Responsible Development Widens Scope

Frank James, M.D., is a member of the Responsible Development Board of Directors.

The scope of Responsible Development, a local nonprofit organization, by necessity has become much broader than Chuckanut Ridge, for the problems that lead to very poor development projects, e.g., Fairhaven Highlands, ought to be addressed in order to prevent their recurrence here and elsewhere. Over the past year, we have learned what ought to be avoided and thus what should be done. We have learned that we should protect critical habitat, enforce concurrency and require that fair impact fees are charged for new construction. Furthermore there should be a long-range plan in place with a way to pace growth that would discourage and prevent projects like Fairhaven Highlands in the future.

Adequate impact fees have not been charged in the past, which means that present growth will be heavily subsidized by current residents. For example, the city recently voted to require developers to pay only 35 percent of the actual cost of new development’s impact on community parks and open space. That means that the remaining 65 percent must be made up by taxes. If it is not made up, we will do without the parks and open spaces.

The Washington state legislature has recognized, and supported, impact fees to cover the costs of new infrastructure in developing communities. (RCW 82.02.050). Our goal is to insure that the true costs of development are recognized, identified and paid for. We have expended considerable time and expense in professional analysis of the true costs of development and will continue to do so. Impact fees are not generally supported by the local government or the development community. However, in a recent study by the Brookings Institute, impact fees do not constrain growth, nor do they slow job growth. In fact, the study concluded that “impact fees are a practical and valuable tool for financing local infrastructure needs. Without them, growing communities may not be able to sustain growth.”

Present transportation impact fees do not cover the actual cost of new development’s impact on roadways. The alternative to increased taxes is to accept heavier traffic than many roadways were designed to bear and to endure increased traffic congestion and traffic jams. The mayor, who is apparently willing to accept the failure in funding, has recently proposed decreasing the level of service to “F” (“Failure”) at several dozen Bellingham intersections, thus accepting the roadway’s failure to handle its traffic flow. (The final transportation section of the Comprehensive Plan is so convoluted and cumbersome that few are able to see its intent clearly and Responsible Development has asked for legal review.)

We can just do nothing, accept gridlock or take the initiative to require these developers to pay their fair share to maintain our quality of life. We strongly advocate imposing adequate impact fees.

We need to require concurrent infrastructure development for all construction projects. Funding for infrastructure should be in place when construction projects are built.

‘Concurrency’ is a fairly abstract concept but simply means that builders and bankers should provide, in a timely way, the infrastructure needed for the construction they do. Roadways are just one example, but an excellent one. We will be overrun by the traffic generated by these projects unless we clearly enforce the legal mandates that are already in place, with a focus on protecting the community, not maximizing the profit of a few. But it goes far beyond roadways. Eben Fodor has demonstrated that our level of service will either decline significantly or our taxes will increase significantly unless the cost of services (roads, police, fire, parks, open space, schools, etc.) is borne by those who demand them by moving here.

Bellingham and Whatcom County should implement a building permit allocation process that can pace growth over 20 years and set priorities for the types of development the community values.

This will insure a balanced approach to construction over time that will prevent boom and bust cycles, such as we have experienced in the logging and fishing industries, and be tiered to allow the community to set priorities for types of developments, e.g., adequate numbers of variably priced homes in the community. See “Building Permit Allocation” on facing page.

An effort should be made to preserve critical habitats in the city and county and to identify priority lands for preservation by objective scientific evaluations.

Twenty-eight Habitats of Local Significance have already been identified in our town and there are others that need to be identified in our region. Not surprisingly Chuckanut Ridge is one of these significant habitats. We need to work hard to have these critical areas protected before development plans are made and the loggers and bulldozers show up.

Responsible Development believes that we will best serve the larger community by focusing on developing the tools to preserve our quality of life in all areas of our bioregion. We plan to invite each of the other ‘hot spot’ areas to join our group as working subcommittees and to offer Web space and e-mail list management to them.

We recognize that if we seek to preserve the quality of life in all areas of our bioregion, a broader community coalition will be needed to empower others to do preservation work in all parts of the county. §