Slow down, Tacoma. We should upzone for affordable housing one neighborhood at a time

After a Tacoma City Council hearing in July, where 93 people spoke and over 400 people submitted comments, it became more clear than ever that we have an affordable housing crisis in Tacoma.

Home in Tacoma is the controversial proposal to upzone 75 percent of the city’s neighborhoods to allow multifamily housing in places currently zoned for single-family residences.

The proposal is well-intended, as it aims to address the lack of available housing at multiple price points. What is missing is a consensus solution that examines all the pieces in this puzzle and fits them together into a proposal that a strong majority can support.

Tacoma has a rare opportunity to learn from the experiences of upzoning in other cities, adapting its housing programs and tax structure to increase affordable housing for low-income residents.

First, Tacoma must protect its current stock of affordable housing.

Residents with low-wage jobs and people of color who have a household income of less than $50,000 tend to live in these areas.. They need to be protected from being pushed out of their own neighborhoods by rising rents, rising property taxes and gentrification.

Broad upzoning is the wrong tool for solving the problem. Rather, phasing in upzoning one arterial at a time would allow for a measured approach. We can determine the effects of tax relief and other housing programs to reduce gentrification and evaluate them for effectiveness as we go.

A careful analysis of each neighborhood’s demographics is needed to ensure that people are not forced out. Forty percent of the city’s population earns a low-income; these workers are the most affected by the housing crisis and deserve greater consideration.

The Tacoma Planning Commission struggled to find a solution after reviewing more than 950 written comments from residents, organizations and non-profit groups.

Three commissioners offered a minority report that clearly defined the complexity of the problem. They asked for more time to keep the issue from becoming polarized.

More demographic information about our neighborhoods and a review of city’s ability to extend city services would show the City Council that the Tacoma cannot afford to upzone 75% of the neighborhoods all at once.

The City Council made a mistake by deciding to delay an environmental assessment. As a result, the Planning Commission and the public do not know the total cost of increased residential density.

With more residents, we will also need more police, traffic improvements along each arterial and expansion of a sewer system that is already operating above capacity.

Coordination is also needed with Tacoma Public Schools to determine where student populations are likely to increase. Metro Parks needs to know were to expand to provide more access to playgrounds, programs and facilities.

A phase-in of high-density housing would allow public infrastructure to keep pace with growth.

No upzoning is really feasible until the city’s North End sewer system is expanded. It is currently operating at capacity and occasionally discharges raw sewage into Puget Sound, according to the Washington Environmental Council.

A phased-in upzone is both wise and mindful of the environment. The state Growth Management Act requires that city infrastructure and services be available within six years of construction. This is not likely to be accomplished if 75% of the city is upzoned all at once.

Furthermore, this decision will play a role in determining outcomes in many aspects of our community we all care about. These include education, child development, public health, traffic congestion, parks and environmental justice.

Ultimately, Home In Tacoma will determine the diversity of our residents and the type of community that Tacoma will become.

Our decisions will determine whether our students can afford to live here after their schooling, and whether people with low-wage jobs can both work and live in Tacoma.

Let’s examine the advantages of a phased-in plan. It is how everyone can benefit and realize having an affordable Home In Tacoma

Kirk Kirkland is a representative of Tahoma Audubon Society and Brett M. Johnson is co-chair of the Sierra Club’s Tatoosh Group of Pierce County. Both are residents of Tacoma.