HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-12-11 Planning Board PacketAgenda
Edmonds Planning Board
REGULAR MEETING
BRACKETT ROOM
121 5TH AVE N, CITY HALL - 3RD FLOOR, EDMONDS, WA 98020
DECEMBER 11, 2024, 7:00 PM
Edmonds Planning Board Agenda
December 11, 2024
Page 1
REMOTE MEETING INFORMATION:
Meeting Link:https://edmondswa-
gov.zoom.us/s/87322872194?pwd=WFdxTWJIQmxITG9LZkc3K0huS0l4QT09 Meeting ID: 873 2287
2194 Passcode:007978
This is a Hybrid meeting: The meeting can be attended in-person or on-line. The physcial
meeting location is at Edmonds City Hall 121 5th Avenue N., 3rd floor Brackett Rooom
Or Telephone :US: +1 253 215 8782
LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and
their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and
taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we
honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Previous Meeting Minutes
3. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA
4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
For topics not scheduled for a public hearing. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes.
5. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Development Code Update Project Overview
8. NEW BUSINESS
9. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
10. PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA
A. Extended Agenda
Edmonds Planning Board Agenda
December 11, 2024
Page 2
11. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
12. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS
13. ADJOURNMENT
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 12/11/2024
Previous Meeting Minutes
Staff Lead: Mike Clugston
Department: Planning & Development
Prepared By: Michelle Martin
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Review and approve minutes from the 11/25/2024 Special Meeting. Revisions to the October 23 and
November 13 draft minutes will be included for review in the next packet.
Narrative
Minutes draft attached.
Attachments:
November 25 Special meeting draft minutes
2.A
Packet Pg. 3
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
November 25, 2024 Page 1 of 5
DRAFT CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD
Minutes of Special Hybrid Meeting November 25, 2024
Chair Mitchell called the hybrid meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. at Edmonds City
Hall and on Zoom.
LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
The Land Acknowledgement was read by Board Member Hankins.
Board Members Present
Jeremy Mitchell, Chair
Lauren Golembiewski, Vice Chair
George Bennett (alternate)
Lee Hankins
Nick Maxwell
Steven Li
Jon Milkey
Board Members Absent
Judi Gladstone
Isaac Fortin, Student Rep.
Staff Present
Shane Hope, Planning & Development Director
Mike Clugston, Planning Manager
Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer
Patrick Lynch, AICP, Principal, Transpo Group
Paul Sharman, Project Manager, Transpo Group
READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR GOLEMBIEWSKI TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF
OCTOBER 9, 2024 AS PRESENTED, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER LI. HOWEVER, A
DISCUSSION WAS HELD TO DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS.
• The last item in the Utilities Draft Elements discussing reducing greenhouse gas emissions should be
made clear that this is to be accomplished by 2029.
• In the Culture, History, and Urban Design Draft Element, the last item discusses investing in the new
generation of artists. It was suggested that this should be removed.
BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL MADE A MOTION TO REMOVE THE REFERENCE TO
SUPPORTING THE NEXT GENERATION OF ARTISTS, AND NOTING THAT THE CLIMATE
ELEMENT REQUIREMENTS ARE FOR THE 2029 UPDATE. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY
BOARD MEMBER WILKEY AND WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
It was then brought up that at the September 25th meeting, it was discussed whether the engineering budget was
based on the previous comp plan and previous DEIs as opposed to this current draft one. The response from
2.A.a
Packet Pg. 4
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
d
r
a
f
t
m
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
P
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
November 25, 2024 Page 2 of 5
staff had been that once the board determines what the preferred alternative plan was going to be, that would be
updated, so the draft comp plan is based on the prior 2020 plan.
MOTION MADE BY JOHN WILKEY TO ADD THIS TO THE OCTOBER 9TH MINUTES, WHICH
WAS SECONDED AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
It was brought up that the hope had been to have both the October 9th and November 11th minutes as bookends.
It was also requested to include the conversation that was on the previous minutes' iteration for the October 9th
minutes that included a paragraph about one of their concerns, which was a reason why they didn't approve the
October 9th minutes previously. It was requested that that information be put back into the October 9th minutes.
It was discussed that although the bullet-point list is preferred to the lengthy prior minutes draft, it was
recommended that there be an introduction to the bullet-point sections to reflect that these were the board's
comments on what was presented to them by staff, some sort of context for where the lists came from, for
example, "The following comments are statements made by board members in review of the draft plan." It was
discussed that this did not need to be amended, just to include same going forward.
VICE CHAIR GOLEMBIEWSKI MOVED TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 17TH MINUTES AS
PRESENTED, WHICH WAS SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER LI. HOWEVER, DISCUSSION
WAS HELD REGARDING THE FOLLOWING ITEMS.
• In the last item in the Land Use Elements, "dismissed" should say "discussed."
• The second part of the sentence, "but overall they are different in scale, density, height differences,"
should be removed.
MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL TO AMEND THE MINUTES TO STATE,
"ALTERNATIVE A AND ALTERNATIVE B TO BE DISCUSSED AT THE NEXT BOARD
MEETING." MOTION WAS SECONDED AND UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
BOARD MEMBER WILKEY MADE A MOTION FOR THE MINUTES TO REFLECT THAT HE
DID NOT READ THE LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT AT THE OCTOBER 17TH MEETING.
BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL STATED THAT HE BELIEVES HE READ IT. BOARD VICE
CHAIR GOLEMBIEWSKI SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
WITH THAT, THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 17TH WERE APPROVED AS AMENDED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA
THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED.
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
None.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
2.A.a
Packet Pg. 5
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
d
r
a
f
t
m
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
P
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
November 25, 2024 Page 3 of 5
None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Review of Revised Draft Transportation Element with Project List
Bernard Hauss, Patrick Lynch, and Paul Sharman presented the draft to the board. The following are questions
and comments made by board members.
• It was asked regarding the method of analysis for vehicle level of service if the industry standard
measurement was used. Staff responded yes, and the study was done in spring of 2024.
• It was discussed if Edmonds' shortfall estimate is comparable to nearby cities. Staff advised that almost
everyone will have a shortfall, and Edmonds' gap is not unusual.
• It was discussed if removing the revenue sources from the general fund would affect the overall budget,
as it is about 5 percent of the total. It was discussed that the contribution to maintenance and operations
is fairly large at 16 percent, and a lot of the funds from capital revenues can't be spent on maintenance
and operations and vice versa.
• Staff confirmed that the integrated priority list did take into account the preferred growth alternative that
had been selected and approved by the City Council.
• There was a question regarding prioritization of projects and how does access to funds not end up as a
priority. Staff stated that the priorities listed are a guide and can change based on availability of grant
money, et cetera. All considered projects have to be on this list in order to qualify for grants.
• The Perrinville intersection, not currently on the priority list, will be revisited and looked at in more
detail by staff.
• It was asked how this affects development code for private development on these corridors that are
going to receive multiuse. The limits will be looked at by staff.
• There was a discussion regarding the fountain on 5th and Main and whether or not it is a roundabout,
since there is a four-way stop. This is an ongoing discussion, but the main issue is pedestrian safety.
• It was mentioned that although the priority list states that there are four intersections identified on page
51 of the master plan, only one is shown on the project map on page 36.
• There was a discussion on whether there is any level of deferred maintenance possible and what that
would do to the budget. Staff stated that it is possible that that could hurt their chances of receiving
grant funds because they wouldn't have a local match.
B. Recommendation for Revised Draft Comprehensive Plan
Mike Clugston presented the draft to the board. The following are questions and comments by board members.
• It was asked by the board if the future land use map could be enlarged by quadrants to make it easier to
read the maps. Staff confirmed that it could be broken out to make it easier to read.
2.A.a
Packet Pg. 6
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
d
r
a
f
t
m
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
P
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
November 25, 2024 Page 4 of 5
• There was a question regarding what happens if the board does not make a recommendation at this
meeting. Staff advised that there is a special board meeting on December 4th to further discuss the
recommendation.
• It was discussed that the intent of a comp plan isn't to be perfect. It's supposed to be forward thinking
and provide a degree of flexibility. Most of the items have been presented and discussed several times.
It is a living document and can be changed as needed.
• It was discussed that a summary of changes between the first draft and the current draft would have
been helpful.
• It was brought up that in a housing commission survey, 64 percent of the residents said that they did not
want changes to the residential zoning, and there are major changes in residential zoning that's written
into the future land use map. Ms. Hope advised that perhaps there is more detail than there should be,
and changes that need to be considered further, and she would like to go back and look at it. She stated
that the intent was to recognize that the standard single family zoning for a lot may not stay the same
once the zoning code gets changed. She recommended that she take another look at the land use map
and perhaps have the draft approved with changes to the land use map or perhaps have a special meeting.
• There was a preference that the whole draft plan be submitted to Council after the special meeting on
the 4th rather than sending it in two parts.
THERE WAS A MOTION TO TABLE THE RECOMMENDATION TO DECEMBER 4TH AS A
SPECIAL MEETING WITH THE REVISED FUTURE LAND USE MAP BY STAFF AND THE
DESIGNATIONS.
However, there was further discussion before this was voted on.
• It was requested that there be a summary of changes made to make it easier to see the changes.
• It was also discussed that the demographic analysis hadn't been introduced to them before. Ms. Hope
advised that this is not new, but had been provided as background information. There were changes to
the alternatives, with all the options moving to an appendix to keep the draft plan cleaner. The
community engagement appendix is also new.
• There were also a few policies amended, in part reflecting comments from Council or the planning
board, but really more of a refinement, other than the Council's request about municipal urban growth
area boundaries.
• There was discussion that the Edmonds Environmental Council had written up a proposal for
incorporation into the comp plan, seeking clarification if that would be incorporated. Ms. Hope advised
that this was discussed at the Council meeting tonight to respond. For example, critical areas are
environmentally sensitive areas, and there are regulations to protect them. Staff has to go back to revisit
regulations and perhaps strengthen them or revise them based on best available science by the end of
2025.
THE MOTION TO TABLE THE RECOMMENDATION TO DECEMBER 4TH AS A SPECIAL
MEETING WITH THE REVISED FUTURE LAND USE MAP BY STAFF AND THE
DESIGNATIONS WAS SECONDED AND THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
NEW BUSINESS
None.
2.A.a
Packet Pg. 7
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
d
r
a
f
t
m
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
P
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
November 25, 2024 Page 5 of 5
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
None.
PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA
Special meeting on December 4th at 6:30 p.m. to go over the changes to the Draft Plan based on tonight's
discussion and recommendations. There is a meeting scheduled for December 16th, as well.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
None.
PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS
None.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 9:13 p.m.
2.A.a
Packet Pg. 8
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
d
r
a
f
t
m
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
P
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 12/11/2024
Development Code Update Project Overview
Staff Lead: Brad Shipley
Department: Planning Division
Prepared By: Brad Shipley
Background/History
This agenda item initiates the process of updating the City’s development code, aligning with key
objectives of the updated Comprehensive Plan. The plan emphasizes thoughtful growth that integrates
land use, transportation, and community amenities to promote sustainable, inclusive development.
Goals of the plan include expanding housing diversity, preserving/enhancing community character, and
ensuring environmental stewardship through well-designed, livable spaces.
State law mandates that cities adopt middle housing provisions by July 1, 2025, or within six months of
their comprehensive plan update deadline. Non-compliance results in pre-emption by the Department
of Commerce’s Model Housing Ordinance (Att. 1). Requirements include an expansion of housing types
and housing affordability levels, streamlined permitting processes, anti -displacement measures, and
transit-oriented development strategies.
The update will be implemented in two phases. Phase 1 concludes by July 1, 2025, focusing on
immediate compliance with state mandates. Phase 2, ending December 31, 2025, will refine these
measures, ensuring alignment with goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, and addressing any
state requirements due by end of 2025.
Staff Recommendation
Consider and discuss the proposed development code update process.
Narrative
A structured approach to updating the City’s development codes is proposed to meeting state
requirements and to advance the goals and policies of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan. The update aims
to address legislative mandates for middle housing, enhance housing affordability and diversity, and
align zoning standards with the city’s long-term vision.
State Requirements
Washington’s legislative updates require Tier 2 cities, such as Edmonds, to adopt development codes
that support middle housing and other housing strategies by July 1, 2025.
A partial list of legislation to implement includes:
7.A
Packet Pg. 9
· E2SHB 1110: Requires fully planning cities like Edmonds to allow for expanded housing choices
by allowing at least two housing units per lot and six of nine middle housing building types, as
identified in the legislation, within all residentially-zoned areas, unless existing zoning permits
higher densities than what can be achieved through middle housing. If the City does not adopt
compliant middle housing language by July 1, 2025, the model Middle Housing ordinance
created by the Department of Commerce will immediately take effect.
· HB 1293: Requires the City to use only clear and objective design standards for the exterior of
development projects. In addition, no design review process may include more than one public
meeting.
· HB 1220: Requires the City to plan for housing that is affordable for a range of income levels.
Cities are required to identify local policies and regulations that result in racially disparate
impacts, displacement, and exclusion. This will need to include adequate opportunities for to
meet growth targets, including supportive and multifamily housing, consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies
The 2024 Comprehensive Plan prioritizes managing future growth through:
· Expanding housing choices and affordability
· Preserving community character while enhancing livability
· Promoting mixed-use development in neighborhood hubs and centers
· Incorporating climate resilience and pedestrian-friendly infrastructure
Project Timeline
A detailed timeline is being developed. However, there are two key phases to keep in mind:
Phase 1
· Development regulations required by the Growth Management Act by July 1, 2025
Phase 2
· Co-housing living regulations, due by December 31.2025
· Allowing conversion of commercial buildings to residential, due by December 31, 2025
· Review and update of critical area regulations by December 31, 2025
Attachments:
Att. 1: Middle Housing Model Ordinance
Att. 2: HB1110_FAQ
Att. 3: Excerpt_HousingLaws_2019thru2024
7.A
Packet Pg. 10
1 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023
V3.1
Revised July 2023
Middle Housing in Washington:
Fact Sheet for Implementing E2SHB 1110
Topics
APPLICABILITY ................................................................................................................................................................... 2
DESIGN AND DENSITY ....................................................................................................................................................... 3
LOT SPLITS AND SUBDIVISION .......................................................................................................................................... 4
TRANSIT STOPS AND PARKING ......................................................................................................................................... 4
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS: ................................................................................................................................................. 5
In 2023, the Washington State Legislature passed E2SHB 1110 (“HB 1110”), which substantially changes the way many cities in
Washington are to plan for housing. HB 1110 requires cities of certain sizes and locations to allow multiple dwelling units per lot in a
middle housing type of form. Commerce is collecting questions from local governments about the bill and other related legislation
passed this session, and has answered certain questions received below, with more to follow. If you have additional questions or
need for technical assistance, please email dave.osaki@commerce.wa.gov or Anne.Fritzel@commerce.wa.gov.
What is middle housing? HB 1110 defines "Middle housing" as “buildings that are compatible in scale, form, and character with
single-family houses and contain two or more attached, stacked, or clustered homes including duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes,
fiveplexes, sixplexes, townhouses, stacked flats, courtyard apartments, and cottage housing.”
What types of assistance will be coming from Commerce?
Model ordinances: Commerce is directed under the HB 1110 to publish model ordinances no later than six months following the
effective date of the bill, which will be in January of 2024. Stakeholders will be notified of the opportunity to review drafts of the
model middle housing ordinances in the fall of 2023 and invited to provide comment.
Grant program: Commerce will offer a statewide competitive grant program in the 2023-2025 biennium to help jurisdictions
implement the bill’s requirements. All grant funds must be expended by June of 2025.
Continuing guidance from Commerce: Commerce has already developed a web page on middle housing, which includes tools
such as PowerPoint presentations, photos, posters, and will include objective design standards, and a pro-forma calculator that
local governments can use to communicate about middle housing.1 Commerce will also be developing the following to
implement the middle housing legislation:
Middle housing model ordinances and guidance on the requirements
Rules for a process by which cities may seek Commerce approval of an alternative local action necessary to meet the
requirements of the bill.2
1 www.commerce.wa.gov/serving-communities/growth-management/growth-management-topics/planning-for-middle-housing/
2 See E2SHB 1110, Sec. 4(3)
HOUSING DIVISION GROWTH MANAGEMENT SERVICES
7.A.a
Packet Pg. 11
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
1
:
M
i
d
d
l
e
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
M
o
d
e
l
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
[
R
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
1
]
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
2 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023
V3.1
Standards and procedures for Commerce to use when processing a city request to extend the date by when middle
housing rules must be applied, when and where certain criteria apply.
Guidance to assist cities on preparing a parking study.3
Possible changes to land capacity and buildable lands guidance to address units per lot density requirements.
APPLICABILITY
What are cities required to do? Table 1 below summarizes the middle housing requirements that apply to cities in each of the three
population tiers established by HB 1110.4 Commerce will provide more detail in the coming year on requirements of the bill and
implementation tools.
Table 1: Basic requirements for cities subject to the HB 1110 in the 2024-2027 periodic update.
Minimum number of
middle housing units that
must be allowed per lot in
predominately residential
zones
NEAR A MAJOR TRANSIT
STOP: Minimum number of
middle housing units that
must be allowed per lot
within ¼ mile walking
distance of major transit stop
in predominately residential
zones
WITH AFFORDABLE
HOUSING: Minimum
number of middle housing
units that must be allowed
per lot with affordable
housing in predominately
residential zones where
density in applicable zone
does not otherwise allow
this number (See also HB
1110, Sec. 3(2))
TIER ONE: Cities with
population of at least 75,000
E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(1)(b)
4 du/lot, unless zoning
permits higher densities
6 du/ lot, unless zoning
permits higher densities
6 du/lot if at least 2 units
are affordable, unless
zoning permits higher
densities
TIER TWO: Cities with
population of at least
25,000 but less than 75,000
E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(1)(a)
2 du/lot unless zoning
permits higher densities
4 du/lot, unless zoning
permits higher densities
4 du/lot if at least 1 unit is
affordable, unless zoning
permits higher densities
TIER THREE: Cities with
population under 25,000
that are contiguous with a
UGA that includes the
largest city in a county with
a population over 275,000
E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(1)(c)
2 du/lot, unless zoning
permits higher densities
N/A N/A
Which cities are required to allow middle housing? Over the 2024-2027 periodic update cycle, cities of at least 25,000 in population
must allow middle housing, as well as cities with a population less than 25,000 in a county of over 275,000 population and which are
within a contiguous urban growth area that includes the largest city in the county. Table 2, at the end of the document, identifies
3 See E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(7)(a)
4 E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(11)(a) requires use of the Washington State Office of Financial Management’s 2020 April 1 population data.
https://ofm.wa.gov/washington-data-research/population-demographics/population-estimates
7.A.a
Packet Pg. 12
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
1
:
M
i
d
d
l
e
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
M
o
d
e
l
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
[
R
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
1
]
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
3 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023
V3.1
cities currently subject to the requirements of HB 1110, based on 2020 Office of Financial Management population data, and
Commerce’s best understanding.5
When does a local government need to allow middle housing? Cities subject to the bill must implement the requirements no later
than six months after their next periodic update required under RCW 36.70A.130. Cities in the central Puget Sound region (within
King, Kitsap, Snohomish and Pierce counties) have the earliest periodic review deadline, on December 31, 2024, which means that
they must implement the bill by June 30, 2025. Additional cities may be added to this list over time or moved to the next tier, should
they meet the population threshold in future years. Commerce recommends cities look ahead to when their population might meet
the thresholds in the bill and be prepared to meet the requirement, if applicable, within 12 months after their next implementation
progress report required under RCW 36.70A.130.6
DESIGN AND DENSITY
What does E2SHB 1110 mean when it uses the term “density”? “Density” measured in “dwelling units per acre” has traditionally
been the way that zoning ordinances have regulated residential land use. HB 1110 introduces the term “unit density” because the
bill focuses instead on the minimum number of dwelling units on a lot, not on a per acre basis. Local jurisdictions may need to
review and amend comprehensive plan policies and development regulations to take this into consideration, at least for
accommodating middle housing.
How can cities adopt design and development standards that reflect differences between detached single-unit houses and
“middle housing” types? One way to adopt design and development standards that reflect differences between detached single-
unit houses and “middle housing” types is to adopt standards for middle housing that are less restrictive than existing standards
required for detached single-family residences. Because HB 1110 Section (6)(b) states that middle housing regulations may not be
“more restrictive” than for detached single-family residences, there is flexibility for some standards to be less restrictive.7 One
example might be to allow driveway widths that are narrower for certain middle housing types than for a detached house. The less
restrictive standard, however, must still be objective (see further below in a separate question regarding EHB 1293’s objective
development regulations).
An alternate way to adopt design and development standards is through the administrative design review process in HB 1110
Section 3(6)(a). “Administrative design review” is defined, in part, as, “…a development permit process whereby an application is
reviewed, approved, or denied by the planning director or the planning director's designee based solely on objective design and
development standards without a public predecision hearing…”8 Objective design review standards enable a city to adopt those
middle housing specific standards that it deems necessary to achieve compatibility in residential zones where detached single family
houses are the predominant use. These middle housing standards may include design and development standards that are not
existing requirements for a detached single family residence so long as these design and development standards are “objective” and
promote compatibility. The middle housing definition conveys that objective design and development standards are intended to
make middle housing buildings compatible with, not identical to, the scale, form and character of detached single family houses. 9
*NEW* QUESTION JULY 2023: Can a city still have a design review board? While some cities may choose to have a design review
board review certain types of permits, e.g., for commercial development, HB 1110 allows only administrative design review for
middle housing. This means that the planning director or the planning director’s designee must decide based on objective criteria,
and not a design review board.10 Another 2023 bill, ESHB 1293, places constraints on all design review, not just for housing, including
a limitation of no more than one public meeting and the requirement to use only “clear and objective” development regulations.
5 If your city is incorrectly listed or incorrectly omitted, please contact Commerce.
6 E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(11)(b)
7 See E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3 6(a) and 6(b)
8 See E2SHB 1110, Sec. 2(1)
9 See E2SHB 1110, Sec 2(21) "Middle housing" means buildings that are compatible in scale, form, and character with single-family houses and
contain two or more attached, stacked, or clustered homes including duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes, sixplexes, townhouses, stacked
flats, courtyard apartments, and cottage housing.
10 E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(6)(a)
7.A.a
Packet Pg. 13
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
1
:
M
i
d
d
l
e
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
M
o
d
e
l
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
[
R
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
1
]
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
4 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023
V3.1
*NEW* QUESTION JULY 2023 Are cities required to adopt Commerce’s 2023 Objective Design and Development Standards?
No. The standards in the Objective Design and Development Standards Toolkit are provided solely as a resource for cities to
consider at their discretion to provide for middle housing. Commerce will prepare model ordinances by January 2024 specific to HB
1110 requirements.
Given that all cities must allow two accessory dwelling units per lot under HB 1337, how does this harmonize with E2SHB 1110
(middle housing)? HB 1337 (section 4(1)(c)) requires that, within urban growth areas, cities and counties allow two accessory
dwelling units on all lots in zoning districts that allow single-family homes. HB 1110 (section 3(5)), requires that cities allow at least
six of the nine types of middle housing to achieve the required unit count.
A city must allow accessory dwelling units and such units may help achieve the unit count, AND the city also must allow middle
housing types (such as a duplex) that can satisfy the minimum density11 (i.e., unit count per lot). For example, where a city must
allow two or four units per lot, it does not have to increase the unit count to also accommodate two ADUs.12 A city may choose to
allow such a higher count but is not required to do so. Both bills require that a city allow separate sale of units and the land they sit
upon.
*NEW* QUESTION JULY 2023 Is a city required to change the name of zoning districts that include “single-family” (or something
similar) in the title? No. HB 1110 does not require that a new name, be assigned to a zoning district, however, some cities have
chosen to rename their single-family zones. For example, the City of Walla Walla has renamed its previous “single family” zones as
“Neighborhood Residential Zones” which allow both detached and middle housing types. A city that wishes to rename an existing
zoning district, or to create, name, and map a new one, has authority to do so as a legislative action,
LOT SPLITS AND SUBDIVISION
Does HB 1110 require a city to allow subdivision of land into lots smaller than 1,000 square feet and then also require that the city
allow additional units on these small lots? HB 1110 Section 3(6)(g) states, in part, “Any city subject to the requirements of this
section . . . are not required to achieve the …. density under this act on lots after subdivision below 1,000 square feet unless the city
chooses to enact smaller allowable lot sizes.” A city has discretion to allow subdivision of land into lots less than 1,000 square feet
and allow additional units on each of those lots, but is not required to do so. While lots may be subdivided (or even if a lot is not
subdivided), the ability to fully achieve four units per lot, for instance, may be limited by the size of the lot and the application of
development standards such as maximum lot coverage, parking, and setback requirements.
TRANSIT STOPS AND PARKING
*NEW* QUESTION JULY 2023: The middle housing bill requires increases in allowed density within “walking distance of a major
transit stop”. Does this mean distance is to be measured along some reasonable path, such as street network or by a straight line
distance? A city may use a method of measuring walking distance that is not just a straight line distance (although using a straight
line distance is acceptable if a city chooses that method). To measure walking distance typically means to calculate the actual
walking distance of each path (whether sidewalk, street edge, or trail) that connects one location to another. For purposes of HB
1110, this would include measuring the walking distance of each pedestrian route leading from a lot to the lot or specific right of
way location on which a major transit stop is located. This type of measurement can be done using certain computerized mapping
applications. However, it is likely to result in a smaller total area (and not identified by standard shape, such as a circle) on a map
than a simple measurement that radiates equidistant from the major transit stop. For practical reasons, jurisdictions are encouraged
11 E2SHB 1110, Section 3(5) states, “A city must allow at least six of the nine types of middle housing to achieve the unit density required in
subsection (1) of this section. A city may allow accessory dwelling units to achieve the unit density required in subsection (1) of this section. Cities
are not required to allow accessory dwelling units or middle housing types beyond the density requirements in subsection (1) of this section. A city
must also allow zero lot line short subdivision where the number of lots created is equal to the unit density required in subsection (1) of this
section.”
12 E2SHB 1110 and EHB 1337 do not expressly state how to reconcile the different requirements between the two bills for jurisdictions with a two
unit density requirement per lot.
7.A.a
Packet Pg. 14
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
1
:
M
i
d
d
l
e
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
M
o
d
e
l
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
[
R
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
1
]
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
5 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023
V3.1
to define a station area using logical boundaries such as roads, edges of land use designations, or other features to delineate a
logical area.
*NEW* QUESTION July 2023 What is the maximum off-street parking requirement for middle housing on a lot exactly 6,000
square feet in area? E2SHB 1110 Section 3(6)(e) and (f) address off-street parking requirements for middle housing based on lot
size as follows,
“(e) Shall not require more than one off-street parking space per unit as a condition of permitting development of middle
housing on lots smaller than 6,000 square feet before any zero lot line subdivisions or lot splits;
(f) Shall not require more than two off-street parking spaces per unit as a condition of permitting development of middle
housing on lots greater than 6,000 square feet before any zero lot line subdivisions or lot splits;”
A lot exactly 6,000 square feet is not addressed. In instances where a lot is 6,000 square feet, a jurisdiction may specify in its
development regulations whether (6)(e) or (6)(f) will apply. Regardless, fewer parking spaces than the maximum under HB 1110 may
be appropriate in many locations. In general, in this specific situation, Commerce recommends requiring fewer parking spaces to
reduce barriers to housing development. A developer may choose to provide additional parking spaces.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS:
Commerce has received additional questions, which will be answered in further updates, including:
How are jurisdictions to allow zero lot line subdivisions?
How does the definition of Major Transit Stop, which includes, “fixed guideway systems”, apply?
How does the provision in ESHB 1293 about height apply to “stepbacks” in particular circumstances (such as for
properties adjacent to single-family zones)?
Should airport overlay areas be exempted from needing to allow additional middle housing?
Are there best practices for wildfire/urban interface areas that could be used for E2SHB 1110 implementation?
Will Commerce provide guidance to utilities to help with growth modeling?
E2SHB 1110, EHB 1337, and ESHB 1293 establish requirements for local government development regulations, but not
comprehensive plans. Do we need to adopt plan policies that reference or align with these new regulatory changes?
Can a city adopt and apply middle housing design and development standards through an overlay zone?
What type of design standards may cities require for accessory dwelling units?
How should land capacity be calculated, given that more units will be allowed?
Does E2SHB 1110 have any bearing on vacant residential land that is yet to be platted? The bill does not seem to
indicate if it only applies to platted lots of record as of 2023, or if lots created through future residential plats would
also be affected.
AFFORDABILITY
Would the bill requirement for mid-size cities to allow 4 units per lot outside ¼ mile distance from a major transit stop
mean we cannot allow additional units without an affordability requirement?
Does E2SHB 1110 require jurisdictions to allow plats within ¼ mile of transit with 4-plexes on each lot, or does that
requirement only apply to existing lots meeting the size requirements of the zoning?
Does E2SHB 1110 allow jurisdictions to apply affordability requirements within ¼ mile of transit?
Would an affordability requirement that provided the same number of affordable units, but some flexibility in the
types of units allowed, be considered compliant?
CONTACT INFORMATION
Dave Osaki, Middle Housing Lead: dave.osaki@commerce.wa.us
Anne Fritzel: Growth Management Housing Programs Manager anne.fritzel@commerce.wa.us
7.A.a
Packet Pg. 15
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
1
:
M
i
d
d
l
e
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
M
o
d
e
l
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
[
R
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
1
]
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
6 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023
V3.1
Table 2 – 2020 City populations and three tiers per HB 1110 Section 3(1)(a)-(c)
TIER 1 TIER 2 TIER 3
Cities with population of at least
75k
Cities with population of at
least 25k and but less than 75k
Cities with populations less than 25K
that are within a contiguous UGA with
the largest city, in a county with a
population more than 275,000
Seattle 737,015 Redmond 73,256 Kenmore 23,914
Spokane 228,989 Marysville 70,714 Tukwila 21,798
Tacoma 219,346 Sammamish 67,455 Mukilteo 21,538
Vancouver 190,915 Lakewood 63,612 Mountlake Terrace 21,286
Bellevue 151,854 Richland 60,560 Mill Creek 20,926
Kent 136,588 Shoreline 58,608 Covington 20,777
Everett 110,629 Olympia 55,382 Arlington 19,868
Renton 106,785 Lacey 53,526 Washougal 17,039
Spokane Valley 102,976 Burien 52,066 Port Orchard 15,587
Federal Way 101,030 Bothell 48,161 Lake Forest Park 13,630
Yakima 96,968 Bremerton 43,505 Woodinville 13,069
Kirkland 92,175 Puyallup 42,937 Newcastle 13,017
Bellingham 91,482 Edmonds 42,853 Edgewood 12,327
Auburn 87,256 Issaquah 40,051 Liberty Lake 12,003
Kennewick 83,921 Lynnwood 38,568 Fife 10,999
Pasco 77,108 Lake Stevens 35,630 Airway Heights 10,757
Counties with April 1, 2020
population greater than 275,000
Wenatchee 35,575 Sumner 10,621
Mount Vernon 35,219 DuPont 10,151
King 2,269,675 University Place 34,866 Milton 8,697
Pierce 920,393 Walla Walla 34,060 Pacific 7,235
7.A.a
Packet Pg. 16
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
1
:
M
i
d
d
l
e
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
M
o
d
e
l
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
[
R
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
1
]
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
7 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023
V3.1
Snohomish 827,957 Des Moines 32,888 Fircrest 7,156
Spokane 539,339 SeaTac 31,454 Normandy Park 6,771
Clark 503,311 Maple Valley 28,013 Steilacoom 6,727
Thurston 294,793 Camas 26,065 Brier 6,560
Kitsap 275,611 Mercer Island 25,748 Black Diamond 4,697
Tumwater 25,573 Algona 3,290
Moses Lake 25,146 Clyde Hill 3,126
Medina 2,915
Millwood 1,881
Woodway 1,318
Yarrow Point 1,134
Ruston 1,055
Hunts Point 457
Beaux Arts Village 317
7.A.a
Packet Pg. 17
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
1
:
M
i
d
d
l
e
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
M
o
d
e
l
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
[
R
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
1
]
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
1 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023
V3.1
Revised July 2023
Middle Housing in Washington:
Fact Sheet for Implementing E2SHB 1110
Topics
APPLICABILITY ................................................................................................................................................................... 2
DESIGN AND DENSITY ....................................................................................................................................................... 3
LOT SPLITS AND SUBDIVISION .......................................................................................................................................... 4
TRANSIT STOPS AND PARKING ......................................................................................................................................... 4
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS: ................................................................................................................................................. 5
In 2023, the Washington State Legislature passed E2SHB 1110 (“HB 1110”), which substantially changes the way many cities in
Washington are to plan for housing. HB 1110 requires cities of certain sizes and locations to allow multiple dwelling units per lot in a
middle housing type of form. Commerce is collecting questions from local governments about the bill and other related legislation
passed this session, and has answered certain questions received below, with more to follow. If you have additional questions or
need for technical assistance, please email dave.osaki@commerce.wa.gov or Anne.Fritzel@commerce.wa.gov.
What is middle housing? HB 1110 defines "Middle housing" as “buildings that are compatible in scale, form, and character with
single-family houses and contain two or more attached, stacked, or clustered homes including duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes,
fiveplexes, sixplexes, townhouses, stacked flats, courtyard apartments, and cottage housing.”
What types of assistance will be coming from Commerce?
Model ordinances: Commerce is directed under the HB 1110 to publish model ordinances no later than six months following the
effective date of the bill, which will be in January of 2024. Stakeholders will be notified of the opportunity to review drafts of the
model middle housing ordinances in the fall of 2023 and invited to provide comment.
Grant program: Commerce will offer a statewide competitive grant program in the 2023-2025 biennium to help jurisdictions
implement the bill’s requirements. All grant funds must be expended by June of 2025.
Continuing guidance from Commerce: Commerce has already developed a web page on middle housing, which includes tools
such as PowerPoint presentations, photos, posters, and will include objective design standards, and a pro-forma calculator that
local governments can use to communicate about middle housing.1 Commerce will also be developing the following to
implement the middle housing legislation:
Middle housing model ordinances and guidance on the requirements
Rules for a process by which cities may seek Commerce approval of an alternative local action necessary to meet the
requirements of the bill.2
1 www.commerce.wa.gov/serving-communities/growth-management/growth-management-topics/planning-for-middle-housing/
2 See E2SHB 1110, Sec. 4(3)
HOUSING DIVISION GROWTH MANAGEMENT SERVICES
7.A.b
Packet Pg. 18
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
2
:
H
B
1
1
1
0
_
F
A
Q
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
2 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023
V3.1
Standards and procedures for Commerce to use when processing a city request to extend the date by when middle
housing rules must be applied, when and where certain criteria apply.
Guidance to assist cities on preparing a parking study.3
Possible changes to land capacity and buildable lands guidance to address units per lot density requirements.
APPLICABILITY
What are cities required to do? Table 1 below summarizes the middle housing requirements that apply to cities in each of the three
population tiers established by HB 1110.4 Commerce will provide more detail in the coming year on requirements of the bill and
implementation tools.
Table 1: Basic requirements for cities subject to the HB 1110 in the 2024-2027 periodic update.
Minimum number of
middle housing units that
must be allowed per lot in
predominately residential
zones
NEAR A MAJOR TRANSIT
STOP: Minimum number of
middle housing units that
must be allowed per lot
within ¼ mile walking
distance of major transit stop
in predominately residential
zones
WITH AFFORDABLE
HOUSING: Minimum
number of middle housing
units that must be allowed
per lot with affordable
housing in predominately
residential zones where
density in applicable zone
does not otherwise allow
this number (See also HB
1110, Sec. 3(2))
TIER ONE: Cities with
population of at least 75,000
E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(1)(b)
4 du/lot, unless zoning
permits higher densities
6 du/ lot, unless zoning
permits higher densities
6 du/lot if at least 2 units
are affordable, unless
zoning permits higher
densities
TIER TWO: Cities with
population of at least
25,000 but less than 75,000
E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(1)(a)
2 du/lot unless zoning
permits higher densities
4 du/lot, unless zoning
permits higher densities
4 du/lot if at least 1 unit is
affordable, unless zoning
permits higher densities
TIER THREE: Cities with
population under 25,000
that are contiguous with a
UGA that includes the
largest city in a county with
a population over 275,000
E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(1)(c)
2 du/lot, unless zoning
permits higher densities
N/A N/A
Which cities are required to allow middle housing? Over the 2024-2027 periodic update cycle, cities of at least 25,000 in population
must allow middle housing, as well as cities with a population less than 25,000 in a county of over 275,000 population and which are
within a contiguous urban growth area that includes the largest city in the county. Table 2, at the end of the document, identifies
3 See E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(7)(a)
4 E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(11)(a) requires use of the Washington State Office of Financial Management’s 2020 April 1 population data.
https://ofm.wa.gov/washington-data-research/population-demographics/population-estimates
7.A.b
Packet Pg. 19
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
2
:
H
B
1
1
1
0
_
F
A
Q
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
3 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023
V3.1
cities currently subject to the requirements of HB 1110, based on 2020 Office of Financial Management population data, and
Commerce’s best understanding.5
When does a local government need to allow middle housing? Cities subject to the bill must implement the requirements no later
than six months after their next periodic update required under RCW 36.70A.130. Cities in the central Puget Sound region (within
King, Kitsap, Snohomish and Pierce counties) have the earliest periodic review deadline, on December 31, 2024, which means that
they must implement the bill by June 30, 2025. Additional cities may be added to this list over time or moved to the next tier, should
they meet the population threshold in future years. Commerce recommends cities look ahead to when their population might meet
the thresholds in the bill and be prepared to meet the requirement, if applicable, within 12 months after their next implementation
progress report required under RCW 36.70A.130.6
DESIGN AND DENSITY
What does E2SHB 1110 mean when it uses the term “density”? “Density” measured in “dwelling units per acre” has traditionally
been the way that zoning ordinances have regulated residential land use. HB 1110 introduces the term “unit density” because the
bill focuses instead on the minimum number of dwelling units on a lot, not on a per acre basis. Local jurisdictions may need to
review and amend comprehensive plan policies and development regulations to take this into consideration, at least for
accommodating middle housing.
How can cities adopt design and development standards that reflect differences between detached single-unit houses and
“middle housing” types? One way to adopt design and development standards that reflect differences between detached single-
unit houses and “middle housing” types is to adopt standards for middle housing that are less restrictive than existing standards
required for detached single-family residences. Because HB 1110 Section (6)(b) states that middle housing regulations may not be
“more restrictive” than for detached single-family residences, there is flexibility for some standards to be less restrictive.7 One
example might be to allow driveway widths that are narrower for certain middle housing types than for a detached house. The less
restrictive standard, however, must still be objective (see further below in a separate question regarding EHB 1293’s objective
development regulations).
An alternate way to adopt design and development standards is through the administrative design review process in HB 1110
Section 3(6)(a). “Administrative design review” is defined, in part, as, “…a development permit process whereby an application is
reviewed, approved, or denied by the planning director or the planning director's designee based solely on objective design and
development standards without a public predecision hearing…”8 Objective design review standards enable a city to adopt those
middle housing specific standards that it deems necessary to achieve compatibility in residential zones where detached single family
houses are the predominant use. These middle housing standards may include design and development standards that are not
existing requirements for a detached single family residence so long as these design and development standards are “objective” and
promote compatibility. The middle housing definition conveys that objective design and development standards are intended to
make middle housing buildings compatible with, not identical to, the scale, form and character of detached single family houses. 9
*NEW* QUESTION JULY 2023: Can a city still have a design review board? While some cities may choose to have a design review
board review certain types of permits, e.g., for commercial development, HB 1110 allows only administrative design review for
middle housing. This means that the planning director or the planning director’s designee must decide based on objective criteria,
and not a design review board.10 Another 2023 bill, ESHB 1293, places constraints on all design review, not just for housing, including
a limitation of no more than one public meeting and the requirement to use only “clear and objective” development regulations.
5 If your city is incorrectly listed or incorrectly omitted, please contact Commerce.
6 E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(11)(b)
7 See E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3 6(a) and 6(b)
8 See E2SHB 1110, Sec. 2(1)
9 See E2SHB 1110, Sec 2(21) "Middle housing" means buildings that are compatible in scale, form, and character with single-family houses and
contain two or more attached, stacked, or clustered homes including duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes, sixplexes, townhouses, stacked
flats, courtyard apartments, and cottage housing.
10 E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(6)(a)
7.A.b
Packet Pg. 20
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
2
:
H
B
1
1
1
0
_
F
A
Q
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
4 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023
V3.1
*NEW* QUESTION JULY 2023 Are cities required to adopt Commerce’s 2023 Objective Design and Development Standards?
No. The standards in the Objective Design and Development Standards Toolkit are provided solely as a resource for cities to
consider at their discretion to provide for middle housing. Commerce will prepare model ordinances by January 2024 specific to HB
1110 requirements.
Given that all cities must allow two accessory dwelling units per lot under HB 1337, how does this harmonize with E2SHB 1110
(middle housing)? HB 1337 (section 4(1)(c)) requires that, within urban growth areas, cities and counties allow two accessory
dwelling units on all lots in zoning districts that allow single-family homes. HB 1110 (section 3(5)), requires that cities allow at least
six of the nine types of middle housing to achieve the required unit count.
A city must allow accessory dwelling units and such units may help achieve the unit count, AND the city also must allow middle
housing types (such as a duplex) that can satisfy the minimum density11 (i.e., unit count per lot). For example, where a city must
allow two or four units per lot, it does not have to increase the unit count to also accommodate two ADUs.12 A city may choose to
allow such a higher count but is not required to do so. Both bills require that a city allow separate sale of units and the land they sit
upon.
*NEW* QUESTION JULY 2023 Is a city required to change the name of zoning districts that include “single-family” (or something
similar) in the title? No. HB 1110 does not require that a new name, be assigned to a zoning district, however, some cities have
chosen to rename their single-family zones. For example, the City of Walla Walla has renamed its previous “single family” zones as
“Neighborhood Residential Zones” which allow both detached and middle housing types. A city that wishes to rename an existing
zoning district, or to create, name, and map a new one, has authority to do so as a legislative action,
LOT SPLITS AND SUBDIVISION
Does HB 1110 require a city to allow subdivision of land into lots smaller than 1,000 square feet and then also require that the city
allow additional units on these small lots? HB 1110 Section 3(6)(g) states, in part, “Any city subject to the requirements of this
section . . . are not required to achieve the …. density under this act on lots after subdivision below 1,000 square feet unless the city
chooses to enact smaller allowable lot sizes.” A city has discretion to allow subdivision of land into lots less than 1,000 square feet
and allow additional units on each of those lots, but is not required to do so. While lots may be subdivided (or even if a lot is not
subdivided), the ability to fully achieve four units per lot, for instance, may be limited by the size of the lot and the application of
development standards such as maximum lot coverage, parking, and setback requirements.
TRANSIT STOPS AND PARKING
*NEW* QUESTION JULY 2023: The middle housing bill requires increases in allowed density within “walking distance of a major
transit stop”. Does this mean distance is to be measured along some reasonable path, such as street network or by a straight line
distance? A city may use a method of measuring walking distance that is not just a straight line distance (although using a straight
line distance is acceptable if a city chooses that method). To measure walking distance typically means to calculate the actual
walking distance of each path (whether sidewalk, street edge, or trail) that connects one location to another. For purposes of HB
1110, this would include measuring the walking distance of each pedestrian route leading from a lot to the lot or specific right of
way location on which a major transit stop is located. This type of measurement can be done using certain computerized mapping
applications. However, it is likely to result in a smaller total area (and not identified by standard shape, such as a circle) on a map
than a simple measurement that radiates equidistant from the major transit stop. For practical reasons, jurisdictions are encouraged
11 E2SHB 1110, Section 3(5) states, “A city must allow at least six of the nine types of middle housing to achieve the unit density required in
subsection (1) of this section. A city may allow accessory dwelling units to achieve the unit density required in subsection (1) of this section. Cities
are not required to allow accessory dwelling units or middle housing types beyond the density requirements in subsection (1) of this section. A city
must also allow zero lot line short subdivision where the number of lots created is equal to the unit density required in subsection (1) of this
section.”
12 E2SHB 1110 and EHB 1337 do not expressly state how to reconcile the different requirements between the two bills for jurisdictions with a two
unit density requirement per lot.
7.A.b
Packet Pg. 21
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
2
:
H
B
1
1
1
0
_
F
A
Q
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
5 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023
V3.1
to define a station area using logical boundaries such as roads, edges of land use designations, or other features to delineate a
logical area.
*NEW* QUESTION July 2023 What is the maximum off-street parking requirement for middle housing on a lot exactly 6,000
square feet in area? E2SHB 1110 Section 3(6)(e) and (f) address off-street parking requirements for middle housing based on lot
size as follows,
“(e) Shall not require more than one off-street parking space per unit as a condition of permitting development of middle
housing on lots smaller than 6,000 square feet before any zero lot line subdivisions or lot splits;
(f) Shall not require more than two off-street parking spaces per unit as a condition of permitting development of middle
housing on lots greater than 6,000 square feet before any zero lot line subdivisions or lot splits;”
A lot exactly 6,000 square feet is not addressed. In instances where a lot is 6,000 square feet, a jurisdiction may specify in its
development regulations whether (6)(e) or (6)(f) will apply. Regardless, fewer parking spaces than the maximum under HB 1110 may
be appropriate in many locations. In general, in this specific situation, Commerce recommends requiring fewer parking spaces to
reduce barriers to housing development. A developer may choose to provide additional parking spaces.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS:
Commerce has received additional questions, which will be answered in further updates, including:
How are jurisdictions to allow zero lot line subdivisions?
How does the definition of Major Transit Stop, which includes, “fixed guideway systems”, apply?
How does the provision in ESHB 1293 about height apply to “stepbacks” in particular circumstances (such as for
properties adjacent to single-family zones)?
Should airport overlay areas be exempted from needing to allow additional middle housing?
Are there best practices for wildfire/urban interface areas that could be used for E2SHB 1110 implementation?
Will Commerce provide guidance to utilities to help with growth modeling?
E2SHB 1110, EHB 1337, and ESHB 1293 establish requirements for local government development regulations, but not
comprehensive plans. Do we need to adopt plan policies that reference or align with these new regulatory changes?
Can a city adopt and apply middle housing design and development standards through an overlay zone?
What type of design standards may cities require for accessory dwelling units?
How should land capacity be calculated, given that more units will be allowed?
Does E2SHB 1110 have any bearing on vacant residential land that is yet to be platted? The bill does not seem to
indicate if it only applies to platted lots of record as of 2023, or if lots created through future residential plats would
also be affected.
AFFORDABILITY
Would the bill requirement for mid-size cities to allow 4 units per lot outside ¼ mile distance from a major transit stop
mean we cannot allow additional units without an affordability requirement?
Does E2SHB 1110 require jurisdictions to allow plats within ¼ mile of transit with 4-plexes on each lot, or does that
requirement only apply to existing lots meeting the size requirements of the zoning?
Does E2SHB 1110 allow jurisdictions to apply affordability requirements within ¼ mile of transit?
Would an affordability requirement that provided the same number of affordable units, but some flexibility in the
types of units allowed, be considered compliant?
CONTACT INFORMATION
Dave Osaki, Middle Housing Lead: dave.osaki@commerce.wa.us
Anne Fritzel: Growth Management Housing Programs Manager anne.fritzel@commerce.wa.us
7.A.b
Packet Pg. 22
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
2
:
H
B
1
1
1
0
_
F
A
Q
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
6 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023
V3.1
Table 2 – 2020 City populations and three tiers per HB 1110 Section 3(1)(a)-(c)
TIER 1 TIER 2 TIER 3
Cities with population of at least
75k
Cities with population of at
least 25k and but less than 75k
Cities with populations less than 25K
that are within a contiguous UGA with
the largest city, in a county with a
population more than 275,000
Seattle 737,015 Redmond 73,256 Kenmore 23,914
Spokane 228,989 Marysville 70,714 Tukwila 21,798
Tacoma 219,346 Sammamish 67,455 Mukilteo 21,538
Vancouver 190,915 Lakewood 63,612 Mountlake Terrace 21,286
Bellevue 151,854 Richland 60,560 Mill Creek 20,926
Kent 136,588 Shoreline 58,608 Covington 20,777
Everett 110,629 Olympia 55,382 Arlington 19,868
Renton 106,785 Lacey 53,526 Washougal 17,039
Spokane Valley 102,976 Burien 52,066 Port Orchard 15,587
Federal Way 101,030 Bothell 48,161 Lake Forest Park 13,630
Yakima 96,968 Bremerton 43,505 Woodinville 13,069
Kirkland 92,175 Puyallup 42,937 Newcastle 13,017
Bellingham 91,482 Edmonds 42,853 Edgewood 12,327
Auburn 87,256 Issaquah 40,051 Liberty Lake 12,003
Kennewick 83,921 Lynnwood 38,568 Fife 10,999
Pasco 77,108 Lake Stevens 35,630 Airway Heights 10,757
Counties with April 1, 2020
population greater than 275,000
Wenatchee 35,575 Sumner 10,621
Mount Vernon 35,219 DuPont 10,151
King 2,269,675 University Place 34,866 Milton 8,697
Pierce 920,393 Walla Walla 34,060 Pacific 7,235
7.A.b
Packet Pg. 23
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
2
:
H
B
1
1
1
0
_
F
A
Q
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
7 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023
V3.1
Snohomish 827,957 Des Moines 32,888 Fircrest 7,156
Spokane 539,339 SeaTac 31,454 Normandy Park 6,771
Clark 503,311 Maple Valley 28,013 Steilacoom 6,727
Thurston 294,793 Camas 26,065 Brier 6,560
Kitsap 275,611 Mercer Island 25,748 Black Diamond 4,697
Tumwater 25,573 Algona 3,290
Moses Lake 25,146 Clyde Hill 3,126
Medina 2,915
Millwood 1,881
Woodway 1,318
Yarrow Point 1,134
Ruston 1,055
Hunts Point 457
Beaux Arts Village 317
7.A.b
Packet Pg. 24
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
2
:
H
B
1
1
1
0
_
F
A
Q
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
4
WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2024
2023 Legislative Changes to Washington State Law
Middle housing must be allowed in certain cities
HB 1110 amended RCW 36.70A to require that certain cities allow middle housing, which means homes that fall between
detached single-family houses and large multifamily complexes, such as duplexes or town homes. HB 1110 requires that
cities that meet certain population and contiguous UGA criteria allow middle housing according to the chart below.
BASE NUMBER OF DWELLING
UNITS (du) of middle housing
that must be allowed per lot.
NEAR A MAJOR TRANSIT
STOP: within ¼ mile of
transit
WITH AFFORDABLE
HOUSING: if affordable
units provided Sec.
3(2)(a)
TIER ONE: Cities with
population of at least
75,000 HB 1110, Sec.
3(1)(b)
Four du/lot on all lots zoned
predominantly residential,
unless zoning permits higher
densities
Six du/ lot within 1/4 mile
walking distance of a
major transit stop, unless
zoning permits higher
densities
Six du/lot if two units
are affordable, unless
zoning permits higher
densities
TIER TWO: Cities with
population between 25,000
and 75,000 HB 1110, Sec.
3(1)(a)
Two du/lot on all lots zoned
predominantly residential,
unless zoning permits higher
densities
Four du/lot within 1/4 mile
walking distance of a
major transit stop, unless
zoning permits higher
densities
Four du/lot on all lots
predominantly
residential if one unit is
affordable
TIER THREE: Cities with
population under 25,000
that are contiguous with
the largest city in a county
with a population over
275,000 HB 1110, Sec.
3(1)(c)
Two du/lot on all lots zoned
predominantly residential,
unless zoning permits higher
densities
Cities and counties must implement this requirement six months after their next GMA periodic update.
Commerce provides the following types of assistance.2
Continuing guidance: Commerce has developed a web page on middle housing, which includes tools
such as PowerPoint presentations, photos, posters, example objective design standards and a
proforma calculator that local governments can use to communicate about middle housing.
Model ordinance: Commerce developed a model ordinance
Grant program: Commerce will offer a statewide competitive grant program in the 2023-2025 biennium
to help jurisdictions implement the bill’s requirements. Recipients must expend grant funds by June 30,
2025.
Additional guidance will include criteria to adopt “substantially similar” regulations, content of parking
studies, and areas exempted from or included in the regulations, and what circumstances warrant an
extension of an exemption.
2 Resources posted at www.commerce.wa.gov/serving-communities/growth-management/growth-management-
topics/planning-for-middle-housing/
7.A.c
Packet Pg. 25
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
3
:
E
x
c
e
r
p
t
_
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
L
a
w
s
_
2
0
1
9
t
h
r
u
2
0
2
4
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
5
WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2024
Resources posted at www.commerce.wa.gov/serving-communities/growth-management/growth-
management-topics/planning-formiddle-housing/
Two accessory dwelling units on each lot in urban growth areas
HB 1337 amended RCW 36.70A to change how jurisdictions that fully plan under the GMA regulate accessory
dwelling units (ADUs). Cities and counties must allow two ADUs per lot within urban growth areas. The ADUs
may be attached, detached, or a combination of both, or may be conversions of existing structures. Cities and
counties may apply public health, safety, building code and environmental permitting requirements to an ADU
that would be applicable to the principal unit, including regulations to protect ground and surface waters from
on-site wastewater. Cities and counties are not required to authorize the construction of an ADU where
development is restricted as a result of physical proximity to on-site sewage system infrastructure, critical
areas or other unsuitable physical characteristics of a property.
In addition, cities and counties:
May not require the owner to occupy the property, and may not prohibit sale as independent units, but may
restrict the use of ADUs as short term rentals;
Must allow an ADU of at least 1,000 square feet and must adjust zoning to be consistent with the bill for
things such as heights, setbacks and other regulations;
Must set consistent parking requirements based on distance from transit and lot size; and
May not charge more than 50% of the impact fees charged for the principal unit.
If a city or county does not adopt rules consistent with the law, then state law will "supersede, preempt and
invalidate” any conflicting local development regulations.
Cities and counties must implement this new requirement six months after their next GMA periodic update.
Actions taken by a city or county to comply with the requirements are not subject to legal challenge under GMA
or SEPA. The bill also addresses restrictive covenants and deed restrictions and protects local governments
from civil liability when issuing a permit for an ADU on a lot with a covenant restricting an ADU.
Streamlining housing development
HB 1293 adds to RCW 36.70A and amends RCW 36.70B to streamline local design review processes, requiring
“clear and objective” standards that don’t reduce development capacity otherwise allowed. Any design review
process must be conducted concurrently, or otherwise logically integrated, with the consolidated review and
decision process for project permits set forth in RCW 36.70B.120(3). No design review process may include
more than one public meeting. A county or city must comply with these requirements beginning six months
after its next periodic update required under RCW 36.70A.130. Local governments are encouraged to expedite
permits that include affordable housing, as defined in the bill, which provides additional flexibility in defining
affordability. The provisions do not apply to regulations specific to designated landmarks or historic districts
established under a local preservation ordinance.
SB 5290 makes changes to local government procedures for new housing permit processing. It amends RCW
36.70B, to improve clarity on the timelines around complete permit applications. For applications received
after January 1, 2025, Section 7 amends RCW 36.70B and sets out time periods and application fee portions
for different types of permit processing. This section updates the reporting requirements for permit
processing, and requires Commerce to develop a reporting template. Section 8 encourages cities and counties
7.A.c
Packet Pg. 26
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
3
:
E
x
c
e
r
p
t
_
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
L
a
w
s
_
2
0
1
9
t
h
r
u
2
0
2
4
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
6
WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2024
take additional measures to enable timely permit processing, with additional direction to improve permitting
over time.
2SSB 5412 amends RCW 43.21C.229 to exempt middle housing developments within urban growth areas from
State Environmental Policy Act review if:
The development complies with all development regulations that implement the comprehensive plan; and
The city or county has prepared environmental analysis that considers the proposed use or density and
intensity of use in the area proposed for exemption and analyzes multimodal transportation impacts. This
includes impacts to neighboring jurisdictions, transit facilities and the state transportation system.
2SSB 5412 also requires consultation with WSDOT and outreach to affected tribes, other state agencies and
jurisdictions.
SB 5258 (section 10) amends RCW 82.02.060 to require local governments to publish a schedule of impact
fees which reflects the proportionate impact of new housing units. This includes multifamily and condo units,
based on square footage, number of bedrooms or trips generated, to produce a proportionally lower impact fee
for smaller housing units. Local governments must adopt this schedule with six months after the periodic
update due date.
Section 11 amends RCW 58.17.060 to require all cities and towns to adopt procedures for unit lot subdivisions
to allow division of a parent lot into separately owned unit lots, or owned in common by the owners of the lots.
This is required with the next periodic update.
Making it easier for multi-unit housing development.
HB 1042 adds a new section to RCW 35A.21 and RCW 35.21 and loosens restrictions on adding housing within
existing multifamily buildings by exempting the added units from density limits, parking and other regulatory
requirements. This must be in effect within six months after the periodic update due date.
SB 5058 amends RCW 64.55.010 to exempt buildings with 12 or fewer units and no more than two stories
from the definition of “multi-unit residential building,” which eliminates building enclosure design and
inspection requirements that add cost to small scale-condo developments.
HB 1181 makes a broad set of changes to the Growth Management Act to address climate change, including a
provision for local governments to increase housing supply, density and variety within urban growth areas and
to address climate change and resiliency in their comprehensive plans.
New tools for affordable housing
SB 1326 amends RCW 35.92 and expands the authorization for utility charge delays or waivers on the behalf of
a nonprofit organization, public development authority, housing authority or local agency that provides
emergency shelter, transitional housing, permanent supportive housing or affordable housing. The bill requires
connection charges waived under this chapter to be funded using general funds, grant dollars, or other
identified revenue stream.
HB 1695 amends RCW 39.33.015, and clarifies the definitions of affordable housing that qualify as a “public
benefit” to authorize governments and public agencies to sell publicly-owned surplus property at discounted
prices for affordable housing development. ”Public benefit” means rental housing where the rent and utilities
7.A.c
Packet Pg. 27
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
3
:
E
x
c
e
r
p
t
_
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
L
a
w
s
_
2
0
1
9
t
h
r
u
2
0
2
4
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
11
WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2024
Condo-conversion tenant-to-homeowner program
ESSB 5758, which amends several state laws, provides a condo-conversion tenant-to-homeowner program for
first-time home buyers. The program must provide homeownership information and resources to tenants in
multifamily buildings that are being converted to condos. For example, the state’s Housing Finance
Commission must refer tenants to its payment funding assistance programs and to available education
seminars. Meanwhile, the state’s Affordable Housing Advisory Board (AHAB) is expanded by one member
representing a condo association (or other similar organization). AHAB must review issues, seek input, and
provide a report on condo conversion issues to the Legislature by December 1, 2022.
2021 Legislative Changes to Washington State Law
GMA housing goal strengthened
In the 2021 legislative session, HB 1220 substantially amended the housing-related provisions of the Growth
Management Act (GMA). These updates strengthened the GMA housing goal from “Encourage the availability
of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population” to “Plan for and accommodate housing
affordable to all economic segments of the population of this state.” The remaining objectives to “promote a
variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage the preservation of existing housing stock”
did not change. Local governments should review local comprehensive plan policies and countywide planning
policies to be consistent with the updated goal.
Commerce to provide need projections for housing elements
The housing needs analysis must now take a more detailed look at housing needs for all economic segments
of the population and examine need for different housing types, such as permanent supportive housing and
shelters. To implement HB 1220, Commerce must supply more detailed projections of housing need, including:
Units for moderate, low, very low, and extremely low-income households; and
Emergency housing, emergency shelters, and permanent supportive housing.
By mid-2022, Commerce plans to provide countywide housing need projections for each income band, along
with projections of need for emergency housing, shelters and permanent supportive housing, aligned with the
population projections from the Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM). In this way, each
county can de-aggregate the needs at a countywide level, as is currently done for population projections.
Commerce will also provide recommendations on how to do this.6 For more detail, see Commerce’s Updating
GMA Housing Elements web page.
Updated housing elements must include moderate density housing policies
The goals and policies of the housing element must now include more specific items. In addition to goals,
policies, objectives, and mandatory provisions for the preservation, improvement and development of housing,
housing elements must include, within an urban growth area (UGA) boundary, moderate-density housing
6 Counties that have identified housing targets at the jurisdiction level need to ensure the total countywide population projection falls
within the range provided by OFM, and review how local zoning allows the development of a sufficient number of housing units of the
types that may be needed to accommodate households at each income level.
7.A.c
Packet Pg. 28
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
3
:
E
x
c
e
r
p
t
_
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
L
a
w
s
_
2
0
1
9
t
h
r
u
2
0
2
4
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
12
WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2024
options, including but not limited to, duplexes, triplexes, and townhomes. This means that for cities and the
urban growth area portion of counties, there must be policies supporting moderate density housing options
such as “middle housing”.7 This list may also include cottage housing, four- and six-unit multi-plexes, row
houses, and courtyard apartments, with the goal of providing additional housing units at a lower cost than
traditional single-family housing. The expectation is to develop and implement development regulations in the
near future. Review of ‘adequate provisions’ for all segments of the community HB 1220 added specific work
items to RCW 36.70A.070(2)(d) regarding “adequate provisions for existing and projected needs of all
economic segments of the community.” These include:
Incorporating consideration for low, very low, extremely low, and moderate-income households;
Documenting programs and actions needed to achieve housing availability including gaps in local funding,
barriers such as development regulations, and other limitations;
Consideration of housing locations in relation to employment locations; and
Consideration of the role of accessory dwelling units in meeting housing needs.
See HB 1220 Web Page for more information.
Communities must examine racially disparate impacts, displacement and
exclusion
Communities must now review past discriminative land use practices and take steps to address and prevent
future displacement. A new component for RCW 36.70A.070(2)(e) is to identify local housing “policies and
regulations that result in racially disparate impacts, displacement and exclusion.” [Commerce has developed
guidance on racially disparate impacts and related topics. See HB 1220 Web Page.] Policies and regulations
to examine include consideration of the following:
Zoning that may have a discriminatory effect: Are there areas that were subject to historic redlining or
racially exclusive deed restrictions? Have you reviewed the racial distribution of residents in your
community and region to review how policies may have affected the overall racial distribution? Are
there zoning districts with restrictions that have resulted in the area being racially or economically
exclusive? In these areas, can you expand moderate density housing uses that may be more affordable,
such as allowing duplexes, townhouses, detached ADUs, etc.?8
Disinvestment: Are there areas that may have been lower priority for public investment? Consider a
strategy to focus on areas most in need of public investment with subarea plans, incentives for
development, infrastructure prioritization, or other tools to increase opportunity. Consider adding parks,
transit services, schools, sidewalks, bike facilities or public buildings in these areas to balance
investment across the community.
Infrastructure availability: Are there residential areas within urban growth areas (UGAs) that are not
adequately served by public utilities or multimodal transportation options? Could such services
7 Middle Housing is a range of house-scale buildings with multiple units—compatible in scale and form with detached single-family
homes—located in a walkable neighborhood.
8 Review guidance at https://www.commerce.wa.gov/serving-communities/growth-management/growth-management-
topics/planning-for-housing/updating-gma-housing-elements/
7.A.c
Packet Pg. 29
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
3
:
E
x
c
e
r
p
t
_
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
L
a
w
s
_
2
0
1
9
t
h
r
u
2
0
2
4
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
13
WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2024
increase opportunities there for attainable housing or jobs? If an area is difficult to serve due to
geographic constraints, should it be re-designated to a more appropriate use?
The housing needs assessment should also provide a statement of observations for each of the above
categories. After identifying such housing policies and regulations, part (f) of the legislation requires
communities to identify and implement “policies and regulations to address and begin to undo racially
disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing caused by local policies, plans, and actions.”
The housing element should also identify “areas that may be at higher risk of displacement from market forces
that occur with changes to zoning development regulations and capital investments” under 36.70A.070(2)(g).
As you consider changes in zoning, consider developing strategies to address preservation of existing housing
units and/or replacing affordable units as new development occurs.9 Your updated housing element should
include anti-displacement policies, which consider:
(h)Preservation of historical and cultural communities as well as investments in low, very low, extremely low,
and moderate income housing; equitable development initiatives; inclusionary zoning; community planning
requirements; tenant protections; land disposition policies; and consideration of land that may be used for
affordable housing.
Commerce has been developing more detailed guidance to address this section, including methodologies to
identify places with racially disparate impacts and displacement risk and examples of anti-displacement
policies.10 See HB 1220 Web Page.
Another bill from the 2021 legislative session, HB 1335, provides funding to universities to research recorded
documents with potential racial restrictions, such as deeds. Any such provisions are declared void by RCW
49.60.224, RCW 49.60.227 provides ways to legally address such statements on a deed or title. See Racial
Restrictive Covenants Project - Washington and Restrictive Covenants Database (washington.edu).
For ‘buildable lands’ jurisdictions
A last change to the housing element occurs within the section related to the seven counties and associated
cities and towns that are required to complete a “buildable lands” assessment under RCW 36.70A.215. [Growth
Management Buildable Lands - Washington State Department of Commerce.] These counties should also
demonstrate how the housing element links “jurisdictional goals with overall county goals to ensure that the
housing element goals are met.” In this case, the housing needs assessment should demonstrate how the
local housing element is consistent with countywide planning policies and multicounty planning policies, if
applicable. For those within the central Puget Sound region (area of Snohomish, King, Pierce, and Kitsap
counties), this could include a statement of consistency. As local governments develop their buildable lands
report, they should take the opportunity to gather data needed to meet new housing element requirements.
For more details, see HB 1220 Web Page.
9 See WAC 365-196-835 relocation assistance for low income tenants
10 Commerce has gathered some example displacement policies from local Housing Action Plans at this link. Cities have taken a
variety of approaches to analyzing the risk of displacement. Examples include Walla Walla, Shoreline (see page 6-9), Burien (see page
51-53 and 92), Lynnwood (see page 57, Appendix E: Displacement Memo), Everett (see page G-12 in Appendix E), and Spokane Valley
(see page 23). The Puget Sound Regional Council’s anti-displacement risk mapping project can be found here and technical
documentation here. Communities might also review “Dismantling Poverty in Washington State.” The resources section has kits for
cities already doing this work.
7.A.c
Packet Pg. 30
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
3
:
E
x
c
e
r
p
t
_
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
L
a
w
s
_
2
0
1
9
t
h
r
u
2
0
2
4
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
14
WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2024
Transitional housing, permanent supportive housing and indoor emergency
shelters
Sections 3, 4 and 5 of HB 1220 provide specific requirements related to permanent supportive housing,
transitional housing and emergency housing. Compliance with this requirement is due by September 30, 2021.
The Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC) has posted guidance at MRSC - Changing Your Zoning
Code to Accommodate Housing and Shelters for the Homeless. Commerce suggests that jurisdictions
approach this requirement broadly to take advantage of funding for permanent supportive housing, the
opportunity to convert hotels to shelters and to other forms of housing, and to respond to pandemic-related
housing impacts. With the periodic update, jurisdictions will establish local targets for these types of housing
and this ordinance can be revisited then.
New definitions for your code
Section 6 of HB 1220 includes new definitions for the housing types mentioned above within RCW 36.70A.030.
During the update, local governments should include the following definitions in their code, or equivalent, as
specific by HB 1220:
(9) Emergency housing means temporary indoor accommodations for individuals or families who are
homeless or at imminent risk of becoming homeless that is intended to address the basic health, food,
clothing, and personal hygiene needs of individuals or families. Emergency housing may or may not require
occupants to enter into a lease or an occupancy agreement.
(10) Emergency shelter means a facility that provides a temporary shelter for individuals or families who are
currently homeless. Emergency shelter may not require occupants to enter into a lease or an occupancy
agreement. Emergency shelter facilities may include day and warming centers that do not provide overnight
accommodations. Emergency shelters include overnight shelters which provide safe and dry conditions which
save lives.
(18) Moderate-income household means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living together whose
adjusted income is at or below 120 percent of the median household income adjusted for household size, for
the county where the household is located, as reported by the United States department of housing and urban
development. This definition is added to the existing definitions in RCW 36.70A.030 for low-income household,
very low-income household, and extremely low-income household. Other housing definitions added to RCW
36.70A.030 in the recent legislative sessions include:
(2) Affordable housing means, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, residential housing whose
monthly costs, including utilities other than telephone, do not exceed thirty percent of the monthly income of a
household whose income is:
(a) For rental housing, sixty percent of the median household income adjusted for household size, for the
county where the household is located, as reported by the United States department of housing and urban
development; or
(b) For owner-occupied housing, eighty percent of the median household income adjusted for household size,
for the county where the household is located, as reported by the United States department of housing and
urban development.
7.A.c
Packet Pg. 31
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
3
:
E
x
c
e
r
p
t
_
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
L
a
w
s
_
2
0
1
9
t
h
r
u
2
0
2
4
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
15
WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2024
(11) Extremely low-income household means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living together
whose adjusted income is at or below thirty percent of the median household income adjusted for household
size, for the county where the household is located, as reported by the United States department of housing
and urban development.
(16) Low-income household means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living together whose
adjusted income is at or below eighty percent of the median household income adjusted for household size,
for the county where the household is located, as reported by the United States department of housing and
urban development.
(19) Permanent supportive housing means subsidized, leased housing with no limit on length of stay that
prioritizes people who need comprehensive support services to retain tenancy and utilizes admissions
practices designed to use lower barriers to entry than would be typical for other subsidized or unsubsidized
rental housing, especially related to rental history, criminal history, and personal behaviors. Permanent
supportive housing is paired with on-site or off-site voluntary services designed to support a person living with
a complex and disabling behavioral health or physical health condition who was experiencing homelessness or
was at imminent risk of homelessness prior to moving into housing to retain their housing and be a successful
tenant in a housing arrangement, improve the resident's health status, and connect the resident of the housing
with community-based health care, treatment, or employment services. Permanent supportive housing is
subject to all of the rights and responsibilities defined in chapter 59.18 RCW.
(30) Very low-income household means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living together whose
adjusted income is at or below fifty percent of the median household income adjusted for household size, for
the county where the household is located, as reported by the United States department of housing and urban
development.
Accessory dwelling units - Updates
Section 7 of HB 1220 provided that cities and counties “should consider” policies to encourage the
construction of ADUs. This section was vetoed Gov. Jay Inslee because it did not specifically limit the
policies to lands within urban growth areas. Commerce recognizes the significant work of the Legislature in
recommending these policies and encourages jurisdictions to review them as options in managing ADUs
within urban growth areas, where they are most appropriate.11 Policies for consideration (only within UGAs)
include the following from HB 1220 Section 7:
Not requiring owner occupancy;
Not allowing an accessory dwelling unit to be used for short-term rentals;
Excluding residents of accessory dwelling units against existing limits on the number of unrelated
residents on a lot;
Reducing minimum gross floor area requirement for accessory dwelling units to that at or below the
state building code;
Making the same allowances for accessory dwelling units' roof decks, balconies, and porches to
encroach on setbacks as are allowed for the principal unit;
Applying abutting lot setbacks to accessory dwelling units on lots abutting zones with lower setback
requirements;
11 7 ADUs in rural areas require more considerations due to the potential to increase densities beyond those that may be supported by
rural levels of services, and hearings board cases have addressed this issue. Commerce plans to develop guidance to address ADUs;
7.A.c
Packet Pg. 32
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
3
:
E
x
c
e
r
p
t
_
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
L
a
w
s
_
2
0
1
9
t
h
r
u
2
0
2
4
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
16
WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2024
Establishing an amnesty program to help owners of unpermitted accessory dwelling units to obtain a
permit;
Permitting accessory dwelling units in structures detached from the principal unit on any lot that meets
the minimum lot size and permitting attached accessory dwelling units on any lot, even if non-
conforming;
Allowing accessory dwelling units to be converted from existing structures, even if they violate current
code requirements for setbacks or lot coverage;
Reducing or eliminating public street improvement requirements as a condition of permitting accessory
dwelling units; and
Not requiring a separate utility connection from an ADU, and if needed, fees should be eliminated, or
made proportional to impact.
SB 5235 amended RCW 36.70A.696, pertaining to accessory dwelling units. Gov. Inslee vetoed several
components of this bill, while sections 2, 5, 6 and 7 were signed into law. Section 2 added two new definitions
that could be useful to local governments:
(8) Owner means any person who has at least 50 percent ownership in a property on which an accessory
dwelling unit is located.
(9) Short-term rental means a lodging use, that is not a hotel or motel or bed and breakfast, in which a
dwelling unit, or portion thereof, is offered or provided to a guest by a short-term rental operator for a fee for
fewer than 30 consecutive nights.
For more information and guidance, see: Affordable Housing Planning Resources (wa.gov).
Occupants in a dwelling unit: jurisdictions may not limit number
Sections 5, 6, and 7 of ESSB 5235 added the following to chapter 35.21 RCW (cities and towns), 35A.21 (code
cities), and 36.01 (counties), limiting the ability of cities to regulate the number of people within a dwelling unit:
Except for occupant limits on group living arrangements regulated under state law (such as assisted
living, group homes or adult family homes) or on short-term rentals as defined in RCW 64.37.010 and
any lawful limits on occupant load per square foot or generally applicable health and safety provisions
as established by applicable building code or city ordinance, a city or town, a code city, or a county may
not regulate or limit the number of unrelated persons that may occupy a household or dwelling unit.
Jurisdictions should review their code for definitions of “family” or other definitions that may limit the number
of unrelated persons living within a single dwelling unit. See also MRSC - Group Homes and the sample
definitions of “family.”
Multifamily tax exemption program - major changes with SB 5287:
The Legislature passed major revisions to the Multifamily Tax Exemption (MFTE) program in SB 5287, which
will open the program to all Washington cities and counties. The legislation requires Commerce to develop
guidance, develop and implement an auditing program and conduct a legislative study. In addition, the
legislation removed the “high-cost” provision of the program. Any projects already under construction should
be completed under their original agreements, but no new certificates should be issued with high-cost
provisions. Other provisions, such as offering a 20-year tax exemption for “permanently affordable” housing or
extending property tax exemptions, are local options, and Commerce is to develop a template for a deed
7.A.c
Packet Pg. 33
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
t
t
.
3
:
E
x
c
e
r
p
t
_
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
L
a
w
s
_
2
0
1
9
t
h
r
u
2
0
2
4
(
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
C
o
d
e
U
p
d
a
t
e
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
)
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 12/11/2024
Extended Agenda
Staff Lead: Michael Clugston
Department: Planning Division
Prepared By: Michael Clugston
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Review the attached extended agenda. It has been updated to include more accurate dates for code
touches in the first half of 2025. Also note the summer break has been tentatively scheduled for August
27 - this would coincide with the Council's break during the last week of August and first week of
September.
Narrative
N/A
Attachments:
December 11 Extended Agenda
10.A
Packet Pg. 34
.11
-
S
e
p
25
-
S
e
p
9-
O
c
t
17
-
O
c
t
23
-
O
c
t
30
-
O
c
t
13
-
N
o
v
25
-
N
o
v
27
-
N
o
v
4-
D
e
c
11
-
D
e
c
25
-
D
e
c
1/
8
/
2
0
2
5
14
-
J
a
n
22
-
J
a
n
12
-
F
e
b
26
-
F
e
b
12
-
M
a
r
26
-
M
a
r
2-
A
p
r
9-
A
p
r
23
-
A
p
r
14
-
M
a
y
28
-
M
a
y
11
-
J
u
n
25
-
J
u
n
9-
J
u
l
23
-
J
u
l
13
-
A
u
g
27
-
A
u
g
10
-
S
e
p
24
-
S
e
p
Comprehensive Plan
Transportation D/R
Land Use
Housing
Waterfront Vision - Preliminary Concept B
Draft Comp Plan Element Review D/R D/R
Draft Perferred Alternative Recommendation D/R
Future Land Use Map Review D/R
Action and Implementation Items D/R
Transpo Plan & Projects, Revised Draft Plan Recommendation D/R D/R
Code Updates
Climate Legislative Package I D
CP Implementation: Middle Housing (HB 1110 - mid 2025) D D
CP Implementation: Centers + Hubs D D
CP Implementation: Design Standards + Processes
(HB 1293 - mid 2025) D
CAO Update (RCW 36.70A.130 - end 2025)I D D PH Rec
Long Range
Capital Improvement Program/Capital Facilties Plan I PH
Tree Canopy Policy
Administrative
Site specific rezone request
Election of Officers I
Planning & Development Annual Work Plan B
Annual Retreat (start at 6)I
Planning Board report to City Council D
Possible Park Renaming I PH
Parks, Recreation & Human Services Report R
KEY
I- Introduction & Discussion Special Meetings/Presentations
PH- Public Hearing January 14, 2025 is a joint meeting with Council
D- Discussion
Rec - Recommendation April 9 is a tentative special meeting
B- Briefing/Q&A
R- Report with no briefing/presentation
Regular meeting cancelled
PB Extended Agenda - December 11, 2024
I RecPH
10.A.a
Packet Pg. 35
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
1
1
E
x
t
e
n
d
e
d
A
g
e
n
d
a
(
E
x
t
e
n
d
e
d
A
g
e
n
d
a
)