Mountlake Terrace staff present draft middle‑housing code changes ahead of June public hearings
Loading...
Summary
City planners and consultants gave a first formal review of nine draft ordinances to implement middle‑housing (state HB 1110/HB 137) changes across new R1–R4 residential zones. The presentation simplifies scale controls by using floor‑area‑ratio (FAR), adds bonuses for public benefits, and sets a June 26 public hearing date.
City planning staff and consultants presented a consolidated first draft of nine code amendments on June 5 to implement middle‑housing requirements and related design standards for the city’s new residential zone map.
Community and Economic Development Director Christy Osborne and consultants outlined proposed changes the council asked for after an earlier meeting: simplified scale controls using floor‑area‑ratio (FAR), adjusted lot‑coverage limits, new height and setback rules, and bonuses to encourage public benefits such as tree retention, new alleys, mid‑block connections and sustainability features.
Why it matters: State law expanding middle‑housing options requires cities to adopt rules allowing duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes and certain cottage‑style housing in much of their residential areas. Mountlake Terrace’s proposal creates four residential zone categories — R1 through R4 — meant to scale from lower‑density neighborhoods to areas around the town center. The draft relies on FAR to control building scale while allowing bonuses (extra FAR) for public‑benefit measures.
Key elements presented by staff and consultants included: - A baseline of units and FAR per zone, with R1 allowing two units per lot (higher with affordable‑housing bonus) and R3/R4 relying on FAR caps rather than fixed density limits. - Lot‑coverage percentages increased in R1 and R2 to preserve the ability for homeowners to add single‑story additions or accessory dwelling units. - Height limits simplified (three stories in R1/R2, higher in R3/R4) while proposing tiered side and rear setbacks so taller portions step back from adjacent properties. - Bonuses for public benefits: tree retention, sustainability certification, creation of alleys or mid‑block connections, improved parking courts and shared driveways to encourage designs that provide community benefits.
Planning commissioner feedback and public comments from an earlier hearing are reflected in the draft, staff said. Director Osborne asked council for direction on outstanding items and reminded members that state timelines require the city to adopt amendments ahead of the statutory deadline; staff set a public hearing and next decision date for June 26.
Councilmembers asked clarifying technical questions about how FAR interacts with height and setbacks, how bonuses would be applied in R1 and R2, and the process for requiring public‑access easements when bonuses provide additional development capacity. Councilmember Murray asked that signs or notices for any required public access be mandatory, not optional, so that the public understands which connections are open for community use. Planning staff said they will return with revised language incorporating council feedback and public comment ahead of the scheduled hearing.
What’s next: Staff will revise drafts to reflect council feedback, incorporate planning commission recommendations and bring the ordinances back for two work sessions and a public hearing on June 26. Adoption must meet state timelines for middle‑housing implementation.
