Sherwood issues 94 building permits in 2024; staff flags need for new subdivisions and tracks state housing bills

Sean Conrad, Sherwood land manager, told the City Council the city issued 94 residential building permits in calendar year 2024 and recorded 93 units constructed, and that “the vast majority of those are detached single family homes.”

The report, presented as the city’s annual housing report for the 2024 calendar year, outlined permit and construction totals, the city’s current vacant lot inventory in previously approved subdivisions, and state housing legislation the city will track. City staff said no new land subdivisions were approved in 2024 and that two minor residential lot partitions and one industrial partition from the Sherwood Commerce Phase 3 application remain under review.

Council members and staff said the city’s recent permit and construction levels reflect a five‑year high and that maintaining that pace will require new lot subdivisions or partitions. Staff also reviewed three bills in a 2024 state housing package, including regulatory changes tied to HB/measure referenced as HP 2001 (middle housing) and a funding bill staff called 1537, and described a pathway by which Sherwood may seek exemptions from some mandatory adjustment provisions in the new law.

City staff emphasized why the numbers matter. The housing report is intended to monitor production, track progress on council livability goals for 2024–25, and provide a basis for city planning and legislative engagement. “We started the annual housing report last year…this is 2024, so we’re doing a calendar year,” Eric (staff member) said when introducing the presentation. The report is a deliverable tied to the council’s pillar on livability.

The most immediate figures: 94 permits issued, 93 units constructed; about 10% of the 2024 permits were for multifamily townhouses (nine units), with most activity tied to detached single‑family lots. Staff noted only four accessory dwelling unit (ADU) applications were on record for the period discussed. Subdivision approvals were zero for new subdivisions in 2024, but staff said there are multiple previously approved lots and two pending minor residential partitions that would create three lots each if approved.

On state legislation, staff summarized three bills described internally as a “housing package.” Two bills focused on funding (grants and loans with income thresholds) and the middle bill created a housing production accountability office and included new requirements for cities on adjustments and variances where density exceeds 17 units per acre. Staff said some code options in Sherwood may allow the city to apply for exemptions to parts of the new mandatory adjustment requirements; staff will confer with the state and the city’s land use attorney over the next two weeks to determine which line‑item adjustments could be excluded from the state requirement. “We can actually apply for an exception to that mandatory law,” the presenter said, adding that staff would “look into this” and follow up.

Staff previewed local development outlook and planning work: continued permits and construction in the Brookman/Brookman (referred to in the presentation as Brookman) addition and Denali area, expected interest along Highway 99 and Sherwood Boulevard for higher‑density proposals, and the upcoming Sherwood West comprehensive planning effort, which staff said will include housing policy and site‑specific proposals. Staff estimated there may be “anywhere between another 100 and 200 lots” available in mapped but not yet serviced areas of the Brookman addition and said the Brookman trunk line infrastructure (estimated locally at about $4 million) is a key project for unlocking those lots.

Councilors pressed staff on details relating to permit time limits and program uptake: staff said a typical building permit is valid about six months and a subdivision approval about two years. Council members also asked why middle‑housing options created under HP 2001 have seen limited take‑up; staff said timing and financing matter (subdivisions often were planned before HP 2001 existed) and that market demand in Sherwood has so far favored single‑family product. “It’s probably why…buyer demand,” one council member said in a discussion of why developers are not using higher‑density options more frequently.

Staff offered to include more analysis in future reports (for example, progress versus the city’s housing needs analysis), noting the city is required to produce a detailed housing needs analysis every six years but could add high‑level progress metrics in next year’s annual report.

City staff concluded by inviting council feedback on what additional housing metrics or analysis the council would like included.