Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Commission adds owner‑builder exemption, raises small‑unit threshold in affordable‑housing in‑lieu draft after public concern

April 19, 2025 | Sammamish City, King County, Washington


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Commission adds owner‑builder exemption, raises small‑unit threshold in affordable‑housing in‑lieu draft after public concern
The Sammamish City Planning Commission voted April 17 to forward proposed changes to the city’s affordable‑housing chapter (SMC 21.10) to the City Council, but added a commission amendment to exempt owner‑builders — residents building a new single‑family home they will occupy — from the draft fee‑in‑lieu requirement. The commission also endorsed staff’s recommendation to raise the small‑unit exemption from 1,000 square feet to 1,500 square feet and asked the council for further study of exemption sizes and market impacts.

Why it matters: the in‑lieu fee and inclusionary‑housing approach affect how new development contributes to a citywide affordable‑housing fund or provides on‑site affordable units. Public commenters at the meeting said the fee structure could impose a heavy cost on long‑time landowners and on residents building homes for their own use.

Public comment and concerns: several residents urged the commission to reconsider the application of the fee to small projects and owner‑builders. James Eastman, a local resident, questioned whether recent plats had used the density provided under newer regulations, noting that “they're allowed 18 units of density, but they only used 12.” Tim Gray, a 42‑year Sammamish resident, said the fee‑in‑lieu and the requirement that 10 percent of new units be affordable “add a very significant cost to the bottom line” and warned that developers may choose to build elsewhere rather than accept the added cost. Colin Malsam asked for clarification of how SMC 21.10.030’s 10 percent requirement would be applied to short plats that create a single lot, saying the fraction-of‑a‑unit calculation and associated fee “makes no sense and unfairly burdens me.” Kevin Schmollick described a 3,000‑square‑foot maximum building‑footprint limit in the code that he said complicates single‑level, accessible homes for families with disabilities.

Staff explanation and commission response: Evan, a city planning staff presenter, summarized a number of editorial and substantive edits to Chapter 21.10, including moving fee‑in‑lieu provisions into a single section, clarifying how total floor area is calculated for the fee, and removing redundant language. Evan said the commission had previously discussed the exemption threshold (1,000 square feet) and that staff proposed raising it to 1,500 square feet based on feedback from builders.

Commission debate focused on two related questions: should owner‑builders be exempt from the fee, and what floor‑area threshold should be used for the small‑unit exemption. Some commissioners warned an across‑the‑board fee could raise the cost of new homes and have knock‑on effects on existing homes; others said the council had already provided policy direction in the comprehensive plan to pursue a citywide inclusionary approach and that the commission’s role was to refine exemptions and administration.

Outcome: the commission voted to recommend the affordable‑housing chapter changes to City Council as presented by staff, and it adopted an amendment to add an explicit exemption for owner‑occupied, owner‑built single‑family homes. The commission also supported increasing the small‑unit exemption from 1,000 to 1,500 square feet and asked staff to document the divergent views and to return or request further Council guidance on exemption levels and economic impacts.

Quotes: “This only leaves the landowner to shoulder these added costs and it's simply not fair,” Tim Gray said in public comment about the fee‑in‑lieu. Colin Malsam asked for clarification of SMC 21.10.030 and said the fractional unit calculation “makes no sense and unfairly burdens me.”

Next steps: staff will include the commission’s amendments and a summary of the commission’s discussion in the transmittal to City Council. The packet, including the commission’s amendments, is scheduled for a May 6 Council workshop; Council consideration is scheduled for May 20.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Washington articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI