Washougal reviews housing‑element draft and code impacts of state middle‑housing and affordability laws

The Washougal City Council on June 9 reviewed a draft housing element for the comprehensive plan periodic update and a preview of follow‑on development‑code changes required by recent state legislation. Elliot Weiss, senior planner for Community Attributes, and Jessica Hrsig, the consultant lead for Dowell, presented the draft and answered council questions about how House Bill 1220 and House Bill 1110 affect local planning and zoning.

The consultants said the draft housing element and housing analysis document summarize Washougal’s current housing stock, show a high and growing share of single‑family detached housing, and translate statutory requirements into targets the city must “plan for and accommodate.” “There are some major changes to state statute…that require you to plan for housing types that have not historically been represented at high rates in Washougal,” Weiss said. He described state requirements that an updated housing element include allocations by area median income (AMI) and that the city’s zoning code must allow middle housing types in single‑family zones.

Key figures presented to the council included a rise in single‑family detached housing from about 70% of the city’s housing inventory in 2000 to about 79% in 2023; a Clark County AMI estimate of roughly $100,000 for 2025; and proposed allocation shifts under the legislation that the presenters summarized as reducing the share of units affordable at 100%+ AMI from 45% to 42%, while increasing the share of units affordable at 0–30% AMI from 3% to 9% and 31–50% AMI from 10% to 12%.

Weiss cautioned that some tools commonly used to encourage affordability—such as multifamily tax exemptions (MFE)—are better suited to workforce and moderate affordability levels than to very low‑income housing and that deep affordability will likely require partnerships with housing authorities and subsidy programs. “It is not the case that MFE is the right tool to try to incentivize housing unit production at very low levels of affordability,” he said. He and other presenters said achieving the lowest AMI targets will probably require coordination with Clark County and the Vancouver Housing Authority and use of federal, state and nonprofit subsidy programs.

House Bill 1110 (the “middle housing” law) requires that certain cities allow duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, cottage housing and townhomes in areas previously zoned exclusively for single‑family homes. The consultants told the council that Washougal’s tier classification requires the city to allow up to two units per lot by right; other implementation details depend on lot size, density rules and development standards. The presentation summarized specific code requirements from the legislation: middle‑housing types must be permitted by right in single‑family zones; development standards for middle housing cannot be more restrictive than for single‑family homes; procedural burdens cannot be imposed on middle housing beyond those for single‑family housing; parking standards are capped (the presenters described a statutory maximum of one off‑street parking space per unit for lots under 6,000 square feet and two per unit for larger lots); and local rules may set setbacks and other dimensional standards so long as they do not effectively preclude middle housing.

The presenters also reviewed other statutory requirements in House Bill 1220: jurisdictions must plan for emergency shelters and permanent supportive housing as part of the allocation for the 0–30% AMI category; cities should consider anti‑displacement and racial equity measures; and Commerce will review whether jurisdictions are making progress toward the AMI allocations over time. Weiss said the Department of Commerce will provide feedback during review and may expect further actions in future periodic updates if development does not track toward the targets.

Councilors asked about implications for homeowners’ associations and private covenants. Presenters said the legislation does not currently preempt existing private covenants and that private covenants generally continue to be enforced unless changed by legislature or court decision; the presenters noted that litigation, judicial decisions or future legislative action could alter that balance. Councilors also asked about mobile‑home parks and whether rezoning could lead to displacement; presenters said anti‑displacement measures are encouraged in the legislation and that individual property transactions would still be subject to private property rights and any applicable county or city procedures.

On schedule, consultants said a Housing Analysis Report and revised draft goals and policies are available for review, that the Bridal Housing Subcommittee has met and will meet again, and that staff will return with specific code‑amendment language. Presenters said statute changes require the city to adopt code changes in close timing with the comprehensive plan adoption; staff projected an implementation period tied to plan adoption with an expected effective date in the first quarter of 2026, and noted the city will need to bundle the code edits with the plan to meet state timeframes. Consultants said they will circulate follow‑up answers to specific council questions and that staff will distribute those materials to council members.