Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Woodland workshop discusses ADU changes, SEPA exemptions and missing‑middle zoning
Summary
City staff briefed the Planning Commission on state mandates (including House Bill 1337) that require allowing up to two ADUs, removing owner‑occupancy and occupancy limits, and on options to raise SEPA exemption thresholds and pursue "missing middle" zoning; staff will draft code language for future review.
At a workshop portion of the meeting, City of Woodland staff reviewed several state housing mandates and local code opportunities, asking the Planning Commission for direction on drafting code language.
Travis Goddard summarized House Bill 1337 (as discussed in the packet), which requires jurisdictions to allow up to two accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on lots where single‑family housing is permitted and removes certain local restrictions previously used by cities (for example, owner‑occupancy and occupancy‑load limits that the presenter said are no longer permissible following recent Supreme Court precedent). Goddard said state law also sets sizing rules and other specifics that Woodland must incorporate.
Staff also reviewed a narrow state change to SEPA categorical exemptions for infill projects and presented options ranging from raising the exemption threshold for single‑family residential from 4 up to 20 or 30 units. Goddard noted Woodland may not see projects large enough to be affected by the maximum increases but that modest increases could reduce time and cost for small infill developments.
The commission revisited a prior (2020) housing action plan and draft ordinance (14‑80) to allow duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes with lower permitting hurdles, extend short‑plat administrative approvals (from 4 to 9 lots), and consider a net density requirement (6 units per acre) in certain zones to encourage diversified housing types. Staff suggested dusting off and updating the earlier ordinance and said much of the technical work had already been completed.
Commissioners and staff discussed sequencing: lower‑priority items could wait (design review or conversion requirements where no qualifying buildings exist), while ADU language and missing‑middle code elements might be returned at the commission's next meeting or at a planned January retreat with council members. Staff will prepare draft code language and bring it back for formal recommendation if the commission directs.
