The Senate version, SB 5184, will be voted on in committee and the House version is getting a hearing and vote in the same week. 1299 is sponsored by Rep. Strom Peterson (D–Edmonds). These bills appear to have momentum so please reach out to your delegation with specific examples of why this prescriptive mandate will not address your community’s needs.

Date to remember

HB 1299 will be heard in the House Local Government Committee on Tuesday, February 4 at 10:30 am and voted on in the same committee on Friday, February 7 at 10:30 am.

SB 5184 is scheduled for a vote in the Senate Housing Committee on Wednesday, February 5 at 10:30 am.

Another bill restricts cities’ ability to ensure parking is provided with development

January 20, 2025

Despite years of parking reform legislation, SB 5184 is proposed as the Parking Reform and Modernization Act.

State law already requires or allows the following parking reductions:

• Capping parking minimums for middle housing, including near transit stops (RCW 36.70A.635) (* The bill creates new language that conflicts with this law)
• Capping parking minimums for low-income, seniors, people with disabilities, and multifamily housing units within one-quarter mile of certain transit stops (RCW 36.70A.620); (*The bill strikes and amends this law creating a conflict with the requirements passed in 2023 – Minimum residential density, above)
• Eliminating off-street parking requirements for accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and co-living housing (defined as small apartments with shared kitchens) within one-quarter mile of major transit stops (RCW 36.70A.698 and RCW 36.70A.535);
• Including parking reductions as part of affordable housing incentive programs (RCW 36.70A.540).
• Offering developers flexibility in meeting minimum parking requirements (RCW 36.70A.622).

Proposed by Sen. Jessica Bateman (D–Olympia), SB 5184 preempts a city from requiring the following, except for accessible spaces required under the Americans with Disability Act:

1. More than 0.5 parking space per residential dwelling unit.
2. More than one parking space per 1,000 feet of commercial space.
3. Any minimum parking requirements for:
   1. Existing buildings undergoing change of use, including vacant buildings;
   2. Residences under 1,200 square feet;
   3. Commercial spaces under 5,000 square feet;
   4. Affordable housing;
   5. Senior housing;
   6. Housing for people with disabilities;
   7. Facilities that serve alcohol;
   8. Child care facilities; or
   9. Commercial spaces in mixed-use projects.
4. For cities 10,000 and above in population and planning under the Growth Management Act and within a county with a population density exceeding 100 people per square mile may not require off-street parking for multifamily, middle, or ADU housing located with a half-mile walking distance of transit service

In addition to the preemption, conflicts of state law, yet another definition of transit service, and overreach by the state in managing what is fundamentally a local, site specific issue, we are also concerned about how this proposal impacts the level of service requirements that the GMA imposes on local government.

The presumption seems to be that developers will choose to provide parking at a reasonable level that does not spill over and clog streets, and that transit service is far more widespread—and used—than it is. Even for the dedicated multimodal users among us (and this author is one) we still need to park our car somewhere.

Date to remember

SB 5184 will be heard in the Senate Housing Committee on Friday, January 24 at 10:30 am.