The URL can be used to link to this page

2024-12-11 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 REMOTE MEETING INFORMATION: Meeting Link:https://edmondswa- gov.zoom.us/s/87322872194?pwd=WFdxTWJIQmxlTG9LZkc3KOhuS014QT09 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 R000m 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 1 11. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS 12. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS 13. ADJOURNMENT Edmonds Planning Board Agenda December 11, 2024 Page 2 2.A 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 Packet Pg. 3 2.A.a 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 Planning Board Meeting Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 1 of 5 Packet Pg. 4 2.A.a 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 11 th 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 g discussed that this did not need to be amended, just to include same going forward. 0 VICE CHAIR GOLEMBIEWSKI MOVED TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 17TH MINUTES AS 2 PRESENTED, WHICH WAS SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER LI. HOWEVER, DISCUSSION a 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 Planning Board Meeting Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 2 of 5 Packet Pg. 5 2.A.a 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. Planning Board Meeting Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 3 of 5 Packet Pg. 6 2.A.a • 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 2 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 a and perhaps have the draft approved with changes to the land use map or perhaps have a special meeting. 2 • There was a preference that the whole draft plan be submitted to Council after the special meeting on c the 4th rather than sending it in two parts. L a THERE WAS A MOTION TO TABLE THE RECOMMENDATION TO DECEMBER 4TH AS A N 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. Planning Board Meeting Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 4 of 5 Packet Pg. 7 2.A.a 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. Planning Board Meeting Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 5 of 5 Packet Pg. 8 7.A 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: Packet Pg. 9 7.A 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 Phase 2 Development regulations required by the Growth Management Act by July 1, 2025 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 Packet Pg. 10 Revised July 2023 3 Middle Housing in Washington: Fact Sheet for Implementing E2SHB 1110 ° 0 L a Topics APPLICABILITY...................................................................................................................................................................2 a� DESIGN AND DENSITY.......................................................................................................................................................3 c LOT SPLITS AND SUBDIVISION..........................................................................................................................................4 w TRANSIT STOPS AND PARKING 4 E ......................................................................................................................................... a ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS: ................................................................................................................................................. 5 0 m a� G 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 c .y 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. W. d 0 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." 0 m What types of assistance will be coming from Commerce? p • Model ordinances: Commerce is directed under the HB 1110 to publish model ordinances no later than six months following the 2 a) 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. c • 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 r local governments can use to communicate about middle housing.' Commerce will also be developing the following to w; w implement the middle housing legislation: Q ■ Middle housing model ordinances and guidance on the requirements m ■ Rules for a process by which cities may seek Commerce approval of an alternative local action necessary to meet the E requirements of the bill.' U ca Q www.commerce.wa.gov/serving-communities/growth-mana eg ment/growth-management-topics/planning-for-middle-housing/ ' See E2SHB 1110, Sec. 4(3) E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023 1 v3.1 I Packet Pg. 11 7.A.a ■ 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.' ■ 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 NEAR A MAJOR TRANSIT WITH AFFORDABLE middle housing units that STOP: Minimum number of HOUSING: Minimum must be allowed per lot in middle housing units that number of middle housing predominately residential must be allowed per lot units that must be allowed zones within Y. mile walking per lot with affordable distance of major transit stop housing in predominately in predominately residential residential zones where zones density in applicable zone does not otherwise allow this number (See also HB 1110, Sec. 3(2)) TIER ONE: Cities with 4 du/lot, unless zoning 6 du/ lot, unless zoning 6 du/lot if at least 2 units population of at least 75,000 permits higher densities permits higher densities are affordable, unless E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(1)(b) zoning permits higher densities TIER TWO: Cities with 2 du/lot unless zoning 4 du/lot, unless zoning 4 du/lot if at least 1 unit is population of at least permits higher densities permits higher densities affordable, unless zoning 25,000 but less than 75,000 permits higher densities E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(1)(a) TIER THREE: Cities with 2 du/lot, unless zoning N/A N/A population under 25,000 permits higher densities 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) 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 ' 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 3 m E2SH6 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023 V3.1 I Packet Pg. 12 7.A.a cities currently subject to the requirements of HB 1110, based on 2020 Office of Financial Management population data, and Commerce's best understanding.' 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.' 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..."' 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. ' 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) 3 m E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023 v3.1 I Packet Pg. 13 7.A.a *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. 3 m 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 density" (i.e., unit count per lot). For example, where a city must > O 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 o upon. a d *NEW* QUESTION JULY 2023 Is a city required to change the name of zoning districts that include "single-family" (or something 'D similar) in the title? No. HB 1110 does not require that a new name, be assigned to a zoning district, however, some cities have n chosen to rename their single-family zones. For example, the City of Walla Walla has renamed its previous "single family" zones as -4a "Neighborhood Residential Zones" which allow both detached and middle housing types. A city that wishes to rename an existing V zoning district, or to create, name, and map a new one, has authority to do so as a legislative action, _ a� LOT SPLITS AND SUBDIVISION g 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 G 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 w 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 a>i development standards such as maximum lot coverage, parking, and setback requirements. d TRANSIT STOPS AND PARKING *NEW* QUESTION JULY 2023: The middle housing bill requires increases in allowed density within "walking distance of a major O 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 m o 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 r r Q 11 E2SHI3 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 y.i _ m 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 v 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 Q section." 11 E2SHI3 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. E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023 V3.1 4 Packet Pg. 14 7.A.a 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 E2SH6 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 % 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 % 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 % 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 3 m Q O m 0 L a W ca a� 0 tU r Q E a O m d G c 0 TO 0 W u d 0 _ M _ =c L O m 0 c N 3 0 x a� r w Q c m E s ca Q E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023 V3.1 I Packet Pg. 15 7.A.a 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 populations less than 25K Cities with population of at that are within a contiguous UGA with least 25k and but less than 75k 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 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023 V3.1 Packet Pg. 16 7.A.a Snohomish 827,957 Des Moines 32,888 I 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 21915 Millwood 1,881 Woodway 1,318 Yarrow Point 1,134 Ruston 1,055 Hunts Point 457 Beaux Arts Village 317 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023 V3.1 Packet Pg. 17 Revised July 2023 Middle Housing in Washington: Fact Sheet for Implementing E2SHB 1110 3 Topics APPLICABILITY...................................................................................................................................................................2 a) > DESIGN AND DENSITY.......................................................................................................................................................3 t5 LOT SPLITS AND SUBDIVISION..........................................................................................................................................4 d 0 a TRANSITSTOPS AND PARKING.........................................................................................................................................4; ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS: ................................................................................................................................................. 5 ca Q. m In 2023, the Washington State Legislature passed E2SHB 1110 ("HB 1110"), which substantially changes the way many cities in �j 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 E passed this session, and has answered certain questions received below, with more to follow. If you have additional questions or CL need for technical assistance, please email dave.osaki@commerce.wa.gov or Anne.Fritzel@commerce.wa.gov. _o m What is middle housing? HB 1110 defines "Middle housing" as "buildings that are compatible in scale, form, and character with Cy single-family houses and contain two or more attached, stacked, or clustered homes including duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, Q fiveplexes, sixplexes, townhouses, stacked flats, courtyard apartments, and cottage housing." of r What types of assistance will be coming from Commerce? r M • 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 N model middle housing ordinances in the fall of 2023 and invited to provide comment. Q • 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. E • 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.' Commerce will also be developing the following to Q 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.' www.commerce.wa.gov/serving-communities/growth-mana eg ment/growth-management-topics/planning-for-middle-housing/ ' See E2SHB 1110, Sec. 4(3) E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023 V3.1 Packet Pg. 18 7.A.b ■ 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.' ■ 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 NEAR A MAJOR TRANSIT WITH AFFORDABLE middle housing units that STOP: Minimum number of HOUSING: Minimum must be allowed per lot in middle housing units that number of middle housing predominately residential must be allowed per lot units that must be allowed zones within Y. mile walking per lot with affordable distance of major transit stop housing in predominately in predominately residential residential zones where zones density in applicable zone does not otherwise allow this number (See also HB 1110, Sec. 3(2)) TIER ONE: Cities with 4 du/lot, unless zoning 6 du/ lot, unless zoning 6 du/lot if at least 2 units population of at least 75,000 permits higher densities permits higher densities are affordable, unless E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(1)(b) zoning permits higher densities TIER TWO: Cities with 2 du/lot unless zoning 4 du/lot, unless zoning 4 du/lot if at least 1 unit is population of at least permits higher densities permits higher densities affordable, unless zoning 25,000 but less than 75,000 permits higher densities E2SHB 1110, Sec. 3(1)(a) TIER THREE: Cities with 2 du/lot, unless zoning N/A N/A population under 25,000 permits higher densities 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) 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 ' 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 a Q u_ E2SH6 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023 V3.1 I Packet Pg. 19 7.A.b cities currently subject to the requirements of HB 1110, based on 2020 Office of Financial Management population data, and Commerce's best understanding.' 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 3 bill focuses instead on the number of dwelling units on a lot, not on a per acre basis. Local jurisdictions may need to d _minimum review and amend comprehensive plan policies and development regulations to take this into consideration, at least for accommodating middle housing. p How can cities adopt design and development standards that reflect differences between detached single -unit houses and 'o "middle housing" types? One way to adopt design and development standards that reflect differences between detached single- a unit houses and "middle housing" types is to adopt standards for middle housing that are less restrictive than existing standards 4) required for detached single-family residences. Because HB 1110 Section (6)(b) states that middle housing regulations may not be Q. "more restrictive" than for detached single-family residences, there is flexibility for some standards to be less restrictive.' One example might be to allow driveway widths that are narrower for certain middle housing types than for a detached house. The less c restrictive standard, however, must still be objective (see further below in a separate question regarding EHB 1293's objective U development regulations). _ m E An alternate way to adopt design and development standards is through the administrative design review process in HB 1110 0 Section 3(6)(a). "Administrative design review" is defined, in part, as, "...a development permit process whereby an application is m reviewed, approved, or denied by the planning director or the planning director's designee based solely on objective design and a development standards without a public predecision hearing..."' Objective design review standards enable a city to adopt those Cy 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 a existing requirements for a detached single family residence so long as these design and development standards are "objective" and r 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 N *NEW* QUESTION JULY 2023: Can a city still have a design review board? While some cities may choose to have a design review r Q board review certain types of permits, e.g., for commercial development, HB 1110 allows only administrative design review for c middle housing. This means that the planning director or the planning director's designee must decide based on objective criteria, m E and not a design review board.10 Another 2023 bill, ESHB 1293, places constraints on all design review, not just for housing, including 0 a limitation of no more than one public meeting and the requirement to use only "clear and objective" development regulations. M Q ' 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) E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023 v3.1 I Packet Pg. 20 7.A.b *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 density" (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 " E2SHI3 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." 11 E2SHI3 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. 3 m E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023 4 v3.1 I Packet Pg. 21 7.A.b 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 E2SH6 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 % 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 % 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 % 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 3 m 0 d 0 a a� ca a m 0 U m E Q 0 m m E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023 V3.1 I Packet Pg. 22 7.A.b 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 I 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 E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023 V3.1 I Packet Pg. 23 Snohomish 827,957 Des Moines 32,888 i 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 21915 Millwood 1,881 Woodway 1,318 Yarrow Point 1,134 Ruston 1,055 Hunts Point 457 Beaux Arts Village 317 3 m E2SHB 1110 MIDDLE HOUSING PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, JULY 13, 2023 V3.1 Packet Pg. 24 7.A.c 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. TIER ONE: Cities with population of at least 75,000 HB 1110, Sec. 3(1)(b) TIER TWO: Cities with population between 25,000 and 75,000 HB 1110, Sec. 3(1)(a) 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) Four du/lot on all lots zoned predominantly residential, unless zoning permits higher densities Two du/lot on all lots zoned predominantly residential, unless zoning permits higher densities Two 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 Four 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 Four du/lot on all lots predominantly residential if one unit is affordable 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/ WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2O24 Packet Pg. 25 7.A.c 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 3 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 O w areas or other unsuitable physical characteristics of a property. a 0 In addition, cities and counties: w • 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 E • May not charge more than 50% of the impact fees charged for the principal unit. a� If a city or county does not adopt rules consistent with the law, then state law will "supersede, preempt and o 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 36.7013 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 36.7013.120(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. SIB 5290 makes changes to local government procedures for new housing permit processing. It amends RCW 36.7013, to improve clarity on the timelines around complete permit applications. For applications received after January 1, 2025, Section 7 amends RCW 36.7013 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 WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2O24 5 Packet Pg. 26 7.A.c take additional measures to enable timely permit processing, with additional direction to improve permitting over time. 2SSB 5412 amends RCW 43.21 C.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. w t5 as SIB 5258 (section 10) amends RCW 82.02.060 to require local governments to publish a schedule of impact ° a 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. c U 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. E This is required with the next periodic update. 2 a� Making it easier for multi -unit housing development. as HB 1042 adds a new section to RCW 35A.21 and RCW 35.21 and loosens restrictions on adding housing within c existing multifamily buildings by exempting the added units from density limits, parking and other regulatory L requirements. This must be in effect within six months after the periodic update due date. SIB 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 SIB 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 WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2O24 6 Packet Pg. 27 7.A.c 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 O Units for moderate, low, very low, and extremely low-income households; and O 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.' 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. 3 m m O .o L a a a� 0 t� as E 0- 0 m am 0 WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2O24 11 Packet Pg. 28 7.A.c 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".' 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: 3 O Incorporating consideration for low, very low, extremely low, and moderate -income households; O Documenting programs and actions needed to achieve housing availability including gaps in local funding, barriers such as development regulations, and other limitations; p O Consideration of housing locations in relation to employment locations; and a O Consideration of the role of accessory dwelling units in meeting housing needs. o a See HB 1220 Web Page for more information. a a� 0 Communities must examine racially disparate impacts, displacement and exclusion E Communities must now review past discriminative land use practices and take steps to address and prevent 2 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 c to examine include consideration of the following: 3 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/ WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2O24 12 Packet Pg. 29 7.A.c 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). 3: 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 o include anti -displacement policies, which consider: 0 as (h)Preservation of historical and cultural communities as well as investments in low, very low, extremely low, a 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 a affordable housing. a� Commerce has been developing more detailed guidance to address this section, including methodologies to U identify places with racially disparate impacts and displacement risk and examples of anti -displacement policies.10 See HB 1220 Web Page. a 0 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 o 49.60.224, RCW 49.60.227 provides ways to legally address such statements on a deed or title. See Racial N Restrictive Covenants Project - Washington and Restrictive Covenants Database (washington.edu). N 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. WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2O24 13 Packet Pg. 30 7.A.c 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. 3 a� a� 0 w .o a` a� a a� 0 as E 0- 0 0 0 0 WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2O24 14 Packet Pg. 31 7.A.c (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. 3 (19) Permanent supportive housing means subsidized, leased housing with no limit on length of stay that m prioritizes people who need comprehensive support services to retain tenancy and utilizes admissions p practices designed to use lower barriers to entry than would be typical for other subsidized or unsubsidized t5 rental housing, especially related to rental history, criminal history, and personal behaviors. Permanent o supportive housing is paired with on -site or off -site voluntary services designed to support a person living with a a complex and disabling behavioral health or physical health condition who was experiencing homelessness or a� a was at imminent risk of homelessness prior to moving into housing to retain their housing and be a successful CL tenant in a housing arrangement, improve the resident's health status, and connect the resident of the housing a) with community -based health care, treatment, or employment services. Permanent supportive housing is C c.� subject to all of the rights and responsibilities defined in chapter 59.18 RCW. _ a� E (30) Very low-income household means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living together whose c 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 o development. Iq 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." 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; WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2O24 15 Packet Pg. 32 7.A.c • 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 3 • Not requiring a separate utility connection from an ADU, and if needed, fees should be eliminated, or made proportional to impact. 0 w as SIB 5235 amended RCW 36.70A.696, pertaining to accessory dwelling units. Gov. Inslee vetoed several o components of this bill, while sections 2, 5, 6 and 7 were signed into law. Section 2 added two new definitions a a� that could be useful to local governments: a (8) Owner means any person who has at least 50 percent ownership in a property on which an accessory dwelling unit is located. 0 (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 c fewer than 30 consecutive nights. a� 0 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 SIB 5287: The Legislature passed major revisions to the Multifamily Tax Exemption (MFTE) program in SIB 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 WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING LAWS 2019 THROUGH 2O24 16 Packet Pg. 33 10.A 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 Packet Pg. 34 10.A.a PB Extended Agenda - December 11, 2024 Comprehensive •. Transportation Waterfront Vision -Preliminary Concept Draft Comp Plan Element Reviewmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Draft Perferred Alternative Recommendation Future Land Use Map Reviewmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Action and Implementation ltemsmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Transpo Plan & Projects, Revised Draft Plan Recommendation Code Updates Climate Legislative Package CP Implementation: Design Standards.1293 -mid Processes0 .■........ .......0 ■........ .. .Update • -end mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm MM Improvement Program/Capital Facilties Plan Tree Canopy Policymmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm AdministrativeCapital Site specific rezone requestmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Election of Officersmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Planning& Development Annual Work Plan Annual Retreat (start at Planning Board report to City Council Possible Park Renamingmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Parks, Recreation & Human Services Reportmmmmmmmmmmmmnmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm KEY I- Introduction & Discussion PH- Public Hearing D- Discussion Rec - Recommendation B- Briefing/Q&A R- Report with no briefing/presentation Regular meeting cancelled Special Meetings/Presentations January 14, 2025 is a joint meeting with Council April 9 is a tentative special meeting a X W _ a X W Packet Pg. 35