Planning commission debates middle-housing fronting, shared yards and garage rules

The Everett Planning Commission on May 20 continued its multiweek review of the Everett 2044 development regulations, focusing on middle-housing design rules that would require new duplexes, triplexes, townhouses and small detached homes to meet objective standards for how buildings face streets, drives and shared yards.

The commission heard staff explain that the neighborhood residential chapter (19.08) is intended to implement the state-required middle-housing code and to keep development “clear and objective.” Planning Director York Stevens Wojd told commissioners, “This is the last great opportunity for the public to come speak to this to the planning commission.” Long Range Planning Manager Lisonbee Wetzel led the technical discussion of options on orientation, yards and garage rules.

Why it matters: the rules determine whether middle-housing can be built in ways that prioritize street-facing front doors and “eyes on the street,” or whether more interior-facing, driveway-oriented layouts with rear garages remain permissible. Commissioners and staff framed the debate as a tradeoff between walkability, public safety and housing production and cost.

Most of the discussion centered on three design elements. First, staff proposed that dwellings either face the street, a shared yard, or a public alley, with possible added flexibility to require only the units closest to the street to front the sidewalk while allowing interior units to face a driveway. Second, the draft sets minimum private yard dimensions at roughly 8 feet by 10 feet (about 80 square feet) or, if no private yard is provided, a shared yard of about 15 by 15 feet. Third, the code retains limits on garage door width relative to the street-facing facade (an existing rule staff noted could limit some townhouse-on-garage layouts).

Staff emphasized the range of parcel types across Everett and offered options rather than a single recommendation. Wetzel said staff is “open to” an option that would require street-facing orientation only for units within a set distance of the street, which staff believes could increase buildable units while preserving street presence.

Speakers from the public and development community urged greater flexibility for garages and driveways. Steven Helpany, a Bothell resident who works on projects in Everett, told the commission: “Garage parking involves driveways, and I'm working on a project right now that has 2 driveways that we've been getting a lot of pushback from the planning department on… anything we can do… to make those easier to develop instead of putting more regulations against it.” Real-estate agent OJ Marston told the commission during public comment that buyers “want garages” and warned that shared yards and HOA-maintained community yards often decline over time.

Commissioners discussed safety and “eyes on the street” as a community benefit of street-facing homes but also raised concerns about feasibility and cost. One commissioner asked for empirical public-health evidence linking building orientation to walking and safety; another noted that different Everett neighborhoods have different lot sizes and connectivity, so a single approach may not work citywide.

Staff clarified several technical points raised by commissioners: current front-yard setbacks in the neighborhood residential zone are 10 feet in front and 5 feet on sides, and staff is considering moving to a 5-foot rear setback for interior-facing units. The state model referenced by staff (Department of Commerce guidance and the International Residential Code) influenced the draft’s objective frontage types (porches, stoops, and similar elements) that would count as “street-facing.”

Outcome and next steps: no vote or formal action occurred. Staff said it will incorporate commissioner feedback and public comments into the final draft to be published before the June 3 planning commission public hearing and the June 11 city council hearing; staff also plans to include a public-comment report and to email materials before the hearings. The commission will be asked to forward a recommendation to council after its June 3 hearing.

The discussion combined earlier public comments, staff proposals and commissioners’ concerns into a set of possible regulatory choices rather than a single adopted direction. The commission signaled interest in preserving street-facing entries near sidewalks while allowing flexibility for interior units and garage access to support housing feasibility.