Question: How well is SmartGrowth working? Answer: About as well as could be expected.

Buying a home

From 1990 to 1998, the price of a median single family home rose 53.5%.

First-time home-buyers earning about 80% of median income could afford only about 8.5% of the single-family homes for sale in King County this past spring. A starter home priced in the lowest 25% of home sales would cost that household about $300 more a month than they could afford. Any household making less than $60,000 ($29 per hour for one full-time worker) will have difficulty buying a first home.

In 1998, low interest rates and rising income made home purchase more affordable than in either 1980 or 1990, but still much more expensive than in 1970. In 1999, with higher interest rates, households can afford less house during the past few years. Rentals Average rent for a two-bedroom, one-bath unit rose from $708 in 1998 to $732 in mid-1999. An apartment with two bedrooms and two baths averaged about $890 a month. The King County average for all types of apartments was $747, requiring an income of about $30,000 per year or $14.50 per hour.

The lowest income groups--under 50% of median income, and especially, under 30% of median income--will have difficulty finding any market-rate housing that they can afford in King County. Less than 0.1% of rental housing is affordable to those below 30% of median income.

In 1998, the median rent for a single-family home was $1,200. A household of three persons at 80% of median income could not afford this rent. Generally speaking, moderate income families of three or more people, who need more than a two-bedroom unit, will not be able to find rentals with 3 or more bedrooms (either single family or apartments) that they can afford. Nor are most condominiums sized or priced for this group.

http://comzone.com/nwnews/editions/19991115/local4.html

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), November 18, 1999

Answers

Politics is the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich, by promising to protect each from the other." Oscar Ameringer

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), November 18, 1999.

Craig, are you drawing a 100% correlation to GMA? land preservation = higher property cost

to some extent this is true, but you'll never convince me that smart growth is a bunch of bung. I just finished publishing and defending my dissertation last spring on Growth Management and land use law. untill you get a complete understanding of those issues other than increased property tax, you'll probably be against it.

let me fill you in on the other side of the fence.

Every year, thousands are forced to sell their homes in the country because they can no longer afford their property tax. Why, because unwise growth in the suburbs has allowed a mini mall to come in across the street. therefore, the farmer's property is taxed at the "highest and best use" not current use. what's that mean? it means that the farmer is taxed like he is a mall owner not a carrot farmer.

And yes, the cost of services does rise the further from the central city you go. this cost has traditionally been passed on to the public, not the developer. GMA has made impact fees legal, but lack of political will and the short term nature of collection still does not pay for services.

I made that as simple as I could. I left out many points because I know that you'll never fully understand them unless you drop your economist attitude.

-- theman (theman@wuzzup.com), November 18, 1999.

Hope your dissertation was more convincing than any argument you've made here. Hate to pay taxes to keep you in school forever.

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.com), November 18, 1999.

"untill you get a complete understanding of those issues other than increased property tax, you'll probably be against it. " Actually, there ought to be DECREASED property tax outside the UGMA, since you've destroyed their land values. Within the UGMA, prices WILL go up, as will taxes and congestion. That is obviously what's happening above. If you consider that to be desirable, I guess you're getting your wish. I just find it curious that those who allegedly are pro-Urban, find these things to be desirable. But then the economics of light-rail are dumb as dirt, too, and Seattles hard over that they've got to have one. I'm an amenable guy. If you don't use any of MY tax money for this nonsense, you can do whatever you want.

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), November 18, 1999.

thewuz

Writes, ", the farmer's property is taxed at the "highest and best use" not current use. what's that mean? it means that the farmer is taxed like he is a mall owner not a carrot farmer."

Apparently these are the same idiots who thought up the MVET schedule.

Ed - and they must be the same person who said my father had no problem walking heal-to-toe in 1989. even though my dad had had his left leg amputated in 1982.

-- Ed (ed_bridges@yahoo.com), November 18, 1999.

Ed, i wrote this so craig could understand it, not so everyone impared or not could. If you need help understanding property tax, call your assessor or go to the library.

-- theman (theman@wuzzup.com), November 18, 1999.

Craig, UGMA?

-- theman (theman@wuzzup.com), November 18, 1999.

I assume you're talking about an urban growth area, UGA, or interim urban growth area, IUGA.

-- theman (theman@wuzzup.com), November 18, 1999.

Showing my age. The old term was urban growth management area.

-- (craigcar@crosswinds.net), November 18, 1999.

Once again the unintended consequences of SmartGrowth. Or are these unintended consequences. Perhaps we are just creating a need that MORE GOVERNMENT can fill with, of course, more tax dollars.

From the South County Journal: http://www.southcountyjournal.com/Homepagedocs/topnews/cmo09059.html

A booming economy makes low-paying jobs easy to come by, but it also makes affordable housing much harder to find.

That combination is sending more and more people to South County homeless shelters.

`` We certainly have clients who can get to Labor Ready for a day's work,'' said John Casey, board president of Homeless Outreach Mobilization Effort, a homeless shelter in Kent.

However, those day laborer jobs don't pay enough for ``first, last and security,'' the familiar litany for anyone renting an apartment. Saving up for several month's rent and a security deposit just isn't possible with a low-paying job, Casey said.

The majority of HOME's clients are day laborers; only a small portion are ``chronically homeless,'' he said.

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), November 22, 1999.