Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Washington council adopts zoning change to allow attached single‑family homes in R2 district
Summary
The council approved an ordinance to permit single‑family attached dwellings in the R2 district, lower minimum lot sizes (proposed: single‑family attached to 3,000 sq ft; two‑family to 6,000 sq ft) and reduce side‑yard requirements to ease conversions and reduce variances.
Planning staff told the Washington City Council on March 2 that proposed amendments to the city zoning code would make it easier for owners of duplexes to convert units and reduce the number of variances the city is processing. The council voted to adopt the ordinance amending Section 400.080 and Chapter 400 Attachment I.
“The R1C zoning district is our city’s district for single‑family attached units,” planning staff said, describing how financing markets and historic lot‑size requirements have created obstacles for owners seeking to dissolve condo associations or subdivide duplex lots. Staff said the planning department has processed nine variances in the R1C district over roughly the last decade — about 10 percent of the 105 properties in R1C — and that the average lot size for affected properties was about 4,500 square feet, well under the current 6,000‑sq‑ft minimum for attached units.
Under the adopted changes, single‑family attached dwellings would become a permitted use in the R2 district; the city will allow single‑family attached units on 3,000‑sq‑ft lots and two‑family dwellings on 6,000‑sq‑ft lots, and staff proposed reducing minimum lot width to 30 feet and removing some side‑yard setback requirements to permit larger, townhome‑style attached development. Staff said the intent is to remove a layer of rezoning and variance requirements that have delayed sales and reconfigurations of existing duplexes.
Council members pressed staff on the potential for increased density in areas where R2 zoning already exists and on limits the city can place during subdivision review. Planning staff and councilors noted that any subdivision would still require planning and zoning approval and that staff would advise against rezoning single‑family neighborhoods that conflict with the future land‑use map. Planning and zoning (PNZ) unanimously recommended the change to the council.
Council approved the ordinance by voice vote. Members recorded in the vote included Coulter, Capsel, Sentrip, Meer and Bayer (as listed in the official roll call during the second reading). The ordinance was identified in the meeting as ordinance 3B.
