HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning 2020-02-27 ITEM 4 - STAFF REPORT - ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT (ADU) REGULATIONS UPDATEi //
City of
i►-r� - r ur �- -;�e - r 'r - � -
STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
FOR THE FEBRUARY 18, 2020
FILE NUMBERS: L17-0067
ISSUE: What revisions are needed to the Accessory Dwelling Unit regulations that
were adopted in July 2018?
LOCATION: City Wide
STAFF: Minnie Dhaliwal, Deputy Director
ATTACHMENTS: A. Map of ADU Registrations received during amnesty program
B. Ordinance 2581
BACKGROUND
Ordinance 2581 adopted by the City Council on July 2, 2018, updated Tukwila's Accessory Dwelling
Unit (ADU) regulations. The updated regulations allow for detached ADUs and require new and existing
ADUs to apply for registration. A one-year amnesty period adopted under Ordinance 2581 allowed for
property owners with ADUs that were created illegally or which were in existence prior to an area's
annexation to come forward to register their ADUs under more flexible zoning rules, provided the units
met building code's life safety standards.
Zoning flexibility given to existing ADUs applying for registration during the amnesty period included the
following:
• Exceeding the permitted height for a detached ADU
• Exceeding the permitted area for an attached or detached ADU, up to 1,200 square feet
• Not providing a second parking space for a two bedroom ADU
• Roof pitch of less than 5:12
• Location of the ADU on the lot.
Owner occupancy, providing at least one parking space per ADU, and meeting the minimum lot size for
a detached ADU were conditions that could not be waived per Council direction. The one-year amnesty
registration period ended on July 1, 2019.
A total of 30 ADU Registration Applications have been received since the city adopted the new ADU
regulations. A total 21 were received during the Amnesty program and only four asked for relief from
zoning standards under the Program. See attached map for the location of these ADUs. Here is the
current review status of these applications:
Approved: 9
Denied: 1
Withdrawn:2
Under construction (not pre-existing but new): 8
Pending: 10 (waiting for the applicant to fix items identified during construction or record owner
occupancy affidavit)
Tukwila City Hall . 6200 Southcenter Boulevard . Tukwila, wit 98188 . 206-433' 1800 - Website: Tukwilol, A. ov
5
Page 2
Issues that came to light as we started implementing the ADU amnesty program:
A. Zoning related issues:
• ADU vs main house size limitations: Many basement ADUs in one-story homes are the
same size as the main floor of the primary home, so it's difficult for them to meet the size
limit of 40% of the primary dwelling. Meeting this requirement either involves increasing
the size of the primary dwelling or reducing the size of the basement unit by making some
of the square footage unusable.
• Owner Occupancy requirement: Owner occupancy is hard to enforce and the property
owners that are currently renting out both units on a property did not want to apply under
the amnesty program if they had to meet the owner occupancy requirement. However,
units in these circumstances are discovered in the process of rental registration process. It
is difficult for the city's code enforcement team to do any enforcement if one of the units is
not occupied by the homeowner.
• Pre-existing duplexes: There are existing duplexes (both legal non -conforming and
illegal) in the LDR zone. No owner occupancy requirements apply to duplexes. Policy
direction is needed on how to enforce or legalize pre-existing duplexes. Additionally, one
application that was denied was for the property with a pre-existing duplex and a detached
ADU in the LDR zone. Ordinance 2581 allows a detached ADU on the same lot as the
primary single-family dwelling, but not if there is already a duplex on the lot.
• Amnesty: Few of the ADUs actually needed amnesty from the zoning requirements. Only
four of the 21 applications submitted needed amnesty, due to the ADU exceeding the
permitted area. Two of the detached ADUs were over 800 square feet (810 square feet;
1,000 square feet). Two attached ADUs had a basement size of the same size as the
primary dwelling unit (870 square feet; 1,000 square feet).
B. Construction related issues:
Units are difficult to inspect after the fact, especially elements that are covered up.
Life safety issues found so far during inspections have included repairing stairs,
handrails, and landings for staircases up to second story units; fixing decks; widening or
changing the height of rescue windows; adding smoke and/or carbon monoxide
detectors; proper installation of utilities; replacing unrated heating equipment; and
installation of fire walls between garages/workshops and ADUs. ADUs applying for
amnesty were not required to install fire suppression systems.
If major issues come up during inspection the homeowners are reluctant to complete and
go through the approval process. For example, if there are no windows in bedrooms, they
do not pass the initial inspection and have to make changes which many homeowners
are reluctant to complete.
C. Cost of obtaining approval:
ADUs located in the Valley View Sewer District must pay a General Facility Charge of
$3,226.00. Additionally, all ADUs constructed after Feb. 1, 1990 are subject to a King
County sewer capacity charge that is either a monthly charge of approximately $65 for 15
years or a lump sum payment of approximately $10,000. Both attached and detached
ADUs are subject to these fees.
City of Tukwila impact fees (parks, fire and transportation) apply for detached ADUs but
not attached ADUs. Parks impact fees are $2,859; Fire impact fees are $1,790 (1,683 if
0
Page 3
sprinkler system is installed); Transportation impact fees range from $350 to $550
depending on the location.
There are some ADU owners with unoccupied units who do not want to pay for or deal
with the hassle of making the necessary changes to their units to bring them into life
safety compliance due to costs. Therefore, they choose not to register their ADU.
There is no fee for registering an ADU with the City. Standard building permit and
inspection fees apply depending on the cost of improvements.
City Council was briefed on all the issues listed above and the Planning and Economic Development
Committee has forwarded this item for the Planning Commission's review and recommendation. The
Committee has directed that all four zoning related items listed above be reviewed by the Planning
Commission to determine what amendments are necessary.
DISCUSSION
1. ADU vs main house size limitations: Under current regulations attached ADUs may occupy a
maximum of 40% of the square footage of the single-family dwelling (excluding the area of any
attached garage) or up to 1000 square feet, whichever is less. Detached ADUs may be a
maximum of 800 square feet and if built over a detached garage, the detached garage does not
count toward the areas limit for the ADU.
This requirement can be easily met for new homes, however many basement ADUs in one-story
homes are the same size as the main floor of the primary home, so it's difficult for them to meet
the size limit of 40% of the primary dwelling. Meeting this requirement either involves increasing
the size of the primary dwelling or reducing the size of the basement unit by making some of the
square footage unusable. The percentage limit varies from 40% to 75% in some cities. Some
cities have a maximum size limit and no percentage requirement.
Pros
Cons
Option 1
No Change. Keep the 40% size
ADU is smaller than
It limits some preexisting
limit up to a maximum of 1,000
the main house thus
homes from getting an
square feet.
preserving the single
ADU registered without
family character of
adding on the house or
the neighborhood.
making some area
unusable.
Option 2
Increase the 40% size limit for all
This may give more
It limits some preexisting
attached ADUs up to a maximum of
flexibility yet keep
homes from getting an
1000 square feet. This increase
the maximum size of
ADU registered without
could range from 40% to 75%
an attached ADU to
adding on the house or
1000 square feet.
making some area
unusable
Option 3
Keep the 40% size limit up to a
Provides flexibility for
There may be some
maximum of 1,000 sq. ft. for new
existing homes while
small existing homes
homes. For preexisting homes
keeping the
that could have equal
allow an ADU up to a maximum
percentage limit for
square footage for the
size of 1000 sq. ft. but have no
new construction.
two units making the
percentage limit to allow better use
structure more like a
of floor space.
duplex.40% of a 2,500
sq. ft. home is 1,000 sq.
N
Page 4
ft. Therefore, under this
option any homes that
are less than 2,500 sq.
ft. could have 1,000 sq.
ft. ADU and it may be
more than 40% of the
structure. Under this
option an existing 2,000
sq. ft. home could have
two 1,000 sq. ft. units
making the structure
more like a duplex
Option 4
No % limit, just the maximum size
Provides the most
There could be homes
limit of 1,000 sq. ft. for an ADU
flexibility for new and
that are 2,000 sq. ft. and
existing homes while
have two 1,000 sq. ft.
limiting the size of an
units making the
ADU to 1,000 sq. ft.
structure more like a
duplex
Staff recommends Option 3
2. Owner Occupancy requirement: Owner occupancy is hard to enforce and the property owners
that are currently renting out both units on a property did not want to apply under the amnesty
program if they had to meet the owner occupancy requirement. However, units in these
circumstances are discovered in the process of rental registration process. It is difficult for the
city's code enforcement team to do any enforcement if one of the units is not occupied by the
homeowner.
Pros
Cons
Option 1
Keep the owner occupancy
More homeowners
Hard to enforce
requirement
living on their
particularly for
property can lead to
preexisting homes that
better upkeep of the
have two rental units.
property and less
Policy direction is
turnover in the
needed if these units
community.
should remain under the
city's rental inspection
program for inspection
related to healthy
housing code (mold, hot
water etc) even though
they do not meet zoning
code requirements.
Option 2
Remove the owner occupancy
Easy to enforce
Potentially it could lead
requirement
to more rental properties
than homeowners living
on their property.
Staff recommends Option 1
Page 5
3. More than two units on one lot: One application that was denied during the amnesty program
was for the property with a pre-existing duplex and a detached ADU in the LDR zone.
Ordinance 2581 allows a detached ADU on the same lot as the primary single-family dwelling,
but not if there is already a duplex on the lot.
Pros
Cons
Option 1
Do not allow more than two units in
Preserves single
Some property owners
LDR zone (one main house and
family character of
may not benefit from
one ADU)
the neighborhood
ADU regulations.
Option 2
Allow a detached ADU on lots that
Allows opportunity
Three units on an LDR
have a legal non -conforming
for homeowners with
zoned parcel.
duplex and the minimum lot size is
non -conforming uses
19,500 sq. ft. thus meeting density
to benefit from
requirements of the LDR zone
adding an ADU
Staff recommends Option 2
4. Amnesty: Few of the ADUs actually needed amnesty from the zoning requirements. Only four
of the 21 applications submitted needed amnesty, due to the ADU exceeding the permitted
area. Two of the detached ADUs were over 800 square feet (810 square feet; 1,000 square
feet). Two attached ADUs had a basement size of the same size as the primary dwelling unit
(870 square feet; 1,000 square feet).
Pros
Cons
Option 1
Extend Amnesty Program
Provide additional
Could encourage illegal
opportunity for
construction
homeowners to
come forward and
legalize their ADUs
Option 2
Do not Extend the Amnesty
Provides consistent
None
Program
and fair regulations.
Not many
homeowners took
advantage of the
program due to
costs.
Staff recommends Option 2
NEXT STEPS
Based on the policy direction from the Planning Commission staff will prepare an ordinance for the
public hearing on April 23, 2020. After the public hearing the Planning Commission will finalize their
recommendation to the City Council. City Council will then hold a public hearing on the Planning
Commission recommended draft prior to final adoption.
9