Middle Housing Implementation: Coalition Roundtable Explores Barriers and Solutions
Last week, the Coalition for More Housing Choices hosted an in-person roundtable discussion on what is needed to support successful implementation of the new middle housing state law, HB 1110. How our region proceeds with middle housing is an important part of our shared work to ensure more current residents, newcomers and future generations may find a home that best fits their lives. The roundtable was held at Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties in Bellevue and featured David Osaki (Department of Commerce, Middle Housing Lead), Joe Tovar (Tovar Planning), Adam Weinstein (City of Kirkland, Director of Planning and Building), and Cameron McKinnon (Confluence Development, homebuilder specializing in infill housing types).
Thank you to our guest speakers for sharing their thoughts on this timely topic. Here are some highlights from the conversation:
Once the model ordinance is published in late January, working with local jurisdictions early will help local adoption that fits each community without creating artificial barriers to more homes of all types.
One size does not fit all and the work with each local jurisdiction should highlight thoughtful variations on the model ordinance while also pursuing consistent rules to facilitate more housing.
Each community is different and their local strengths should be reflected in how we allow for more middle housing.
Consistent and transparent ordinances across jurisdictions is critical for enabling homebuilding of all types, developed by homebuilders competing to offer more housing choices that are accessible, affordable and fit the community.
David Osaki with the Department of Commerce kicked off the discussion with an update on the middle housing model ordinances the department is developing in compliance with the new law. The deadline for comments was December 6, and Commerce intends to publish the final model ordinances and user guide by January 23. After the model ordinance is published, he underscored the importance of working with local jurisdictions early so that the local version of the ordinance will have an opportunity to reflect the unique local challenges and opportunities of each community.
Joe Tovar encouraged cities to consider the full spectrum of housing choices allowed under the new middle housing law. He also recommends cities take a close look at the flexibility and choice that exists in the Department of Commerce’s model ordinances to see what works in their communities. “One size does not fit all,” he said. He suggests looking at other places that have already adopted middle housing bills, such as Oregon and more recently, the city of Spokane, to see how they have approached this. Instead of expecting each local jurisdiction to adopt the model ordinance as written, a set of thoughtful variations should be considered that empower local leaders to pursue more housing choices without creating unnecessary barriers and inconsistencies across jurisdictions.
Tovar said he liked the shift to administrative design review in middle housing implementation, in compliance with House Bill 1293, which seeks to streamline the design review process. Design standards still play an important role in his view. He said design matters, and if done right, design standards can ensure a successful path forward for middle housing by helping to plan for more housing choices.
Tovar also strongly recommends stakeholders work with planners, city staff, and local elected officials on middle housing implementation and encourage them to make it work as best as they can.
Adam Weinstein spoke about his experience with implementing middle housing codes that the City adopted in 2020. He noted that some existing requirements, such as fire and building codes, don’t always work well with zoning changes, which they are working to address. He also noted that market pressures in his city, where single family homes command such a high premium, create another challenge in adding more middle housing choices. In the context of generations of momentum for adding more single-family homes to a community, we must work together so that a full spectrum of housing types can be available.
Weinstein said it’s important to remember what makes a community complete – creating walkable neighborhoods with access to transit, green spaces, and other amenities -- and how middle housing plays a role in this.
Weinstein shared opportunities he sees as our region moves forward with middle housing implementation. He pointed to technology, such as 3D printing of housing and mass timber, that could help the housing industry produce more affordable homes. He observed that high land values have created an opportunity by aligning with the momentum to add more housing choices that are accessible to more people. Weinstein also touched on the YIMBY movement (Yes in My Back Yard) and local groups like Livable Kirkland who advocate for more housing choices by telling stories about the need.
Cameron McKinnon observed that middle housing is not scalable like some larger single-family communities. This creates an opportunity for small local builders to add more of the housing that our region requires. To be successful, McKinnon spoke about the benefits of consistent implementation of middle housing codes across jurisdictions to minimize the learning curve and risk that builders assume when entering new markets. If local codes differ too much from city to city, he said, this could have the effect of arbitrarily increasing barriers to entry for those seeking to build more homes of all types. McKinnon said cities that welcome more builders will help increase competition and open opportunities for a wide variety of housing types in any given community.
McKinnon cautioned against adding expensive infrastructure requirements on middle housing choices that have a relatively minimal impact on local streets and utilities. If utility and street requirements are too heavy, for example, it will artificially limit opportunities to add more housing choices. Smaller, middle housing projects, which he referred to as “low impact development,” cannot easily absorb these costs, resulting in fewer choices in all our communities grappling with the affordability crisis.
McKinnon also expressed concerns about the economic feasibility of some of the affordable housing requirements in HB 1110, especially in high-cost areas like King County. He cited Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA) in the city of Seattle’s low-rise zones as an example of a fee for small projects that led to a decline in townhome permits due to the cost. His suggested solution is to increase thresholds to 10 or more homes before affordability requirements kick in, and/or offer an effective fee in-lieu option.