Seattle committee previews interim rules to implement House Bill 11-10, sets one-year window

The Select Committee on the Comprehensive Plan heard an overview March 29 from city planning staff and the mayor’s office on interim legislation the executive proposes to meet the state requirements of House Bill 11-10.

The presentation said the interim ordinance is narrowly written to “comply with house bill 11 10” and other state laws with similar deadlines while the city works toward permanent code changes. The executive proposes the interim rules take effect by June 30 and remain in place for up to one year while staff prepare a permanent package, subject to the hearing examiner’s pending appeals of the comprehensive plan environmental impact statement.

The interim text would require residential lots zoned for housing to allow a wider range of “middle housing” types. “Under the interim legislation you would have lots would be allowed to have up to 4 units per lot or 6 if they're near major transit or 2 are affordable, consistent with HB 11 10,” said Bridal Staley of the Office of Planning and Community Development. The presenters explained the interim approach applies that 4-or-6-unit allowance to existing lots only; subdividing a lot would not preserve extra unit allowances for the new parcels.

Staff described additional numerical standards included in the interim proposal. Floor‑area‑ratio (FAR) would vary with unit count, starting at about 0.6 FAR for a single unit and stepping up to approximately 1.2 FAR for four or more units. Under the interim text, building height limits would generally be about 32 feet (three stories), lot coverage caps would stay near 50 percent, and typical setbacks would be 10 feet front and rear (0 rear where an alley exists) and 5 feet at the side (0 with an alley). Presenters noted garages remain constrained by turn‑radius requirements and may still need 4–8 feet of setback even when alley setbacks are zero.

The interim bill also implements several state mandates cited by staff: updates to clear-and-objective design standards, limits on how cities regulate off‑street parking near frequent transit, and changes to electrical‑vehicle charging standards for new development. Staff said design review for affordable housing may be limited to administrative review and that parking could be exempted within a half‑mile of a major transit stop, consistent with the state model ordinance.

Geographic scope in the interim draft focuses on neighborhood residential zones (NR‑1, NR‑2, NR‑3) and residential small‑lot zones, which together represent roughly two‑thirds of the city’s residentially zoned land, plus adjustments in low‑rise zones needed to comply with state law. Staff said the interim package is intentionally narrower than the permanent legislation: it includes only provisions necessary for legal compliance and those items where the proposed permanent code and the state model ordinance are already closely aligned.

During the briefing council members pressed staff on definitions and impacts: Council President Nelson asked how “frequent transit” is defined; staff replied that the city code definition generally refers to stops served about every 15 minutes during a weekday span (roughly a 10‑hour weekday window) with additional weekend requirements. Council members asked for more detail about lot sizes and FAR tradeoffs; staff said lot sizes in Seattle vary widely, from about 3,000 square feet up to 100,000 square feet or more, and that the permanent code would use a density approach that scales with lot size rather than a single 4‑unit cap.

Staff repeatedly noted one constraint on the interim package: the city’s environmental impact statement for the comprehensive plan is under appeal to the hearing examiner. On attorney advice, staff said the appeals have reduced the set of policy choices the city can put into interim rules and that some desired provisions for the permanent legislation—bonuses to incentivize stacked flats and deeper incentives for low‑income housing—were omitted from the interim text for that reason.

The committee was told the council will hold a public hearing prior to May 30 (the chair said the hearing date will be announced soon) and that the executive expects to transmit permanent HB 11‑10 implementing legislation in May or June, depending on the appeals and law department review schedule. If the council does not pass permanent legislation by the state deadline, staff said the state's model ordinance would go into effect in Seattle.

The presentation closed with staff saying the interim ordinance will include a rationale and a one‑year work plan to finalize permanent code changes; the committee sought additional detail on alignments between the interim and permanent drafts and asked staff to provide more data on lot size distributions and the legal limits imposed by the EIS appeals.

The committee did not take a vote on the interim ordinance at the March 29 briefing; staff will return with additional materials and a public hearing date before the council considers formal action.