Port Orchard commission reviews proposed code changes to implement House Bill 1998 co-living rules

City planning staff presented proposed zoning and code amendments to implement House Bill 1998, which directs municipalities to permit “co-living” housing in areas that allow multifamily development.

Jim Fisk, principal planner, described co-living as developments made up of individually rented lockable sleeping units that provide private sleeping and living space while sharing kitchen facilities. “Co living refers to residential developments made up of individually rented lockable sleeping units,” Fisk said. He said the model is intended to expand affordable rental options for single-person households, some seniors and people seeking lower-cost or more social housing alternatives, and that it does not rely on public subsidies.

Staff summarized key points of the draft amendments: co-living must be permitted on any lot that allows six or more multifamily dwelling units; municipalities may not impose room-size or unit-configuration requirements beyond state building code standards; parking requirements are limited (no more than 0.25 off-street spaces per sleeping unit and reduced parking rules apply within a half-mile of major transit); co-living must be permitted outright (not subject to conditional-use permits); and for density and sewer-fee calculations, each sleeping unit counts as one quarter of a dwelling unit (no more than one-half for other fee or service calculations). Staff gave an example: in the R-3 zone, which allows six dwelling units, a co-living development could include up to 24 sleeping units under the draft approach.

Commissioners asked clarifying questions about how co-living differs from hotels or congregate-care facilities, where the new use would be permitted (R-3, R-4, R-5, mixed-use and commercial-corridor districts), and how the new rules interact with existing congregate-care and congregate-living definitions. Fisk and staff said legal review led to consolidating some group-living categories into a single co-living use, removing prior location criteria from the congregate-living facility definition, and that a revised redline incorporating legal feedback will be sent to commissioners before the Nov. 4 public hearing.

Staff said the city must adopt implementing regulations by the end of the year or state law will supersede conflicting local rules; the state’s Commerce Department issued guidance the city is following. Staff will issue a SEPA determination as appropriate, transmit the draft to the Department of Commerce for required review and properly notice a public hearing for the Nov. 4 planning-commission meeting. Final council action is tentatively scheduled for Nov. 18.

Several commissioners noted parking concerns in a largely car-dependent community and asked staff to clarify how definitions will appear in the redlined packet. Commissioner Paul Fontenot and others also described co-living as a housing opportunity for lower-income or early-career renters and said projects locally (for example, the Amici House refurbishment) had worked well for neighborhoods when properly managed.

Staff committed to circulate the updated redline (including legal feedback) and to answer commissioner questions before the Nov. 4 hearing.