Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Update topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mill Creek planning staff outline annual code update focusing on tables, ADU rules and administrative fixes
Summary
At a Feb. 19 study session, Mill Creek planning staff proposed reorganizing land-use standards into comparative tables, clarifying definitions and state references, and suggested changes to ADU counting and setbacks intended to make the municipal code easier to use; staff will draft ordinance language and seek further commissioner input.
Planning staff presented a package of mostly administrative and clarifying updates to Mill Creek's municipal code at the Feb. 19 Planning Commission study session, emphasizing easier navigation and alignment with state law rather than major land-use changes.
Justin, the staff presenter, said the annual code update is "a process for making lots of little changes" intended to fix vague or outdated language without pursuing rezones or controversial policy shifts. He proposed converting narrative, chapter-based use lists into cross-zone tables so residents and businesses can quickly see which uses are allowed citywide. "You don't have to look through every zone trying to find where they can do their business," Justin said.
Staff described a set of targeted edits across code titles: Title 14 (definitions and land-use processes) would be updated to separate similar but distinct terms such as roadway buffers and cutting preserves and to correct out-of-date citations to the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) and the Washington Administrative Code (WAC). Title 15 would combine clearing and grading into a single "land disturbing activities" chapter, with a separate chapter for tree removal and preservation to reflect division of responsibilities between Public Works (clearing/grading permits) and Community Development (tree decisions). Title 16 changes would separate planned area development and binding site plan rules into distinct chapters and remove lingering references to an older residential development handbook.
On zoning and development details (Title 17), staff proposed allowing HVAC equipment within side-yard setbacks provided units meet building-code clearances (about three feet from the property line) to give homeowners flexibility where backyards are narrow. Staff also suggested regulating height by feet (for example, 60 feet) rather than by a number of stories.
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) were a frequent focus. Justin noted the city's prior 800-square-foot ADU cap was increased to 1,000 last year to comply with the middle housing bill and said staff is considering rules to exclude truly subterranean (basement) space from ADU size counts so that underground units do not count against above-ground size limits. He also raised measurement questions for daylight basements and ADUs on sloped lots and said staff will draft clear definitions. "If there's a hill, we need to make sure that we know whether that counts or not," Justin said.
Other specific proposals include adding a maximum driveway width at the street connection (staff suggested a typical maximum near 20 feet at the street face while allowing widening on private property behind that connection) to protect street trees and on-street parking, and clarifying home-occupation rules to permit online retail activity when sales activity is not performed at the residence. Staff reiterated an existing limit of five customer visits per day for home occupations, with stated exceptions for certain uses such as music teachers.
Commissioners asked for clarifications on several points, including how to classify partially buried ADUs, whether grandfathering would apply to driveway widths (staff said yes), and whether state RCWs impose any binding definitions for ADUs; staff said they would check applicable RCWs and draft precise language.
Justin said the code update is designed to be largely noncontroversial and administrative, but he invited commissioners to provide direction and submit suggestions by email as staff develops draft ordinance language. "As we develop that draft language, you may have more things to add," he said; staff plans to circulate draft text to the commission and other stakeholder groups before advancing items to City Council.
The study session closed after roughly an hour and a half of presentation and discussion; no formal land-use decisions or ordinance adoptions were made during the meeting. Staff will prepare draft code language and return to the Planning Commission and Council as required by the city's public-review process.
