by
<a href="mailto:carls@awcnet.org">Carl Schroeder</a>, <a href="mailto:shannonm@awcnet.org">Shannon McClelland</a> | Apr 10, 2023
After countless hours working with the sponsor and advocates on the proposed middle housing legislation, the bill has arrived at a place that is closely aligned with AWC’s Housing Solutions Group (HSG) proposal.
After countless hours working with the sponsor and advocates on the proposed middle housing legislation, the bill has arrived at a place that is closely aligned with AWC’s Housing Solutions Group (HSG) proposal. Based on these changes, AWC now supports
the bill.
A major change to HB 1110 was adopted in the Senate Ways & Means Committee, restructuring the provisions related
to “contiguous UGAs” that captured many smaller cities and applied the highest standards to them regardless of their population. Multiple compliance options have been added, including one that closely matches the HSG proposal. As it stands
now, the density requirements are as follows:
Current version of HB 1110:
Population | All residential lots | ¼ mile from major transit | Affordability |
|---|
75,000+ | Four units per lot | Six units per lot | Six units per lot if at least two are affordable (60% AMI for rental, 80% AMI for homeownership) |
25,000-74,999 | Two units per lot | Four units per lot | Four units if 1 is affordable (60% AMI for rental, 80% AMI for homeownership) |
Less than 25,000 and contiguous with the largest city in a county, if county population is over 275,000.* | Two units per lot | N/A | N/A |
*If the city’s UGA touches any other UGA that, ultimately, touches the UGA of the largest city.
AWC Housing Solutions Group proposal:
Population | All residential lots | ½ mile from major transit | Affordability |
|---|
Any population | N/A | No maximum density if affordable. | 20% of units are affordable at 80% of AMI or below. |
20,000+ | 75% of lots allow three units per lot.
Alternative: Allow three units per lot near schools, parks, and ¼ mi from arterials. | N/A | N/A |
As the bill has moved forward, more alternative compliance and grandfathering provisions have been added that recognize different routes to the same policy objective:
- As an alternative to the density requirements above, city may implement those density requirements on 75% of their lots primarily dedicated to single family housing. The other 25% of cannot include, unless identified as a displacement risk: lots previously
covered by racially restrictive covenants, areas for which exclusion would further racially disparate impacts, or areas within ½ mile of a major transit stop.
- Cities who have already adopted a comprehensive plan or development regulations by January 1, 2023, that is similar can request approval of the Department of Commerce that their plan and regulations are “substantially similar” to those
of the state law. Cities have one year from the effective date of the bill (July 22,2023) to adopt permanent developments regulations that are substantially similar to the requirements in the bill. The bill includes the following criteria that,
when combined, Commerce must deem as substantially similar:
- Result in an overall increase in housing units allowed in single-family zones that is at least 75% of the increase in housing units allowed in single-family zones if the specific provisions of this act were adopted;
- Allow for middle housing throughout the city, rather than just in targeted locations; and
- Allow for additional density near major transit stops, and for projects that incorporate dedicated affordable housing.
The bill also requires Commerce to publish model middle housing ordinances no later than six months following the effective date of the bill, which is July 22, 2023. Cities have until six months after their next comprehensive plan update to comply with
the bill requirements, based on their 2020 population.
HB 1110 now awaits a floor vote in the Senate.
From the press release announcing our change in position on the bill:
“Cities of all sizes in every part of Washington feel deeply that we need to increase housing supply and affordability,” said Carl Schroeder, Deputy Director of Government Relations at the Association of Washington Cities. “It’s
important to address the housing needs of our residents, particularly those making lower incomes. As our state’s housing affordability crisis only grows, cities are looking at partnerships to come up with creative solutions to a very complicated
and nuanced problem. We are working hard to make sure that proposals are workable in our very diverse cities. With that, cities around the state are reaching to the middle to work on and eventually support many creative policy changes such as this
middle housing bill — because our housing challenge requires an all-hands-on-deck approach.”
“Local governments are ready and willing,” Schroeder said, “to build on our longstanding partnership with the state to work together and create a variety of solutions that will benefit all our shared residents, including our most vulnerable.
In addition to this proposal and some key regulatory reforms that are advancing this session, the next step is to ensure we can marry these policy changes with the needed dedicated resources to increase affordable housing production.”