Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Element topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Spokane County housing element shows large affordability gap; planners outline policy toolbox
Summary
County staff presented a housing needs assessment and land-capacity analysis showing a large shortfall of deeply affordable units and an estimated annual funding gap of roughly $133 million to deliver extremely low-income housing. Staff listed local policy tools under consideration, including land banking, surplus-public-land use, multifamily tax exemptions and inclusionary zoning incentives.
Spokane County planners told the Planning Commission on April 9 that meeting new state housing requirements will require a combination of zoning changes, regional coordination and new funding strategies.
The housing-element presentation explained the state's new expectations under House Bill 1220 and the Growth Management Act: countywide housing targets that the county must plan to accommodate (roughly 17,000 units in the urban area and 6,200 in rural areas by the planning horizon). The housing needs assessment summarized in the meeting showed rising home prices and rents outpacing income growth; as of 2021, nearly 29% of households were cost-burdened and more than 19,000 people experienced homelessness or unstable housing in 2024.
The most acute shortfall is for extremely low- and very low-income households. Staff said the county's land-capacity analysis shows most market-rate capacity exists for higher AMI bands and that the county still faces an unmet need of roughly 9,753 units for the 0'20% AMI range. Using state per-unit cost benchmarks for low-income tax-credit projects, staff estimated an annual funding need of about $137 million to deliver 375 deeply affordable units per year and calculated a current local funding shortfall on the order of $133 million per year.
To narrow that gap, planners listed a menu of policy and funding options for consideration: surplus-public-land programs and land banking, impact-fee waivers for affordable projects, multifamily tax-exemption programs, parking-lot redevelopment incentives, inclusionary zoning with incentives or fees-in-lieu, and pursuing expanded state incentives (for example, broader application of sales-tax incentives currently limited to cities).
Commissioners asked how contamination or unusual site-condition costs (such as West Plains groundwater remediation) would affect the per-unit cost estimates; staff said the high-level numbers are averages and do not account for extraordinary remediation costs. Commissioners also discussed joint planning limits, annexation realities, and the practical challenges of producing rental and supportive housing in county unincorporated areas that are largely suburban and automobile-oriented.
What's next: staff will continue drafting comp-plan text and development-code changes to implement the policies and will present revised materials at upcoming public-review events (virtual open house May 6; commission meeting April 30) and a possible May 28 hearing.
