2023, 02-07 study session minutes MINUTES
City of Spokane Valley
City Council Study Session Meeting
Tuesday, February 7, 2023
Mayor Haley called the meeting to order at 6 p.m. The meeting was held in person by Council and staff in
Council Chambers, and also remotely via Zoom meeting.
Attendance:
Councilmembers Staff
Pam Haley,Mayor John Hohman, City Manager
Rod Higgins,Deputy Mayor Erik Lamb, Deputy City Manager
Tom Hattenburg, Councilmember Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director
Brandi Peetz, Councilmember Tony Beattie, Sr. Deputy City Attorney
Laura Padden, Councilmember Dave Ellis,Police Chief
Ben Wick, Councilmember John Bottelli, Parks &Rec Director
Arne Woodard, Councilmember Bill Helbig, Community& Public Works Dir.
Gloria Mantz, City Engineer
Rob Lochmiller, CIP Engineering Manager
Marty Palaniuk, Associate Planner
Chaz Bates, Planning Manager
Mike Basinger,Economic Dev. Director
Eric Robison, Housing&Homeless Coordinator
Emily Estes-Cross, Public Information Officer
Virginia Clough,Legislative Policy Coordinator
Nikki Kole,IT Specialist
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called roll; all Councilmembers were present. Mayor Haley
announced that the change to the agenda includes the addition of a non-action item concerning proposed
House Bill 1110.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Higgins, seconded, and unanimously agreed
to approve the amended agenda.
PROCLAMATION: Black History Month
After Mayor Haley read the proclamation, it was accepted with thanks from members of the Daughters of
the American Revolution.
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY: After explaining the process,Mayor Haley invited
public comment.
Ms. Janet Wilcox, Spokane Valley (via zoom): said she supports the Homeless Action Plan draft as it has
realistic and manageable goals; it also addresses business outreach; she commented on the statement in the
draft that homelessness is not a crime; and said that to communicate the awareness is critical for the plan's
success.
Ms. Barb Howard, Spokane Valley(via zoom): she extended thanks to Police Chief Ellis and the Sheriff's
Office for putting the camera out in the neighborhood and said she should like to get more; mentioned
property taxes and said this Council has tried to keep those taxes down.
Mr. Dan Allison, Spokane Valley: concerning last week's agenda item about the artwork for the signal
wraps, said the drawing with the plane had Spokane, so someone might want to talk to them about that
before they put them up; said he mentioned a couple of weeks ago about not having a rendering available
of the proposed multi-purpose room at Balfour Park,and he would like to get a copy. City Clerk Bainbridge
said it was included in that week's agenda packet and she will e-mail him a copy;and finally he spoke about
repaving of roads, said we did Broadway for about a mile, and with the method that was used, our paving
Council Meeting Minutes,Study Session:02-07-2023 Page l of 5.
Approved by Council:02-28-2023
guys said it cost us 25% of what it would have if we would have went the regular way that we do stuff; said
this person also told him that if the maintenance money was upped, they could do more roads like that; so
if that's the case and for every million you put in there you knock another three off the top of that 16,why
wouldn't we do that instead of looking at some increases with license fees or other increases; said he thinks
we should exhaust everything before we think about raising any taxes; if we're not putting more money
into the repaving,then we are not doing justice to citizens.
Mr. John Harding, Spokane Valley: spoke of a tragedy last week on Sprague Avenue where a woman was
hit by a vehicle near Yokes on Sprague and McDonald; he mentioned there are long stretches of Sprague
where there is no opportunity to safely walk across Sprague, and it is even more dangerous at night; and
said he would like someone to look at this problem.
ACTION ITEMS:
1. CONSENT AGENDA: consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any
member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately.
Proposed Motion:I move to approve the Consent Agenda.
a. Approval of claim vouchers on Feb 7,2023 Request for Council Action Form Total: $1,387,525.79
b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period ending January 31, 2023: $752,398.78
c. Approval of January 17, 2023 Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session
d. Approval of January 24,2023 Council Meeting Minutes, Formal Format
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Higgins,seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the Consent Agenda.
2. First Reading Ordinance 23-005 Code Text Amendment 19.30—Marty Palaniuk
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Higgins and seconded
to waive the rules and approve Ordinance 23-005. Mr.Palaniuk gave a briefing of the ordinance, and said
this will amend the zoning regulations in an effort to reduce high intensity uses from moving into lower
intensity areas. Vote by acclamation: in favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried.
3. Motion Consideration: Barker Grade Separation Project Change Orders/Update — Gloria Mantz, Rob
Lochrniller
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Higgins and seconded to authorize the City Manager to approve Change
Order Numbers 27 and 37 with Max J. Kuney Company in the amount of$12,897 11 and$208,953.00
respectively. City Engineer Mantz went over the background of this project as explained in the Request for
Council Action form,followed by Mr.Lochmiller's discussion about the bridge installation and associated
errors; said he is hopeful the remaining bridge work will be installed in the next two weeks with Barker
open by the end of February; and afterwards, staff will proceed with the process to permanently close Flora
Road from Garland to Trent as required by BNSF. Mr. Lochrniller also explained the two change orders.
There was discussion about future negotiations with BNSF with Ms. Mantz stating that BNSF will be doing
the bridge construction,that future contracts will include more language about timelines, and she reminded
Council that this is BNSF property, so we do work with them. Mayor Haley invited public comment. Ms.
Barb Howard, Spokane Valley (via zoom): she questioned why the railroad isn't taking care of the
problems; that she understands about having to take the lowest bid, and that was Kuney, but also said she
wonders if we can put limits on change orders. Mr. John Harding, Spokane Valley: said he has a concern
with the number of change orders, that he understands this project is huge so maybe it is to be expected;
mentioned the lack of coordination between the rail system; regarding the grade issue, said they didn't like
the way or the process, or the materials we used, and that cost a lot of money, and he asked where was the
railroad when we were putting this in; if they are the ones able to impact our costs, said apparently they
were not there during the process; but if they were then a part of the malfeasance is on them and not us;
said he remembers that there were several pillars that were improperly constructed, and he asked if that
shouldn't be on the contractor; that this whole change order process seems to be a bit one-sided when it
comes to taxpayer dollars and he thinks that should be Iooked into.There were no further public comments.
Vote by acclamation: in favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried.
Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session:02-07-2023 Page 2 of 5
Approved by Council:02-28-2023
NON-ACTION ITEMS:
3a. Proposed House Bill 1 110, Impacts Update—Virginia Clough, Chaz Bates
Ms. Clough went over the highlights of the bill as noted in the Request for Council Action; she also
mentioned our zoning amendments that created an R-4 zone that allows 10 units per acre within a quarter
mile of frequent transit; she said that our lobbyist Briahna Murray informs us this bill is likely to pass even
though numerous cities have concerns, but many agencies outside local government support the bill; also
that Ms.Murray will look at the possibility of any amendment but if not,then she'll oppose the bill on our
behalf. Mr. Bates added that should this bill pass, we would need to amend our permitted use matrix to
allow up to four units per lot in the residential areas and up to six within half-mile of transit; and we would
also need to modify shoreline regulations to allow this housing type. Councilmember Wick asked if the bill
refers to units per lot or per acre.Mr.Bates said he feels the bill is poorly written;reading the bill in context,
we would have to allow per lot.
Mr. Hohman explained that this bill would pre-empt all the work this community has done for 20 years;
how we structured our zoning code with different residential zones;that this bill passes it would effectively
wipe them all out; said we have the R4 zone to preserve the character of single family homes; that this is
an incredible terrible thing for us to face now;that we are required to follow due process when we do zoning
changes or a comp plan change, but apparently the state can do that in a matter of weeks with very little
public involvement. Mr. Hohman said he has asked Mr. Bates to make those involved in housing items,
aware of this bill and of the impacts and that perhaps we could change the course of the bill if members of
the public provide comments; he noted Ms. Murray said there is a lot of combined interest to push this bill
and a lot of it deals with what occurs on the West side; said he doesn't think there will be a pathway to do
a moratorium or exempt us; and again he stressed that the entire point is,this will override what we want
to do and have done for 20 years.
Councilmember Woodard said he testified against this bill and our comments are similar to other cities;
said our zones in areas like the Ponderosa and Rotchford areas could be severely impacted as in the
Ponderosa area,we only have two inlets/outlets;said we don't have the infrastructure as something like this
will require more sewer, sidewalks,etc.;said four houses per lot or even four living units is a lot; said there
will also be limited parking. Councilmember Wick asked about exemptions to SEPA(State Environmental
Protection Act) and would that excuse us from moving forward. Mr. Bates said that it would not as this is
not appealable under SEPA. Mr. Bates also mentioned the website address for members of the public to
respond to this bill. Ms. Clough said she and our Public Information Officer Ms. Estes-Cross will be
working to put out some information about the public hearings. Councilmember Peetz added that the
members of the AWC (Association of Washington Cities) Legislative Committee agree cities should be
able to deal with things best for their cities;that she will add her comments to this bill and she encouraged
others to do so as well.
4. City's 20th Anniversary Update—Emily Estes-Cross
Ms. Estes-Cross went through her PowerPoint explaining about the upcoming 20th anniversary recognition
and activities. In answer to her question to Council of whether to have a sit-down dinner March 31 at about
$65 per person, or hors d'oeuvres instead, there was apparent Council agreement to go with the hors
d'oeuvres in order to encourage greater attendance; having a registration book at the event was also
suggested. As the date is quickly approaching,it was suggested that some type of event is needed for March
31 whether at CenterPlace or City Hall; and if CenterPlace, depending on the weather, perhaps it could be
both or either indoor or outdoor.Ms.Estes-Cross also asked about a community event either separate or as
part of Valleyfest. CounciImember Wick suggested trying to expand on what is or will already be there and
'beef up' our presence. Ms. Estes-Cross also discussed the 20t'' anniversary logo, showing the Council's
preferred version on the screen; she noted that there could be changes our current logo, but any such
proposed changes will be brought forward for Council approval. The idea of having a time capsule was also
suggested for the 20th anniversary event.
Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session:02-07-2023 Page 3 of 5
Approved by Council:02-28-2023
5. Homeless Plan Update—Eric Robison
Housing and Homeless Coordinator Robison said that tonight's main goal is to share the draft plan included
in Council's packet, to inform Council of where we are in the process, and to solicit any feedback or
comments from Council on the draft plan; he mentioned there will be a community meeting March 8 at
CenterPlace,from 4-6 p.m.which will be advertised,and also that the event will be held in partnership with
the Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Hohman added that he and Mr. Lamb will be meeting Mr. Larry Haskell
to discuss this and other issues; that one of the points of focus will be on the availability of affordable
housing units and that we are meeting with community partners in that regard as we look to those agencies
and partners for their assistance, such as with Spokane Housing Authority, Community Frameworks,
Habitat for Humanity. Councilmember Woodard also noted there are organizations which can help prevent
foreclosures or evictions such as SNAP (Spokane Neighborhood Action Partners); that perhaps we could
have a resource card or pamphlet to distribute to those in need of those resources; he also mentioned the
idea of STA (Spokane Transit Authority) being contracted to allow transportation to and from downtown
for those trying to get the help needed. Councilmember Wick mentioned Spokane Valley Partners as a
resource, with Councilmember Padden adding that another resource is the Diocese of Spokane, as well as
the idea of work training and apprenticeships; she noted that while no individual government has sufficient
resources to fund everything, no individual government has to rely solely on itself. Mr. Hohman said this
is just an introduction and discussion of the process as we wanted to make sure Council has a copy of the
draft plan; that the excellent feedback is appreciated; this is just the initial stages of shaping the document
and we also want stakeholders and the community's input, after which staff will return to Council to further
craft the document.
Mayor Haley called for a recess at 7:31 p.m.; she reconvened the meeting at 7:40 p.m.
6.Regional Homeless Entity Discussion—Erik Lamb
Mr. Lamb said tonight's discussion is in follow-up from last week where discussions were held about the
process to determine what options exist for creation of a reginal authority or entity, as well as talk about a
public launch and our potential participation.Mr.Lamb noted that at the end of this item last week,Council
elected to defer the discussion to this week to see what we have learned. Mr. Lamb said he isn't sure that
we aren't in a materially different position than last week, as there are still no definitive answers on what's
occurring on either the discussion process or launch event. Mr. Lamb brought Council's attention to the
handout placed at the dais, of a Draft Joint Settlement, showing the proposed changes in track-change
format; said the Board of County Commissioners considered it last night and it is their hope that all could
agree and have this put out this Friday instead of a press release; adding that he's not even sure that is the
case now as it is very definitive in language for all to agree to in form and substance;he stated that our view
is if the 90-days would be a process,to see if there could be a regional effort,but not an approval of anything
at this point; he said the Board of County Commissions wanted bi-weekly updates, but again, no formal
decision has been made although there is interest in participating in the discussions as several want to see
what a regional approach could look like. Mr. Lamb further explained that the Board met today regarding
this Joint Statement, and has concerns with some of the wording; noting that the track-changes are the
Board's desired changes, and again, nothing has been approved; he stated that the Board hopes all three
entities will ultimately sign off on this statement, although the City of Spokane hasn't considered it yet.
Mr.Lamb said he feels it would be premature to ask for Council's consensus tonight either on the statement
or with us participating in the process; although he feels ultimately it makes sense to participate.
Council had some suggested changes to the draft, including that we did not select the retired employees to
'help guide this effort' and Mr. Lamb concurred that we were not involved in any selection, but were told
the individuals were volunteers. The signatures were also questioned as why it appears there is a need for
four signatures;top of page two mentions that we are leaning to launch this in a 'big and positive way' but
it doesn't state who that refers to or how; there are several places in the draft that simply state"Spokane"
rather than Spokane region; and questions about how all can participate in 90 days.Mr. Lamb said he feels
the dates mentioned are arbitrary, including why limit it to 90 days.Mayor Haley said it is apparent Council
Council Meeting Minutes,Study Session:02-07-2023 Page 4 of 5
Approved by Council:02-28-2023
is not ready for any consensus on this draft. Mr. Lamb said he will try to work up some of these comments
but for now,there is no approval and no consensus;but Council would like further opportunities to consider
the draft and the process.
7. 2022 Accomplishments Report John Hohman
City Manager Hohman said he is humbled to be here and have this discussion with Council; that as a lot
happened over the last year, he started thinking about the early days and where we are now; said it is
astounding to see the change from that group to what we have today; that we have a sophisticated and
talented group who works well together and with various partners to get the necessary work done.To point
out many of the notable things we did last year, Mr.Hohman discussed several of our large projects and of
the link with the Council's 2022 goals. Mr. Hohman then mentioned several highlights from
accomplishments over the year, including the over $50 million in grants, which is more than we received
in the last five years all total. Mr. I-Lohman said we will continue to build upon our past successes and he
thanked Council for policy direction,thanked staff and partner agencies and jurisdictions,as well as contract
service providers and the public.
8.Advance Agenda—Mayor Haley
There were no suggested changes to the Advance Agenda.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Peetz asked about having a letter in support of funding of the North/South Corridor to hand
to the legislators next week and there was Council consensus to do so.Mr.Hohman said staff will work on
that draft as that is an important issue for Council. Councilmember Wick also asked about a letter to
encourage action on vehicular pursuits. Mr. Hohman said that there were some concerns with the bill and
we are not sure if we are in a position to lend our support as it might not have the desired effect, and that
Chief Ellis also has concerns with the way the bill is now written. Ms. Clough said that staff would like to
spend time to make sure everything is on track and that Council will be sent something to brief them on the
bill's specifics.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS
Mr. Hohman reminded everyone that there will be no Council meeting next week as Council attends the
AWC Conference in Olympia.
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Higgins, seconded and unnawaimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting
adjourned at 8:28 p.m.
ATT ST Q :'7-
1 _ Pam Hale
Cristine Bainbridge, City Clerk0t—
Council Meeting Minutes,Study Session:02-07-2023 Page 5 of 5
Approved by Council:02-28-2023
New Agenda Item: #3a
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: February 7, 2023 Department Director Approval: ❑
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Admin Report— Proposed House Bill 1110 -Impacts Update
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Proposed House Bill 1110
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: N/A
BACKGROUND:
The City Council adopted its amended 2023 State Legislative Agenda on December 20, 2022 and
the 2023 Legislative Session commenced on January 9. While the City of Spokane Valley and
many other cities across the state support removing barriers to the construction of housing, a bill
has been proposed that appears to be advancing and gaining traction despite severe impacts to
Washington cities and the residents and businesses within the communities we serve.
Tonight staff will update City Council about the potential impacts this proposed bill could have on
our City, and let our community know that what is happening in Olympia could have significant
impacts upon their neighborhoods and their City's infrastructure needs.
A description of HB 1110 states that it will increase middle housing in areas traditionally dedicated
to single-family detached housing. While the goal of the bill to increase density with middle
housing is well-intended, the bill itself is poorly constructed and the associated impacts to the City
of Spokane Valley are cause for concern.
Highlights of the bill include requirements for the City of Spokane Valley to:
• Authorize development of at least four units per lot on all lots zoned for residential use;
• Authorize development of six units per lot in all residential zones if at least two of the units
are affordable; and
• Authorize six units per lot in all residential zones within one half-mile walking distance of
a major transit stop.
In 2020, the City of Spokane Valley received a grant from the state to develop a Housing Action
Plan, and concurrently adopted zoning amendments that created an R-4 zone that allows for 10
units per acre within a quarter mile of frequent transit throughout the city. This zoning change
concentrated the density near frequent transit service and commercial services and in areas
where City infrastructure can support higher density.
The City's Housing Action Plan, adopted in 2021, recommends zoning and Accessory Dwelling
Unit modifications and the evaluation of a Multifamily Tax Exemption Program. These items are
currently in the City Council's workplan.
Despite our City's careful and strategic planning effort, we would be mandated by the state to
adhere to the proposed requirements in HB 1110 within two years of its adoption.
The City's legislative efforts to date include Councilmember Woodard testifying to voice concerns
at the January 17 public hearing before the House Housing Committee, and the City's lobbyist,
Briahna Murray, working with the Association of Washington Cities to communicate cities'
concerns about the bill. Additionally, City staff and Ms. Murray attended a January 20 meeting
New Agenda Item: #3a
with the bill's sponsor, Rep. Bateman, to express concerns about the proposed bill along with two
dozen other cities.
The bill was scheduled for an executive session by the House Housing Committee at 4:00 p.m.
February 7, 2023. The next step in the process includes holding another public hearing before
the House Appropriations Committee. The hearing date has not yet been announced.
It should be noted that a number of agencies outside of local government have supported the bill
despite opposition and concerns voiced by Washington cities.
The City of Spokane Valley plans to stay engaged with this proposed legislation and keep our
community informed as the process continues. We encourage the public to learn more about this
bill and participate in the process if so inclined.
Planning Manager Chaz Bates will update the Council on the specific impacts to the Spokane
Valley community.
OPTIONS: Discussion
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: NIA
STAFF CONTACT: Virginia Clough, Legislative Policy Coordinator; and Chaz Bates, Planning
Manager.
ATTACHMENT: HB 1110 Bill Analysis
Washington State BILL
House of Representatives ANALYSIS
Office of Program Research
Housing Committee
HB 1110
Brief Description: Increasing middle housing in areas traditionally dedicated to single-family
detached housing.
Sponsors: Representatives Bateman, Barlcis, Reed, Taylor, Riecelli, Berry, Fitzgibbon,
Peterson,Duerr, Lekanoff, Alvarado, Street,Ryu,Ramel, Cortes, Doglio, Maori, Mena,
Gregerson, Thai, Bergquist,Farivar, Wylie, Stonier, Pollet, Santos, Fosse and Ormsby.
Brief Summary of Bill
- Requires certain cities planning under the Growth Management Act to
authorize minimum development densities in residential zones.
• Establishes requirements for middle housing development regulations.
• Requires the Department of Commerce to provide technical assistance to
cities in implementing the requirements and to develop model missing
housing ordinances.
Hearing Date: 1/17/23
Staff: Serena Dolly (786-7150).
Background:
Growth Management Act.
The Growth Management Act(GMA) is the comprehensive land use planning framework for
counties and cities in Washington. The GMA establishes land use designation and
environmental protection requirements for all Washington counties and cities. The GMA also
establishes a significantly wider array of planning duties for 28 counties, and the cities within
those counties, that are obligated to satisfy all planning requirements of the GMA. These
This analysis was prepared by non partisan legislative staff for the use of legislative
members in their deliberations. This analysis is not part of the legislation nor does it
constitute a statement of legislative intent.
House Bill Analysis - 1 - HB 1110
jurisdictions are sometimes said to be "fully planning" under the GMA.
Counties that fully plan under the GMA are required to designate urban growth areas (UGAs)
within their boundaries sufficient to accommodate a planned 20-year population projection range
provided by the Office of Financial Management. Each city located within a planning county
must be included within a UGA. Urban growth must be encouraged within the UGAs, and only
growth that is not urban in nature can occur outside of the UGAs. Each UGA must permit urban
densities and include greenbelt and open space areas.
Comprehensive Plans.
The GMA directs fully planning jurisdictions to adopt internally consistent comprehensive land
use plans that are generalized, coordinated land use policy statements of the governing body.
Comprehensive plans are implemented through locally adopted development regulations, and
both the plans and the local regulations are subject to review and revision requirements
prescribed in the GMA. In developing their comprehensive plans, counties and cities must
consider various goals set forth in statute.
The GMA also establishes 14 goals in a non-prioritized list to guide the development of
comprehensive plans and development regulations of counties and cities that plan under the
GMA. Examples include urban growth,housing, and economic development goals.
Mandatory Housing EIement.
Comprehensive plans must include a housing element that ensures the vitality and character of
established residential neighborhoods. The housing element must include the following:
• an inventory and analysis of existing and projected housing needs that identifies the
number of housing units necessary to manage projected growth, as projected by the
Department of Commerce(Department), including:
• units for moderate-, low-,very low-, and extremely low-income households; and
• emergency housing, emergency shelters, and permanent supportive housing;
• a statement of goals,policies, objectives, and mandatory provisions for the preservation,
improvement, and development of housing;
• identification of sufficient capacity of land for various housing including government-
assisted housing, housing for all levels of income, manufactured housing, and permanent
supporting housing, and within an urban growth area, consideration of duplexes,triplexes,
and townhomes;
• adequate provisions for existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the
community, including:
• incorporating housing for households of all income levels;
• documenting programs and actions needed to achieve housing availability;
• consideration of housing locations in relation to employment locations; and
• consideration of the role of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in meeting housing
needs;
House Bill Analysis -2 - HE 1110
• identification of local policies and regulations that result in racially disparate impacts,
displacement, and exclusion of housing;
• identification and implementation of policies and regulations to address and begin to undo
racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion of housing;
• identification of neighborhoods that may be at higher risk of displacement from market
forces; and
• establishment of antidisplacement policies.
Planning Actions to Increase Residential Building Capacity.
Fully planning cities are encouraged to take an array of specified planning actions to increase
residential building capacity. Specified planning actions include, for example:
• authorizing middle housing types on parcels in one or more zoning districts that permit
single-family residences unless unfeasible to do so;
• authorizing cluster zoning or lot size averaging in all zoning districts that permit single-
family residences;
• adopting increases in categorical exemptions to the State Environmental Policy Act
(SEPA) for residential or mixed-use development;
• adopting a form-based code in one or more zoning districts that permit residential uses;
• authorizing a duplex on each corner lot within all zoning districts that permit single-family
residences;
• authorizing accessory-dwelling units in one or more zoning districts in which they are
currently prohibited;
• adopting ordinances authorizing administrative review of preliminary plats; and
• allowing off-street parking to compensate for lack of on-street parking when private roads
are utilized or a parking demand study shows that less parking is required.
In general, ordinances and other nonproject actions taken to implement these specified planning
actions, if adopted by April 1, 2023, are not subject to administrative or judicial appeal under
SEPA or legal challenge under the GMA.
Technical Assistance and Funding.
The Department is required to assist cities and counties, both with funding and with technical
assistance, in the adoption of comprehensive plans. The Department's assistance program must
include a priority list for funding and technical assistance based on a county's or city's growth
rate, commercial and industrial development rate, and the existence and quality of a
comprehensive plan, among other factors. The Department is also required to administer a grant
program to provide direct financial assistance to local governments for the preparation of
comprehensive plans. Other technical assistance required to be provided by the Department
includes utilizing the Department's staff and the staff of other agencies to assist in the
development of comprehensive plans, including the provision of model land use ordinances, the
adoption of procedural criteria, and regional education and training programs.
House Bill Analysis -3 - HB 1110
Homeowners'Associations and Common Interest Communities.
A homeowners' association(HOA) is a legal entity made up of members who are owners of
residential real property located within the association's jurisdiction and who are required to pay
dues for the upkeep of the association and common areas. An association can also adopt rules
and regulate or limit the use of property by its members.
A common interest community (CIC) is similar to an HOA and is made up of member-owners
who are obligated to pay for the taxes, maintenance, or other costs of common areas. Like an
BOA, a CIC can also regulate or limit the use of property by its members, including by adopting
rules to establish and enforce construction and design criteria as well as aesthetic standards. A
CIC may generally only be terminated by the agreement of at least 80 percent of the members.
A restrictive covenant, or a restrictive deed, is a restriction or limitation of the use of the property
that runs with the land.
Summary of Bill:
Density Requirements.
A fully-planning city with a population of at least 6,000, or a city located within a contiguous
urban growth area with a city with a population above 200,000, must authorize the development
of:
• at least four units per lot on all lots zoned for residential use;
• six units per lot in all residential zones if at least two of the units are affordable; and
• six units per lot in all residential zones within one half-mile of a major transit stop.
To qualify as affordable housing,the applicant must commit to renting the unit at a rent that is
affordable to low-income households for at least 50 years and record a covenant or deed
restriction that ensures continued affordability.
A major transit stop includes:
• a stop on a high-capacity transportation system;
• commuter rail stops;
• stops on rail or fixed guideway systems;
• stops on bus rapid transit routes;
• stops for a bus or other transit mode meeting minimum frequency requirements; or
• Washington ferry terminals.
Antidisplacement Measures.
Cities subject to the density requirements that have not adopted local antidisplacement measures
as a portion of the city's comprehensive plan housing element must,within nine months of the
act's effective date:
House Bill Analysis -4- BB 1110
• identify local policies and regulations that result in racially disparate impacts,
displacement, and exclusion in housing;
• identify and implement policies and regulations to address and begin to undo racially
disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing caused by local policies,plans,
and actions;
• identify areas that may be at higher risk of displacement from market forces that occur
with changes to zoning development regulations and capital investments; and
• establish antidisplacement policies, with consideration given to the preservation of
historical and cultural communities as well as investments in low,very low, extremely
low, and moderate-income housing, equitable development initiatives, inclusionary
zoning, community planning requirements, tenant protections, land disposition policies,
and consideration of land that may be used for affordable housing.
Middle Housing Requirements.
Cities subject to the density requirements are directed to include specific provisions related to
middle housing in their development regulations. Middle housing is defined as buildings that are
compatible in scale, form, and character with single-family homes and contain two or more
attached, stacked, or clustered homes including duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes,
sixplexes, townhouses, courtyard apartments, and cottage housing. Any city subject to the
middle housing requirements:
• must adopt objective development and design standards on the development of middle
housing that do not allow personal or subjective judgment and do not discourage the
development of middle housing through unreasonable costs, fees, delays, or other
requirements or actions which individually, or cumulatively,make impracticable the
permitting, siting, or construction of all allowed middle housing types or the ownership of
a middle housing unit;
• may not require standards for middle housing that are more restrictive than those required
for detached single-family residences;
• must apply to middle housing the same development permit and environmental review
processes that apply to detached single-family residences;
• must apply to middle housing the same critical areas regulations that apply to detached
single-family residences;
• may not require off-street parking as a condition of permitting development of middle
housing within one-half mile of a major transit stop;
• may not require more than one off-street parking space per lot as a condition of permitting
development of middle housing on lots smaller than 6,000 square feet; and
• may not require more than two off-street parking spaces per lot as a condition of
permitting development of middle housing on lots greater than 6,000 square feet.
The density and middle housing requirements take effect the latter of 24 months after the
effective date of the act for cities with at least 10,000 population or 12 months after the Office of
Financial Management determines a city has reached a population threshold under this section.
House Bill Analysis -5 - HB 1110
Technical Assistance.
Commerce must provide technical assistance prioritized based on need to cities in implementing
middle housing and average minimum density requirements. Commerce must develop and
publish model middle housing ordinances within 18 months after the act takes effect. The model
ordinances supersede,preempt, and invalidate local development regulations that fail to allow
middle housing within the time frames provided. Commerce must establish a process for cities
to seek approval of required local actions, and any local actions approved by Commerce are
exempt from appeals under the GMA and SEPA.
A city that adopts the density and missing middle regulations is deemed to be in compliance with
the mandatory GMA element of making adequate provisions for existing and projected needs of
all economic segments of the community until June 30, 2032.
Extensions.
Cities may apply for extensions of the timelines established. Extensions may only be applied to
specific areas where a city has identified water, sewer, storrnwater, or transportation services that
are deficient or will become deficient within five years and for which the city has established a
plan of action to remedy such services on a specific timeline.
Homeowners' Associations and Common Interest Communities.
Governing documents of HOAs and the governing documents and declarations of CICs within
cities subject to the middle housing and density requirements that are created after the act takes
effect may not prohibit the construction or development of the types of housing or density
requirements that must be permitted within such cities.
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Requested on January 14, 2023.
Effective Date: The bill takes effect 90 days after adjournment of the session in which the bill is
passed.
House Bill Analysis -6- HB 1110
JOINT STATEMENT
Collaborating for our Community
Spokane Regional Elected Leadership announces a 90-Day Due Diligence Period to evaluate a
collaborative effort model to address options for responding to Establish Regional, Collaborative
Authority to Effectively Manage Homelessness and its Impacts on our Community.
Our region's greatest strength is our ability to build community vitality through regional partnerships
and collaboration, and now is the time to utilize that strength to address homelessness in our
community. Spokane has a history of achieving big things when responsibility and successful outcomes
are shared.
Homelessness affects communities across the country, and Eastern Washington is no exception. One of
the biggest challenges communities face in addressing homelessness is that much of the homeless
response system requires efficiency across jurisdictions with a regional focus. Together,we can better
coordinate resources invested in public housing and human services to successfully manage this crisis.
As elected leaders, we know this isn't a political issue, it is a people issue, and it affects all of us in
Spokane County. We believe that working beyond eliminating political and jurisdictional boundaries wa-F4
may give us the best chance to build and deliver strategic and impactfui solutions for our entire
community for years to come.
About the-our Collaborative AutheFityEffort
Developing an integrated strategy with shared responsibility is best achieved when all local elected
officials have an equal voice. No one jurisdiction can, or should, serve as the primary lead in this work or
bear the responsibility to solve this challenge alone.
OneThis initiative we will be assessing, modeled after successful campaigns in Houston and Atlanta, is an
effort to establish an independent authority tasked with making strategic and coordinated decisions and
investments to achieve the best outcomes. The Spokane region is ready to ready to work to establish
our own model, one that best fits our community's needs and desires.
We recognize that our many providers and other professionals throughout the homeless response
system have worked diligently for many years, but often without the regional planning and support
they've needed to succeed. A collaborative authority effort couldw+ll address these needs by properly
aligning the region around strategies, funding, and many other resources, including the areas of health
and services, public housing, and public safety.
To help guide this effort, we've selected three retired City of Spokane employees, former Chief Financial
Officer Gavin Cooley, former Utilities Director and Director of Strategic Planning Rick Romero, and
former City Administrator Theresa Sanders. Each has worked on numerous successful regional
collaborations during their careers.
The Next 90 Days
The first step towards developing the a regional authoritsolution is a 90-day due diligence period.
During this time, community leaders and stakeholders will identify how a regional and collaborative
system can could be created—a system that could be built on shared vision, finances, data, and other
resources. ieCommunity members, private, and nonprofit leaders are leaning in to help launch this
initiative in a big and positive way. The due diligence period will focus on:
1. Reviewing potential legal structures fora regional authorityeffort, including pro/con
evaluations; e.g. Public Development Authority (PDA), nonprofit, others
2. Reviewing potential governance models and best practices, including roles of jurisdictions,
elected leaders and community stakeholders in coordination and support of a regional effortthe
regional authority
3. Reviewing initial funding for at#e regional efforta-utherity
4. Reviewing initial staffing for at-Ile regional effortouthority
point and a roadmap for the futureFollowing the due diligence period, regional elected leaders will
determine the likelihood of success for a regional authority model. Gathering comprehensive input will
be key to our success. Many different stakeholder groups, providers throughout the homeless response
system, those with lived experience, our local Continuum of Care Board, local, state, and federal
government agencies and their staff, as well as businesses, and neighborhood councilsresidents, will
have the opportunity to participate.
There will be many avenues for the public community members to share their input and perspectives. A
website will be made available soon where community members can provide suggestions and ideas for
consideration. Public forums with elected and other leaders will also be facilitated throughout the due
diligence period, and more information about those sessions will be available soon.
Together we can build a bright future for the Spokane region.
Signed,
City of Spokane
City of Spokane Valley
Spokane City Council
Spokane County