Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Study session: consultant recommends $10/sq ft fee‑in‑lieu, council weighs infrastructure, AMI targets
Summary
A consultant told the Woodinville council a $10 per square‑foot fee on new homes larger than 1,500 sq ft could generate funds to subsidize rental units at 60% AMI; council members debated AMI targets, parking and feasibility of mandatory affordable commercial space and asked staff to return a final report early next year.
Woodinville received an extended study‑session presentation and discussion on Dec. 9 about inclusionary zoning, fee‑in‑lieu options and mixed‑use zoning changes for parts of the city including the Eastrail Mixed‑Use (EMU) zone.
Consultant Brian (presenting the analysis to council) walked through methodologies for calculating an appropriate fee‑in‑lieu, noting one approach is to estimate the subsidy needed to make a 60% AMI apartment unit feasible. He cited example numbers: a typical market apartment unit cost of about $500,000 with a 60% AMI tenant able to cover roughly $290,000 of that cost, leaving a subsidy gap near $217,000 per unit. Using a Woodinville example of new homes averaging 4,000 square feet and a $10 per square‑foot fee assessed on homes larger than 1,500 square feet, the consultant said an average new house would incur about a $25,000 fee; collecting that fee across several homes could fund deep subsidies for an affordable unit (consultant summarized: "for every 9 homes, we're collecting enough fee to make the tenth home affordable").
Brian also said mandatory affordable commercial space in mixed‑use buildings is likely to reduce project feasibility; he said he knows of no cities that require mandatory affordable commercial space and instead described several opt‑in or incentive programs (tenant‑improvement grants, building‑improvement grants, pop‑up programs) as more common.
Council discussion focused on which AMI target to pursue (options discussed included 50%–60%, with 85% noted as near market rate by the consultant), possible tiered fee structures or percent‑of‑sale alternatives, thresholds tied to a 1,500‑sq‑ft cutoff (noted as the city’s ADU threshold), and infrastructure and parking constraints in EMU that could limit taller, denser building forms. Several council members expressed support for pursuing fee‑in‑lieu and for exploring options 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 9 from the consultant’s packet; staff said the consultant will finalize a written report and staff will return policy/code recommendations early next year.
No formal zoning changes or ordinances were adopted at the meeting; the item remained a study session and staff will return with refined recommendations.
