waiting for the interurban
SPREADSHEET AUTO-CHART:
"Decentralize 'til you qualify"— Vision 2040 or not—affordable housing can NOT be a tag-on afterthought, at least not when it involves over 3 million people!
Filed as Attachments below:
—A VISION 2040 REALITY CHECK— 2018
—CHARTS of Actual vs Targeted growth, 2000—2018
"When the solution is the problem—... what appears from the perspective of first-order change to be a solution reveals itself from the perspective of second-order change to be the keystone of the problem."
— Watzlawick*
* Change, Principles of Problem Formation and Problem Resolution, 1974.
Abstract: A VISION 2040 REALITY CHECK—2018
First noticed by Crosscut's Doug MacDonald, the Puget Sound Regional Council's Vision 2040 growth strategy shift from "multiple centers" (Vision 2020) to five "mega-cities" can be steadily reality-checked against annual state estimates. The Regional Council does not release any such check even though, as 2020 approaches, Vision 2020 is proving itself a far better match with affordable housing.
The Regional Council's authority stems from the GMA, Washington's Growth Management Act. The GMA mandates affordable housing as well as maximum public participation as non-functional tag-ons. The functional mandates are for "county-wide growth planning policies" and "multi-county growth planning policies when neighboring counties exceed a certain population. The Regional Council enacts the latter.
"Bend the trend" not withstanding: greatly increasing the intensity of land use raises exchange values far above existing use values, causes people to decentralize until they qualify, and lip service to take the place of the impossibly vast public subsidies it would take to comply with affordability mandates. As is all to common with problems industries, It's the solution that is the problem—and as the years go by the above scenario becomes more and more apparent!
Where to find the latest information:
The new Livable Seattle Charts (filed below) compare OFM's 2018 estimates with Vision 2040's targets.
Washington State Office of Financial Management
Growth Management Act Mandates and Populations Projections
— 2017 County Population Planning Projections (current as of July 2018) with links to the Act:
http://www.ofm.wa.gov/POP/gma/default.asp:
Census and Estimates
—1890 to 2010 census:
http://www.ofm.wa.gov/pop/census.asp
— Population estimates (April, 2018), new one due each July:
http://www.ofm.wa.gov/pop/estimates.asp
Update of following links "under construction"
Puget Sound Regional Council (GMA multi-county planning entity)
Vision 2040 —minor tinkering:
— Several targets adjusted and some "small cities" re-categorized as "larger cities," 2009, 2011;
http://psrc.org/assets/1737/Part_II_Regional_Growth_Strategy.pdf
— "it's early, our efforts will turn the tide"— (Appendix II A)
http://psrc.org/growth/vision2040/background
King County
25 years of GMA in King County
http://www.kingcounty.gov/depts/executive/psb/regional-planning/Growth-Management.aspx
Assignment of GMA Housing/Employment Projections
—King County Growth Management Planning Council Growth Target Update 2012:
lost: (offline) to obtain contact Chandler Felt on link just below
King County Buildable Lands Report-July 2014 Final adopted:
Seattle
Seattle 2035 Development Capacity Report, September 2014 (included within King County 2014 BLR link above)).
http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/cs/groups/pan/@pan/documents/web_informational/p2182731.pdf
Emerald City, An Environmental History of Seattle, Matthew Klingle, 2007 Seattle Public Library "a modern moral fable"