Regional View Newsletter
October 2002
Glass Apples, Tacoma Museum of Glass
Table of Contents

Proud of a Project in Your Neighborhood?
2003 VISION 2020 Awards Call for Nominations

VISION 2020 Awards recognize inspiring projects, plans, and programs that increase the vitality of the central Puget Sound region.

The Regional Council honors businesses, local governments, and non-profit organizations who do creative work to focus new housing and jobs in urban areas, provide transportation access and mobility, protect our natural environment, and improve the quality of life in the central Puget Sound region.

Award winners will be selected by a committee composed of nine elected officials serving on the Regional Council's Executive and Policy Boards, and two regional experts. The awards will be presented at the Regional Council's General Assembly in March 2003.

Help recognize great work by nominating exceptional efforts for the 2003 VISION 2020 Awards.

Award nomination materials are available on the Regional Council's Web site, psrc.org, or by calling Michele Leslie at 206-587-4819, mleslie@psrc.org.

Back to top


Destination 2030 logo
Wins "Outstanding Project" Award

The region's long-range transportation plan, Destination 2030, has picked up another prestigious award. The latest is from the Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations, which each year honors outstanding organizations, people and projects most effective in implementing federal transportation policies embodied in TEA-21 and ISTEA.

Sidewalk Cafe, City of Everett "Adopting a long-range plan is the most fundamental responsibility of an MPO. Puget Sound's document and communication tools should be a model for us all," said AMPO of Destination 2030 at its annual meeting in Los Angeles.

There are 340 MPOs in the nation. The Regional Council, along with the Bay Area's MTC, was singled out among the nation's large MPOs for outstanding achievements and projects this past year. Destination 2030 was picked "Outstanding Project," bringing the Regional Council the award for technical merit.

For more information about Destination 2030, check out psrc.org or call the Information Center at 206-464-7532.

Assessing the Effectiveness of Concurrency - Phase II

The Regional Council has just published Assessing the Effectiveness of Concurrency: Phase II -- Analysis of Practices, which examines transportation concurrency programs from a selected group of jurisdictions. This follows a previous report that included a comprehensive inventory of concurrency programs in the region.

Some of the major findings of the report include:
  • No Two Programs Are The Same. Jurisdictions' programs vary widely with significant differences in the administrative details, and, perhaps more importantly, differences in the program objectives. Some see it as a growth management tool and others as a funding tool.
  • The Tool Is Being Used Cautiously. Jurisdictions are balancing their concurrency program with other goals, meaning they are not aggressively seeking to focus growth through tailoring the standard, nor are they requiring growth to pay its "fair share," with few collecting even half of the rate they calculate it will cost to serve the new development.
  • Innovations Are Occurring. While cautious, jurisdictions are finding innovative ways to solve problems. Some are focusing growth by changing how they measure congestion or by reducing concurrency requirements. Some are building projects by implementing concurrency through impact fees. Some are supporting those uses important to them -- such as daycares, libraries, transit stations, or even outdoor cafes -- through the granting of exemptions. Some are addressing pass-through traffic by using different standards for peak versus non-peak hours.
  • The Choice of a Measurement System Is Key. Concurrency is almost exclusively an automotive measurement system. This can greatly affect mitigations and infrastructure planning. Jurisdictions are reconsidering their programs in order to avoid having concurrency control the capital facility plan.
  • Multimodal Approaches Are Limited. While many jurisdictions do allow for mitigations that support other transportation modes, and some authorize trip reduction credits for demand management, rarely is the presence of alternative modes used as a factor in what standard is adopted, and never do jurisdictions use a wholly separate standard for areas with high levels of transit service.
  • Limited Coordination Is Occurring. Programs focus almost exclusively on the local impacts of development. Therefore, all impacts that occur geographically distant (or on another jurisdiction's or agency's facilities) from a proposed development are essentially ignored. A number of participants indicated that a role exists for regional and perhaps state agencies to help address cross-boundary issues and mitigations for local and regional facilities.

These findings provide a foundation for developing recommendations for how local governments can use the existing concurrency tool. The findings also provide the framework for considering where regional policy and/or state law can be enhanced to provide greater clarity and direction. On November 13, the Regional Council will be hosting a hands-on workshop to consider possible local, regional, and statewide recommendations.

For more information, contact Ivan Miller at 206-464-7549 or imiller@psrc.org or visit our Web site at psrc.org/projects/growth/concur/reports.htm.


Regional Council Pilots New Web Based Map to Highlight Transportation Projects

In September, the Regional Council launched a new Web based mapping application to highlight the proposed transportation projects included in the Draft 2003-2005 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).

Visitors to the Web map can view transportation projects in proximity to their home or individual commute and find information about the proposed phases of the projects, funding amounts, and funding sources. Visitors can also use the map to comment on the projects. View the Web map at psrc.org.

Web Based Map demonstration

If the pilot project is successful, the Regional Council intends to expand the information available through the map to include all current TIP projects. A map featuring completed projects that received funding through the Regional Council could include pictures and other graphics.

For more information contact, Kelly McGourty at 206-464-7892 or kmcgourty@psrc.org.


Puget Sound Trends logo
Changes in Housing Affordability

Homeownership costs changed considerably throughout the central Puget Sound region between 1990 and 2000. A key measure of housing affordability is the proportion of household income that is required to pay for rent or homeownership costs. Federal and state guidelines have established the threshold of affordability at 30% of gross income devoted to housing costs (rent and/or homeownership costs plus utilities).

Data from the 1990 and 2000 U.S. Censuses indicate that a substantially larger portion of homeowners' incomes was devoted to the costs of owning a home in 2000 than in 1990. In 1990, 54.9% of homeowners reported spending less than 20% of their monthly income on ownership costs, while 17.8% spent 30% or more of their earnings on such costs. By 2000, the proportion of homeowners spending less then 20% had decreased to 44.2% and the homeowners in the 30% or more bracket had increased to 27.5%. In other words, the proportion of homeowners spending a moderate proportion of their income on homeownership costs had decreased by ten percentage points, while the group devoting larger portions of its income to housing increased by ten percentage points.


Percentage of Income Spent on Homeownership Costs, Central Puget Sound Region, 1990 and 2000

Percentage of Income Spent on Homeownership Costs, Central Puget Sound Region, 1990 and 2000


Housing Costs Increased Faster Than Incomes

The primary reason for this shift is that growth in housing costs substantially outpaced income growth during the decade. Each area mentioned on in this Trend saw a much faster increase in housing costs than in income. In some places, real income actually fell.

When adjusted for inflation using the regional CPI, the median incomes for King, Kitsap, Pierce and Snohomish Counties changed by 3.4%, 2.9%, 4.6%, and 1.4%, respectively. However, ownership costs increased across the board at a much faster pace. Among the counties, the greatest percentage increase in adjusted median ownership costs for mortgaged homes was in King County, which had an increase rate of 25.0%. Other increases in owner costs were 18.4% for Kitsap County, 24.3% for Pierce County, and 23.2% for Snohomish County.

Change in Median Household Income, 1989-99 vs. Change in Median Homeownership Costs,
1990-2000

Change in Median Household Income, 1989-99 vs Change in Median Homeownershp Costs, 1990-2000

Among five major cities in the region -- Bellevue, Bremerton, Everett, Seattle, and Tacoma -- the trend looks similar, with a few twists. Inflation-adjusted ownership costs rose across the board, ranging between 17.7% (Bellevue) to 31.9% (Seattle). Seattle experienced the sharpest increase in ownership costs by far, but also saw a much larger leap (9.7%) in median income than any other city. Bremerton, on the other hand, showed a slightly different combination of trends. Although it reported the second-lowest increase in ownership costs among the cities (19.7%), Bremerton also had a drop in real income of 3.6%. Everett also showed a slight drop in median income of 0.7%. However, it posted the second highest percentage increase in housing costs (26.2%). The full version of this Trend is available on the Regional Council Web site at psrc.org, or by calling the Information Center at 206-464-7532. For questions regarding this article, contact Chris Peak at 206-464-7536 or cpeak@psrc.org.

Information Center logo
206-464-7532 - FAX 206-587-4825 - infoctr@psrc.org

Sign language and communication material in alternative formats can be arranged given sufficient notice by calling Grace Foster at 206-464-7090. TDD\TTY; 206-464-5409. Funding for this newsletter provided in part by member jurisdictions, grants from U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Federal Highway Administration and Washington State Department of Transportation. PSRC fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes and regulations in all programs and activities. For more information, or to obtain a Title VI Complaint Form, see http://www.psrc.org/about/titlevi/index.htm, or call 206-464-6175.

Back Issues
September 2002 | August 2002 | July 2002 | June 2002 | May 2002 | April 2002 | March 2002 |
February 2002 | January 2002 | December 2001 | November 2001 | October 2001