Lacey staff recommend allowing fourplexes and stacked flats in low‑density zones after survey on middle housing

City planning staff presented the results of a November–December 2024 community survey on middle housing and recommended that the Planning Commission adopt six of nine state‑defined middle‑housing types for Lacey’s low‑density residential zones.

Jennifer (city planning staff) summarized the outreach and survey: 361 respondents completed the questionnaire, of whom 333 identified as Lacey residents and 28 lived outside city limits. The city mailed targeted notices to roughly 3,000 parcels (parcels of about 10,000 square feet or larger and within 200 feet of an active sewer) and used its usual outreach channels. Respondent demographics skewed toward female, white/Caucasian, ages 35–65 and household incomes of $75,000 or more, and staff noted younger residents, renters and lower‑income households were underrepresented.

Survey respondents rated housing types on a five‑star scale. Cottage housing scored highest with an average of 3.24 stars; townhouses averaged 2.94. Fourplexes averaged 2.90; stacked flats 2.49; courtyard apartments 2.50; fiveplexes 2.32; and sixplexes 2.21. Respondents expressed more concern than support for three‑ and four‑story buildings in established neighborhoods.

Staff recommended that existing allowed types (duplexes, triplexes, townhouses and cottage housing) be retained and that the commission add fourplexes and stacked flats to meet the state requirement to allow six of nine middle‑housing varieties. Ryan (planning staff) explained the requirement can be applied by zone (for example, allowing incrementally larger unit counts in higher‑density zones) and that the state law includes an affordability provision — when fourplexes are allowed the law requires one unit to be affordable under the statute’s criteria.

Commission discussion touched on neighborhood character, parking and infrastructure. Several commissioners and members of the public raised parking and sidewalk capacity in older neighborhoods as concerns. Commissioners noted that development economics tend to limit rapid wholesale change in existing neighborhoods and that design standards and parking policy details will be central to any code draft.

Commissioners expressed general agreement with staff’s recommended set of six types and asked staff to draft code language that addresses scale, parking and neighborhood compatibility. Staff said it will return to the commission with draft ordinance language and detailed development‑standard proposals for further public review and council consideration.

No formal ordinance was adopted at this meeting; staff recorded that the commission gave consensus direction to proceed with drafting code to implement the recommended middle‑housing types.