Shoreline council reviews broad development-code package: co-living rules, temporary uses and fencing debate

Shoreline planners outlined a broad set of development-code amendments Nov. 10 that would implement recent state housing legislation and clean up local regulations. Planning Manager Elise Klein and planning staff described changes ranging from definitions for "co-living" to rules for temporary uses, adaptive reuse, and commercial fencing.

Staff said co-living housing consists of private sleeping units with shared kitchens and that state House Bill 1998 requires cities to permit co-living in locations where multifamily housing of six or more units is allowed. "The state gave cities like Shoreline until the end of the year to adopt codes for co-living housing, or the state requirements would supersede local development regulations," staff said. The state's density calculation treats a sleeping unit as one-quarter of a dwelling unit, and staff said local co-living standards cannot be more restrictive than multifamily standards.

Other proposed changes include permitting certain temporary pop-up retail and construction-related offices without conditional-use permits, prohibiting pure-residential townhomes in Neighborhood Business zones to protect ground-floor commercial space, clarifying adult-use retail spacing in Mixed Business zones, allowing columbariums associated with cemeteries even when no church is present, expanding daycare/early-learning definitions, and deleting a rarely enforced minimum-density requirement in NR2 and NR3 zones to facilitate modest infill such as accessory dwelling units.

One of the most discussed items was a proposed commercial-fencing standard that would require chain link fences to be vinyl-coated rather than untreated. Mayor Roberts said he is open to vinyl-coated chain link in sides and backs of properties but urged an amendment to prohibit chain link on frontages facing arterial streets to preserve an attractive, walkable streetscape: "When I think about our frontage requirements, I think about how the building and the frontage work with a living vibrant streetscape," he said. Other councilmembers asked staff to provide options that balance business security needs (for example, lumberyards that store inventory) against design goals.

Councilmembers expressed general support for putting the comprehensive-plan amendments on the Dec. 1 consent calendar while asking staff to return with a fencing amendment. Staff and the Planning Commission recommended approval of the batch; the council did not adopt changes Nov. 10 and staff will return on Dec. 1 with final ordinances and any proposed amendments.

What happens next: staff will return Dec. 1 with finalized ordinances and any additional amendments requested by council, including the requested analysis/options on frontage fencing.