Consultants: Ephrata has overall housing capacity but lacks lower-income units; targeted rezones proposed

Consultants updating Ephrata’s comprehensive plan told the city council that the technical land‑capacity work shows ample overall capacity but a deficit in housing affordable to the lowest income bands, and recommended targeted rezones and modest code changes to address the shortfall.

"What we're going to be talking about today is mainly the land capacity analysis," said Aaron Mercar of SCJ Alliance, who opened the presentation and introduced consultants from Cleveland Consulting Group. A presenter summarized the analytic method used to classify parcels, exclude tax‑exempt and recently developed land, and apply reduction factors for infrastructure and market feasibility.

The consultant presenting the results said the county and state allocate housing targets by income bands and that state law requires most lower‑income targets be assigned inside cities and urban growth areas, which increases the need to show multifamily capacity in urban zoning. The presentation reported a large aggregate capacity number but noted "there is a deficit of housing units" in the lowest income bands, meaning the city would not meet the state‑assigned targets for those income levels under existing zoning.

To close that gap, the consultants recommended a set of targeted changes rather than a blanket upzone. Recommendations included converting select low‑density residential (LDR) parcels to medium‑density residential (MDR), modestly increasing MDR capacity (a proposed guideline of about 25 units per acre), allowing two accessory dwelling units (ADUs) per lot where permitted by state rules, and ensuring emergency shelters and urban supportive housing are allowed in zones that permit housing. They also suggested reviewing setbacks and parking requirements and encouraging ground‑floor commercial only where it is feasible.

Consultants explained their assumptions: capacity is measured in units per acre (not units per building), critical areas and floodplain constraints were treated conservatively (some downtown floodplain acreage was counted at a reduced redevelopment rate), and pipeline units built or permitted since the 2020 baseline were included in the capacity totals. The presentation referenced the Department of Commerce methodology adapted by the county and noted county staff provided allocation inputs.

Council members asked about the realism of 'redevelopable' parcels that assessor records list as developed; consultants said ground‑truthing can reveal opportunities where single‑family homes sit on lots that could support higher densities. City staff and a council member noted that infrastructure (sewer, water, roads) and site topography will limit how much of the theoretical capacity is actually buildable without additional investment.

Mercar and the consultants said the next steps are to refine the future land‑use map with targeted MDR rezones, finalize policy language to comply with state housing element requirements, and continue outreach. The presentation also included an equity review and an adequate provisions checklist; consultants reported only limited disparate impacts in the local data and recommended small language changes in the draft housing element.

The workshop concluded with presenters offering follow‑up contact information and an invitation for councilors to provide feedback before staff and consultants finalize the plan materials for the next stage.

The presentation materials and the full Housing Needs Analysis with underlying data were referenced several times; the consultants asked council members to provide input on which specific LDR parcels to consider for rezoning to MDR as part of the revised future land‑use map.