In Lacey, a duplex or triplex could be coming to a lot near you
In Olympia, they call it the “missing middle” plan, a way to increase density by adding housing types that fall somewhere between a single-family home and large apartment buildings.
Now, Lacey is about to embark on something similar.
Lacey’s housing density plan is not as broad as the one in Olympia, but it still aims to increase certain types of housing — largely duplexes and triplexes — in neighborhoods that city officials believe can accommodate them.
The city now has four residential zoning designations: high density, moderate density, and two low density categories. The lowest of the two allows up to four dwelling units per acre. The next step up allows three to six dwelling units per acre. The city’s proposal is to combine the two and emerge with one low density standard that would allow up to six dwelling units per acre.
The city’s proposal is part of its affordable housing strategy. The economics are straightforward: By increasing the supply of homes, monthly rents and sale prices should drop.
But there’s another reason for the proposal: Single-family home construction continues to slow while Lacey’s population is forecast to grow by another 6,000 people over the next 20 years. That’s about 300 new residents per year, according to Thurston Regional Planning Council data.
A few years ago, more than 200 single-family homes a year were being built in the city, Rick Walk, the city’s community and economic development department director, told the planning commission recently. But the city expects to end this year having issued just 150 single-family building permits in 2019. The city’s lot supply continues to decrease, he said.
Ryan Andrews, Lacey Planning Commission manager, said the city is nearly built out to the north and south.
“The way we grow (as a city) is really going to change,” he said. “We can’t grow out, we have to grow up.”
Property owners weigh in
The Lacey Planning Commission took up the proposal last spring. Later, in preparation for a public hearing, the city mailed notices to about 2,300 property owners who live in the lowest of the low-density zones — up to 4 units per acre — and on lots of about 10,000 square feet that are large enough to be subdivided or used for another type of development. Those lots also are near sewer.
Accessory dwelling units, or mother-in-law apartments, already are allowed in Lacey, but setback rules from property lines would be reduced to 5 feet under the low-density proposal.
Low-density lots of about 10,000 square feet are sprinkled throughout the city, but the heaviest concentration is in an area bordered by Lacey Boulevard, Mullen Road, College Street and Ruddell Road, in the city’s older, established neighborhoods. Some have sidewalks and some don’t.
The public hearing in October was attended by dozens of people, with about 20 residents offering testimony, most of which was opposed to the city’s proposal.
Among them was Patricia Williams, who called The Olympian as soon as she received the notice in the mail. She also fired off a letter to the editor about her concerns.
“When you considered where to live, I imagine the first things you evaluated were the neighbors and the neighborhood; you would never expect that a neighbor could tear down his house and build a triplex,” she wrote. “You would not expect the number of homes in your neighborhood to increase by half, or double or triple.”
Randy Todd, who lives on Brentwood Drive Southeast, spoke out against the proposal during the public hearing.
He said his neighborhood has character and is filled with people who have lived their for decades. Residents of a duplex or triplex will be transitory, he said.
“You’re putting a commercial business in my neighborhood,” he said about the multifamily proposal. “It’s not going to enhance the quality of my neighborhood.”
The city and commission respond
After the public hearing, the commission met again in November and Planning Commission Manager Andrews laid out the testimony, including concerns about parking, traffic, compatibility, property values and fear of neighborhoods changing.
“They bought into an older neighborhood and want it to continue that way,” he summed up some resident testimony.
Andrews pointed out that duplexes and triplexes would have to meet the same design standards as single-family homes and be compatible with neighborhoods. He shared two examples of both that have blended in well with the neighborhood: a duplex on Willow Street and a triplex at the corner of Golf Club Road and 14th Avenue Southeast.
Accessory dwelling units have to meet compatibility and privacy standards, he said.
When a triplex is proposed in the city, the city requires sidewalks or a signature of deferral that says the property owner will pay for his or her share of the sidewalk if they’re installed at a later date. City staff is recommending the same requirement for duplexes, Andrews said.
The private covenants of a homeowners’ association also might prevent what the city is proposing, he said.
Commissioner David Lousteau was unswayed by the post-public hearing justifications.
“I’m struggling with the democracy of it,” he said, reflecting on the fact that 95 percent of the testimony at the public hearing was opposed to the city’s proposal.
“If we go against them, then it just reinforces the idea of planning commissions being window dressing,” he said.
Lousteau also questioned whether the proposal would increase affordable housing. He said if anything, it appears to only benefit the building community.
“I don’t understand why we seem to be so poised to pass something that’s not going to benefit people who live there,” he said.
But his remarks were challenged by Commissioner Eddie Bishop, who said that doing nothing would be a mistake.
“We have to accommodate growth,” he said. “If we don’t, housing costs are going to go through the roof.”
More discussion ahead
The planning commission is set to meet again at 7 p.m. Tuesday at Lacey City Hall, 420 College St. SE. Lacey City Council could take up the proposal early next year.
But there’s another factor Lacey will consider: Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1923.
The legislation, which took effect in July, states that regulations to allow duplexes and triplexes in single-family zones will not be subject to administrative or judicial appeals.
“Essentially this means that the regulations would be final and could not be appealed after adoption by Lacey City Council,” city officials wrote.
But community development department director Walk emphasized that if the low-density proposal is ultimately approved, neighborhoods won’t suddenly be transformed.
“There will be incremental change,” he said.
