Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Adus And Design topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission discusses state ADU mandates, single‑family design guidelines and tiny‑home questions

2959398 · April 8, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Commissioners and staff reviewed state ADU guidance, potential local limits (utilities, hookups, impact fees), single‑family design guidance and tiny‑home/village issues; public commenter urged careful implementation and raised unit‑lot subdivision and density concerns.

Planning staff and commissioners spent an extended portion of the meeting on accessory dwelling units (ADUs), single‑family design guidelines and tiny homes, outlining the limits the state law imposes and the local choices the city still controls. "We can't probably prohibit the sale of a condominium unit independently of a principal unit solely on the grounds that the condominium unit was originally built as an ADU," Staff member Chris read from guidance in the packet.

Staff said the state law narrows local discretion on several points but that the city can still require utility hookups and set some impact‑fee policies. "One allowance we do have and something we can regulate is we can require them to be hooked up to utilities," Chris said, adding that the city can require connections to water and sewer and could disallow septic hookups for ADUs in some cases. Staff also said municipalities can collect up to 50% of typical impact fees for ADUs (water, sewer, storm, traffic, park and school impact fees) and that whether ADUs can have separate utility hookups remains a local decision in many cases.

Commissioners discussed design guidelines for ADUs so new units would be visually compatible with existing homes. "If we have the design guidelines for the single family, then we can have them for the ADUs," one commissioner said, noting the town's diverse housing stock means guidelines must be flexible. Staff cautioned that design rules for new houses are different from rules that could be applied to century‑old houses.

Public comment: resident Josh Osford urged caution and a phased approach. He urged the commission to study how other nearby cities regulate RVs, tiny homes and ADUs, including Enumclaw's permit approach for temporarily occupied RVs and unit‑lot subdivision rules. "If my plan was to build an ADU, move her out of that single wide mobile into that option, a little ADU, she'd be totally fine," Osford said, describing how lower‑cost ADUs could meet pressing housing needs for lower‑income renters in Buckley. He also noted an apparent change in the comp plan's density language and asked staff to confirm math used to compute units per acre.

Next steps: staff asked commissioners to review state guidance and the form‑based code examples, then compile recommendations for council at the next meeting. Commissioners will also consider draft single‑family design guidelines before forwarding advice to city council.