Council wrestles with housing targets, local preference and implementation tools in comprehensive plan review

Jerry Wilson, interim planning director, told the City Council at its Jan. 9 study session that staff had compiled council comments into a matrix and were aiming to return recommended language for the ordinance and adoption process in coming weeks.

The most contested subjects were how the plan frames housing targets required under regional and state rules, local preferences for affordable units, and the suite of implementation tools the city may use — from fee reductions to tax-exemption programs.

“This is a target for the increase and that we're not setting this as a ceiling or a floor,” Andrew, a planning consultant, said during the meeting while describing the relationship between regional targets and the city’s draft language inserting the word “minimum.” The draft language reads, in part, “plan for a minimum net increase of 892 housing units.” Council members and staff debated whether “minimum” implies a floor and could be misunderstood by regulators or the public.

Nut graf: The discussion matters because state and regional mandates (including Growth Management Act implementations and PSRC targets) require cities to demonstrate capacity for specified housing amounts…