The Washington State Building Code Council's technical advisory group met Nov. 20 to begin drafting code language implementing a legislative mandate to allow dwelling units smaller than the current interpreted minimum of about 190 square feet.

The group's conversation centered on which functional elements must remain in reduced-size units, how accessibility rules would apply and whether the TAG should draft language itself or solicit external proposals. Staff told the group the current “minimum efficiency dwelling unit size is a 190 square feet,” and that the TAG must identify where and how to allow reductions.

"I guess my thought on the looking at it from a life safety angle is it doesn't really mesh because there's been no direction given to us to reduce the life safety elements," said Tim, a TAG member, who urged keeping egress, alarms, sprinklers, ventilation and sanitation requirements intact.

Members debated kitchen requirements as a driving factor for minimum area. Tim suggested requiring "a 20 amp, dedicated circuit for cooking appliances" rather than specifying a particular appliance, arguing a power/infrastructure requirement could allow flexibility in appliance choice while limiting ventilation and exhaust impacts. Staff and other members noted that a full range would trigger additional hood and electrical requirements, while a plug-in microwave or induction plate would not.

Several members proposed using the National Healthy Housing Standard (NHHS) as a reference for kitchen and storage requirements, though Micah, a TAG member, cautioned the NHHS updates (2018) might be outdated for newer induction technologies and urged modern-technology review.

Accessibility was a recurring concern. Multiple members noted that providing an elevator, building type or project scope can trigger Chapter 11 accessibility requirements; several said reduced-size provisions should not be read as exemptions from accessibility law. The TAG discussed placing exceptions or tailored rules in chapter 12.08 (efficiency dwelling unit provisions) rather than altering core definitions that could inadvertently change rules for all dwelling units.

The group also debated process. Some members urged soliciting external petitions; others warned the TAG risks bias if it pre-writes proposals. Micah confirmed a public notice had been posted: "We'll be accepting proposals through December 31," he said, and staff said petitions would be reviewed by the TAG as they arrive and posted to the SBCC website for transparency.

With action not permitted at the meeting (the group lacked a quorum), the chair asked members to "put pen to paper" and submit draft language or section proposals via the official SBCC submission process so staff can post and track them. Staff said existing internal proposals already on file will remain posted for the TAG to review.

The TAG adjourned after agreeing to continue work remotely and to reconvene after the holiday interval; no formal amendments were adopted at this session.