[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6308141,"mediaKeyId","2424947-ffa440f34c8777435644641d903cdaa5","parentId",2424947,"title","ARCH presents middle-housing options; commission asks staff for draft ordinance in March","audioSeconds",9088,"startMs",1449000,"endMs",10537000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2424947-ffa440f34c8777435644641d903cdaa5&start=1449&end=10537","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2424947-ffa440f34c8777435644641d903cdaa5/thumbnail_1449000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6308141/Washington/ARCH-presents-middle-housing-options-commission-asks-staff-for-draft-ordinance-in-March","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6308141-6687ad442e2b994dc2bade4ae1b09cd4/orig.mp4?Expires=1775379399&Signature=E1V1fWWoABmxOqZt5BxTq~T5xiWV~CIvsRt1Lz0vAULNFfuoDilwjTsOI2tBOVqLwqRFzCCDZ8Gb9osMd-7KvXl4Q-dXvcS4hu0GXkSSGlB-fbW2YYTaV2ZPxloT2Rt4N2HUkUoQSx7uWf7HFUfoS1hZ1skPDAup6UaWhvVrD700vmNH~UdV3FpacwyuOJ20IH~Fwoh6LW5vg1nuyVdNZVlZMKLY4TDv0a-wWxEupxxf4MeNwDRRSSrE3WYtquvprtEAA6lpKjnexAUVy2wJI-tFzjeX4cDyi4a-2ryoyVSVLxChjceAiuHPLXOx3oFXwB1Yi-QjTmX9OHg2yvWTOQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Newcastle, WA","date","2025-02-27T01:50:09Z","article","City planning staff and ARCH, a regional housing coalition, briefed the Newcastle Planning Commission on middle-housing requirements and inclusionary-housing options during the Feb. 26 meeting, outlining how the state-mandated allowance for duplexes and other “middle housing” could be paired with local policies to generate affordable units.

Lindsay Masters, executive director of ARCH, told the commission that ARCH and its member jurisdictions have used a mix of strategies — including inclusionary zoning, fees in lieu and local investments — to produce affordable rental and for-sale homes across East King County. ARCH staff said the coalition has helped produce roughly 10,000 affordable homes regionwide and that ARCH-administered inclusionary programs have delivered more than 2,300 rental units and about 800 homeownership units in member cities.

ARCH’s feasibility work, Masters said, shows that allowing additional density typically raises land value, which creates an opportunity to capture value for affordable housing. At the same time, she cautioned that middle-housing product types in East King County often remain expensive without subsidies; ARCH’s market work indicated that many middle-housing configurations would still require household incomes above typical local medians to be market-rate attainable without incentive programs.

Key points from the presentation and discussion

- State requirement and timeline: Staff and ARCH reminded the commission that state middle-housing rules require local code changes this year; the state model code will inform the city’s updates and some state provisions take effect in July.

- Minimum local changes: Newcastle will be required to allow two units per residential lot (e.g., duplexes or stacked flats) and to permit up to two accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on single-family lots, consistent with state law.

- Inclusionary options: ARCH described how jurisdictions apply inclusionary requirements (for example, Redmond’s 10% requirement at 80% AMI, which Redmond later raised to 12.5% in its update) and how fees in lieu are calculated and pooled for regional projects. Kirkland’s model applies inclusionary requirements to projects of four or more units and uses fees in lieu for smaller projects.

- Local examples and feasibility: ARCH noted a Newcastle example (Lake Warren Townhomes) that included three deed-restricted affordable units at 80% AMI. ARCH’s study showed that without additional incentives, many middle-housing types would be affordable in form but not in price to moderate- and lower-income households in the regional market.

Commissioner questions focused on practical implementation: whether fees in lieu tend to be paid rather than affordable units built on-site, how fee levels would affect small infill projects, and whether fee revenue could be used locally (commissioners were told cities usually set policy direction to invest fees locally but may invest regionally if no viable local projects exist). Officers also discussed exemptions for very small units (Sammamish exempts homes under 1,000 square feet) and the practicality of applying a citywide fee requirement to scattered small subdivisions or single-lot infill.

Staff direction and timeline

Planner Aaron (staff) said the commission’s feedback would be used to prepare a draft middle-housing ordinance in March. The staff timeline presented in the meeting indicated a draft ordinance would be returned to the commission next month, followed by ordinance review, a public hearing and anticipated City Council adoption later in the spring/early summer, aligned with state deadlines.

Clarifying numbers and context

- ARCH reported having a regional mailing list of about 10,000 households seeking affordable housing opportunities.
- Newcastle currently has about 60 units designated for extremely low-income households but the stated local need figure discussed was roughly 250 units at that level.
- ARCH and member jurisdictions reported having pooled roughly $100 million in local resources across decades to leverage state and federal funding.

Ending

Commissioners asked staff to return with a draft ordinance in March that reflects the commission’s guidance: consider applying inclusionary requirements with exemptions for very small projects or units, outline a fee-in-lieu formula for small developments, and present options for how fee revenue would be spent or prioritized. The commission did not adopt any binding inclusionary percentages or fee amounts; those details will be part of the staff’s ordinance draft and later public hearings.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","2025-02-26 Planning Commission","oneSentenceSummary","ARCH outlined how inclusionary zoning, fees in lieu and incentives can produce affordable units alongside middle housing; commissioners asked staff to return with a draft ordinance in March and discussed exemptions, fee triggers and implementation details.","taxTitle","City Council Meetings, Newcastle, King County, Washington","taxId",71821,"location","Washington","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6308146,"Planning commission forwards revised comprehensive plan after heated DEI and connected-streets debate",8009,87000,8096000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2424947-ffa440f34c8777435644641d903cdaa5&start=87&end=8096","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2424947-ffa440f34c8777435644641d903cdaa5/thumbnail_87000.jpg","/articles/6308146/Washington/Planning-commission-forwards-revised-comprehensive-plan-after-heated-DEI-and-connected-streets-debate","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6308146-1191243753d031e9a43c49a5a80de1c9/orig.mp4?Expires=1775379399&Signature=ZUaBrsUFX-XMGUJeTxy8w-6T4t9pdaVydQIKK06NpXNxuvy1wjxH0DVtMxr8~CdtwkhSSMOI9h8oFN5Dtci3EbMXPU6Z0KgfuJPu~lIr0QkcTV4~mFKjYVz1~FbyWPAQjG2qhe1MyBpUk7ky4X-D5CqCFURl5g2hCACzDoost4SSYaKuzzMs3XGKnJ5oGOCOXkeTpqoz7r5cch3Xy856V67lJptT0hnej1ycIjGkoy0GrEEEZsetxZci~Nx1JCaFtHVGTlsEwEl3fBz9U0z4Eexx5rBgzF5toLp0aSkhImLaZ7mtWPClw3o7l3vex4vaOKAQzM-ExkUWBgrxoG9VWw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Newcastle Planning Commission voted 4–3 on Feb. 26 to forward a revised draft of the city’s comprehensive plan and three supplemental exhibit packages to the City Council, after an extended public hearing and several competing motions on how extensively the commission should revise the draft before sending it on.

The commission’s decision sends the plan — including edits compiled as “Exhibits 8, 9 and 10” — to council with direction that staff apply the edits in Exhibit 10 first, then Exhibit 9, and notify the council of any portions that staff believe may conflict with state law. Commissioners later directed staff to prepare a single draft reflecting that approach for the March council packet.

The vote followed a divided public hearing in which speakers urged both retention and removal of language on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) and voiced differing views on whether the commission should finalize more edits or move the item to the council for additional debate. Mary Vickers, who said she has been a Newcastle homeowner nine years, urged commissioners to “stay the course and not let political pressure derail a plan that was carefully crafted with community input.” Several other speakers — including Jennifer McAleer and Allison Sweeney — also urged keeping DEI language. By contrast, speakers such as Tom Griffin and other commenters argued the DEI language was unnecessary or divisive.

Commission debate turned on process and scope as much as on substance. Commissioner Scott Marsh moved to adopt and forward the version of the plan that had been on the table at the Jan. 22 meeting; that motion failed on a 3–4 roll call. Commissioner Christian Blocker then moved to forward the draft with Exhibits 8–10 and the staff-direction language; Vice Chair Trautman seconded that motion and it passed 4–3 after an amendment to make Exhibit 10 the primary source when exhibits conflicted.

Director Erin Fitzgibbons and the city attorney flagged specific concerns about the format and legal clarity of some proposed edits. Commissioners who supported forwarding argued the council is the appropriate forum to resolve outstanding disputes and that lengthy continued deliberation at the commission would delay the statutory schedule. Commissioners opposing the forward motion said the commission’s role is precisely to vet and resolve edits so council receives a clarified, internally agreed draft.

The commission’s action does not finalize policy. Staff will assemble the final consolidated draft for council and will attach staff notes where wording may raise legal issues or need further clarification. The commission also directed staff to note priorities so Exhibit 10’s language is applied in preference to Exhibit 9 where the two conflict.

Votes at a glance

- Motion to adopt the Jan. 22 draft of the comprehensive plan and forward it to council (moved by Commissioner Marsh; seconded by Commissioner Van Natta): failed, vote record — Marsh: yes; Gack: no; Lowe: no; Van Natta: yes; Blocker: no; Vice Chair Trautman: no; Chair Gazzic: yes. Outcome: failed.

- Motion to forward the draft plan with Exhibits 8, 9 and 10 and direct staff to apply Exhibit 10 first and notify council of any potential conflicts with state law (moved by Commissioner Blocker; seconded by Vice Chair Trautman): approved, vote record — Marsh: no; Gack: yes; Lowe: yes; Van Natta: no; Blocker: yes; Vice Chair Trautman: yes; Chair Gazzic: no. Outcome: approved.

What’s next

City staff will prepare the consolidated draft and related staff notes for the City Council’s packet. The commission was told the item is likely to appear on the City Council agenda in March. Commissioners and staff emphasized that any further legal or technical corrections identified by staff will be forwarded to council as staff comments rather than held up at the commission level.

Community context

Testimony at the hearing reflected strong community engagement and sharply differing views on whether explicit DEI language belongs in the comprehensive plan and how to balance neighborhood character concerns with state-required housing changes. Commissioners repeatedly noted that continued public interest and recent turnover on the commission have fed the intensity of discussion.

Ending

The council will receive the draft with the commission’s direction and staff annotations. If the council requests additional edits, staff and the commission may return to the item later; commissioners said they expect the state-required updates (including housing elements tied to new state law) to remain on a fast timeline because some elements take effect in July.

","After hours of public testimony and internal debate, the Newcastle Planning Commission voted 4–3 to forward a version of the updated comprehensive plan and three related exhibit packages to city council, directing staff to prioritize the most recent edits and flag any legal conflicts.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

ARCH presents middle-housing options; commission asks staff for draft ordinance in March

Planning commission forwards revised comprehensive plan after heated DEI and connected-streets debate