I’m on an email distribution list for the Master Builder’s Association and their political action committee (PAC) whereby I receive all kinds of information about issues that matter to the MBA. Most of the time this means topics that impact the costs of developing and building and what local cities are doing to make it harder or more expensive for builders to do business. This item came up in yesterday’s email.
“Word has come forward that Normandy Park has denied further discussion of downzoning lots below 15,000 sqft with the developer who originally proposed 7,200 sqft and 9,000 sqft lots (both denied) on a buildable 3.6 acre parcel in the city. The developer and Futurewise have appealed Normandy Park all the way to the Supreme Court, which now appears the only option to force Normandy Park to accept density. The Growth Board ruled against Normandy Park two years ago for not meeting growth demands, but a Superior Court Judge overturned that decision.The MBA is considering a brief to support the developer in his push for smaller lots and more density.”
I like Normandy Park and I can understand why they may not want to join in on the movement toward higher density, but like Kirkland, they are being a bit “arrogant” as the MBA calls them (the title to this article was “Normandy Park remains arrogant”) in that they somehow don’t see why they need to participate in the Growth Management Act mandates that all cities are to implement with respect to growth and developing more density to minimize uncontrolled sprawl.
Readers, what do you think? Should Normandy Park get away with ignoring GMA mandates?
