Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDN 2017-08-28 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETCity of Tukwila Community Development & Neighborhoods Committee O Kathy Hougardy, Chair O Verna Seal O Kate Kruller MONDAY, AUGUST 28, 2017 — 5:30 PM HAZELNUT CONFERENCE ROOM (At east entrance of City Hall) Distribution: Recommended Action K. Hougardy Mayor Ekberg V. Seal D. Cline K. Kruller C. O'Flaherty D. Robertson L. Humphrey Item Recommended Action Page 1. PRESENTATION(S) 2. BUSINESS AGENDA a. Update on Community Connectors. a. Forward to 9/11 C.O.W. Pg.1 Mia Navarro, Community Engagement Manager b. Results of community survey on Accessory Dwelling b. Forward to Planning Units. Commission for a Pg.11 Nora Gierloff, Deputy Community Development Director hearing in October. 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS 4. MISCELLANEOUS Next Scheduled Meeting: Monday, September 11, 2017 SThe City of Tukwila strives to accommodate individuals with disabilities. Please contact the City Clerk's Office at 206-433-1800(TukwilaCityClerk@TukwilaWA.aov) for assistance. City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Community Development and Neighborhoods Committee FROM: Mia Navarro, Community Engagement Manager CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE., August 21, 2017 asumm"HELIa. 7171=1 ISSUE Tukwila's award-winning Community Connector program improves outreach to residents historically underrepresented in civic processes by contracting with people from various language, ethnic, and age groups to act as liaisons between their community and the City. The program began in 2013, and since then, has undergone several staff changes among the partner agencies. This is an update on the program to date, and ideas for the program going forward, BACKGROUND Please see attached presentation. FINANCIAL IMPACT The annual budget for this program is $32,500. It is in the 2017-2018 budget RECOMMENDATION The Community Development and Neighborhoods Committee and Council are being updated on the Community Connector program to date, and ideas for the program going forward. This presentation is scheduled to go before the Committee of the Whole on September 11, 2017. ATTACHMENTS -Tukwila Community Connector Program August 2017 Update W Program began in 2013 2012 Strategic Plan Vision: "City of Opportunity, Community of Choice`° Partners: Forterra and Global to Local Annual budget of $32,500 Up to ten Connectors Ethnic and language communities, seniors and youth. Two-fold: Get information TO their respective communities Get feedback FROM their respective communities Represented communities since 2014: Bhutanese, Burmese, Ethiopian, Eritrean, Latino, Nepali, Somali, Vietnamese, Senior, and Youth Communities. • 194 Surveys regarding the Comprehensive Plan • Three Community Conversations with 130 participants • Leadership Development for Connectors • Built relationships with Police and Fire • Community Event on Safety October, 2015 • Connectors spoke about the Comprehensive Plan, specifically housing affordability, at a Council meeting and wrote a letter to Council • Program Update to Tukwila City Council • Foster Career Day • Disaster Preparedness Training • Each shared what they learned with their community • Leadership Development • Public Safety Plan Training • Public Safety Plan Open Houses • SeeYou in the Park (7/26) • 46 surveys about parks Two projects per year Contract supports up to 10 Connectors Each Connector reaches out to 5-10 people, and they in turn reach out to more people in their community... Connectors receive small stipends Most Connectors work full or part time Limited capacity Forterra provides training and event support Global to Local manages relationships with the Connectors and provides training and event support 2 Hispanic 2 Somali 1 Burmese 1 Ethiopian/Eritrean 1 Senior iYouth co Rethinking intermediary structure Redeploying resources to increase program capacity More leadership training for Connectors Broader reach More availability for department needs co T City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor TO: Community Development and Neighborhoods FROM: Jack Pace, DCD Director BY: Nora Gierloff, Deputy DCD Director CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: August 22, 2017 SUBJECT: Update to Accessory Dwelling Unit Regulations ISSUE Should Tukwila modify its Accessory Dwelling Unit regulations to encourage development of this housing type? BACKGROUND The City Council considered a variety of actions at their Housing Policy Work Session this March. One of the items that the Council prioritized for policy consideration was an update to Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) zoning standards to be followed by an amnesty program for existing units. Seattle's experience with loosening restrictions on ADUs and Portland's dramatic increase in the number of ADUs built over the past few years have spurred a policy debate about this housing type. An MRSC article about revising city regulations to encourage accessory dwelling units from its Homelessness and Housing Toolkit is included as Attachment A. A study discussing the mismatch between existing housing stock and current demographic trends as well as the barriers to development of ADUs is included as Attachment B. Public feedback during the Community Conversations project showed support for well designed attached and detached ADUs, see Attachment C. Tukwila's current standards for ADUs are: • Minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet, • The ADU is no more than 33% of the square footage of the primary residence and a maximum of 1,000 square feet, whichever is less, • One of the residences is the primary residence of a person who owns at least 50% of the property, • The unit is incorporated into the primary single-family residence, not a separate unit, so that both units appear to be of the same design as if constructed at the same time, • Minimum of three parking spaces on the property with an ADU less than 600 square feet, and a minimum of four parking spaces for an ADU over 600 square feet, and • The ADU is not sold as a condominium. DISCUSSION Staff began public outreach and education about this issue in mid-July by developing a survey about possible changes to current ADU standards. The intent was to give the INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 Council a general sense of the public support for or opposition to the possible changes. The survey was publicized through the following actions: • See You in the Park Events — 7/12, 7/26, 8/9 • Flyers at Valley View Sewer and Public Safety Plan Open Houses • Included on the public safety flyers distributed in multiple neighborhoods by Communications • Distributed to Planning Commission, City Council, Parks Commission, TIBAC, COPCAB, Arts Commission, and Block Watch Captains • Mailed/emailed information to the 468 single family and duplex landlords with rental housing licenses • Article in the July Tukwila Reporter • Posted on the City's Facebook account • Flyers at DCD, City Hall, TCC counters • Emailed information to city residents who have expressed interest in neighborhood issues We received 165 responses to the survey, see the results in Attachment D. Overall a majority supported making changes to all of Tukwila's current standards, though for some questions such as maintaining the owner occupancy requirement there was less than a 10% spread. Based on the feedback from the survey should changes to any of these standards be removed from consideration? Should any new standards be added, such as limitations on short term rentals (Air B&B)? A table comparing Tukwila's current ADU standards to neighboring jurisdictions as well as Portland is included as Attachment E. Begin allowing detached ADUs a. Only if lot meets minimum area required in the zone b. Not allowed if there is an attached ADU on site c. Unit may be up to 800 square feet (must still meet maximum footprint for all buildings of 2,275 sf and maximum impervious area of 4,875 sf for a 6,500 sf lot) d. Limit height to 25 feet or the height of the main house, whichever is lower t. --• lot area requirement from 7,200 SF a. ADUs allowed on lots that meet the minimum area for the zone, even if the Low Density Residential standard were lowered from 6,500 SF to 6,000 SF in the future b. Same lot area standard for attached or detached ADUs 3. Attached ADU size limit a. Unit could be up to half of the total square footage of the main house up to 1,000 SF, OR b. Retain limitation of 1/3 of total square footage 4. Owner occupancy a. An owner must occupy one of the units for at least 9 months of the year, though this is very difficult to enforce, OR 12 Z:\Counb1 Agenda IternsOMADU Update�ADU InfoMerno 8-28 CDN,doc INFORMATIONAL MEM* Page 3 5. Parking I a, Require 3 on-site parking spaces for lots with an ADU, 0 b. Continue to require 4 spaces if the ADU is over 600 sf 6. Short term rentals a. Prohibit rentals of less than 30 days in LDR so that these units increase the housing supply, though this is very difficult to enforce. OR b. Allow Air B&B type rentals of ADUs to provide flexibility and a potential income stream for property owners, Next Steps If the Council would like to proceed with revisions to the ADU standards the next step is a Planning Commission hearing and recommendation. We would provide notice using the email list of survey respondents who signed up for further information as well as mailing a notice to all single family addresses. Based on the PC recommendation we would return to Committee with a draft ordinance for Council review. FINANCIAL IMPACT In addition to modifying zoning code standards, much of the increase in ADU development in Portland is attributed to waivers or reductions in impact and utility hook- up fees for ADUs. Tukwila is served by multiple water, sewer and electricity providers with different fee structures and capacity charges that are not subject to Tukwila control. Tukwila also charges fire, traffic and parks impact fees and would need to decide if detached ADUs would be treated as new single family residences, charged the multi- family rate or not charged at all. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to forward their chosen policy options to the Planning Commission for a public hearing and recommendation, likely at their October meeting. The issue could then return to the November 131h Community Development and Neighborhoods meeting followed by a public hearing at the November 27th Committee of the Whole and then full Council on December 4In ATTACHMENTS A. Revising city regulations to encourage accessory dwelling units — MRSC Homelessness and housing toolkit for cities B. Accessory Dwelling Units: A Flexible Free -Market Housing Solution C. Community Conversation Visual Preference Result — Accessory Units Poster D. ADU Survey Responses E. ADU Standards Comparison Z:1Councjl Agenda ltemsOCMADU Update�ADU InfoMemo 8-28 CDN.doc 13 I Affordable housing Revising city regulations to encourage accessory dwelling units Accessory dwelling units k40U$have been around for decades. In many parts ofWashington State, the concept isaccepted and local governments have revised their regulations to accommodate such housing. Even so, the number ofADUscreated in accordance with local standards has remained relatively low, due |npart iothe difficulty |nmeeting those regulations and the associated costs, |nresponse, afew local governments are re|ook|ngaktheir standards and discussing how tomake them easier to meet. The potential easing ofexisting ADUregulations, however, |scausing neighborhood homeowners totake notice. What is an accessory dwelling unit (ADU)? Anaccessory dwelling unit (ADU) isasmall, self-contained residential unit located onthe same lot asan existing single-family home. They are sometimes referred toas°mother-in- |awapertments.'AnAUUhas all the basic facilities needed for day-to-day living independent nfthe main home, such asakitchen, sleeping area, and a bathroom, 16 There are two types of ADUs: tAttached 4DW,which may be created as either: a Aseparate unit within anexisting home (such asimanattic o/ basement); or b.Anaddition to the home (such as aseparate apartment unit with its own entrance), 2. Detached AD0\created ina separate structure onthek¢(such asaconverted gaoageoranew "backyard cottage"), Reasons for allowing ADUs State law UR[VV43,63A.215and R[VV 36.70A.400requires that certain cities and counties adopt ordinances tu encourage the development ofADUs insingle-family zones, byincorporating the model ordinance recommendations prepared bythe Washington Department of Commerce. |naddition tojust meeting astatutory mandate, however, ADUshave also helped local jurisdictions meet their Growth Management Act goals hmencourage affordable housing and provide avariety ofhousing densities and types, while still preserving the character of single- family neighborhoods. From a planning perspective, |t}sconsidered bymany tobea"kinder and gentler" method for accommodating population growth |n acommunity, oscompared toupzon|mg land todmso. U9 Standard ADU regulations Most local ADUregulations have standards toaddress the following ^ Maximum unit size ^ Owner -occupancy ^ Dedicated off-street parking ^ Attached ADOsonly ^ Maximum number o[dwelling units unone lot ` Separate entrances/only one visible from the street ^ Other design standards (especially for detached ADU$for such items as roof pitch, window style, and exterior material ^ Maximum number n(occupants ~ Minimum lot size ^ Building code and other ~Ufe/safety" requirements to reconsider ADU requirements Some local governments in Washington State and elsewhere are reexamining their "standard^ADUrequirements and questioning the rationale behind them, especially given the low production rate ofnew accessory dwelling units. Asaresult, some communities are considering changes toADUregulations, such as: * Unit size: Most current ADU standards set amaximum size (for example, 00square feed'but some communities are considering un increase hotheir limit toprovide more flexibility. ^ Om -site parking: Some local governments are looking ac areduction orelimination of standards requiring on-site parking spaces for the ADUsoccupants, especially inareas where there isadequate on -street parking. Such achange may face stronger opposition |nneighborhood where street parking isatapremium. ` Detached ADUs:Most codes only allow attached ADUs,but more communities are expanding requ|obunstopermit detached ADUs(which are usually required hobeplaced |nthe back half ofa residential |ot).Even |fallowed, the high cost cfconstructing "backyard cottages" may limit the number that actually get built. ^ Most codes require that the property owner needs tooccupy either the primary oraccessory unit, but some communities (such asSeatt}e) are considering removing this requirement. ° Allowing more than two dwelling units: A^cuttivgedge' reg u<atory change btoincrease themaximum number ofdwelling units omasingle family lot \othree (by allowing one primary dwelling unit, one ottachedADU and one detached ADU).}nSeattle, the City Council |scurrently considering proposed code revisions that would include anincrease tothree units onone lot. Discussion about these types of changes has caused anxiety for some homeowners, who are concerned about the impacts mnneighborhood character and property values. Dothe other side are affordable housing advocates who consider changing existing regulations axaway toeffectively increase the number oflegal AQUs. Regardless of how local governments decide ioregulate them, ADUsmay bemviable approach toaddress a community's growth and affordable housing policies |namanner that b acceptable to residents (especially if they 112 consider the akernaUvey.just besure regulations and development review process aren't soburdensome that property owners end upnot creating these dwelling units orbuilding anADU without obtaining the required permits. Resources Accessory Dwellings website ` org MRSC's Accessory Dwelling - Ukmfts: Issues & Options publication MRSC's Accessory Dwelling Units and Affordable Housing webpages _ _ 17 Ah Ah ♦ R STREET POLICY STUDY NO, 89 Warch 2017 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS - HOUSING SOLUTION Jonathan coppage much of the American built environment was con- structed in the post -World War 11 era, when gov- ernment policy and planning fashion favored a highly dispersed development model centered on the primacy of the single-family detached home. Subsequent developments in zoning law tended to further privilege and protect the single-family detached home front any neighbor- ing diversity of land use or building form. As a pattern popularized at the peak of American nuclear family formation, such models initially met consumer pref- erences and served the needs of many. As the 20`i, century progressed, however, American demographic patterns and housing needs dramatically changed. The built environment was, by this point, too calcified by accumulated land -use reg- ulations to adapt to these changes, producing significant dis- tortion in high -demand housing markets and unresponsive legal environments across the country. As housing supply constraints choke productivity in hot eco- nomic regions, and household structure and demographics continue to shift nationally, significant public -policy debates have been opened about the appropriate responses to these developments. These range from debates over national entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare to battles over gentrification in urban centers. The political disputes often are characterized by high tempers and little perceptible progress. While these important, high-intensity debates continue, (here is opportunity simultaneously to pursue lo%ver-profile solutions that could alleviate pressure on the market, even if they cannot provide complete resolution to all of its prob- lenm One supplemental policy priority would be to ease sig- nificantly existingobstacles to the construction and permit- ting of accessory dwelling units in single-family residential zones. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS An accessory dwelling unit (ADU) is defined as "a second- ary dwelling unit xvith complete independent living facili- ties for one or more persons" on a single-family lot, wheth- er attached to the primary structure, detached from it or contained within it.' ADUs commonly are referred to by a wide variety of less formal names, including "granny flat," "mother-in-law suite," "carriage house secondary unit" and "backyard cottage.", ADUs, then, are dependent apartments built onto otherwise typical single-family homes. They are often created by means of gat -age conversion, basement finishing, wing addition or even as free-standing construction behind a house. A fully independent ADD will contain its own entrance and full kitchen and bathroom facilities; it may even have separate 1. CaWotma Departrneri> Housing and Community Development, "Accessory Dwell- ing Unik Memorandum," Dearnber 2016 R STREET POLICY STUDY; 2017 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS: A FLEXIBLE FREE- MARKET HOUSING SOLUTION I W. and independent utility metering. While there was signifi- cant scholarly interest in ADUs in the 1980s, it waned until recent years, leaving relative shortage of studies of and data on the current state of secondary units. Filling the inforil tional gap could prove especially difficult, given the large proportion of secondary units that exist as illegal conver- sions, without permits or official recognition in government databases. One 2001 study estimated that fully one in five San Francisco residential buildings included an illegal secondary unit" and that supply -constrained coastal cities could expect 2 to 10 percent of their housing stock tone illegal Secondary units. The ADD is starting to recover attention, as demographic shifts also lead many groups to revisit accessory dwelling units as an option for the increasing number of multigen- erational households. There are any number of causes of this trend, including the aging of the baby boomer generation, a persistent "boomerang" young adult cohort, and growth in the Hispanic and Asian populations, Moreover, housing shortages in hot urban markets have raised interest in cre- ative means to expand supply. Before accessory dwelling units can be brought to bear on those challenges, however, there is a need to popularize and pass significant reforms to accommodate this flexible, free- market solution. BRIEF HISTORY OF ZONING The basic tenets of American zoning were set by the raid - 1930s, which is also when the federal government began to provide assistance to the detached single-family house as an ideal base for American life) In the postwar period, the relatively simple and compact single-family zoning pat- tern—originally designed to protect residential neighbor- hoods front noxious industrial activity—wvas expanded and complicated, with explicit federal housing policies that rein- forced single-family housing on ever larger lots with rapidly diminishing tolerance of diversiry. Zoning shifted from pro- hibiting industrial and commercial development in residen- tial zones to prescribing the shape and structure that resi- dential housing could take within those already protected neighborhoods. As University of Chicago's Emily Talen wrote in her book City rules, "The zoning changes of one small town in central Illinois, Urbana, home of the University of Illinois, illustrate 2, George Wdliam, Secondary Units A Painless Way to Increase the SuQPIy of Hous - mu", Sao F (ancisco Planning and Urban Research Association. Aoqu,;t 2001 Sonia Hirr2ooedir) the USA, Reg dation Cornell University Ness, Is, 32, 2014 the traditional progression."' As she recounts, Urbana's first zoningordinance was passed in 1936, but there were no inin- itnum lot widths and no lot areas were required per Unit until 1950. In 1950, six zones were introduced, two each for resi- dential, commercial and industrial uses. By 1979, however, 16 districts and two overlay zones had been introduced, apart- ments in single-family areas were banned, and minimum lot sizes and floor -area ratio rules were brought into effect. The introduction of a few zoning regulations metastasized into a narrowly prescriptive regime that, as Sonia Hirt described in Zoned in the USA, "has exceeded historic and international precedent to build what may well be the low- est -density settlements in the history ofthe world [emphasis original]."' America's hyperdispersed, land -use -segregated settlement pattern is functional for adults who drive cars but the car- less are significantly inhibited from accessing any activities or areas other than the ones in their immediate neighbor- hood. Functionally, this prevents nondriving children from contributing to the household byrunning errands to corner store, for instance, in addition to placing severe limits on the independence of elderly adults who no longer drive." The recently observed recovery of multigenerational house- holds and parallel decline of intact nuclear families takes place, then, in a regulatory environment rigidly designed for a very different population. As Reilian Salam has written: Since the initial rise of the suburbs, families have changed. Married couples with children have fallen from 42.9 percent of all households in 1.940 to 20.2 percent of all households in 2010, while married cou- ples without children have fallen from 33.4 to 28.2 percentof all households. Single -parent families have also increased, of course, from 43 percent to 9,6 per- cent. The most dramatic change has been the steep increase in one-person households, front 7.8 to 26.7 percent of the total. Families have also been trans- formed by rising female labor force participation, with worsen now serving as the sole or primary wage earner in four in 10 U.S. households with children.... Viewed through this lens, the problem we face is clear: Much of our built environment still bears the imprint of the post- war era, despite the fact that the families that were charac- teristic of that era are no longer dominant' 4Emily Talen, City Rules, Island Press, Pr,, 120.2, 2012, 5. Hirl, D 28. 6� Aodr(!s Duany. F1,zabotn Plater-7ybe4k, and J0, f Spec, Suburban Notion Me Rise of North Point Press, pl15.2000, 7, Reihan Scilarn, "How the SLjbkjrt)s Got Poor,` Slate, Sept- 4,2014, q,,_ R STREET POLICY STUDY: 2017 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS: A FLEXIBLE FREE-MARKET HOUSING SOLUTION 2 19 BENEFITS OF ADUS Rental income According recent Oregon study of Portland ADUs, the larg- est primary motivation among ADU developers was addi- tional income.' By converting part of a house, building an addition or constructing a free-standing unit, homeowners were able to create a supplementary stream of income for themselves, while adding housing„ to the constrained market. The great majority of this additional income comes via long- term rentals: Atlanta architect Eric Kronberg estimates that, when lie constructs AMUS for his market under current reg- ulatory conditions, they can reasonably command rents of $950 to $1400 1 month. By contrast, "you have an all in cost of $550-$715 a month. The two bedroom unit would range 5700-$900 all -in," both of which are estimated very conser- vatively assuming entirely home equity financed, no cash projects. This means Atlanta ADUs could pay for their own financing while providing a homeowner with hundreds of dollars in additional income per month. Most impressively, Kronberg's projections are for detached ADU prototypes, which are much more expensive to produce than attached ADUs that come from conversions or additions on an exist- ing building." In the Portland study, 80 percent of ADUs rented for mar- ket rates comparable to those in multifamily development. However, between 13 and 18 percent of Portland ADUs go for zero or very low rents. In a separate study, University of California researchers Jake Wegrnann and Karen Chapple likewise found 17 percent of San Francisco Bay Area ADUs were occupied for zero rent,"' As Martin J. Brown and.for- dan Palmeri note in the Portland study, this pattern "sug- gests some unique phenomenon is occurring in ADU devel- opments." Indeed, in that same survey, "owners reported that 26 percent of ADU tenants were family or friends when they moved in." This would indicate that a small but significant fraction of ADU development is, indeed, intended for per- sonal relariom hips, as planners and advocates have tradi- tionally assurned. The Portland study also marked an interesting departure from earlier studies when it came to its findings on afford- ability. According to Brown and Palmeri, Portland ADU rents were market competitive with comparable rental apartments 8 Martin J. Brown and jordan Pairneri, 'Accessory Dwelling Units rn Pcirtlancl, Ofogor, Evaluation and interpretation of a Survey of ADU Owners," Oregon Department of Environwiental Quality, June 1, 2014, 9, Eric Kronberg, "ADU Math," Kronberg Wall, Veb 24 2017, 10.lake Wegm3nn and Karen Chapple. "Understanding the Market for Secondiify Units ir) the East Bay," IURD Working Paper Series, October 2012 i only if zero -rent units were included; they actually rented for a premium if those outliers were excluded. Previous stud- ies had indicated that ADUs were cheaper than comparable rentals. Brown and Palmieri tried to adjust market compara- bles by unit size via the number of bedrooms. In their report on the Bay Area, 'Wiegman and Chapman did not attempt to adjust for unit sizes, but noted that the ADUs were smaller than their market cornparables, as well as often beingunper- mitted. Taken at face value, the Portland results could undermine the perception of ADUs as an inherently affordable housing solution. Although the results certainly indicate a need for further study, such reasoning should be tempered by a robust u nderstanding of the ADU context. ADUs are more expert - sive to build Icer -square -foot, which could partially explain why owners would demand higher rents per -square -foot. III general, due to their smaller unit sizes, ADUs should occu- py the lower end of the rental spectrum. As an NYU Fur- man Center working paper noted: "Micro -units [ADUs and compact apartments] in many cities frequently rent at rather high rates per square foot, but at lower total monthly rent levels, than larger apartments."" In this sense, ADUs remain a source of affordable housing;•. Iia supply -constrained hous- ing markets, any production of additional dwelling; space will help ease rental market pressure, and production of low total rent units is all the more welcome. Further, as Brown and Palmieri note, the zero and below- market rents that are presumably charged to family members or friends should not be dismissed. Voluntarily discounting rent to those with whom the propertyowner has pre-existing relationships is still a provision of affordable housing. Where the housing is provided to elderly relations who might other- wise require costly personal care, it also represents a poten- tially large government savings, Rejoining multiple genera- tions in close living arrangements allows for child care of - eldercare to be provided by the family, instead of relying on expensive market services. Such arrangements can benefit the whole family by strengthening their relationships and shared experiences. Anecdotally, children can benefit from the experience of elders in quilting, crafting or carpentry. Elders, meanwhile, sometimes can benefit from younger gencrations'g,reater familiarity with maintaining and navi- gating each new wave of domestic technology. further study of ADU rents would bring welcome clarity. For the great majority of homeowners who plan to rent their 21])U at market -competitive rents, ADUs can provide ft Vicki Been, Banj,)rnarr Gross. and John Infranca, "Resporlding to Clianging House- t,olds. Regulatory Challenges for Micro -Units and Accessory Dwelling Unit;," NYU FuTman Center, January 2014, mlr;LF, R STREET POLICY STUDY: 2017 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS: A FLEXIBLE FREE-MARKET HOUSING SOLUTION 3 9"A ,4•J' reliable stream of additional income which should, in most circumstances, pay for itself. Multigencrational housing Almost one -in -five Americans now live in multigeneration- al household, according to a recent Pew analysis of U.S. Cen- sus Bureau data." That is a record absolute number and the highest proportion of the American population since 1950. Once a near -universal feature of the American lifecycle in the rmid-1911 century, the proportion of households living with multiple adult generations had been declining since 1860, with more than half the collapse in multigenerational living occurring between 1940 and 1980," ADUs are often preferred for multigenerational living arrangements because they allow family members to share a residence, assist each other in day-to-day tasks and share a life without erasing all boundaries between the primary household and the additional generation. When equipped with independent entrances and kitchen units, residents of ADUs are able to maintain a modicum of independence, coming and going as they please and entertaining their own guests, while still remaining tightly bound to their fanifly. The AARP has advocated for relaxation of rules around accessory dwelling units in order to accommodate a desire among its members (current and prospective) to "age in place" whenever possible. Expanded ADU capability allows older Americans either to move into their children's homes or to construct a more modest apartment that suits their needs. Toward that end, the AARP in 2000 commissioned the American Planning Association to draft an ADU "model state act anti local ordinance,"" Older Americans are not, however, the largest consumer of multigenerational housing today. In 2014, more 18 -to - 34 -year-olds lived with their parents than in other arrange- ments for the first time in 130 years,", and 31 percent of 25 -to -29 -year-olds lived in multigenerational households. The persistence of the millennial generation living rat home, even as the econornyornerged from the Great Recession, has been a topic cf great concern and headlines. For the pur- 12, D Veira Cohn and Je`frey S. Passel "A Record 60.6 Americans uve in Multigenera- tional HOUSOOICJS," Pew RC1S0arCf1 Center, Aug, 11, 2016, j 13 Steven Ruggles, "Multigenerational ParntFes in Nineteenth Century America,' Continuity and Chifncje, 18 139-165, 2003 14 Rodney L, Cobb and Scott Dvoraf, 'Acccssory Dwelling Wits Model Slate Art arld Local Order ante;' AARP, April 200 15 Richard Fry, 'For First Time if, Modern Era, Living Witt', Parents Edges out Other Livmg Arrangormit5 for IS- to 34-Year-01ds," Pcvv Research Cenler, May 2x1.2016. . .. . ..... . poses of this paper, it is enough to note simply that the trend exists and seems likely to continue, thus further addingto the number of multigenerational homes and potential demand for ADUs. Finally, ethnic demographic patterns also suggest that mul- tigenerational housing will continue to grow in the United States. As Pew found, Asian and Hispanic household,,; both are significantly more likely to be multigenerational than non -Hispanic white households. Both of those subgroups are experiencingsignificant population growth. Fiexit)jhi y In Brown and, Palmeri's study, only about 80 percent of Port- land ADUs were occupied as independent housing. The rest served as some combination of extra space, home offices or other nonresidential use: 11 percent of units were used as a work or living space, while 5 percent were used for short- term rentals,"' Short-term rentals are one of the most interesting alterna- tive uses for ADUs going forward, as the recent explosion of room and homesharing services like Airbrib and VRBO make it easier for homeowners to find short-term tenants for their properties, and the independence of ADUs make l particularly well-suited for such service. The Portland study was conducted in 2013, relatively early in the growth of such services. It would be interesting to update the survey to see how short -team -rental use has grown. OBSTACLES TO ADU DEVELOPMENT The single biggest obstacle to ADU development is their widespread illegality. Burdensome regulatory requirements often will depress ADU production, even where zoning codes theoretically allow them, in order to allow ADUs to serve as a flexible, free-market solution to ease pressures in supply -constrained housing markets, such regulatory bur- dens need to be lifted. Such regulations fall into two broad categories: structural and occupancy. S1l'Llf-,tLlral 1"CgU1,,Jti0J1S Structural regulations regulate the size, shape and facilities of an ADU, as well as its connection to the broader city util- ity netivorks, As with many other forms of housing production, miningurn parking requirements can be a significant obstacle to ADU Production. While COMP10titiOn for on -street parking is one of the most frequently cited concerns and complaints about 16. Brown and Palwen, 2014. R STREET POLICY STUDY: 2017 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS: A FLEXIBLE FREE-MARKET HOUSING SOLUTION 4 21 ADUs, imposed off-street requirements arc often excessive and counterproductive. Until 2015, for instance, Austin, Texas combined onerous parking requirements (two spots each for both the main dwelling and the accessory unit) and an impervious surface cap. if the main dwelling was built before off-street park- ing requirements, the construction of an ADU would cost the property its grandfathered status, meaning four park - ingspots would have to be built for one accessory unit to be constructed. As the Furman Center noted, "built structures may not cover more than 40 percent of a lot, and the combi- nation of structures and any other impervious surfaces may not exceed 45 percent of the lot," Since any parking space is counted as impervious surface regardless of its construction material, Austin homeowners could easily have a hard time fitting everything onto their lots even if they were willing to corn ply.17 Encouragingly, the Austin City Council adopted a much liberalized ADU system in November 2015, with very light parking requirements, a standard minimum lot size and nearly citywide applicability." Portland does not require any off-street parking for ADUs, so it should be most vulnerable to street parking overcrowd- ing. Yet the city's 2013 survey found that one in five ADUs had no cars associated with it whatsoever, and 63 percent had no cars parked on the street. The mean number of cars parked on the street associated with ADUs was a mere 0.46. These findings are similar to results of the Bay Area study in 2012. While these are necessarily limited results, they should encourage cities to loosen or relieve their own park- ing requirements in the set -vice of ADU production. ADUs are also subject to a variety of size regulations: mini- mum and maximum unit sizes; minimum and maximum ratio Of Unit -to -main -dwellings; minimum and maximum ratio of unit -to -lot -size. All of these can vary by whether the ADU is attached or detached. Attempts to build ADUs can be subject to regulations that bar the construction of kitchen facilities in secondary units, as well as restrictions on inde- pendent entrances, Some governments restrict where ADUs can be placed on a lot, whether it or its entrance can be vis- ible from the street and whether the unit's architectural design is required to match the main dwelling. While reason- able regulations can be inciffensive, cities should take care to set their minimum or maximum levels within the bounds of normal ADU production, and to give homeowners as much flexibility as possible-" 17, Been, Cross aria Infranca, 2014 18, Jennifer Curington, 'Austin City Council lessens restricuor's On acxossoty dwelling units,' Commun,ty irripact, Nov, 19, 2015, 19, California Dcpariment of Housing and Community Dmiopment, 2016. Finally, city services fees and regulations can pose an over- whelmingand unreasonable burden to the development of accessory units where they are not tailored appropriately. Portland chose to give financial relief to A17U construction bywaivingthe systerns development charges (SDCs) usually imposed to pay for utility and other public-service impacts. Such charges average around $8,000 for ADUs, which explains why the city's reprieve began a significant ADU boom. Ultimately, the waiver was extended. Even without opting for a full waiver, cities can -adjust their SDCs for the true impact of accessory units, which will be dramatically less than other new Construction. Under normal conditions, extending utility services like water, sewer, electricity and gas should be relatively pain- less for accessory unit construction, as most of the fixed costs have already been built for the main dwelling. Cities that require separate utility metering; can quickly undermine this advantage and even make ADUs outright uneconomical. Arcliirects Newspaper reports that, in Austin, separate water metering alone can cost a builder $20,000.-'0 Local governments often discourage ADU production by prohibiting; qualities that would make them attractive and usable as an independent dwelling unit. This can include restrictions on independent entrances and the visibility of those entrances from the street. Often, they will include prohibitions on kitchen facilities, in Atlanta, for instance, ADUs are permitted but they cannot possess a stove, oven or similar cooking -appliance- The most cooking capability occupants can hope for under code is a hot plate they can plug in, These barriers are best removed whenever possible, as they give homeowners more flexibility in how they can use their ADU over its life span, and so will make their produc- tion more attractive. Occupancy i esirichons Occupancy regulations regulate who may stay in ADUs and what their relationship to the property's owner may be. A frequent and significant ADU regulation requires owner occupancy of the property. ADU construction is, in fact, usu- ally undertaken by homeowners occupying the property, so this requirement often is presented as hearing limited nega- tive consequences. According to the NYU Furman Center report, owner occupancy is seen by advocates as a shortcut to prevent more detailed and onerous restrictions and inspec- tions from being imposed on ADU development. in this rea- soning, an owner -occupant's presence assures against ADU tenants inflicting nuisances on the surrounding neighbor- hood. Because the owner -occupant is a neighbor, he or she 20. Jack Murphy, "As housing (Ost.s and economic segregatfor, incroaFe, Austin's qr<lnny nats proverate, rhe Arch)teets Wwspaper Sept. 12, 2016, j, R STREET POLICY STUDY: 2017 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS: A FLEXIBLE FREE-MARKET HOUSING SOLUTION 5 22 would be more likely to SUPCI'ViSC and head Offany nuisances than an absewee landlord would. Those building ADUs in order to accommodate family or friends would seem to have even less reason to object to such laws. But owner -occupancy restrictions have the potential to impede ADU financing and homeowner flexibility signifi- cantiv. As the NYU Furman Center report notes: "Lenders may fear that, if they foreclose on the property, they will be unable to rent both the primary residence and the ADU," resulting in less favorable financing or outright opposition. Homeowners may also face difficulty selling; their own home, as the house and ADU bear restrictions lacked byconipetifive properties, such as duplexes. They would thus be unable to recoup the full value of their property should a nonresiden- tial buyer be interested. This comes on top of what Brown and Watkins identify asan already significant gap in apprais- al practices that often prevents ADUs from being measured appropriately in home valuation." Furthermore, while ADUs are usually constructed by own- er -occupants with owner occupancy in mind, they are most attractive when they can accommodate a variety of contin- gencies. Young retirees who build an ADU intending to live with fan-fily or move into the smaller unit and rent out the bigger house may find themselves in need of more profes- sionalized care than is available in most home settings. The family they were planning to live with may need to move. it) any of these conditions, the house would shift from an asset to a liability, as the property owner would be precluded by the owner -occupancy restrictions from renting; out both the main house and the accessory unit. They would be forced to either leave the house vacant and unattended, or to sell it. Furthermore, as the NYU Furman Center roundtable partici- pants noted, ADU owner -occupancy would, in many cases, introduce a unique restriction to properties. There generally are no such restrictions banning owners of a Single-family home from renting it to others, and duplex units rarely come so bound either." Portland, Oregon, has one of the stron- gest ADU development markets in the country, and notably lacks an owner -occupancy requirement. Such liberalization is fairly rare, however, as owner -occupant requirements are widespread. In some cases, governments considering ADU legalization want to go even further, and restrict to whom the property can be rented, or whether it can be rented at all. Most often, these restrictions come in the formofreqUiringADUoccu- pants to be related to the homeowner for the unit to be used 21 Mar0r, John Btowri and Taylor Walkms, ' Undetslanding and Appraising Propodlos with Accessory DwOling Units," rhe Appraisaldourrial, Fali 2012, 22 Been, Gros, and infranca, 2014. a, . s a residence. Total or near-total rental bans are likely to chill the construction of ADLJs significantly and foreclose any of the benefits they provide. SHORT-TERMl RENTALS ADUs are interesting platforms to evaluate with regard to short-term rentals, both because of their natural suit- ability to the use and because even ADU advocates some- times are made uncomfortable by the use. Because ADUs are independent dwelling units, they have the potential to be nacre appealing to some renters and homeowners who prefer not to live quite as intimately with visiting strangers. Because ADUs are dependent, they share any neighborhood attractiveness equally with their primary dwellings. ADUs equipped with kitchen, allow renters to cook for themselves, which may be a particular advantage in the eyes of short- term renters, who are more likely than hotel guests to stay for multiple days.,, For advocates who see AI)U growth as a provision of afford- able housing and a relief valve on constrained regional sup- ply, the seem i ng diversion of ADU stock, into short-term rent- als is feared to be a distraction, or even counterproductive. In tourism -heavy cities, some voice concerns about residential neighborhoods hollowing Out in community and character as owner -occupied residences convert into short=term rental pads with a constantly rotating cast of characters." Santa Cruz, California, which has been one of the most aggressive cities in liberalizing its ADU regulations and promotingADU production recently revised its laws specifically to outlaw ADLJ Short-term rentals going forward.'' Austin's new, more liberal ADU law restricts short-term rental of ADUs to 30 nights a year, and prohibits it on properties that aren't occu- pied by the owners,"' Survey respondents have said that one of the central appeals of AI)U construction is then- flexibility.'' Though the upfront costs are considerable for a homeowner, they can justify that investment by the ADU's potential to bring in additional income; to use as a home office or extra living space for a growing family; or to be used by adult family members as needed. Short-term rental services can expand that flexibil- ity further by not requiring homeowners to lock their ADU 23, Andre Moylan, RoorTlscoro 2016 Short-term. rental requiatior tn U , dtjos,' R Sifeer. Institute, March 16, 2016 24, Matfiri Jobn Brown provides one of We bet;l detailed corwderat;onsof these 25, City of Santa Cru?, Ordinance No 2015-15, Nov 10, 2015, 26, Jentifter Cunngton, 2015, 27 Brown and Palmeri, 2014, 11 STREET POLICY STUDY: 2017 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS: A FLEXIBLE FREE-MARKET HOUSING SOLUTION 6 23 into a long-term lease, but rather to use it for income pur- poses on an as -needed basis. SPECIAL CHALLENGES In contrast to almost all other housing production and con- struction, ADUs are primarily built by homeowners, not pro- fessional developers. While professionals generally regard regulatory compliance costs to be expected, if often frustrat- ing, homeowners tryingto build accessory units are unlikely to have Much familiarity with the permitting and corapli- ,nice process. Cities looking to take advantage of accessory dwelling unit production will need to make their process as transparent and easily navigable as possible. Toward this end, Santa Cruz, California produced an "ADU Manual" that offers step-by-step instructions to complete the ADU permitting and construction process successfully. Santa Cruz also maintains a set of draft architectural plans to get interested homeowners started, and even goes so far as to offer financing assistance for those willing to commit to renting the unit at affordable rates for 15 to 20 years. Portland, Oregon, meanwhile, has maintained a relatively libertarian regulatory environment, relieving homeowners from having to forecast for and navigate parking require - men is, owner occupancy rules, or many other often- imposed constraints. it ,dlows widespread buildingufADUs by right, so homeowners are not required to convene public hearings on the subject of planned construction on their property. Local governments that desire to take advantage of accessory dwell ing un its should take care to write their codes and poli- cies into as easily accessible a format as possible, and make that information widely available. CO NCL U S 10 N At a time when many housing markets are experiencing severe supply constraints and housing affordability is under stress nationwide, accessory dwelling unit legalization rep resents a low -profile free-market solution that requires little from government actors beyond getting out of the way. Pro- duction is undertaken by private actors on their own prop- erty, and rop- erty'and diversifies a local housing -stock without introduc- ing large potentially contentious or character -transforming multifamily buildings to a single family neighborhood. Thi.s, incremental infill farther empowers homeowners by allow- ing them to increase the value of their property and receive an additional income stream. it offers renters more neigh- borhood options and cheaper rents. While there are federal -level financing reforms that could further ease ADU development, local governments usually have all the tools they need to take advantage of ADU con- struction without asking permission or seeking assistance from any higher bureaucracy. Reforming outdated zoning systems to accommodate the changing needs of American households, includingthe return of multigenerational living arrangements, should be an urgent priority. Such reforms should take care not to introduce new and unnecessary regu- lations, such as owner -occupancy requirements and short- term rental bans. These could chill the market's response to ADU legalization. Accessoiw dwelling units will not solve housing affordabil- ity crises by themselves, nor will they be suited to wide- spread adoption in every market. But there is little reason for towns and cities to persist in outlawing a flexible housing form that was widespread in the first half of the 201" century, just because it fell afoul of trendy regulations in tho second half. The American built environment was notably adaptable throughout the growing country's many changes up until the postwar land use codes were imposed and accumulated. Giv- en the significant national changes still unfolding, land-LISC and building regulations need to provide as much adaptabil- ity and flexibility as cities can provide. Legalizing; accessory dwelling units should be a simple way to engage that process. �m j�­!, 2 1 ' n4 r R STREET POLICY STUDY: 2Ot7 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS: A FLEXIBLE FREE-MARKET HOUSING SOLUTION 7 24 A *MCM4 howthqcoag sIMAMOd *T d6WCh*d 40 a houbc uqmda as" as M" L%d*p*"' Mu"A. OUSt IAbA4d � ft dh*PM M AkA 141 gUn. A Like the most: 22% (8) Like the least: 78% (28) Like the most: 94% (16) Like the least: 6% (1) Like the most: 82% (23) Like the least: 18% (5) Like the most: 71% (12) Like the least: 29% (5) Like the most: 4% (2) Like the least: 96% (52) Like the most: 87% (13) Like the least: Mal (2) Like the most: 71% (12) Like the least: 29% (5) Like the most: 100% (26) Like the least: M (0) 25 W ADU Changes SurveyMonkey Q1 Should the City reduce the minimum lot size required to build an ADU from 7,200 square feet to the minimum lot size in the Low Density Residential Zone, 6,500 square feet? Answered: 165 Skipped: 0 Yes - make the change No - keep this the same ANSWER CHOICES Yes - make the change No - keep this the same TOTAL 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% RESPONSES 63,03% 36,97% # OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE 1 Make the change to include SMALLER propertiesfl! 7/23€2017 9:37 PM 2 What percentage of Tukwila lots would be effected? 712212017 3:15 PM 3 Who cares what a person decides to build on their property as lomg as it doesn't create a health 7/21,12017 4:07 PM hazard to their neighbors? 4 Why allow two houses on one LDR lot when present PRD is 5525SF. Poor choice for housing infil. 7/20/2017 6:10 PM 5 By changing the lot size and allowing an ADU Low Density Residential zoning in Tukwila would 7/18/2017 5:46 PM virtually cease to exist- Two homes on 6,500 square feet is what I would consider High Density for a single family home neighborhood, 6 If is quality and number of residents is regulated and distance from neighbors property 7/18/2017 4:26 PM 7 Tukwila should also reduce all residental lots sizes to 6,,000 square feet from 6,500. 7/18/2017 2:06 PM 8 Minimum lot size should be dependent on if ADU is attached or detached, 6500 for attached- 7200 7/17,12017 11:05 PM for detached. 9 If the ADU is attached to the house, or above a detached garage, 6500 sq ft would be ok. Keep 7/17,12017 11:44 AM the same if detached (backyard cottages) are allowed (although I would not like backyard cottages). 1/15 104 61 165 27 ADU Changes SurveyMonkey Q2 Should the City allow detached ADUs, like backyard cottages, th are not part of the main house? i Yes - make the change No - keep this the same ANSWER CHOICES Yes - make the change No - keep this the same TOTAL Answered: 161 Skipped: 4 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% RESPONSES 77,02% 22,98% # OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE 1 It should depend on the size of the lot 7/31/2017 8:40 PM 2 Yes if lot coverage remains the same as it is now. 7/25/2017 6:22 PM 3 Please, allow this! Housing is SUCH a struggle for this county. We need more options!! 7/23/2017 9:37 PM 4 Shouldn't a person be allowed to house their mother-in-law without having her live in their house? 7/21/2017 4:07 PM 5 Owner s choice , can be either backyard cottages or detached AUD 7120/2017 7:42 PM 6 City Council should have their heads examined for spending money on a suspicious idea. Instead 7/20/2017 6:10 PM of one rental property their will be two. Where is the benefit for the community. 7 This could be useful for certain people, but not appropriate for all—,overall this may be a good 7/19/2017 8:15 AM solution to certain circumstances., bad for others. 8 This is the most important change. 7/18/2017 7:25 PM 9 One house pure lot. 7/18/2017 5A6 PM 10 No rehab or halfway houses, etc. 7/18/2017 4:26 PM 11 Much additional affordable housing is needed. 7/1 8/201 7 2:06 PM 12 Design should reflect design of original/main home anftr neighborhood, 7/17/2017 11'.05 PM 13 Yes, but lot square footage should be more compared to ALUs. 7/17/2017 3:01 PM 14 Would not mind if an ADU was above, the garage even if the garage is not attached to the house. 7/17/2017 11:44 AM Would not like to see 2 homes on 1 lot, 2/15 W 124 37 161 ADU Changes SurveyMonkey Q3 Should the City allow detached ADUs to be up to 800 square '® n1l mYtter the size of the main house? Yes - make the change No - keep this the same ANSWER CHOICES Yes - make the change No - keep this the same TOTAL 10 13 14 Answered: 159 Skipped: 6 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% RESPONSES 67.92% 32.08% OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE 900 sf 8/1/2017411 PM Could even be bigger that 800 sf 8/112017 4:04 PM I'm not aware of the current square footage. 7/31/2017 4:09 PM I would want t know why 800? 7/2612017 7.49 AM No. Maximum lot coverage established should remain the same. See above. 7/25/2017 6122 PM 650 sft 7/23/2017 1:02 PM 800 square feet is enough to provide an nice living space for a relative. 7/21/2017 4:07 PM 8 x 10 is not very big... 7/19/2017 8:15 AM Would I be happy if an 800 sq ft building went up in my neighbors backyard, No! Would he be 7/18/2017 5:46 PM happy if one went up in my backyard? No. Why create all that unhappiness? For scale and blending, it should be a percentage of the existing structure and some ratio of the lot 7/17/2017 4:00 PM size. Maybe up tp, 1000 sqft. Unless it's above a garage and the garage is 800 sq ft, then ADU would be ok at 800 sq ft. 7/17/2017 11:44 AM I would suggest approximately the size of a generous studio, I am not sure what that would equate 7/14/2017 6:10 PM to but I am thinking maybe 600 -600 sq feet? And also 800 Sqf should not include the parking space. 7/14/2017 1124 AM Detached should be smaller. 7/13/2017 9:10 AM 3/15 108 51 159 29 ADU Changes SurveyMonkey Q4 Should the City allow attached ADUs to be up to half the square footage of the house rather than the current limit of one third? Answered: 159 Skipped: 6 Yes - make the change No - keep this the same ANSWER CHOICES Yes - make the change No - keep this the same TOTAL 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% RESPONSES 60.38% 39.62% # OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) 1 Pay extra costs 2 If it meets other lot dimension requirements 3 Depends on how big the house and lot is. 4 Not sure - maybe up to half with a cap on the total sq. I'L 5 Is the City worried about over crowding when it is building a monstrosity of a low income housing unit near the SouthCenter Mall? 6 AUDs should be allowed Lip half the sq footage of the main house 7 Only If the ADU is on a 7200SF lot, then and only then could ADU be 1000SF, 8 Yes, up to 800 sf max 9 This creates a duplex, 10 a single amount seems better, so an adu could be the limit of 800 square feet 11 Lot size should be a factor making sure the structure does not cover the entire lot. Scale scale a consideration. 12 Most homes would not allow up to half of the square footage, but for those that can, we feel it should be allowed. 4/15 30 DATE 8%1/20174:08 PM 7/26/2017 7:49 AM 7/2512017 6-22 PM 7/22/2017 12:11 PM 712112017 4:07 PM 712012017 7A2 PM 712 012017 6:10 PM 7/1812017 9:34 PM 7/18/2017 5:46 PM 7/17(2017 4:30 PM 7117/2017 4:00 PM 711312017 11:41 AM 96 63 159 ADU Changes SurveyMonkey Q5 Should the City only require 1 additional parking space per ADU, rather than the 2 that are now required for units over 600 square feet? Answered: 162 Skipped: 3 Yes - make the change No - keep this the same ANSWER CHOICES Yes - make the change No - keep this the same TOTAL 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 500% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% RESPONSES 54,32% 45M% # OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE 1 Who cares? There are cars parked all over the place. Just keep the cars parked off of the streets- 7/2112017 4!07 PM 2 if the MIL is for one person why two cars? somehow, the parking spaces should match the number 7119/2017 8:15 AM of cars that belong to the residents of the MIL 3 Its important that ADUs not effect street parking 7/18)2017 7:25 PM 4 Parking is already a HUGE issue in Tukwila. Off street parking is essential if we are going to have 711812017 5:46 PM passable roads, 5 City should LIMIT additional parking to one space 7/17/2017 11:05 PM 6 Parking is generally a problem in the city, let's not exacerbate the parking problem, 7/17/2017 4:00 PM 7 Is a parking space considered a place in the driveway, in front of the garage? 7/1 6/201 7 4:51 PM 8 The density of this area is increasing. Many people will ride public tranist and only have a max of 7/13/2017 11:11 AM one car. The current 2 additional spots seems to not take into account the current culture of the area, 9 Encourage less car use. 7113/2017 9:10 AM 5/15 88 74 162 31 ADU Changes SurveyMonkey Q6 Should the property owner be allowed to rent out both the house and ADU instead of living on site? Yes - make the change No - keep the same ANSWER CHOICES Yes - make the change No - keep the same TOTAL Answered: 163 Skipped: 2 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% RESPONSES 53,37% # OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) 1 This is the main problem. As a past Tukwila Building Inspector I found developers buying properties to convert the property into a duplex with no intention of living there. I brought this to the attention of the Planning Director and was told that requiring the owner live at the residence was not enforceable, A study was done a while ago about the percent of rental units in the city. There must have been some concerti, 2 Again, this is a MUCH needed change to support this crowded, growing regiont! Affordable options are shrinking!' 3 Okay as long as a professional property manager is Managing property'l! 4 No, these changes should be for housing family and friends not for converting the LDR lots into high density, money making lots which would destry the charm of LDR neighborhoods. 5 Allow rent out both the house and AUD if the owner lives in the premise or not 6 But only on 7200SF lots otherwise there is no benefit to the community. 7 Its important to for Tukwila to rerinain an owner occupied city, 8 If both units are rentals more multi -family buildings which are unregulated will be created. Do we really need more multi -family dwellings in 'Tukwila? We already have more per capita than any other city in the state. 9 nol owner occupation is a must 10 Lets not encourage absentee landlords who are mostly profit and not community oriented. 11 People own these buildings and should be able to do what they want with them. There are so many existing codes and rental requirements it is the least we can do for people who have to abide by all of Prose regulations and business license. 12 No slum lords please 6/15 32 DATE 8/512017 8:46 AM 7/23/2017 9:37 PM 7/23/2017 1:02 PM 712112017 4:07 PM 7/2012017 7:42 PM 712012017 6:10 PM 7/18/2017 7:25 PM 7/18/2017 5:46 PM 7118/2017 1233 PM 711 7120 1 7 4:00 PM 711312017 1111 AM 7/1312017 9:10 AM 87 76 163 ADU Changes Q7 In what neighborhood do you live? Answered,- 160 Skipped: 5 Ryan HiU Allentown Duwarnish Foster Point Riverton Foster Cascade View Thorndyke l'ukwiIa Hill ANSWER CHOICES Ryan Hill Allentown Duwamish Foster Point Riverton Foster Cascade View Thorndyke Tukwila Hill McMicken 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 7/15 RESPONSES 1.88% 7.50% 1,25% 5.63% 9.38% 11.88% 938% 11.25% 2175% 13.75% Sui-veyMonkey 3 12 2 9 15 19 15 18 38 22 a ADU Changes I don't live in Tukwila TOTAL Um 34 4.38% SurveyMonkey 160 ADU Chanes ANSWER CHOICES Own Rent TOTAL Q8 Do you own or rent your house? Answered_ 162 Skippe& 3 mo 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 9/15 RESPONSES 93,21% 6.79% SurveyMonkey 35 ADU Changes No Yes - enter your email... Email address Answered: 158 Skippec: 7 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES No 37,97% Yes - enter your email address below 1,90% Email address 60.13% TOTAL 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 W, 10/15 SurveyMonkey DATE 8/16/2017 3:17 PM 8/16/2017 1:05 PM 8116/2017 1:03 PM 8/1612017 1:01 PM 8/16/2017 1:00 PM 8/1 3/201 7 9:55 AM 8/9/2017 9!54 AM 8/8/2017 1:14 PM 8/7/2017 1:02 PM 8/3/2017 5:20 PM 8/2/2017 10:34 AM 8/1/2017 4:12 PM 8/1/2017 4:09 PM 8/1/2017 4:07 PM 8/1/2017 4:06 PM 811/10174:04 PM 8/1/201'712:11 PM 8/1/2017 7:46 AM 60 3 95 158 ADU Changes 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 SurveyMonkey 8/1/2017 7:35 AM 7131/2017 7:12 PM 7/31/2017 6:21 PM 7/31/2017 4:10 PM 7/30/2017 939 PM 7/30/2017 3:17 PM 7/2812017 3:44 PM 7126/2017 6:16 PM 7/26/2017 7:52 AM 7/25/2017 6:24 AM 7/24,12017 1136 PM 7/23/2017 9:41 PM 7/23/2017 4:32 PM 7/23/2017 1;58 PM 7/2312017 1!08 PM 7/22/2017 9:34 PM 7/22/2017 3:16 PM 7/22/2017 1213 PM 7121/2017 12:36 PM 7/20/2017 11:16 PM 7/20/2017 9:16 PM 7/20/2017 7.43 PM 7/20/2017 6:13 PM 7/20/2017 4:41 PM 7/20/2017 8:13 AM 7/1912017 12:44 PM 7/19/2017 9:57 AM 7/19/2017 9:21 AM 7/19/2017 8:16 AM 7/19/2017 6:20 AM 7/19/2017 4:50 AM 7/1812017 9:35 PM 7/18/2017 9:13 PM 7/18/2017 7:27 PM 7/18/2017 7:05 PM 7/18/2017 5:48 PM 7/18/2017 5:40 PM 7/18/2017 5:08 PM 7/1 8/201 7 4:48 PM 7/18/2017 4:41 PM 7/18/2017 4:29 PM MA ADU Changes 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 W -P 12/15 SurveyMonkey 7/18/2017 12:36 PM 7,118/2017 8:02 AM 7/17/2017 11:06 PM 711712017 10.03 PM 7/17,12017 9:44 PM 7/17/2017 6:14 PM 7/1712017 4:07 PM 7/1712017 3:13 PM 711712017 2:56 PM 7/1712017 2:55 PM 7,11712017 11:45 AM 7/17,2017 8:49 AM 7/16/2017 8:29 PM 7116/2017 4:53 PM 7/15/2017 11:23 PM 7114/2017 8:44 PM 7/14,12017 7:44 PM 7,114/2017 11:25 AM 711412017 10:54 AM 711 4/201 7 6:09 AM 7!13/2017 8:38 PM 7`1312017:3:29 PM 7/1312017 1:50 PM 7/1312017 1:17 PM 7/1312017 12:29 PM 711312017 12:06 PM 7/1312017 11:42 AM 7113)2017 11:32 AM T1312017 11:29 AM 711312017 11:25 AM 711312017 11:19 AM Tel 312017 1115 AM 7113/2017 11,12 AM 7113/2017 11:10 AM 7/13/2017 9:52 AM 7/1 31201 7 9:11 AM ADU Changes 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 in 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 SurveyMonkey #10 Thank you for taking the time to give us your opinion. Let us know if you have other thoughts on this issue. Answered: 54 Skipped: 111 RESPONSES DATE ADUs are a great tool for improving the inventory of affordable housing in our community (arid for 8/1612017 3:17 PM providing a little income boost to home owners, as well!) Win -Win! Hardcopy response from 8/9 See You in the Park 811612017 1 06 PM Hardcopy response from 8/9 See You in the Park 8/16/2017 1:05 PM Hardcopy response from 8/9 See You in the Park 811612017 1:05 PM Hardcopy response from 8/9 See You in the Park 8/1612017 1:03 PM Hardcopy response from 8/9 See You in the Park 8/1612017 1:01 PM Hardcopy response from 8/9 See You in the Park 8/16/2017 1:00 PM I would like the changes be made in steps --I'm not totally opposed to detached ADU's but I have 8/712017 1:02 PM concerns, given the foreign environment of our citizens as to how they would be kept and what they would took like. We have a boarding house at the end of our street and it was not unusual to have 14-18 cars parked there until we complained. the owner says he lives there but we neighbors seriously doubt it. Having a nonowner occupancy allowance leaves room for the excuse of "not knowing" what is going on and depending on neighbors to police activity. Allowing detached AMU's will certainly increase the appeal for developers and landlords to 8/512017 9:06 AM purchase properties to profit from multiple tenant properties. It is happening now. In many cases the property owners do not live at the residence. The council should not adopt unenforceable regulation. This will certainly change the character of Tukwila. Attached ADUS have already obanged Tukwila's character, I believe this will increase Tukwila's problem with irresponsible landlords. Thank you for making the survey. There are already several of these type units, have, some good 8/212017 10:34 AM guidefinesIbOUndaries is a great idea. Hardcopy response from 7/26 See You in the Park 8/112017 4:13 PM Hardcopy response from 7126 See You in the Park 8/112017 4:12 PM Hardcopy response from 7/26 See You in the Park 8/112017 4:10 PM Hardcopy response from 7/26 See You in the Park 8/112017 4:09 PM Hardcopy response from 7/26 See You in the Park 8/112017 4:07 PM Hardcopy response from 7126 See You in the Park 8/112017 4:06 PM Hardcopy response from 7126 See You in the Park 8/112017 4104 PM Hardcopy response from 7/26 See You in the Park 8/112017 4:01 PM Vintage laws do not apply well to modern times. 8/112017 7A6 AM It Would be helpful to have more specific information on these issues in order to provide more 7/26/2017 7.52 AM informed responses. I know if one of my relatives needed to stay with us, it would be great to have an ADU (well built 7/24/2017 11:36 PM and with curb appeal). I don't see any reason not to allow these in Tukwila, provided they are not eye sores and well maintained. Feel strongly that increased opportunities for ADU an private properties can only increase the 7/23/2017 9:41 PM options for housing and the prosperity of the region! Keep Tukwila a single family/single home community -....And NO MORE high-rises, despite the 7/2312017 4:32 PM bribes 13/15 �GH ADU Changes SurveyMonkey 24 Property managers need to be involved if both units are rented, expecially if owner is out of state! 7/23/2017 1:08 PM otherwise you can quickly lose the upkeep that comes from pride in ownership. Square foot of detachable dwelling could be larger if lot size is larger but capped at 800 square feet 25 More and more people moving into Tukwila and low density zoning should be changed to full fill 7/22/2017 9:34 PM the needs of housing, 26 City should also look at results of sticky dot exercise (@ Showalter MS and Tukwila CC) several 7/22/2017 12:13 PM years ago, prior to Comp Plan update. 27 Nobody likes a busybody. We do not need a "nanny state"- We can make our own decisions - as 7/21/2017 4-11 PM long as they do not, negatively, affect others, 28 More parking, not less, it seems that the Asus are capable of two or more adults, most will have 7/20/2017 11:16 PM cars, street parking is getting scarce 29 Which Council persons plan to recuse themselves because they own lots 7200SF or are 7/20/2017 6:13 PM considering ADU on their property? 30 Why are the new lot sizes in Georgetown as low as 2500'LDR lots? 7/20/2017 4:41 PM 31 yes fir cottage and tiny homes! 7/20/2017 8:13 AM 32 Thank you for requesting input, and for considering this shift in policy. 7/19/2017 9:21 AM 33 These ADU's will be an increase to the Population of Tukwila. I hope that the City ensures we are 7/19/2017 12:45 AM able to provide the necessary services to current citizens and provide for growth. 34 1 Wouldn't mind allowing a current garage on the property to be converted to an ADU if an 7/1812017 10:38 PM additional parking space was required and all of the other current ADU requirements weremet 35 Stop making Tukwila a slum- 7/18/2017 9:13 PM 36 While there are some valid, compelling reasons for ADUs let's not destroy the single family 7/1812017 5:48 PM neighborhoods that we have,.,.there just aren't that many of them. 37 Constituits get tired of their local governments trying to control every aspect of their personal 7/18/2017 5:40 PM decisions concerning their properties and lifestyles. 38 This is a positive and needed way to address the affordable housing issues we face. 7/18/2017 5:08 PM 39 Please do not sneak anymore halfway, sexoffender- rehab houses into our neighborhood 7/1 8/201 7 4:29 PM 40 Thank you. 7/18/2017 2:07 PM 41 1 see these units as a place for seniors or a disabled family mernber that needs help. They should 7/1812017 12-36 PM not be built solely as a revenue stream for the home owner 42 Let's try to accommodate more affordable housing, without destroying the appearance , integrity, 7/1712017 4:07 PM aesthetics and scale of our neighborhoods- If we had wanted ghetto style, appearance and culture, we would have looked elsewhere outside the city of Tukwila, 43 It is great that the city is moving in a positive way to create affordable housing. This will help build 7/17/2017 8:49 AM a stronger and secure neighborhoods. 44 this is one of the solution to resolve the housing crisis in urban area. 7/16/2017 8:29 PM 45 We appreciate your work on options for affordabllity. I am also eager to hear if and when cottage 7/14/2017 7:44 PM developments (with parking on the periphery of a cluster) will be allowed again on larger lots as historically. 46 To clarify I am a property owner- in Tukwila but not a resident 7/14/2017 6:10 PM 47 Trees! City should have an official arborist on staff to promote care and preservation of mature 7/1412017 10:54 AM trees, and incorporation of existing trees into new project designs. All building permits should require arborist's sign -off. Codes against cutting down mature trees should be enacted and enforced. Public needs to be educated about the value of trees and alternatives to removal. 48 The easiest way to increase affordable, housing is with ADUs. 7/13/2017 8:38 PM 49 1 own a house across from the Duawamish in Tukwila. I think increasing density is a good idea. 7/13/2017 1:17 PM 50 The ADU should riot have to be of like style to the main house. Keeping this requirement will stop 7/13/2017 12:29 PM the building of more efficient and practical housing alternatives. MAIN Hsi ADU Changes SurveyMonkey 51 1 believe that amending the code to encourage ADU's will help homeowners battle the ever 711312017 12:06 PM increasing housing costs in our area, as well as provide affordable housing for tenants, Additionally. because many ADU's are already in existence, I would encourage the city to offer a program to grandfather in existing ADU's (I have no idea how that would work, but I have heard of other municipalities doing that very thing) 52 We like this idea to help with housing needs! 7113/2017 11-42 AM 53 What would the rules be for utilities: water sewer and electricity? 7113/2017 11:10 AM 54 Glad you are working on this, 711312017 9-11 AM 15/15 41 42 Accessory Dwelhng Unit Standards City Min. Lot Size Max. Unit Size Height Parking Requirement Owner Occupancy Other Regulations Tukwila Attached smaller of 1/3 sf of main house or 1,000 7,200 sf NA 2 for main house, 1 for ADU up to 600 sf, 2 for ADU over 600 sf Required Incorporated into the primary single-family residence so that both units appear to be of the same design as if constructed at the same time, Not sold as a condo, Detached not permitted Renton Attached and Detached Sarne as zone main house or 800 sf than main house 2 for main house, 1 for ADU affidavit, notice on title in City, meet impervious surface and building coverage smaller of 3/4 sf of 30', but no taller Required, signed Conditional Use Permit, match main house, 50 total per year Kent Specific zoning requirements of each zone. ADU in new development limited to 800 sf or Attached and 33% of the principal Detached same as Zone home 23' but not to exceed the height of the principal building 2 for main house, 1 for ADU 1 unit must be owner occupied for 6 months of the year Must have recorded covenant with the County Immediate neighbors of an ADU applicant will be notified of the pending ADU permit within 15 days of the application being deemed complete. SeaTac Attached Detached Same as NEW. 800 SF Zone, 1 ADU EXiSTING. 45% of the per lot principal home 20' Parking for main house by zone, 1 for ADU up to 600 sf, Required to occupy for 2 for ADO over 600 sf at least 9 months ADU must be registered with the City of SeaTac. Waiver for additional parking requirements can be granted if adequate street parking is available. Same as Zone, 1 ADU per lot 800 SF Parking for main house by zone, 1 for ADU up to 600 sf, Required to occupy for 20' 2 for ADU over 600 sf at least 9 months ADU must be registered with the City of SeaTac. Waiver for additional parking requirements can be granted if adequate street parking is available. Burien Attached and Detached Same as Zone. ADU footprint no more than 15% of the total lot area or 80% of the main residence Attached 1000 SF Detached 800 SF May not exceed 10ft above the height of the primary existing structure or the max allo..ved in the zone 1 additional parking space is required. Parking should be on the side or rear of the building. Required Non -conforming ADU's can apply to become legal ADU's if they meet all requirements set fourth in the BMC Seattle (in SF Zone) Attached Detached Same as zone 1,000 sf NA 1 for main house, 1 for ADU, waiver is possible Required, signed covenant Max 8 residents on site unless all related Duplex building standards for sound and fire separation if new construction, Only 1 visible entrance per street 4,000 800 sf 1 for main house, 1 for ADU, waiver is possible Required, signed covenant Entrance can't face nearest side yard or rear unless on an alley W:\@SHAREPOINT FOLDER RESTRUCTURE\Cocie Updates\Code_Amendments\ADU Proposal \ ADU Standards City Min. Lot Size Max. Unit Size Height Parking Requirement Owner Occupancy Other Regulations 1 or more related persons plus up to 5 additional persons, Portland Some utility hook up and impact fees reduced or waived Attached Detached smaller of 3/4 sf of Same as zone main house or 800 sf NA No additional for ADO No Only 1 entrance on street facade smaller of 3/4 sf of Same as zone main house or 800 sf 20height No additional for ADU No Smaller footprint than main house, 40' setback from front lot line or behind the house, design to match main house, Duplex building standards if new construction WA@SHAREPOINT FOLDER RESTRUCTURE \Code Updates\Code_Amendments\ADU Proposal\ADU Standards