In his Oct. 2 guest column, Fred Obee inveighs against the city’s plan to rezone part of the Golf Park, writing that Port Townsend “does not need to set aside more land for …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
We have recently launched a new and improved website. To continue reading, you will need to either log into your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you had an active account on our previous website, then you have an account here. Simply reset your password to regain access to your account.
If you did not have an account on our previous website, but are a current print subscriber, click here to set up your website account.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
* Having trouble? Call our circulation department at 360-385-2900, or email our support.
Please log in to continue |
|
In his Oct. 2 guest column, Fred Obee inveighs against the city’s plan to rezone part of the Golf Park, writing that Port Townsend “does not need to set aside more land for residential development” and that “the Golf Park land is not needed for development.”
As he correctly points out, there is — on paper — more than enough land zoned residential to accommodate population growth projections. Unfortunately, that is a meaningless statistic. Port Townsend has always had sufficient residentially zoned land, but that has not been enough to prevent or treat a virulent housing crisis that has made Jefferson County the second most unaffordable county in a state that is ninth worst, nationwide, for affordable housing supply.
Because he focuses on a crude measure of available land, his argument against redevelopment of the golf course is wrongheaded. Not all land is equal. The overwhelming majority is privately owned, and vastly varies on how close it is to services and infrastructure, or in terms of its physical suitability. Obee claims that “numerous single-family lots on utility lines” can accommodate hundreds of housing units, a point that at least recognizes that not all zoning is identical, but — besides being vague as to quantity and ignoring the need for multifamily housing — is silent on all other aspects of development criteria.
In the case of the Golf Park land, not only is it eminently developable compared to most places zoned residential, it is owned by the city. Private development has not been enough to create the affordable, multifamily housing that is most sorely needed. I take the view that almost any housing construction is better than nothing, but, by rezoning land it owns, the city can guide it in a way that better serves the public interest than another tract of $800,000 single family homes with $4,000 mortgage payments.
Obee also asks how, regarding the Golf Park, Mayor David Faber knows “where future developers will construct their buildings?” My — admittedly amateur — understanding is that whoever owns land gets a pretty strong say in where a building gets built on it.
In this case, that would be the City of Port Townsend.
Trent Diamanti
Port Townsend
