Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Regulations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Proposed development-regulation changes would create permitting path for major industrial developments and update housing rules
Summary
Staff presented 11 key code updates including a new permitting pathway for major industrial developments using development agreements, and multiple housing-related changes (family daycare, co-living, density bonuses and step housing); commissioners asked for additional outreach on where changes would apply in a predominantly rural county.
County staff presented a package of proposed development-regulation updates intended to align Kittitas County code with the periodic comprehensive-plan update and recent state law changes.
Erin Opelli, staff supporting the comprehensive-plan update, said the update focuses on 11 key items that either align development regulations with the revised comprehensive plan or respond to changes in state law. "The major industrial developments as proposed in the code would be permitted similar to master plan resort where they would go to the county and would enter into a development agreement process," Opelli said, explaining that the draft does not set a fixed acreage threshold and that MIDs could be allowed in rural areas subject to Growth Management Act limits.
The package also includes statutory and policy-driven changes: removing code language that limited household occupancy by relationship, accommodating family daycare in residential zones as required by state law, adding co-living definitions for urban growth areas, and offering a 20% density bonus option to certain affordable housing projects associated with religious organizations. Staff clarified the step-housing provisions (shelters, transitional housing and permanent supportive housing) generally apply in urban growth areas and will require interlocal agreements with cities where necessary.
Commissioners and members of the public raised questions about how the MID approach would interact with existing zoning and whether the county should do outreach to property owners before mapping or incentive changes. Staff said they adopted the existing development-agreement pathway and did not propose immediate map changes, and that further outreach on zoning and land-use tables will resume after the periodic update.
On technical items, staff proposed clarifications to parking calculations (counting tandem and unenclosed parking) and to gross floor area measurement for zoning purposes; attendees asked whether those zoning-measure changes would affect building-permit fees, and staff explained building-permit measurements remain governed by the building code and permit office.
The planning commission will hold a public hearing on May 12 and staff committed to return later for a more detailed land-use table and short-term rentals review after the periodic updates are complete.
