Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Middle Housing ADU topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council passes first reading of middle‑housing and ADU code updates after public comment on lot‑coverage table
Summary
Council approved first reading of Ordinance 792 to adopt middle‑housing and accessory dwelling unit (ADU) code changes required by state law; a public commenter flagged a perceived lot‑coverage math irregularity and staff said the table intentionally creates a disincentive to keep very large lots intact.
The Woodinville City Council passed first reading of Ordinance 792, updating zoning and development standards to implement state middle‑housing and ADU requirements.
Staff said the changes reflect recent state legislation, including House Bill 1110 (middle housing) and House Bill 1337 (ADU rules), and align zoning text with the updated comprehensive plan. The ordinance adds defined housing types (cottage housing, courtyard housing, stacked flats), updates the permitted‑use table, and sets a minimum of two dwelling units per lot per state guidance. ADU rules were revised to allow up to two accessory dwelling units per lot (maximum 1,500 square feet habitable), allow ADUs to be sold separately via condominium or unit‑lot subdivision, and remove owner‑occupancy as an absolute requirement.
During the public hearing, Barry Margolis, a property owner and developer, urged a technical correction to the lot‑coverage table (Table 21‑32‑050). He presented calculations and materials, contending that the table creates a discontinuity: "If you go one square foot over... the building coverage that you're permitted drops from 8,712 square feet to 6,534 square feet," Margolis said, and asked staff to revise the math.
Staff responded that the step‑change was intentional. The city attorney/staff stated the design is meant to incentivize subdividing large parcels rather than preserving very large lots, and that the table's structure was discussed by the planning commission. After brief discussion, the council voted to close the hearing and moved, seconded and passed first reading of the ordinance.
A council member noted the city has previously modeled scenarios to meet Growth Management Act targets and that EMU/CBD development assumptions serve as a baseline for projected unit counts. Staff will incorporate feedback from the hearing as they prepare final ordinance language for subsequent readings.
The ordinance advances to second reading; staff asked members of the public to submit any technical table corrections prior to the next meeting so they can be evaluated.
