Commissioners clear draft cottage-cluster rules for public hearing after edits on affordability and setbacks

The Sedro-Woolley Planning Commission agreed Feb. 18 to move proposed cottage-cluster regulations toward a public hearing after commissioners and staff resolved several wording and policy clarifications.

Why it matters: the proposed chapter would create a new regulatory path for compact “cottage cluster” development (tiny homes, park models, and similar dwelling types). The draft aims to encourage smaller-scale, potentially more affordable housing choices while protecting public infrastructure and adjacent properties through development standards and recorded maintenance obligations.

What changed after commissioner review Staff described edits made since the commission’s January review: striking language that would have allowed accessory structures to encroach on common areas, swapping a proposed exemption of school impact fees for a traffic-impact-fee exemption for permanently affordable cottage clusters, and expanding a plan-review fee waiver so projects that are 100% affordable — not just those that reserve 50% affordable — qualify.

Nicole (city staff) and commissioners discussed several technical clarifications that staff agreed to fix before public hearing, including: - Replace specific references to “cottages” with the more consistent term “dwelling units” where the chapter discusses minimum/maximum counts, or otherwise clarify terminology in the definitions to make clear that “cottage clusters” can include tiny homes, park models and cottage homes. - Clarify that the park-model and tiny-home definitions include size limits (park models and tiny homes not larger than 400 sq. ft. in the definitions as presented) and reconcile affordability fee calculations that apply a reduced impact-fee rate to units under 400 sq. ft. - Reconcile setback and separation rules: commissioners debated 10-foot minimum separation between structures versus the smaller side-setbacks used in standard zones and asked staff to confirm fire code constraints (staff noted the fire department’s 5-foot setback requirement to achieve a 10-foot separation in some PRDs). - Require recorded maintenance agreements or CC&Rs for common open spaces regardless of whether an HOA is formed so shared common areas are covered by binding obligations.

Affordability and fees Staff explained the rationale for exempting traffic impact fees (rather than school impact fees) for permanently affordable cottage clusters, because these developments typically generate fewer vehicle trips and often use private internal roads. The proposed fee study attached to the staff packet compared permitting costs and impact fees for multiple development types on a half-acre R15 parcel and showed how cottage clusters were assessed differently under current rules.

Next steps and procedural outcome Commission consensus was to move the draft to a public hearing after staff incorporates several minor edits (terminology consistency, small corrections in definitions, and a note to add the cottage-cluster parking language to the main parking matrix later). Staff said it will add the parking requirement to Ashton’s parking table in a future update but keep the access and other requirements in the cottage-cluster chapter for now.

Ending Staff will prepare the revised draft for a public hearing at a future meeting; commissioners agreed to forward the draft to public notice after the listed edits.