Skip to Content
Streetsblog California home
Streetsblog California home
Log In
Streetsblog USA

Flawed Environmental Laws Threaten to Preserve Parking and Block Housing

Seattle could build many more accessory dwelling units (ADUs), but looser rules enabling their construction will be delayed by environmental review. Map: Seattle Department of Planning and Development

Seattle has a housing affordability problem, and there are serious institutional barriers to fixing it. Among the most substantial is the fact that most of the city is zoned exclusively for single-family housing.

Housing affordability advocates have been working on some common sense reforms, including one that would allow accessory dwelling units, like granny flats, in single-family neighborhoods.

But even that modest change is encountering resistance from some homeowners. And ironically they're drawing strength from the state's environmental laws.

Doug Trumm at The Urbanist reports:

The legal challenge to the ADU law was brought by Queen Anne Community Council board member and homeowner activist Marty Kaplan, who raised more than $25,000 from like-minded folks around the city to cover legal fees. (Josh Feit has good background here.) In addition to the transparency issues that ultimately seemed to tip the hearing examiner against the proposed law, Kaplan’s gripes included parking impacts and a convoluted argument that allowing one ADU and one [detached accessory dwelling unit] per lot might open up a development frenzy eating up “affordable” single-family homes in Seattle. Newsflash: single-family homes in Seattle are already not affordable to low and moderate earners.

Bizarrely, the logic of our parking industrial complex is baked into our environmental laws. Thus, preserving parking is misconstrued as an environmental asset, much to the chagrin of climate change activists who’d like to see fewer cars and fewer tailpipe and embodied car emissions rather than more.

In fact, environmentalists argue transit-rich cities like Seattle should lead in a societal transition away from car dependence. The environmental impact of a few more people parking on the street (apparently one third of ADU households if Portland is any guide) seems much less than paving more off-street parking spaces because of code requirements enabling bad environmental decisions. More parking spaces mean more impermeable surfaces, more runoff, and more induced demand for driving. There’s your environmental impact.

Elsewhere on the Network today: The Political Environment explains the push to digitally archive national climate change research now that Trump has appointed a climate science deniers to head up federal agencies. And Mobilizing the Region looks at how New Jersey Transit's funding mechanisms set it apart -- in a bad way -- among the nation's large transit agencies.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog California

Advocates Share What It Takes to Fight Highway Expansions in Court 

What does it take to sue your state DOT? Time, money, the right partners, and a little creativity, a recent survey of activists found.

July 19, 2024

Friday Video: Paris Does it Again

Come for the bike-friendly streets, but stay for adopt-a-tree program and all the car-free school roadways.

July 19, 2024

Neighbors Want a BART Stop in San Antonio

It's one of the most densely populated parts of the Bay Area. BART goes right through it. So why not stop there?

July 19, 2024

Friday’s Headlines

Rep. Waters hates the people mover; SacRT's new transportation hub; Lessons learned from a long bike ride; More

July 19, 2024

The Active Transportation Program Has to Strategize About its Severely Reduced Funding

Funding for Cycle 7 of the Active Transportation Program is less than $200 million, and already there have been requests for fifteen times the amount of available funding

July 18, 2024
See all posts