The “Missing Middle” efforts that started in 2016 to expand the variety and density of housing in Olympia have been the subject of legal battles that some hoped would have ended today, at the end of a 30-day appeal period.
Instead, yesterday, a citizens' group filed another appeal. The battle continues.
Here’s a brief (and partial) chronology:
Judy Bardin, a member of OSD&LN, confirmed they had taken their appeal to the Court of Appeals.
“How is it that community members like us don’t have the right to challenge bad land-use decisions and that we can be denied standing after winning rulings and paying our way forward with effort and money for so long?,” Bardin asked in a press release today, adding, “It is unfortunate that the city decided to spend time and money on legal maneuvers rather than doing what the GMHB initially recommended, which is to simply fix the flaws in the Missing Middle ordinance."
Missing Middle housing
Olympia’s Ordinance 7160, approved by the city council in 2018, allowed changes to developmental regulations, including regulations for building accessory dwelling units, cottage housing, courtyard apartment, and duplexes. The ordinance was in force for approximately four months before it was withdrawn due to legal appeals.
The ordinance allowed for the missing middle housing program, which according to the city’s website, refers to a range of housing types that can provide more than one housing unit per lot in a way that is compatible in scale with single-family homes.
The 2019 Board decision made the ordinance ineffective.
The 2019 state laws
Two acts of the legislature enabled Olympia and other cities to take another look at some aspects of Ordinance 7160. These were:
Following the state legislation, Community Planning and Development Director Leonard Bauer said Olympia adopted housing code amendments in 2021.
He said the new ordinance allows the building of duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes in specific community areas.
It also includes some provisions around accessory dwelling units, including:
According to Bauer, the Housing Options ordinance was able to re-adopt some aspects of the missing middle regulation that had been declared invalid by the Board.
Because the missing middle case is again on appeal, Bauer told The JOLT today, “the missing middle ordinance is held in abeyance and those other aspects of that ordinance are not in effect, only those that were adopted by the housing options.”
3 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
waltjorgensen
The article is slanted and leaves out or mischaracterizes many important facts. First, Accessory Dwelling Units were not newly allowed by the Missing Middle. They have been allowed in single family neighborhoods since 1994. Also cottages, townhouses, tiny homes and manufactured homes were allowed in these neighborhoods prior to the Missing Middle. Therefore single family neighborhoods have long allowed diverse housing types.
The Missing Middle would allow some new forms of density at the expense of the environment by including: duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and courtyard apartments; and would permit long rows of townhouses similar to the row houses of Baltimore. It would also give density bonuses, decreased lot sizes, and setbacks in yards, thereby decreasing greenspace.
The reason the Growth Management Hearings Board invalidated the Missing Middle ordinance is because they found that it violated two major State laws, SEPA (the State Environmental Policy Act) and GMA (the Growth Management Act). The Board found that the City had done an inadequate environmental review (ignoring over half of it) and there were serious concerns about stormwater and protection of water bodies. The Board also found that density could more than double what was allowed by the City's Comprehensive Plan and that adequate infrastructure such as roads, school and fire had not been planned for.
All these concessions, and still no incentives for affordable housing.
Walt
Walter R. Jorgensen
823 North St SE
Tumwater, WA 98501-3526
waltjorgensen@comcast.net
360-819-0678 (cell)
“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.” -- Aristotle
“Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value.” -- Joe Biden
“We are conditioned to believe, not to understand.” -- Marcelina Cravat
“It’s easier to fool people than it is to convince them that they have been fooled.” -- Mark Twain
"With Isaac Asimov, Carl Sagan and Ralph Nader included in our mix of humanity, how could we have gone so wrong?" -- Walt Jorgensen
Friday, July 1, 2022 Report this
sunshine39
Not only did the Superior Court judge inexplicably find that this group of citizens from every area of Olympia had no standing to bring this appeal, but the judge also ruled that the state laws 1923 and 2343 could be backdated, altho that is not stated in the laws
Friday, July 1, 2022 Report this
vkrull
I heartily agree with the following quote from your article:
“It is unfortunate that the city decided to spend time and money on legal maneuvers rather than doing what the GMHB initially recommended, which is to simply fix the flaws in the Missing Middle ordinance." I, for one, am glad to know that Olympians for Smart Development and Livable Neighborhoods are steadfast in their commitment to both protecting citizen voices in the land use and development activity of our city (a protection sorely needed after City officials' maneuverings managed to strip us of our rights at the State level) AND call out the clear and very destructive pattern of handholding going on between wealthy developers with hefty profit motives and our City government, which is supposed to be upholding quality of life for all Olympians, including and especially, our precious natural environment.
Monday, July 4, 2022 Report this