urban but are greater than one dwelling unit per 5 acres are generally deemed to promote sprawl in violation of goal 2 of the GMA”, citing numerous prior Board decisions to that effect. In the appeal of this case, the Supreme Court found the application of an urban/rural five acre bright-line exceeded the Board’s jurisdiction. The Board has since followed that Supreme Court directive and will continue to do so.
In addition, they stated that:
The GMA does not define what constitutes “rural densities”; rather, rural densities are “not characterized by urban growth” and are “consistent with rural character.” “Whether a particular density is rural in nature is a question of fact based on the specific circumstances of each case.” Nor does the GMA dictate a specific manner of achieving a variety of rural densities. “Local conditions may be considered and innovative zoning techniques employed to achieve a variety of rural densities.”
This leaves open the question: What is the minimum lot size in rural lands? To answer this question you need to look at the Growth Management Act:
Under RCW 36.70A.070(5)(b) it states that: “The rural element shall provide for a variety of rural densities…”
Under RCW 36.70A.030(17) it states that: “Rural development can consist of a variety of uses and residential densities…”
Under RCW 36.70A.030(18) it states that: “Rural services do not include storm or sanitary sewers…”
Under RCW 36.70A.030(20) it states that: “Urban governmental services” or “urban services” include those public services and public facilities at an intensity historically and typically provided in cities, specifically including storm and sanitary sewer systems…”
In other words, the difference between rural and urban is whether there is sewer available or not.
Under WAC 246-272A-0320 Table X the minimum lot size depends on the type of soils and whether there is public water available. The minimum lot size ranges from 12,500 square feet to 2.5 acres.
In considering all the above it is clear that retaining a 5 acre minimum lot size is not consistent with the GMA. In fact, the minimum lot size could be 12,500 square feet (0.2869 acres). It is clearly up to the county to have a range of rural residential densities. Currently the County has not provided a range of rural densities.
Now we get to the crux of this new Emergency Moratorium. There are over 900 subdivisions in Jefferson County. Most of these subdivisions were created prior to 1971. Most of the lots created were less than 12,500 square feet in area.
So some people are trying to use the Boundary Line Adjustment to reconfigure existing lots that are less than 12,500 square feet. Most of the substandard lots (substandard because sewers are not available) are 5,000 to 7,000 square feet.
There are many of these lots in Jefferson County. Once they are reconfigured they can meet the 12,500 square foot minimum to build on septic.
Why should we care? The answer is simple: Under basic economics of supply and demand, as the supply decreases and the demand increase, the price will go up. That is why homes and land are being bid up.
Our supply of homes and land to build on is in short supply, thus the price is going up. This is not a problem for people with the money to bid a home up in value, but it is quite a problem for those of lesser means.
In time this may contribute to areas like Irondale being gentrified… but then where can poorer people there afford to live?
There are many deeply concerned citizens currently working on solutions to our housing crisis. A more democratic approach might have been a concerted effort by county authorities to solicit input from the public prior to instituting a stop-gap measure which, in the near term, is certain to compound the problem.
The currently adopted Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan has the following important statement:
“Even with Jefferson County’s current low growth rate, the shortage of attainable housing is not reconciled. The condition of average housing prices being beyond what average wages can attain has been documented over the last two decades in state and local reports, including the Port Townsend/Jefferson County Housing Action Plan (2006).”
It does not appear that Jefferson County is in compliance with its own Comprehensive Plan. The above-quoted statement confirms that. While the Comprehensive Plan actually encourages affordable housing, its Unified Development Code (UDC) does the opposite, as I will explain.
There are currently many impediments to providing adequate housing for workers, young families, small business owners, artists–just about anybody who doesn’t have tons of money. The most widely-discussed impediment is the lack of a sewer in Port Hadlock. Jefferson County is currently working on that issue, although progress is quite slow.
There are other impediments to building adequate housing that do not receive as much attention, though their impact is just as negative on our housing problem.
Currently the county has a minimum 5 acre subdivision requirement. This means that land can not be subdivided like it used to be. There are over 300 existing subdivisions in Jefferson County. These subdivisions are where the majority of homes are. By restricting the ability to subdivide more property into smaller than 5 acre lots the cost to build goes up dramatically. No one can build a house affordable to an average family on a 5 acre lot. The cost of the land is over $200,000, to start with. If the county permitted realistic subdivisions, a developer could create much smaller, and therefore cheaper lots so that more people could afford the new housing that would be built.
Under Washington regulations the minimum lot size allowed is 12,500 square feet in areas with public water and soils suitable for septic drainage fields. But the county does not allow a subdivision if the parcels are smaller than five acres–period. The result is that there is a severe lack of buildable and affordable lots in Jefferson County. This, in turn, artificially limits the housing supply and drives prices to unaffordable levels. The situation created by our county’s land use regulations, as I have written before, is driving young people out of our communities and turning us into an exclusive retirement community for the wealthy who can afford inflated housing prices.
It would appear that Jefferson County is not following the State-mandated Growth Management Act nor their own Comprehensive Plan. Under the State Growth Management Act the county is required to plan for growth. But Jefferson County regulations are preventing growth.
Something needs to be done to bring Jefferson County into compliance!
I am the chair of the landowners committee pushing for construction of the Port Hadlock sewer. I am very worried the county is getting set to undermine everything we’ve hoped for and the financial commitment we’re ready to make to build the sewer. We are seeing the signs of a bait-and-switch that will betray landowners and cripple the ability of the sewer to enable affordable housing and job creation.
The final design for the Port Hadlock Sewer is still being worked on. I would expect to see it completed early next year. It has been more than 15 years since Port Hadlock was declared an Urban Growth Area (UGA) under the Growth Management Act (GMA). That’s how long the sewer project has been in the works.
A sewer in Port Hadlock could allow our existing businesses to expand, plus there is enough land to attract other businesses and to build more housing. A sewer is the final element needed for full urban development in Port Hadlock.
This could be highly desirable and provide jobs, affordable housing and more revenue for government. But, it is highly dependent on the development that would be allowed under our Unified Development Code (UDC).
It should be noted that the UDC is a living document. By that I mean that it can be changed per a process in the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan).
The Comp Plan is as close as Jefferson County gets to a constitution. It is the framework that the county uses to control growth. Any regulation that affects land use must be in harmony with the Comp Plan.
One issue with the new plan is how the sewer is to be constructed. Previously the sewer was going to use a gravity collection system and a fixed bio filtration system. The new plan is to use a pressure collection system and a modular bio filtration system. This was done to reduce costs and allow the sewer to be built.
This change in the sewer requires a change in the Comp Plan as the Comp Plan contains the wording for the approved sewer design. And here’s where this alarming problem has reared its head.
Cause for Concern
What’s happening, as I will explain, is that the very development density we need to provide affordable housing and increased commercial activity–the very density that will be needed so landowners can pay for the sewer–may be sacrificed for sake of open spaces and greenways that will take the place of apartments, parking lots and business buildings.
Here we go: Any changes to the Comp Plan must be initiated by a request from either an individual or a department of Jefferson County. The Jefferson County Department of Community Development (DCD) wrote such a request, dated March 2020 to the Board of County Commissioners, Planning Commission and other parties. This letter contained numerous items including item “3. Port Hadlock Sewer Redesign Comprehensive Plan Amendment” and item “5. Port Hadlock Urban Core Revitalization Subarea Plan.”
Item 3, as expected, was the sewer design changed to lower the cost of construction.
Item 5, however, is something completely different, and very concerning to landowners. Basically, the DCD is requesting that the existing development regulations for the sewered areas of Port Hadlock be changed.
Contained in item 5 is the following wording: “There is a likelihood that those zones anduses can be revised to reflect current conditions and aspirations for an attractive urban core, complete with design standards and considerations of developing public amenities such as multi-modal trails and sidewalks, outdoor recreation areas and areas for future residential and commercial development with an emphasis on environmental sustainability.”
What does this mean? It means that once the property owners commit to paying $15M for a sewer then the county can pull the rug out from under them and change the zoning to restrict their ability to use, develop and make some money from their land and sewer investment. Instead of dense residential development that will provide affordable housing in multi-story apartments, townhomes, tiny houses and row homes, the DCD wants more parks and undeveloped spaces where no one can live except in a tent.
The $15M is the amount that the property owners would pay and once they agree to a Local Improvement District (LID) there is no going back. The county can change the zoning afterwards to whatever it wants.
Not only did the DCD write the March 2020 letter but they wrote two others like it, showing how intent they are on zoning changes that will hurt landowners and cripple the sewer’s benefits. One was written August 11, 2020 and another on September 2, 2020. Basically, they reiterated their desire to change the existing zoning.
This action by the county could be quite detrimental to existing property owners. No one in their right mind would agree to a LID only to have their zoning change to something unknown. The whole point of the sewer is to allow urban zoning and urban development, not more “outdoor recreation areas.”
Please note thatthe DCD did not send this letter to any of the property owners in the area to get the sewer. In other words, the county did not deem it fit to let the people who would pay for the sewer know that they are planning on changing their zoning.
Jefferson County is already mostly characterized by green belts, forests and parks. Port Hadlock has parks that have been closed to the public. I speak of Chimacum Park that has been closed for years. There are other parks that have not been fully developed, such as Irondale Park, H.J. Carroll Park, Oak Bay Park and land where the log dump used to be.
What we need is land that can be developed to its maximum potential for housing, and commercial and industrial development. This is how jobs and housing are created and businesses expand.
This is not the time to add costs to our local businesses and handcuff them in their ability to develop their land to create affordable housing and jobs. Our job base is shrinking terribly, depriving young people of hope and futures. We have a real housing crisis. We need denser development on a new sewer system to have any hope of solving these crises. The current Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area zoning has already passed muster with the Growth Management Hearings board and should be retained as is.
We have all heard of Trickle Down Economics. But, there is another concept called “Trickle Up Poverty.” In Trickle Down Economics the concept is that the rich and/or the government basically spend or invest their money. That in turn allows development to occur where people get employed. Thus the money trickles down to others. But, what is Trickle Up Poverty? That is where there is no investment by the rich or the government and no jobs created. Poverty, which is a creation of the government, becomes more prevalent.
Of course, there is a glass ceiling to Trickle Up Poverty. Heaven forbid that the Elite should suffer in poverty. So, where is trickle up poverty practiced? Plenty of places–North Korea, Venezuela, and the United States of America. Socialism is a good example of Trickle Up Poverty. Everyone suffers together, except for the few at the top.
What? This could not happen in this country, no way we would do that!!! But it is happening right here in Jefferson County. Yes, right here.
Why would anyone want to promote poverty? Simple, it drives out the lower classes of people. Take any place here in Jefferson County and gentrify it. What do you get? Higher property values that translate to higher revenue for government and more income for the few that can afford to buy out the poor. It is happening right now. People with money are moving in and buying out those that either die, want out of the socialist mecca in process or are forced to leave due to no jobs and unaffordable taxes. The policies imposed on the county by the elite are having the intended effect of making Jefferson County the very sort of Carmel North, Aspen-by-the-Sea and Martha’s Vineyard West those same elites constantly doth protest too much.
Look at what they’ve done with the power they’ve had for two decades. That says it all.
Trickle Up Poverty is not new. It has been practiced in many parts of our country. Typically, the elite and the politicians they control create a dying economic model, usually by restricting property development. Once the local people have no jobs they are forced out and their property becomes available to gentrify. At one time, back as far as the 60s, Port Townsend was a working town where the working class stood a chance at upward mobility and better lives for their children. No longer. In fact, given enough time the last remaining larger employer, the pulp mill, will likely be forced out. Then the cycle will be complete.
[Editor’s Note: According to the Economic Research branch of the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank, the overall poverty rate in Jefferson County climbed more than 10% between 2016 and 2018, to 13.3%. That is 33% higher than Washington’s statewide poverty rate. The overall poverty rate hides an even uglier story. The census tract for Port Townsend has a poverty rate of 16.2%. The census tract for the southern and western county has a poverty rate of 16.5%. These figures come from the Census Bureau’s latest American Community Survey The poverty rate for the areas immediately south and west of Port Townsend and around Discovery Bay stands at 14.3%. The considerable wealth of households on Marrowstone Island and in Port Ludlow pulled those census tracts down to 7.8% and 10.9%, respectively. The extreme poverty in Irondale and pockets of the Tri-Cities was masked by the extreme wealth a few miles west on Marrowstone Island. Likewise, the surprisingly high poverty rate within Port Townsend city limits, with its million dollar homes and exclusive neighborhoods on Morgan Hill and near Fort Worden, reveals the severe economic divide in our community. Lastly, the Census Bureau’s latest employment data shows the job base for Jefferson County shrinking, not growing while at the same time the cost of housing continues to increase.]
“There wasn’t a county in the U.S. where a minimum wage worker clocking in 40 hours a week could afford to rent a two-bedroom apartment in 2019.” That’s according to a report by the National Low Income Housing Coalition. This seems to be a sad reality. Right here in Jefferson County it is a very big concern.
Of course, politicians talk about affordable housing. They spout important- sounding proclamations. They empanel task forces and have meetings and churn out lots of paper about affordable housing.
What has all this wheel-spinning accomplished?
The only incorporated city in Jefferson County, Port Townsend, has spent a ton of money and donated valuable land in a pathetic attempt at a solution. I speak of the Cherry Street Project. It has been written about in detail on this website for going on four years. Cherry Street is a fiasco. In the end it will likely have to be demolished. It never did make any sense.
A while back the county donated land to OlyCap to build affordable housing. They rolled out plans for a costly multi-story apartment building. Nothing more has happened.
About the only thing happening is the growing homeless camp at the Jefferson County Fairgrounds.
Why is there so much talk and no meaningful action? Well, it would appear that government is not the answer. They can’t seem to get anything done. They have the land but they lack the skill set and/or the will to produce tangible results.
According to the Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy at New York University there are four reasons for the lack of affordable housing.
The first is that incomes for many workers are just too low compared to the cost of housing.
“Some people think that full-time workers can afford housing, but that’s a myth. In some housing markets, only workers earning hourly wages of $30 or more can comfortably afford housing. In fact, there is no metro area in which full-time workers earning the Federal minimum wage can comfortably afford the costs of a typical 2-bedroom rental unit.
“On average, a worker needs to earn $20.30 an hour to afford a typical 2-bedroom apartment. In other words, someone earning the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour would need to work almost three full-time jobs in order to afford a typical two-bedroom apartment. And the problem is getting worse, not better. Incomes for low- and moderate-income workers have largely stagnated while housing costs have risen.”
The second reason is closely related to the first: for-profit developers generally don’t respond to the demand for housing among lower-income households.
“It’s not because they don’t want to, it’s because they can’t. The rents and home prices that many households can afford to pay are too low to cover the costs of developing and operating newly constructed housing. Some households’ incomes are too low to cover even the costs of maintaining and insuring existing housing.”
A third problem is that certain types of government regulation raise production costs and reduce the overall supply of all types of housing.
“For example, limits on density restrict the number of homes that can be built on available land, and complicated and lengthy approvals processes can slow down the construction process and even cause developers to go elsewhere, making it difficult for the supply of housing to keep pace with increases in demand and rising housing prices throughout the entire housing market.
“It may seem counterintuitive, but it’s true: limits on construction of middle- and high-end housing also affect affordability in the lower half of the housing market. Too little building for moderate- and high-income households hurts people further down the income spectrum, because moderate- and higher income households end up driving up rents on units that would otherwise be relatively affordable.
“There are good reasons for many government regulations. But it’s important to remember that increases in development costs are often passed on to families. We should at least take a hard look at regulations that affect development costs to figure out whether they are unavoidable and the benefits outweigh the costs, which can run to the tens of thousands of dollars per unit.
“Reducing regulation will not lower costs enough to make new housing development for low-income households economical without government subsidies, but it could make housing more affordable for families in the middle.”
A final problem is a lack of government funding.
“To expand the availability of affordable homes, federal, state and local governments fund a range of programs that successfully house millions of families. Unfortunately, these programs are not keeping pace with the need. Federal housing assistance over the past 15 years has been stagnant or declining at the same time that the number of renters with very low incomes (less than 50% of AMI) is increasing. Currently, only about one in four eligible households with a housing burden receives government housing assistance of any kind.”
In considering these four issues it would seem that our local governments could encourage and promote economic development to support a better job base, lower the cost to build by easing land use regulations and contribute part of their tax revenue from increased growth to very low income housing
Neither the city nor the county have done much to promote economic development. In fact, they have severely restricted economic development through tight land use regulations. This action means that there are not enough family wage jobs to support a healthy community. Because there are not enough jobs there is also a lack of tax revenue that could go toward affordable housing. In addition, due to the restrictive land use regulations there is no good place to build affordable housing.
We do not lack the land. We lack the will in our government to actually solve this issue. It has been government policy and regulation that has created the affordable housing crisis here. Why does it continue? Because that is what the majority of voters keep voting for. All the talk of affordable housing, living wage jobs or family wage jobs means nothing as long as voters do not want real change. As a result, we will continue to turn Jefferson County into a place for only the well off.
My school motto is “Acta non Verba.” Deeds not Words. That is the only mindset that will make any difference in our affordable housing crisis.
