Council workshop weighs code 'cleanups' and a contentious change to inclusionary housing exemptions; staff directed to refine language for June public hearing

Sammamish City Council held a detailed workshop on May 6 to consider a first round of “code cleanup” amendments implementing the city’s 2025 docket. Staff presented a series of largely technical edits — definitions, subdivision process clarifications, building height measurement, sidewall height rules, and fence/retaining‑wall wording — and also flagged changes prompted by the State Department of Commerce related to emergency and permanent supportive housing and the city’s inclusionary affordable‑housing rules.

David Pyle of the Department of Community Development said the package is intended to be “minor” adjustments to make the code more administrable. Highlights presented to council included: adding an Area Median Income definition to the affordable housing chapter; moving final subdivision approval authority for short subdivisions to the hearing examiner (citing RCW 58.17.100 and Senate Bill 5674 as the statutory basis for that authority in other jurisdictions); simplifying building‑height measurement to a single plane from survey‑heavy methods; clarifying when a “sidewall” triggers a lower maximum and additional setback (24‑foot sidewall rule vs. 35‑foot limits elsewhere); and clarifying how a retaining wall plus fence are measured for height and maintenance responsibilities.

Pyle also addressed code language governing transitional, emergency and permanent supportive housing. Under the city’s existing rules a one‑mile separation and a 10‑person occupant limit had reduced the practical capacity for required supportive housing. Pyle said staff mapped alternatives and recommended removing the occupancy cap, shortening the separation to a quarter‑mile and retaining a half‑mile proximity requirement to transit stops; he said the State Department of Commerce reviewed and agreed with those changes.

The most discussed item was proposed revisions to the inclusionary affordable‑housing chapter (21.10). The planning commission had recommended several changes: raise the single‑home exemption to 1,500 square feet (from 1,000), clarify rounding so fractional unit requirements move to fee‑in‑lieu rather than produce fractional construction outcomes, exempt rebuilt homes in place of small tear‑down/rebuilds, and add a limited exemption for individuals building their own single‑family home on a lot.

Council debate focused on that individual‑builder exemption and on how to treat tear‑down/rebuilds. Council member Pamela Stewart proposed the city require a fee on the differential square footage when a home is rebuilt larger than the previous home. Stewart said the fee could be calculated on the added square footage rather than blanket exemption. Council member Kent Treen objected to an additional new exemption for owner‑builders, saying it could be exploited and calling the proposal an infringement on property rights; Treen said he would object to giving a special carve‑out that might be used by builders who flip homes. Council member Sid Gupta and others discussed the policy tradeoffs and explained why the planning commission sought the 1,500 square‑foot threshold as a balance to encourage smaller units and middle housing.

After discussion council gave staff direction to remove the proposed new blanket exemption for individual owner‑builders from the draft and to return with refined code language at the scheduled public hearing on June 3, 2025. The planning commission had also formally requested that the city add a work plan item to re‑evaluate the inclusionary housing program (possible modification or removal); staff said it would carry that request forward to council for direction.

Staff also noted several clarifications that do not change policy outcomes but improve administration: fee‑in‑lieu calculations moved to a consistent rounding method, clarifications on applicability for additions and replacement homes, and removal of an obsolete lot‑coverage reference now covered by hardscape rules. Pyle said the city will post required SEPA and state notifications and expects a Department of Commerce comment letter confirming the adequacy of supportive‑housing changes in advance of the June public hearing.