Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Public speakers press Thurston County on housing: supportive housing, anti-discrimination policies and limits on rural growth
Loading...
Summary
Speakers at the April 23 hearing supported rewritten housing policies that expand supportive and transitional housing, enact anti-discrimination measures, and urged the county to limit rural growth to 5 percent over 20 years; others urged caution on detached rural ADUs and clustering.
Several public commenters at the April 23 Thurston County Planning Commission hearing urged adoption of the draft housing chapter's stronger anti-discrimination and supportive-housing provisions and asked the commission to limit new development in rural areas.
Alex Sassoni, a high-school student who identified himself as attending Northwestern High School, said the draft's Objective 2.b and 2.c set important paths for residents who are most vulnerable, including people with disabilities and those exiting homelessness. He praised policy 2.3.1, which proposes a streamlined special-permit process for small residential care facilities, and said the plan's support for nonprofit grant applications, expedited staff reviews and fee waivers would “directly accelerate the creation of emergency and transitional beds.”
Speakers including Phyllis Farrell of the Sierra Club and Paris McCluskey of Christian Climate Action Team urged the commission to adopt the action alternative promoted in the SEIS that would limit rural growth to 5 percent over the next 20 years, focusing new housing in urban growth areas where services and employment exist. Farrell and others argued that limiting rural growth is important for protecting farmland, forests and water resources.
Several commenters opposed allowing detached accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in rural areas. Resident Loretta Sepponen (spelled as presented in the hearing) asked the commission to remove the proposal to allow detached rural ADUs and said attached ADUs and existing farmworker housing options should be sufficient to meet many needs. Sepponen also urged the commission to speed up water conservation actions and move several housing-implementation docket items earlier in the schedule.
Staff confirmed the housing chapter in the draft is a full repeal-and-replace with updated data, housing projections by income level, a land-capacity analysis and an assessment of racially disparate impacts. The commission did not take final votes on housing policies at the hearing; staff and commissioners said additional work sessions will follow to refine the code and implementation docket items.
