Gig Harbor: High-Density Residential Development
Gig Harbor's overdue 2044 Comprehensive Plan update is grappling with the state mandate to accommodate moderate to low-income housing, necessitating a shift towards higher-density residential development. This requirement pushes the city to enable developers to create 662 new homes, with over half affordable to those with moderate to low incomes. To achieve this, the plan proposes significant upzones, notably a fivefold increase in density on a 13-acre parcel in Swede Hill and a similar increase around Point Fosdick and Olympic Drives.
These proposed upzones, particularly the increase to 32 dwelling units per acre from the existing 6, have sparked considerable controversy. Residents, particularly from Henderson Bay Estates and Horizon West, are actively opposing the Swede Hill upzone, citing concerns about increased density in their single-family home neighborhoods. They express "high development fatigue" and worry about the city's proposed density significantly exceeding the surrounding areas.
Conversely, the draft plan's proposed changes for the Village at Harbor Hill, a stalled commercial project, are receiving a more positive response. The plan's shift to a Planned Community Development-Commercial designation, allowing up to 32 housing units per acre, aligns with community suggestions for a mixed-use development, potentially revitalizing the project. However, the developer reiterates that a grocery store anchor is crucial for the project's viability.
The city faces the challenge of balancing state mandates with local concerns. While state law doesn't require Gig Harbor to build affordable housing, it mandates providing development options that encourage such housing. The city's current housing market, dominated by single-family homes, necessitates a shift towards multi-family dwellings. The plan proposes re-zones and adjusts existing zoning designations to allow higher densities, potentially triggering redevelopment of underutilized commercial spaces.
Infrastructure concerns are paramount. Residents and officials alike express worries about increased traffic and strain on existing infrastructure. The city acknowledges these concerns, emphasizing that developers will bear their share of infrastructure costs through impact fees and connection charges. Furthermore, the city highlights that growth will occur regardless of its actions, with surrounding areas contributing to traffic and service usage without paying Gig Harbor property taxes.
The debate centers on balancing growth with preserving community character and ensuring adequate infrastructure. The city contends that accommodating growth within its boundaries allows for a more equitable distribution of infrastructure costs. Gig Harbor's predicament reflects a broader statewide challenge, as cities grapple with state mandates for affordable housing amidst local opposition and infrastructure limitations.