Birmingham, Alabama, which just eliminated parking mandates citywide, is now more progressive on parking than every city in Washington state except Port Townsend.

Congrats Colorado!

It doesn't get any better than statewide parking reform.

Too bad they had to shrink the radius around transit stops to 1/4-mile to get the votes, but any statewide mandate that preemepts local control on parking is a huge political lift.

Hey #WAleg , we next?

Legalizing small apartment buildings like this on every lot is what all of our cities' leaders should be doing if they are serious about addressing the housing crisis.

Spokane did it!

Reminder:
Join us tomorrow at 4pm at Reuben's in Fremont for wonktastic conversations and tasty beer!

I mean, what two things go together better than that?*

Just try to control yourselves about the injustice of parking mandates, okay?

(*rhetorical)

reubensbrews.com/event/gratitue…

Ahoy Seattle urbanistas, ever get the hankering to drink beer for a good cause?

Come hang out with me and the Sightline Institute nerds at the Fremont Reuben's this Tuesday May 7th, starting at 4pm.

Reuben's will donate $1 to Sightline for every beer sold.

mailchi.mp/sightline/reub…

Yet another example of how parking mandates prioritize storage for cars over homes for people.

Most WA cities still enforce rules like what Bellingham nixed - reform is a big political lift.

A state parking bill could fix it everywhere in one shot.

sightline.org/2024/05/01/bel…

WA's 2024 graduated REET bill (that didn't pass) has the right intent to boost the tax on high-end mansions, but it's flawed because it also applies that elevated tax to apartments buildings.

The thread below explains how a tax like that suppresses apartment construction.

How it started, how it's going: YIMBY Austin edition

therealdeal.com/texas/2024/02/…

Permits for new homes are declining for the the 2nd year in a row in WA (-25%) and metro Seattle (-36%).

State lawmakers can't change interest rates, but this trend should motivate them to keep pushing on zoning reform to allow more homes.

mynorthwest.com/3957505/washin…

Capturing the value of upzones by mandating affordabity is one of those policies that seems justified, but when you unpack it, it's actually deeply flawed.

This great UCLA paper that spells it all out. Reads spot on to me. Does anyone have a convincing rejoinder to it?

The only valid defense of unfunded IZ is political: if it's the only way to get upzones passed, then it may be better than doing nothing.

But for middle housing in Seattle, the state bill eliminated the political challenge to upzoning.

No need to offer MHA as compromise!

What Bryn said:

EXCLUSIVITY SHOULD PAY FOR EXCLUSIVITY

What we have now is 'growth pays for non-growth'