Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Middle Housing Amendments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission reviews middle‑housing code amendments including cottage‑housing size, density and parking
Summary
Staff presented proposed middle‑housing amendments to add definitions, allow duplexes/fourplexes/townhomes/cottage clusters in single‑family zones, set a proposed 1,400 sq ft maximum cottage unit, parking at two spaces per unit, and density incentives; commissioners requested clarifications in the land‑use matrix and on affordable‑housing requirements.
Planner Anita returned to the commission with proposed middle‑housing code amendments that would add definitions for 'cottage housing' and 'middle housing,' revise the land‑use matrix, and add a new cottage housing section with development standards.
Anita said the cottage housing definition will describe "small scale detached residential units on a single lot with a common open space," and that the draft cottage‑housing section would set a maximum unit size of 1,400 square feet, a maximum building height of 25 feet or two stories and parking requirements of two spaces per dwelling unit while allowing shared parking areas instead of a required garage. She told commissioners the middle‑housing definition is based on a Department of Commerce model ordinance and that the draft currently includes duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, townhomes, stacked flats, apartments and cottage housing as potential uses in single‑family zones.
Commissioners raised several substantive questions. One asked why staff landed on 1,400 square feet; Anita said that figure came from consultant work modeled on Portland area codes. Brandy said she supported at least some units at that size to accommodate families. Commissioners discussed whether the new design standards are more or less strict than existing infill or single‑family standards; Anita said the intent is to transfer and align current infill standards, not to be more restrictive. Kelsey asked whether the 20% affordable‑unit requirement included in draft supplemental requirements is defined; Anita said affordability is defined in the city’s existing affordable housing chapter and that staff can bring examples of income levels and program design back to the commission.
On density, Anita said she had proposed an incentive model that doubles allowed density for cottage clusters compared with the base zone (example: 14 units per acre in R‑7 and 30 units per acre in R‑15), and commissioners asked that the land‑use matrix explicitly link to the cottage‑housing section so users can tell when the higher density applies. Staff committed to adding clarifying text or a footnote pointing developers to the cottage‑housing regulations.
Anita closed by saying this is a work in progress and she will return with revised drafts, example drawings from consultants, and comparisons to existing single‑family standards for commissioners to review.
