Task force presses cities on tiny-shelter permitting, cites 2–3 week target vs. multi-year reality

Task Force members and housing providers pressed city and county planners and building officials for faster, clearer permitting paths for tiny shelters and tiny-home villages, saying temporary, church-hosted solutions should be deliverable within weeks rather than years. County and city staff said the regulatory path depends on the structure and site. Tiny homes that are permanent residences (under 400 square feet) are subject to building codes and, where prefabricated, require LNI or HUD certification, staff said. Tiny shelters – temporary, emergency structures used to house people experiencing homelessness – are not fully contemplated by the state residential code and often require case-by-case review for life-safety, utility connections and stormwater. Sequim and Port Angeles staff said some temporary uses can be permitted administratively for up to one year; longer-term uses implicate zoning, impact fees and sometimes conditional-use processes. Municipal officials flagged utilities and general facility charges (GFCs) as material costs that cannot be waived in most cases because water and sewer operate as enterprise funds. Port Angeles staff described a menu of local incentives — sales-and-use tax grants and a community improvement grant for utility costs — intended to lower development costs for affordable and transitional housing. Builders, shelter operators and a county plans examiner described a “learning curve” for both jurisdictions and developers. Several presenters urged standard “minimum requirements for health, life and safety” — for example, standardized nailing patterns, heater clearances and anchoring instructions — to create a predictable, fast track for shelters built from repeatable components. Providers described models in neighboring jurisdictions where churches host temporary villages that later convert to permanent supportive housing, and stressed the need for transition pathways so residents are not left without exit options. Task Force members asked lawmakers and staff why cities do not simply waive all fees and land-use steps; municipal staff and a public works official noted some fees and impact charges are statutory or fund-specific and cannot be unilaterally waived. The group discussed proposed state legislation cited by a Task Force member that would preempt local limits on RV living in urban growth areas (Senate Bill 5334 and House Bill 1443 as cited in the meeting transcript). The Task Force agreed to continue the topic at a future meeting and to form a small working group to develop recommendations to the Housing Solutions Committee.