The purpose of this position paper is to offer considerations for contemplation and discussion to the Edmonds Housing Commission, Edmonds City Council, and Edmonds Mayor.  The Alliance of Citizens for Edmonds (ACE) was created by concerned residents in 2004.  ACE supports responsible housing development which respects and complements the small-town atmosphere and generally low-level architecture of Edmonds.

Understanding that the Covid-19 crisis has greatly impacted the ability of the Housing Commissioners to meet, we recognize that work has been progressing insofar as is possible.  As Commission work continues, ACE recommends strong consideration of the following points: 

• The Housing Commission can best provide guidance regarding affordable housing options in a considered and organic manner.  Growth in Edmonds is currently occurring even without specific recommendations by or from the Commission.  This current growth abides by long-established zoning and building codes that have served Edmonds residents well for many years.  Any changes to these codes should be envisioned only in keeping with how Edmonds will look and feel as a result.
• We encourage Housing Commissioners to control the process.  Commissioners should determine what expertise and information they need rather than being led down a pre-determined path by City staff or paid consultants.
• Our hope is for the City to hear more from average citizens in Edmonds than from consultants and special interest groups.  Let’s improve opportunities to provide ideas and input to the Commission.  Being able to provide input only electronically greatly limits this dialogue.
• The City of Edmonds can and should look at housing affordability. However, residents should fully understand local housing needs and possible solutions before rushing to make broad changes to existing zoning and building codes. This will take time. And there are limits to what the City can and should do to address affordability issues. Market forces, for example, are not something Edmonds can control. Abandon the concept that everyone who works in Edmonds should be able to live in Edmonds.  This is an unrealistic and unnecessary goal.  It is an error to believe it is hardship to commute to one’s place of employment.
• Accept that the City of Edmonds has and continues to meet its projections for the Growth Management Act.
• We should not be apologetic about seeking to preserve Edmonds’ aesthetic appeal including the distinct charm of the downtown, the views of the Puget Sound and mountains that everyone can enjoy, residents and visitors alike. We should aim to maintain a sense of building scale as well as a livable density with lessons learned from neighborhoods being lost in Ballard, Kirkland and several other areas.
• Edmonds, unlike many places in the Puget Sound region, enjoys a unique sense of community – livable, walkable and scaled neighborhoods. Zoning and building codes help support and sustain this sense of community. Let’s not sacrifice quality-of-life in Edmonds merely for the sake of seeking to race toward expanding concepts of affordable housing.
• How might Edmonds best look at possible changes?
  • Identify, with full community input, those areas where new affordable housing development might best be placed, including higher-density and higher building heights. Possibilities include accurately identified heavier transit corridors closest to public transportation where amenities such as grocery stores, banks, medical facilities, etc. are readily available.
  • Plan for overall growth, not just housing growth. Include studies of traffic growth, pedestrian access and safety. 
  • Avoid the rush to change neighborhoods with Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) thinking these automatically equate to affordable housing. Some are currently allowed in some areas within the Edmonds codes. If zoning for ADUs is to be expanded, we need to consider the negative impacts on neighborhoods with increased traffic and parking. Edmonds must at least require one or more off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit. Limit the number of ADUs on any one parcel. Require the owner to live on-site.
  • The whole concept of Detached Accessory Dwelling Units (DADUs) in Edmonds needs much further evaluation. Most residential neighborhoods simply are not suited to transformation into smaller lot sized multi-family housing areas.
  • Explore possibilities of comprehensive architectural design plans in different areas of Edmonds where design themes might help add to “sense of place” and community identity.
  • Review the status of Multi-Family Tax Exemptions. MFTEs have been portrayed as costing the City of Edmonds ‘net-zero’.  However, ACE has requested and has yet to see any cost-benefit analysis done by the City. What have MFTEs actually cost the City in lost tax revenue? And how successful have these been for expanding housing affordability? The City must put a moratorium on new MFTEs until this evaluation is completed.
  • The City should envision other creative thinking towards supporting housing affordability. Why not evaluate expanding Section 8 housing support? Other options?
  •  The City should continue to be mindful of the property tax burden on homeowners and look for ways to avoid pricing current residents out of living in their own homes.