title: RCW 36.70A.380

text:
The department may extend the date by which a county or city is required to designate agricultural lands, forestlands, mineral resource lands, and critical areas under RCW 36.70A.170, or the date by which a county or city is required to protect such lands and critical areas under RCW 36.70A.060, if the county or city demonstrates that it is proceeding in an orderly fashion, and is making a good faith effort, to meet these requirements. An extension may be for up to an additional one hundred eighty days. The length of an extension shall be based on the difficulty of the effort to conform with these requirements.
[ 1991 sp.s. c 32 s 39.]

catchline: Extension of designation date.


doc_type: statute

jurisdiction: wa

title: RCW 36.70A.385

text:
(1) The legislature intends to determine whether the environmental review process mandated under chapter 43.21C RCW may be enhanced and simplified, and coordination improved, when applied to comprehensive plans mandated by this chapter. The department shall undertake pilot projects on environmental review to determine if the review process can be improved by fostering more coordination and eliminating duplicative environmental analysis which is made to assist decision makers approving comprehensive plans pursuant to this chapter. Such pilot projects should be designed and scoped to consider cumulative impacts resulting from plan decisions, plan impacts on environmental quality, impacts on adjacent jurisdictions, and similar factors in sufficient depth to simplify the analysis of subsequent specific projects being carried out pursuant to the approved plan.
(2) The legislature hereby authorizes the department to establish, in cooperation with business, industry, cities, counties, and other interested parties, at least two but not more than four pilot projects, one of which shall be with a county, on enhanced draft and final nonproject environmental analysis of comprehensive plans prepared pursuant to this chapter, for the purposes outlined in subsection (1) of this section. The department may select appropriate geographic subareas within a comprehensive plan if that will best serve the purposes of this section and meet the requirements of chapter 43.21C RCW.
(3) An enhanced draft and final nonproject environmental analysis prepared pursuant to this section shall follow the rules adopted pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW.
(4) Not later than December 31, 1993, the department shall evaluate the overall effectiveness of the pilot projects under this section regarding preparing enhanced nonproject environmental analysis for the approval process of comprehensive plans and shall:
(a) Provide an interim report of its findings to the legislature with such recommendations as may be appropriate, including the need, if any, for further legislation;
(b) Consider adoption of any further rules or guidelines as may be appropriate to assist counties and cities in meeting requirements of chapter 43.21C RCW when considering comprehensive plans; and
(c) Prepare and circulate to counties and cities such instructional manuals or other information derived from the pilot projects as will assist all counties and cities in meeting the requirements and objectives of chapter 43.21C RCW in the most expeditious and efficient manner in the process of considering comprehensive plans pursuant to this chapter.
[ 1998 c 245 s 30; 1995 c 399 s 43; 1991 sp.s. c 32 s 20.]

license: public-domain-government-work

rule_set: Revised Code of Washington

catchline: Environmental planning pilot projects.

code: rcw

unit: section

court: Washington State Legislature


title: RCW 36.70A.390

text:
A county or city governing body that adopts a moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control without holding a public hearing on the proposed moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control, shall hold a public hearing on the adopted moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control within at least sixty days of its adoption, whether or not the governing body received a recommendation on the matter from the planning commission or department. If the governing body does not adopt findings of fact justifying its action before this hearing, then the governing body shall do so immediately after this public hearing. A moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control adopted under this section may be effective for not longer than six months, but may be effective for up to one year if a work plan is developed for related studies providing for such a longer period. A moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control may be renewed for one or more six-month periods if a subsequent public hearing is held and findings of fact are made prior to each renewal.
This section does not apply to the designation of critical areas, agricultural lands, forestlands, and mineral resource lands, under RCW 36.70A.170, and the conservation of these lands and protection of these areas under RCW 36.70A.060, prior to such actions being taken in a comprehensive plan adopted under RCW 36.70A.070 and implementing development regulations adopted under RCW 36.70A.120, if a public hearing is held on such proposed actions. This section does not apply to ordinances or development regulations adopted by a city that prohibit building permit applications for or the construction of transitional housing or permanent supportive housing in any zones in which residential dwelling units or hotels are allowed or prohibit building permit applications for or the construction of indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing in any zones in which hotels are allowed.
[ 2021 c 254 s 5; 1992 c 207 s 6.]

catchline: Moratoria, interim zoning controls—Public hearing—Limitation on length—Exceptions.


title: RCW 36.70A.410

text:
No county or city that plans or elects to plan under this chapter may enact or maintain an ordinance, development regulation, zoning regulation or official control, policy, or administrative practice which treats a residential structure occupied by persons with handicaps differently than a similar residential structure occupied by a family or other unrelated individuals. As used in this section, "handicaps" are as defined in the federal fair housing amendments act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 3602).
[ 1993 c 478 s 23.]

catchline: Treatment of residential structures occupied by persons with handicaps.


title: RCW 36.70A.420

text:
The legislature recognizes that there are major transportation projects that affect multiple jurisdictions as to economic development, fiscal influence, environmental consequences, land use implications, and mobility of people and goods. The legislature further recognizes that affected jurisdictions have important interests that must be addressed, and that these jurisdictions' present environmental planning and permitting authority may result in multiple local permits and other requirements being specified for the projects.
The legislature finds that the present permitting system may result in segmented and sequential decisions by local governments that do not optimally serve all the parties with an interest in the decisions. The present system may also make more difficult achieving the consistency among plans and actions that is an important aspect of this chapter.
It is the intent of the legislature to provide for more efficiency and equity in the decisions of local governments regarding major transportation projects by encouraging coordination or consolidation of the processes for reviewing environmental planning and permitting requirements for those projects. The legislature intends that local governments coordinate their regulatory decisions by considering together the range of local, state, and federal requirements for major transportation projects. Nothing in RCW 36.70A.420 or 36.70A.430 alters the authority of cities or counties under any other planning or permitting statute.
[ 1994 c 258 s 1.]
Notes:
Captions not law—1994 c 258: "Section captions used in this act constitute no part of the law." [ 1994 c 258 s 6.]


title: RCW 36.70A.430

text:
For counties engaged in planning under this chapter, there shall be established by December 31, 1994, a collaborative process to review and coordinate state and local permits for all transportation projects that cross more than one city or county boundary. This process shall at a minimum, establish a mechanism among affected cities and counties to designate a permit coordinating agency to facilitate multijurisdictional review and approval of such transportation projects.
[ 1994 c 258 s 2.]
Notes:
Captions not law—1994 c 258: See note following RCW 36.70A.420.

catchline: Transportation projects—Collaborative review process.


title: RCW 36.70A.450

text:
(1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section, no county or city may enact, enforce, or maintain an ordinance, development regulation, zoning regulation, or official control, policy, or administrative practice that prohibits the use of a residential dwelling, located in an area zoned for residential or commercial use, as a family day-care provider's home facility.
(2) A county or city may require that the facility: (a) Comply with all building, fire, safety, health code, and business licensing requirements; (b) conform to lot size, building size, setbacks, and lot coverage standards applicable to the zoning district except if the structure is a legal nonconforming structure; (c) is certified by the department of children, youth, and families licensor as providing a safe passenger loading area; (d) include signage, if any, that conforms to applicable regulations; and (e) limit hours of operations to facilitate neighborhood compatibility, while also providing appropriate opportunity for persons who use family day-care and who work a nonstandard work shift.
(3) A county or city may also require that the family day-care provider, before state licensing, require proof of written notification by the provider that the immediately adjoining property owners have been informed of the intent to locate and maintain such a facility. If a dispute arises between neighbors and the family day-care provider over licensing requirements, the licensor may provide a forum to resolve the dispute.
(4) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a county or city from imposing zoning conditions on the establishment and maintenance of a family day-care provider's home in an area zoned for residential or commercial use, so long as such conditions are no more restrictive than conditions imposed on other residential dwellings in the same zone and the establishment of such facilities is not precluded. As used in this section, "family day-care provider" is as defined in RCW 43.216.010.
[ 2018 c 58 s 22; 2007 c 17 s 13; 2003 c 286 s 5; 1995 c 49 s 3; 1994 c 273 s 17.]
Notes:
Effective date—2018 c 58: See note following RCW 28A.655.080.

catchline: Family day-care provider's home facility—County or city may not prohibit in residential or commercial area—Conditions.


title: RCW 36.70A.460

text:
(1) A permit required under this chapter for a watershed restoration project as defined in RCW 89.08.460 shall be processed in compliance with RCW 89.08.450 through 89.08.510.
(2) A fish habitat enhancement project meeting the criteria of RCW 77.55.181 shall be reviewed and approved according to the provisions of RCW 77.55.181.
[ 2014 c 120 s 15; 2003 c 39 s 21; 1998 c 249 s 11; 1995 c 378 s 11.]
Notes:
Findings—Purpose—Report—Effective date—1998 c 249: See notes following RCW 77.55.181.

catchline: Watershed restoration projects—Permit processing—Fish habitat enhancement project.


title: RCW 36.70A.470

text:
(1) Project review, which shall be conducted pursuant to the provisions of chapter 36.70B RCW, shall be used to make individual project decisions, not land use planning decisions. If, during project review, a county or city planning under RCW 36.70A.040 identifies deficiencies in plans or regulations:
(a) The permitting process shall not be used as a comprehensive planning process;
(b) Project review shall continue; and
(c) The identified deficiencies shall be docketed for possible future plan or development regulation amendments.
(2) Each county and city planning under RCW 36.70A.040 shall include in its development regulations a procedure for any interested person, including applicants, citizens, hearing examiners, and staff of other agencies, to suggest plan or development regulation amendments. The suggested amendments shall be docketed and considered on at least an annual basis, consistent with the provisions of RCW 36.70A.130.
(3) For purposes of this section, a deficiency in a comprehensive plan or development regulation refers to the absence of required or potentially desirable contents of a comprehensive plan or development regulation. It does not refer to whether a development regulation addresses a project's probable specific adverse environmental impacts which the permitting agency could mitigate in the normal project review process.
(4) For purposes of this section, docketing refers to compiling and maintaining a list of suggested changes to the comprehensive plan or development regulations in a manner that will ensure such suggested changes will be considered by the county or city and will be available for review by the public.
[ 1995 c 347 s 102.]
Notes:
Findings—Intent—1995 c 347 s 102: "The legislature finds that during project review, a county or city planning under RCW 36.70A.040 is likely to discover the need to make various improvements in comprehensive plans and development regulations. There is no current requirement or process for applicants, citizens, or agency staff to ensure that these improvements are considered in the plan review process. The legislature also finds that in the past environmental review and permitting of proposed projects have been used to reopen and make land use planning decisions that should have been made through the comprehensive planning process, in part because agency staff and hearing examiners have not been able to ensure consideration of all issues in the local planning process. The legislature further finds that, while plans and regulations should be improved and refined over time, it is unfair to penalize applicants that have submitted permit applications that meet current requirements. It is the intent of the legislature in enacting RCW 36.70A.470 to establish a means by which cities and counties will docket suggested plan or development regulation amendments and ensure their consideration during the planning process." [ 1995 c 347 s 101.]
Finding—1995 c 347: "The legislature recognizes by this act that the growth management act is a fundamental building block of regulatory reform. The state and local governments have invested considerable resources in an act that should serve as the integrating framework for all other land-use related laws. The growth management act provides the means to effectively combine certainty for development decisions, reasonable environmental protection, long-range planning for cost-effective infrastructure, and orderly growth and development." [ 1995 c 347 s 1.]
Severability—1995 c 347: "If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected." [ 1995 c 347 s 901.]
Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347: "Part headings and the table of contents as used in this act do not constitute any part of the law." [ 1995 c 347 s 902.]

catchline: Project review—Amendment suggestion procedure—Definitions.


title: RCW 36.70A.480

text:
(1) For shorelines of the state, the goals and policies of the shoreline management act as set forth in RCW 90.58.020 are added as one of the goals of this chapter as set forth in RCW 36.70A.020 without creating an order of priority among the 15 goals. The goals and policies of a shoreline master program for a county or city approved under chapter 90.58 RCW shall be considered an element of the county or city's comprehensive plan. All other portions of the shoreline master program for a county or city adopted under chapter 90.58 RCW, including use regulations, shall be considered a part of the county or city's development regulations.
(2) The shoreline master program shall be adopted pursuant to the procedures of chapter 90.58 RCW rather than the goals, policies, and procedures set forth in this chapter for the adoption of a comprehensive plan or development regulations.
(3)(a) The policies, goals, and provisions of chapter 90.58 RCW and applicable guidelines shall be the sole basis for determining compliance of a shoreline master program with this chapter except as the shoreline master program is required to comply with the internal consistency provisions of RCW 36.70A.070, 36.70A.040(4), 35.63.125, and 35A.63.105.
(b) Except as otherwise provided in (c) of this subsection, development regulations adopted under this chapter to protect critical areas within shorelines of the state apply within shorelines of the state until the department of ecology approves one of the following: A comprehensive master program update, as defined in RCW 90.58.030; a segment of a master program relating to critical areas, as provided in RCW 90.58.090; or a new or amended master program approved by the department of ecology on or after March 1, 2002, as provided in RCW 90.58.080. The adoption or update of development regulations to protect critical areas under this chapter prior to department of ecology approval of a master program update as provided in this subsection is not a comprehensive or segment update to the master program.
(c)(i) Until the department of ecology approves a master program or segment of a master program as provided in (b) of this subsection, a use or structure legally located within shorelines of the state that was established or vested on or before the effective date of the local government's development regulations to protect critical areas may continue as a conforming use and may be redeveloped or modified if: (A) The redevelopment or modification is consistent with the local government's master program; and (B) the local government determines that the proposed redevelopment or modification will result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. The local government may waive this requirement if the redevelopment or modification is consistent with the master program and the local government's development regulations to protect critical areas.
(ii) For purposes of this subsection (3)(c), an agricultural activity that does not expand the area being used for the agricultural activity is not a redevelopment or modification. "Agricultural activity," as used in this subsection (3)(c), has the same meaning as defined in RCW 90.58.065.
(d) Upon department of ecology approval of a shoreline master program or critical area segment of a shoreline master program, critical areas within shorelines of the state are protected under chapter 90.58 RCW and are not subject to the procedural and substantive requirements of this chapter, except as provided in subsection (6) of this section. Nothing in chapter 321, Laws of 2003 or chapter 107, Laws of 2010 is intended to affect whether or to what extent agricultural activities, as defined in RCW 90.58.065, are subject to chapter 36.70A RCW.
(e) The provisions of RCW 36.70A.172 shall not apply to the adoption or subsequent amendment of a local government's shoreline master program and shall not be used to determine compliance of a local government's shoreline master program with chapter 90.58 RCW and applicable guidelines. Nothing in this section, however, is intended to limit or change the quality of information to be applied in protecting critical areas within shorelines of the state, as required by chapter 90.58 RCW and applicable guidelines.
(4) Shoreline master programs shall provide a level of protection to critical areas located within shorelines of the state that assures no net loss of shoreline ecological functions necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources as defined by department of ecology guidelines adopted pursuant to RCW 90.58.060.
(5) Shorelines of the state shall not be considered critical areas under this chapter except to the extent that specific areas located within shorelines of the state qualify for critical area designation based on the definition of critical areas provided by *RCW 36.70A.030(6) and have been designated as such by a local government pursuant to RCW 36.70A.060(2).
(6) If a local jurisdiction's master program does not include land necessary for buffers for critical areas that occur within shorelines of the state, as authorized by RCW 90.58.030(2)(d), then the local jurisdiction shall continue to regulate those critical areas and their required buffers pursuant to RCW 36.70A.060(2).
[ 2023 c 228 s 2; 2010 c 107 s 2; 2003 c 321 s 5; 1995 c 347 s 104.]
Notes:
*Reviser's note: RCW 36.70A.030 was amended by 2023 c 332 s 2 and 2023 c 228 s 14, changing subsection (6) to subsection (11).
Intent—2010 c 107: "(1) The legislature recognizes that Engrossed Substitute House Bill No. 1933, enacted as chapter 321, Laws of 2003, modified the relationship between the shoreline management act and the growth management act. The legislature recognizes also that its 2003 efforts, while intended to create greater operational clarity between these significant shoreline and land use acts, have been the subject of differing, and occasionally contrary, legal interpretations. This act is intended to affirm and clarify the legislature's intent relating to the provisions of chapter 321, Laws of 2003.
(2) The legislature affirms that development regulations adopted under the growth management act to protect critical areas apply within shorelines of the state as provided in section 2 of this act.
(3) The legislature affirms that the adoption or update of critical area regulations under the growth management act is not automatically an update to the shoreline master program.
(4) The legislature intends for this act to be remedial and curative in nature, and to apply retroactively to July 27, 2003." [ 2010 c 107 s 1.]
Retroactive application—2010 c 107: "This act is remedial and curative in nature and applies retroactively to July 27, 2003." [ 2010 c 107 s 5.]
Effective date—2010 c 107: "This act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and takes effect immediately [March 18, 2010]." [ 2010 c 107 s 6.]
Finding—Intent—2003 c 321: See note following RCW 90.58.030.
Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347: See notes following RCW 36.70A.470.

catchline: Shorelines of the state.


title: RCW 36.70A.481

text:
Nothing in RCW 36.70A.480 shall be construed to authorize a county or city to adopt regulations applicable to shorelands as defined in RCW 90.58.030 that are inconsistent with the provisions of chapter 90.58 RCW.
[ 1995 c 382 s 13.]

catchline: Construction—Chapter 347, Laws of 1995.


title: RCW 36.70A.490

text:
The growth management planning and environmental review fund is hereby established in the state treasury. Moneys may be placed in the fund from the proceeds of bond sales, tax revenues, budget transfers, federal appropriations, gifts, or any other lawful source. Moneys in the fund may be spent only after appropriation. Moneys in the fund shall be used to make grants or loans to local governments for the purposes set forth in RCW 43.21C.240, 43.21C.031, 36.70A.500, 36.70A.600, for costs associated with RCW 36.70A.610, and to cover costs associated with the adoption of optional elements of comprehensive plans consistent with RCW 43.21C.420. Any payment of either principal or interest, or both, derived from loans made from this fund must be deposited into the fund.
[ 2019 c 348 s 8; 2012 1st sp.s. c 1 s 309; 1995 c 347 s 115.]
Notes:
Finding—Intent—Limitation—Jurisdiction/authority of Indian tribe under act—2012 1st sp.s. c 1: See notes following RCW 77.55.011.
Authority of department of fish and wildlife under act—2012 1st sp.s. c 1: See note following RCW 76.09.040.
Findings—Purpose—1995 c 347 s 115: "(1) The legislature finds that:
(a) As of July 23, 1995, twenty-nine counties and two hundred eight cities are conducting comprehensive planning under the growth management act, chapter 36.70A RCW, which together comprise over ninety percent of the state's population;
(b) Comprehensive plans for many of the jurisdictions were due by July 1, 1994, and the remaining jurisdictions must complete plans under due dates ranging from October 1994 to September 1997;
(c) Concurrently with these comprehensive planning activities, local governments must conduct several other planning requirements under the growth management act, such as the adoption of capital facilities plans, urban growth areas, and development regulations;
(d) Local governments must also comply with the state environmental policy act, chapter 43.21C RCW, in the development of comprehensive plans and development regulations;
(e) The combined activities of comprehensive planning and the state environmental policy act present a serious fiscal burden upon local governments; and
(f) Detailed environmental analysis integrated with comprehensive plans, subarea plans, and development regulations will facilitate planning for and managing growth, allow greater protection of the environment, and benefit both the general public and private property owners.
(2) In order to provide financial assistance to cities and counties planning under chapter 36.70A RCW and to improve the usefulness of plans and integrated environmental analyses, the legislature has created the fund described in RCW 36.70A.490." [ 1995 c 347 s 114.]
Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347: See notes following RCW 36.70A.470.

catchline: Growth management planning and environmental review fund—Established.


title: RCW 36.70A.500

text:
(1) The department of commerce shall provide management services for the growth management planning and environmental review fund created by RCW 36.70A.490. The department shall establish procedures for fund management. The department shall encourage participation in the grant or loan program by other public agencies. The department shall develop the grant or loan criteria, monitor the grant or loan program, and select grant or loan recipients in consultation with state agencies participating in the grant or loan program through the provision of grant or loan funds or technical assistance.
(2) A grant or loan may be awarded to a county or city that is required to or has chosen to plan under RCW 36.70A.040 and that is qualified pursuant to this section. The grant or loan shall be provided to assist a county or city in paying for the cost of preparing an environmental analysis under chapter 43.21C RCW, that is integrated with a comprehensive plan, subarea plan, plan element, countywide planning policy, development regulation, monitoring program, or other planning activity adopted under or implementing this chapter that:
(a) Improves the process for project permit review while maintaining environmental quality; or
(b) Encourages use of plans and information developed for purposes of complying with this chapter to satisfy requirements of other state programs.
(3) In order to qualify for a grant or loan, a county or city shall:
(a) Demonstrate that it will prepare an environmental analysis pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW and subsection (2) of this section that is integrated with a comprehensive plan, subarea plan, plan element, countywide planning policy, development regulations, monitoring program, or other planning activity adopted under or implementing this chapter;
(b) Address environmental impacts and consequences, alternatives, and mitigation measures in sufficient detail to allow the analysis to be adopted in whole or in part by applicants for development permits within the geographic area analyzed in the plan;
(c) Demonstrate that procedures for review of development permit applications will be based on the integrated plans and environmental analysis;
(d) Include mechanisms to monitor the consequences of growth as it occurs in the plan area and to use the resulting data to update the plan, policy, or implementing mechanisms and associated environmental analysis;
(e) Demonstrate substantial progress towards compliance with the requirements of this chapter. A county or city that is more than six months out of compliance with a requirement of this chapter is deemed not to be making substantial progress towards compliance; and
(f) Provide local funding, which may include financial participation by the private sector.
(4) In awarding grants or loans, the department shall give preference to proposals that include one or more of the following elements:
(a) Financial participation by the private sector, or a public/private partnering approach;
(b) Identification and monitoring of system capacities for elements of the built environment, and to the extent appropriate, of the natural environment;
(c) Coordination with state, federal, and tribal governments in project review;
(d) Furtherance of important state objectives related to economic development, protection of areas of statewide significance, and siting of essential public facilities;
(e) Programs to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the permitting process by greater reliance on integrated plans and prospective environmental analysis;
(f) Programs for effective citizen and neighborhood involvement that contribute to greater likelihood that planning decisions can be implemented with community support;
(g) Programs to identify environmental impacts and establish mitigation measures that provide effective means to satisfy concurrency requirements and establish project consistency with the plans; or
(h) Environmental review that addresses the impacts of increased density or intensity of comprehensive plans, subarea plans, or receiving areas designated by a city or town under the regional transfer of development rights program in chapter 43.362 RCW.
(5) If the local funding includes funding provided by other state functional planning programs, including open space planning and watershed or basin planning, the functional plan shall be integrated into and be consistent with the comprehensive plan.
(6) State agencies shall work with grant or loan recipients to facilitate state and local project review processes that will implement the projects receiving grants or loans under this section.
[ 2012 1st sp.s. c 1 s 310; 1997 c 429 s 28; 1995 c 347 s 116.]
Notes:
Finding—Intent—Limitation—Jurisdiction/authority of Indian tribe under act—2012 1st sp.s. c 1: See notes following RCW 77.55.011.
Authority of department of fish and wildlife under act—2012 1st sp.s. c 1: See note following RCW 76.09.040.
Severability—1997 c 429: See note following RCW 36.70A.3201.
Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347: See notes following RCW 36.70A.470.

catchline: Growth management planning and environmental review fund—Awarding of grant or loan—Procedures.


title: RCW 36.70A.510

text:
Adoption and amendment of comprehensive plan provisions and development regulations under this chapter affecting a general aviation airport are subject to RCW 36.70.547.
[ 1996 c 239 s 5.]

catchline: General aviation airports.


title: RCW 36.70A.520

text:
Counties that are required or choose to plan under RCW 36.70A.040 may authorize and designate national historic towns that may constitute urban growth outside of urban growth areas as limited by this section. A national historic town means a town or district that has been designated a national historic landmark by the United States secretary of the interior pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 461 et seq., as amended, based on its significant historic urban features, and which historically contained a mix of residential and commercial or industrial uses.
A national historic town may be designated under this chapter by a county only if:
(1) The comprehensive plan specifically identifies policies to guide the preservation, redevelopment, infill, and development of the town;
(2) The comprehensive plan and development regulations specify a mix of residential, commercial, industrial, tourism-recreation, waterfront, or other historical uses, along with other uses, infrastructure, and services which promote the economic sustainability of the town and its historic character. To promote historic preservation, redevelopment, and an economically sustainable community, the town also may include the types of uses that existed at times during its history and is not limited to those present at the time of the historic designation. Portions of the town may include urban densities if they reflect density patterns that existed at times during its history;
(3) The boundaries of the town include all of the area contained in the national historic landmark designation, along with any additional limited areas determined by the county as appropriate for transitional uses and buffering. Provisions for transitional uses and buffering must be compatible with the town's historic character and must protect the existing natural and built environment under the requirements of this chapter within and beyond the additional limited areas, including visual compatibility. The comprehensive plan and development regulations must include restrictions that preclude new urban or suburban land uses in the vicinity of the town, including the additional limited areas, except in areas otherwise designated for urban growth under this chapter;
(4) The development regulations provide for architectural controls and review procedures applicable to the rehabilitation, redevelopment, infill, or new development to promote the historic character of the town;
(5) The county finds that the national historic town is consistent with the development regulations established for critical areas; and
(6) On-site and off-site infrastructure impacts are fully considered and mitigated concurrent with development.
A county may allocate a portion of its twenty-year population projection, prepared by the office of financial management, to the national historic town corresponding to the projected number of permanent residents within the national historic town.
[ 2000 c 196 s 1.]

catchline: National historic towns—Designation.


title: RCW 36.70A.530

text:
(1) Military installations are of particular importance to the economic health of the state of Washington and it is a priority of the state to protect the land surrounding our military installations from incompatible development.
(2) Comprehensive plans, amendments to comprehensive plans, development regulations, or amendments to development regulations adopted under this section shall be adopted or amended concurrent with the scheduled update provided in RCW 36.70A.130, except that counties and cities identified in *RCW 36.70A.130(4)(a) shall comply with this section on or before December 1, 2005, and shall thereafter comply with this section on a schedule consistent with *RCW 36.70A.130(4).
(3) A comprehensive plan, amendment to a plan, a development regulation or amendment to a development regulation, should not allow development in the vicinity of a military installation that is incompatible with the installation's ability to carry out its mission requirements. A city or county may find that an existing comprehensive plan or development regulations are compatible with the installation's ability to carry out its mission requirements.
(4) As part of the requirements of RCW 36.70A.070(1) each county and city planning under RCW 36.70A.040 that has a federal military installation, other than a reserve center, that employs one hundred or more personnel and is operated by the United States department of defense within or adjacent to its border, shall notify the commander of the military installation of the county's or city's intent to amend its comprehensive plan or development regulations to address lands adjacent to military installations to ensure those lands are protected from incompatible development.
(5)(a) The notice provided under subsection (4) of this section shall request from the commander of the military installation a written recommendation and supporting facts relating to the use of land being considered in the adoption of a comprehensive plan or an amendment to a plan. The notice shall provide sixty days for a response from the commander. If the commander does not submit a response to such request within sixty days, the local government may presume that implementation of the proposed plan or amendment will not have any adverse effect on the operation of the installation.
(b) When a county or city intends to amend its development regulations to be consistent with the comprehensive plan elements addressed in (a) of this subsection, notice shall be provided to the commander of the military installation consistent with subsection (4) of this section. The notice shall request from the commander of the military installation a written recommendation and supporting facts relating to the use of land being considered in the amendment to the development regulations. The notice shall provide sixty days for a response from the commander to the requesting government. If the commander does not submit a response to such request within sixty days, the local government may presume that implementation of the proposed development regulation or amendment will not have any adverse effect on the operation of the installation.
[ 2004 c 28 s 2.]
Notes:
*Reviser's note: RCW 36.70A.130 was amended by 2020 c 113 s 1, deleting subsection (4).
Finding—2004 c 28: "The United States military is a vital component of the Washington state economy. The protection of military installations from incompatible development of land is essential to the health of Washington's economy and quality of life. Incompatible development of land close to a military installation reduces the ability of the military to complete its mission or to undertake new missions, and increases its cost of operating. The department of defense evaluates continued utilization of military installations based upon their operating costs, their ability to carry out missions, and their ability to undertake new missions." [ 2004 c 28 s 1.]

catchline: Land use development incompatible with military installation not allowed—Revision of comprehensive plans and development regulations.


title: RCW 36.70A.535

text:
(1) Cities and counties planning under this chapter must allow co-living housing as a permitted use on any lot located within an urban growth area that allows at least six multifamily residential units, including on a lot zoned for mixed-use development.
(2) A city or county subject to the provisions of this section may not require co-living housing to:
(a) Contain room dimensional standards larger than that required by the state building code, including dwelling unit size, sleeping unit size, room area, and habitable space;
(b) Provide a mix of unit sizes or number of bedrooms; or
(c) Include other uses.
(3)(a) A city or county subject to the provisions of this section also may not require co-living housing to:
(i) Provide off-street parking within one-half mile walking distance of a major transit stop; or
(ii) Provide more than 0.25 off-street parking spaces per sleeping unit.
(b) The provisions of (a) of this subsection do not apply:
(i) If a city or county submits to the department an empirical study prepared by a credentialed transportation or land use planning expert that clearly demonstrates, and the department finds and certifies, that the application of the parking limitations of (a) of this subsection will be significantly less safe for vehicle drivers or passengers, pedestrians, or bicyclists than if the jurisdiction's parking requirements were applied to the same location. The department must develop guidance to assist cities and counties on items to include in the study; or
(ii) To portions of cities within a one-mile radius of a commercial airport in Washington with at least 9,000,000 annual enplanements.
(4) A city or county may not require through development regulations any standards for co-living housing that are more restrictive than those that are required for other types of multifamily residential uses in the same zone.
(5) A city or county may only require a review, notice, or public meeting for co-living housing that is required for other types of residential uses in the same location, unless otherwise required by state law including, but not limited to, shoreline regulations under chapter 90.58 RCW.
(6) A city or county may not exclude co-living housing from participating in affordable housing incentive programs under RCW 36.70A.540.
(7) A city or county may not treat a sleeping unit in co-living housing as more than one-quarter of a dwelling unit for purposes of calculating dwelling unit density.
(8) A city or county may not treat a sleeping unit in co-living housing as more than one-half of a dwelling unit for purposes of calculating fees for sewer connections, unless the city or county makes a finding, based on facts, that the connection fees should exceed the one-half threshold.
(9)(a) A city or county subject to the requirements of this section must adopt or amend by ordinance and incorporate into their development regulations, zoning regulations, and other official controls the requirements of this section to take effect no later than December 31, 2025.
(b) In any city or county that has not adopted or amended ordinances, regulations, or other official controls as required under this section, the requirements of this section supersede, preempt, and invalidate any conflicting local development regulations.
(10) Any action taken by a city or county to comply with the requirements of this section is not subject to legal challenge under this chapter or chapter 43.21C RCW.
(11) For the purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:
(a) "Co-living housing" means a residential development with sleeping units that are independently rented and lockable and provide living and sleeping space, and residents share kitchen facilities with other sleeping units in the building. Local governments may use other names to refer to co-living housing including, but not limited to, congregate living facilities, single room occupancy, rooming house, boarding house, lodging house, and residential suites.
(b) "Major transit stop" means:
(i) A stop on a high capacity transportation system funded or expanded under the provisions of chapter 81.104 RCW;
(ii) Commuter rail stops;
(iii) Stops on rail or fixed guideway systems, including transitways;
(iv) Stops on bus rapid transit routes or routes that run on high occupancy vehicle lanes; or
(v) Stops for a bus or other transit mode providing actual fixed route service at intervals of at least 15 minutes for at least five hours during the peak hours of operation on weekdays.
[ 2024 c 180 s 2.]
Notes:
Intent—Findings—2024 c 180: "(1) The legislature makes the following findings:
(a) Washington state is experiencing a housing affordability crisis;
(b) Co-living housing is a type of housing that can provide rental homes affordable to people with moderate to low incomes without requiring any public funding, and rents in newly constructed, market-rate co-living housing in the Puget Sound region can be affordable to people with incomes as low as 50 percent of area median income;
(c) Co-living housing is a residential development with sleeping units that are independently rented and provide living and sleeping space, in which residents share kitchen facilities with residents of other units in the building;
(d) Co-living housing historically provided a healthy inventory of rental homes on the lowest rung of the private housing market, comprising up to 10 percent of housing in some cities;
(e) Starting in the mid-20th century, local governments began adopting restrictive zoning and other rules that increasingly prohibited co-living housing, or made it impractical to build or operate, and its numbers plummeted;
(f) Today, many cities and counties outright prohibit co-living housing on most of their residential land, or they enforce any number of restrictions that make it effectively impossible to build new co-living housing or to convert existing buildings into co-living housing;
(g) Co-living housing provides options for people who:
(i) Wish to lower their housing expenses by paying less for a smaller home;
(ii) Prefer a living arrangement with shared community spaces that facilitate social connections;
(iii) Wish to trade off location for space and, by living in a small home, also get to live in a high opportunity neighborhood they could not otherwise afford; or
(iv) Want a low-cost, more private alternative to having a roommate in a traditional rental;
(h) Many communities throughout Washington face a severe shortage of workforce housing, and co-living housing provides housing affordable to that income range and below, without public funding;
(i) Co-living housing reduces pressure on the limited amount of publicly funded affordable housing by providing housing that is affordable to lower income residents who might otherwise wait years for subsidized housing;
(j) Co-living housing works best for single-person households, but the housing for singles that it provides reduces demand for family-sized rentals from singles who would otherwise group together to rent large homes;
(k) Co-living housing provides a good option for seniors, especially those who want to downsize, or those who desire a living arrangement that is more social than a standard apartment. When located in walkable neighborhoods, co-living housing gives mobility options to seniors who can no longer drive;
(l) Co-living housing is well-suited for the conversion of office buildings to housing, because it typically requires less plumbing and fixtures for kitchens and bathrooms;
(m) Co-living housing is well-suited for very low-income people, supportive and recovery housing, and "housing first" homes for the formerly homeless;
(n) State building codes have established minimum sizes and other standards to ensure that co-living housing meets modern health and safety standards;
(o) Creating co-living housing near transit hubs, employment centers, and public amenities can help the state achieve its greenhouse gas reduction goals by increasing walkability, shortening household commutes, curtailing sprawl, and reducing the pressure to develop natural and working lands; and
(p) Co-living housing, because the units are small, is inherently more energy efficient than standard apartments, both saving residents money and reducing the state's energy demand.
(2) Therefore, the legislature intends to allow the creation of co-living housing as a means to address the need for additional affordable housing options for a diversity of Washington residents." [ 2024 c 180 s 1.]

catchline: Co-living housing.


title: RCW 36.70A.536

text:
(1) Any county that is required or chooses to plan under RCW 36.70A.040 may provide by ordinance and incorporate into its development regulations, zoning regulations, and other official controls, authorization for the following:
(a)(i) Middle housing types on each parcel that permits single-family residences in limited areas of more intensive rural development designated according to the requirements in RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(i);
(ii) If a county takes action authorized by this subsection (1)(a), it may not authorize more than four residential units per lot in limited areas of more intensive rural development designated according to RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(i), and its development regulations must:
(A) Not require any standards for middle housing that are more restrictive than those required for detached single-family residences, but may apply any objective development regulations that are required for detached single-family residences, including, but not limited to, setback, lot coverage, stormwater, clearing, and tree canopy and retention requirements;
(B) Apply to middle housing the same development permit and environmental review processes that apply to detached single-family residences, unless otherwise required by state law, including, but not limited to, shoreline regulations under chapter 90.58 RCW, building codes under chapter 19.27 RCW, energy codes under chapter 19.27A RCW, or electrical codes under chapter 19.28 RCW;
(C) Require that middle housing in limited areas of more intensive rural development in a rural county be served by a publicly owned sanitary sewer system or a large on-site sewage system; and
(D) Require that middle housing in limited areas of more intensive rural development in a nonrural county be served by a publicly owned sanitary sewer system.
(b)(i) Middle housing types on each parcel that permits single-family residences in designated urban growth areas.
(ii) If a county takes action authorized by this subsection (1)(b), it may not authorize more than four residential units per lot within the designated urban growth area and its development regulations must:
(A) Not require any standards for middle housing that are more restrictive than those required for detached single-family residences, but may apply any objective development regulations that are required for detached single-family residences, including, but not limited to, setback, lot coverage, stormwater, clearing, and tree canopy and retention requirements;
(B) Apply to middle housing the same development permit and environmental review processes that apply to detached single-family residences, unless otherwise required by state law, including, but not limited to, shoreline regulations under chapter 90.58 RCW, building codes under chapter 19.27 RCW, energy codes under chapter 19.27A RCW, or electrical codes under chapter 19.28 RCW; and
(C) Require that middle housing in designated urban growth areas be served by water and sewer services.
(2) For purposes of this section:
(a) "Rural county" has the same meaning as in RCW 43.160.020; and
(b) "Large on-site sewage system" has the same meaning as in RCW 70A.115.010.
[ 2026 c 12 s 1; 2025 c 386 s 1.]

catchline: Middle housing.


title: RCW 36.70A.540

text:
(1)(a) Any city or county planning under RCW 36.70A.040 may enact or expand affordable housing incentive programs providing for the development of low-income housing units through development regulations or conditions on rezoning or permit decisions, or both, on one or more of the following types of development: Residential; commercial; industrial; or mixed-use. An affordable housing incentive program may include, but is not limited to, one or more of the following:
(i) Density bonuses within the urban growth area;
(ii) Height and bulk bonuses;
(iii) Fee waivers or exemptions;
(iv) Parking reductions; or
(v) Expedited permitting.
(b) The city or county may enact or expand such programs whether or not the programs may impose a tax, fee, or charge on the development or construction of property.
(c) If a developer chooses not to participate in an optional affordable housing incentive program adopted and authorized under this section, a city, county, or town may not condition, deny, or delay the issuance of a permit or development approval that is consistent with zoning and development standards on the subject property absent incentive provisions of this program.
(2) Affordable housing incentive programs enacted or expanded under this section shall comply with the following:
(a) The incentives or bonuses shall provide for the development of low-income housing units;
(b) Jurisdictions shall establish standards for low-income renter or owner occupancy housing, including income guidelines consistent with local housing needs, to assist low-income households that cannot afford market-rate housing. Low-income households are defined for renter and owner occupancy program purposes as follows:
(i) Rental housing units to be developed shall be affordable to and occupied by households with an income of fifty percent or less of the county median family income, adjusted for family size;
(ii) Owner occupancy housing units shall be affordable to and occupied by households with an income of eighty percent or less of the county median family income, adjusted for family size. The legislative authority of a jurisdiction, after holding a public hearing, may establish lower income levels; and
(iii) The legislative authority of a jurisdiction, after holding a public hearing, may also establish higher income levels for rental housing or for owner occupancy housing upon finding that higher income levels are needed to address local housing market conditions. The higher income level for rental housing may not exceed eighty percent of the county area median family income. The higher income level for owner occupancy housing may not exceed one hundred percent of the county area median family income. These established higher income levels are considered "low-income" for the purposes of this section;
(c) The jurisdiction shall establish a maximum rent level or sales price for each low-income housing unit developed under the terms of a program and may adjust these levels or prices based on the average size of the household expected to occupy the unit. For renter-occupied housing units, the total housing costs, including basic utilities as determined by the jurisdiction, may not exceed thirty percent of the income limit for the low-income housing unit;
(d) Where a developer is utilizing a housing incentive program authorized under this section to develop market rate housing, and is developing low-income housing to satisfy the requirements of the housing incentive program, the low-income housing units shall be provided in a range of sizes comparable to those units that are available to other residents. To the extent practicable, the number of bedrooms in low-income units must be in the same proportion as the number of bedrooms in units within the entire development. The low-income units shall generally be distributed throughout the development and have substantially the same functionality as the other units in the development;
(e) Low-income housing units developed under an affordable housing incentive program shall be committed to continuing affordability for at least fifty years. A local government, however, may accept payments in lieu of continuing affordability. The program shall include measures to enforce continuing affordability and income standards applicable to low-income units constructed under this section that may include, but are not limited to, covenants, options, or other agreements to be executed and recorded by owners and developers;
(f) Programs authorized under subsection (1) of this section may apply to part or all of a jurisdiction and different standards may be applied to different areas within a jurisdiction or to different types of development. Programs authorized under this section may be modified to meet local needs and may include provisions not expressly provided in this section or RCW 82.02.020;
(g) Low-income housing units developed under an affordable housing incentive program are encouraged to be provided within developments for which a bonus or incentive is provided. However, programs may allow units to be provided in a building located in the general area of the development for which a bonus or incentive is provided; and
(h) Affordable housing incentive programs may allow a payment of money or property in lieu of low-income housing units if the jurisdiction determines that the payment achieves a result equal to or better than providing the affordable housing on-site, as long as the payment does not exceed the approximate cost of developing the same number and quality of housing units that would otherwise be developed. Any city or county shall use these funds or property to support the development of low-income housing, including support provided through loans or grants to public or private owners or developers of housing.
(3) Affordable housing incentive programs enacted or expanded under this section may be applied within the jurisdiction to address the need for increased residential development, consistent with local growth management and housing policies, as follows:
(a) The jurisdiction shall identify certain land use designations within a geographic area where increased residential development will assist in achieving local growth management and housing policies;
(b) The jurisdiction shall provide increased residential development capacity through zoning changes, bonus densities, height and bulk increases, parking reductions, or other regulatory changes or other incentives;
(c) The jurisdiction shall determine that increased residential development capacity or other incentives can be achieved within the identified area, subject to consideration of other regulatory controls on development; and
(d) The jurisdiction may establish a minimum amount of affordable housing that must be provided by all residential developments being built under the revised regulations, consistent with the requirements of this section.
(4) To provide more affordable housing options, tiny house communities may be part of an incentive program permitted under this section.
[ 2022 c 275 s 2; 2009 c 80 s 1; 2006 c 149 s 2.]
Notes:
Findings—Intent—2022 c 275: "In 2019 the legislature enacted a statutory framework encouraging the construction of tiny houses and tiny house communities. These homes provide a unique opportunity in the affordable housing market. It is the objective of the legislature to facilitate more development of housing that people with lower incomes can own and remove barriers that would prevent the development of tiny houses and tiny house communities." [ 2022 c 275 s 1.]
Construction—2022 c 275: "This act shall be liberally construed to carry out its purposes and objectives." [ 2022 c 275 s 3.]
Findings—2006 c 149: "The legislature finds that as new market-rate housing developments are constructed and housing costs rise, there is a significant and growing number of low-income households that cannot afford market-rate housing in Washington state. The legislature finds that assistance to low-income households that cannot afford market-rate housing requires a broad variety of tools to address this serious, statewide problem. The legislature further finds that absent any incentives to provide low-income housing, market conditions will result in housing developments in many areas that lack units affordable to low-income households, circumstances that can cause adverse socioeconomic effects.
The legislature encourages cities, towns, and counties to enact or expand affordable housing incentive programs, including density bonuses and other incentives, to increase the availability of low-income housing for renter and owner occupancy that is located in largely market-rate housing developments throughout the community, consistent with local needs and adopted comprehensive plans. While this act establishes minimum standards for those cities, towns, and counties choosing to implement or expand upon an affordable housing incentive program, cities, towns, and counties are encouraged to enact programs that address local circumstances and conditions while simultaneously contributing to the statewide need for additional low-income housing." [ 2006 c 149 s 1.]
Construction—2006 c 149: "The powers granted in this act are supplemental and additional to the powers otherwise held by local governments, and nothing in this act shall be construed as a limit on such powers. The authority granted in this act shall extend to any affordable housing incentive program enacted or expanded prior to June 7, 2006, if the extension is adopted by the applicable local government in an ordinance or resolution." [ 2006 c 149 s 4.]

catchline: Affordable housing incentive programs—Low-income housing units—Tiny house communities.


title: RCW 36.70A.545

text:
(1) Any city or county fully planning under this chapter must allow an increased density bonus consistent with local needs for any affordable housing development of any single-family or multifamily residence located on real property owned or controlled by a religious organization provided that:
(a)(i) At least 50 percent of the affordable housing development is set aside for or occupied exclusively by low-income households; or
(ii) At least 20 percent of the affordable housing development is set aside for or occupied exclusively by very low-income households;
(b) The affordable housing development is part of a lease or other binding obligation that requires the affordability requirements and other conditions in this subsection (1) to be maintained for at least 50 years, even if the religious organization no longer owns the property; and
(c) The affordable housing development does not discriminate against any person who qualifies as a member of a low-income household based on race, creed, color, national origin, sex, veteran or military status, sexual orientation, or mental or physical disability; or otherwise act in violation of the federal fair housing amendments act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 3601 et seq.).
(2) A city or county must develop policies to implement this section if it receives a request from a religious organization for an increased density bonus for an affordable housing development. A city or county may establish policies to require an affordable housing development to set aside more residential dwelling units for low-income or very low-income households than is required under subsection (1) of this section to qualify for the increased density bonus.
(3) An affordable housing development created by a religious institution within a city or county fully planning under RCW 36.70A.040 must be located within an urban growth area as defined in RCW 36.70A.110.
(4) The religious organization or an entity leasing the property for the purpose of developing the affordable housing development must pay all fees, mitigation costs, and other charges required through the development of the affordable housing development.
(5) If applicable, the religious organization developing the affordable housing development should work with the local transit agency to ensure appropriate transit services are provided to the affordable housing development.
(6) This section applies to any religious organization rehabilitating an existing affordable housing development.
(7) For purposes of this section:
(a) "Affordable housing development" means a proposed or existing structure in which 50 percent of all single-family or multifamily residential dwelling units within the development are set aside for or are occupied by low-income households or 20 percent of all single-family or multifamily residential dwelling units within the development are set aside for or occupied by very low-income households, whose monthly housing costs, including utilities other than telephone, do not exceed 30 percent of the household's monthly income;
(b) "Low-income household" means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living together whose adjusted income is at or below 80 percent of the median family income, adjusted for household size, for the county where the affordable housing development is located, as reported by the United States department of housing and urban development;
(c) "Religious organization" has the same meaning as in RCW 36.01.290; and
(d) "Very low-income household" means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living together whose adjusted income is at or below 50 percent of the median family income, adjusted for household size, for the county where the affordable housing development is located, as reported by the United States department of housing and urban development.
[ 2026 c 2 s 3; 2019 c 218 s 3.]

catchline: Increased density bonus for affordable housing located on property owned by a religious organization.


title: RCW 36.70A.550

text:
(1) Any city coterminous with, and comprised only of, an island that relies solely on groundwater aquifers for its potable water source and does not have reasonable access to a potable water source outside its jurisdiction may designate one or more aquifer conservation zones.
Aquifer conservation zones may only be designated for the purpose of conserving and protecting potable water sources.
(2) Aquifer conservation zones may not be considered critical areas under this chapter except to the extent that specific areas located within aquifer conservation zones qualify for critical area designation and have been designated as such under RCW 36.70A.060(2).
(3) Any city may consider whether an area is within an aquifer conservation zone when determining the residential density of that particular area. The residential densities within conservation zones, in combination with other densities of the city, must be sufficient to accommodate projected population growth under RCW 36.70A.110.
(4) Nothing in this section may be construed to modify the population accommodation obligations required of jurisdictions under this chapter.
[ 2007 c 159 s 1.]

catchline: Aquifer conservation zones.


title: RCW 36.70A.570

text:
(1) Each county, city, and town assuming regulation of forest practices as provided in RCW 76.09.240 (1) and (2) shall adopt development regulations that:
(a) Protect public resources, as defined in RCW 76.09.020, from material damage or the potential for material damage;
(b) Require appropriate approvals for all phases of the conversion of forestlands, including clearing and grading;
(c) Are guided by the planning goals in RCW 36.70A.020 and by the purposes and policies of the forest practices act as set forth in RCW 76.09.010; and
(d) Are consistent with or supplement development regulations that protect critical areas pursuant to RCW 36.70A.060.
(2) If necessary, each county, city, or town that assumes regulation of forest practices under RCW 76.09.240 shall amend its comprehensive plan to ensure consistency between its comprehensive plan and development regulations.
(3) Before a county, city, or town may regulate forest practices under RCW 76.09.240 (1) and (2), it shall update its development regulations as required by RCW 36.70A.130 and, if applicable, RCW 36.70A.215. Forest practices regulations adopted under RCW 76.09.240 (1) and (2) may be adopted as part of the legislative action taken under RCW 36.70A.130 or 36.70A.215.
[ 2007 c 236 s 2.]

catchline: Regulation of forest practices.


title: RCW 36.70A.590

text:
For the purposes of complying with the requirements of this chapter relating to surface and groundwater resources, a county or city may rely on or refer to applicable minimum instream flow rules adopted by the department of ecology under chapters 90.22 and 90.54 RCW. Development regulations must ensure that proposed water uses are consistent with RCW 90.44.050 and with applicable rules adopted pursuant to chapters 90.22 and 90.54 RCW when making decisions under RCW 19.27.097 and 58.17.110.
[ 2018 c 1 s 102.]
Notes:
Intent—2018 c 1: See note following RCW 90.94.010.
Effective date—2018 c 1: See RCW 90.94.900.

catchline: Complying with requirements relating to surface and groundwater resources.


title: RCW 36.70A.600

text:
(1) A city planning pursuant to RCW 36.70A.040 is encouraged to take the following actions in order to increase its residential building capacity:
(a) Authorize development in one or more areas of not fewer than five hundred acres that include at least one train station served by commuter rail or light rail with an average of at least fifty residential units per acre that require no more than an average of one on-site parking space per two bedrooms in the portions of multifamily zones that are located within the areas;
(b) Authorize development in one or more areas of not fewer than two hundred acres in cities with a population greater than forty thousand or not fewer than one hundred acres in cities with a population less than forty thousand that include at least one bus stop served by scheduled bus service of at least four times per hour for twelve or more hours per day with an average of at least twenty-five residential units per acre that require no more than an average of one on-site parking space per two bedrooms in portions of the multifamily zones that are located within the areas;
(c) Authorize at least one duplex, triplex, quadplex, sixplex, stacked flat, townhouse, or courtyard apartment on each parcel in one or more zoning districts that permit single-family residences unless a city documents a specific infrastructure of physical constraint that would make this requirement unfeasible for a particular parcel;
(d) Authorize a duplex, triplex, quadplex, sixplex, stacked flat, townhouse, or courtyard apartment on one or more parcels for which they are not currently authorized;
(e) Authorize cluster zoning or lot size averaging in all zoning districts that permit single-family residences;
(f) Adopt a subarea plan pursuant to RCW 43.21C.420;
(g) Adopt a planned action pursuant to RCW 43.21C.440(1)(b)(ii), except that an environmental impact statement pursuant to RCW 43.21C.030 is not required for such an action;
(h) Adopt increases in categorical exemptions pursuant to RCW 43.21C.229 for residential or mixed-use development;
(i) Adopt a form-based code in one or more zoning districts that permit residential uses. "Form-based code" means a land development regulation that uses physical form, rather than separation of use, as the organizing principle for the code;
(j) Authorize a duplex on each corner lot within all zoning districts that permit single-family residences;
(k) Allow for the division or redivision of land into the maximum number of lots through the short subdivision process provided in chapter 58.17 RCW;
(l) Authorize a minimum net density of six dwelling units per acre in all residential zones, where the residential development capacity will increase within the city. For purposes of this subsection, the calculation of net density does not include the square footage of areas that are otherwise prohibited from development, such as critical areas, the area of buffers around critical areas, and the area of roads and similar features;
(m) Create one or more zoning districts of medium density in which individual lots may be no larger than three thousand five hundred square feet and single-family residences may be no larger than one thousand two hundred square feet;
(n) Authorize accessory dwelling units in one or more zoning districts in which they are currently prohibited;
(o) Remove minimum residential parking requirements related to accessory dwelling units;
(p) Remove owner occupancy requirements related to accessory dwelling units;
(q) Adopt new square footage requirements related to accessory dwelling units that are less restrictive than existing square footage requirements related to accessory dwelling units;
(r) Adopt maximum allowable exemption levels in WAC 197-11-800(1) as it existed on June 11, 2020, or such subsequent date as may be provided by the department of ecology by rule, consistent with the purposes of this section;
(s) Adopt standards for administrative approval of final plats pursuant to RCW 58.17.100;
(t) Adopt ordinances authorizing administrative review of preliminary plats pursuant to RCW 58.17.095;
(u) Adopt other permit process improvements where it is demonstrated that the code, development regulation, or ordinance changes will result in a more efficient permit process for customers;
(v) Update use matrices and allowable use tables that eliminate conditional use permits and administrative conditional use permits for all housing types, including single-family homes, townhomes, multifamily housing, low-income housing, and senior housing, but excluding essential public facilities;
(w) Allow off-street parking to compensate for lack of on-street parking when private roads are utilized or a parking demand study shows that less parking is required for the project;
(x) Develop a local program that offers homeowners a combination of financing, design, permitting, or construction support to build accessory dwelling units. A city may condition this program on a requirement to provide the unit for affordable homeownership or rent the accessory dwelling unit for a defined period of time to either tenants in a housing subsidy program as defined in RCW 43.31.605(14) or to tenants whose income is less than eighty percent of the city or county median family income. If the city includes an affordability requirement under the program, it must provide additional incentives, such as:
(i) Density bonuses;
(ii) Height and bulk bonuses;
(iii) Fee waivers or exemptions;
(iv) Parking reductions; or
(v) Expedited permitting; and
(y) Develop a local program that offers homeowners a combination of financing, design, permitting, or construction support to convert a single-family home into a duplex, triplex, or quadplex where those housing types are authorized. A local government may condition this program on a requirement to provide a certain number of units for affordable homeownership or to rent a certain number of the newly created units for a defined period of time to either tenants in a housing subsidy program as defined in RCW 43.31.605(14) or to tenants whose income is less than eighty percent of the city or county median family income. If the city includes an affordability requirement, it must provide additional incentives, such as:
(i) Density bonuses;
(ii) Height and bulk bonuses;
(iii) Fee waivers or exemptions;
(iv) Parking reductions; or
(v) Expedited permitting.
(2) A city planning pursuant to RCW 36.70A.040 may adopt a housing action plan as described in this subsection. The goal of any such housing plan must be to encourage construction of additional affordable and market rate housing in a greater variety of housing types and at prices that are accessible to a greater variety of incomes, including strategies aimed at the for-profit single-family home market. A housing action plan may utilize data compiled pursuant to RCW 36.70A.610. The housing action plan should:
(a) Quantify existing and projected housing needs for all income levels, including extremely low-income households, with documentation of housing and household characteristics, and cost-burdened households;
(b) Develop strategies to increase the supply of housing, and variety of housing types, needed to serve the housing needs identified in (a) of this subsection;
(c) Analyze population and employment trends, with documentation of projections;
(d) Consider strategies to minimize displacement of low-income residents resulting from redevelopment;
(e) Review and evaluate the current housing element adopted pursuant to RCW 36.70A.070, including an evaluation of success in attaining planned housing types and units, achievement of goals and policies, and implementation of the schedule of programs and actions;
(f) Provide for participation and input from community members, community groups, local builders, local realtors, nonprofit housing advocates, and local religious groups; and
(g) Include a schedule of programs and actions to implement the recommendations of the housing action plan.
(3) The adoption of ordinances, development regulations and amendments to such regulations, and other nonproject actions taken by a city to implement the actions specified in subsection (1) of this section, with the exception of the action specified in subsection (1)(f) of this section, are not subject to administrative or judicial appeal under chapter 43.21C RCW.
(4) Any action taken by a city prior to April 1, 2023, to amend its comprehensive plan or adopt or amend ordinances or development regulations, solely to enact provisions under subsection (1) of this section is not subject to legal challenge under this chapter.
(5) In taking action under subsection (1) of this section, cities are encouraged to utilize strategies that increase residential building capacity in areas with frequent transit service and with the transportation and utility infrastructure that supports the additional residential building capacity.
(6) A city that is planning to take at least two actions under subsection (1) of this section, and that action will occur between July 28, 2019, and April 1, 2021, is eligible to apply to the department for planning grant assistance of up to one hundred thousand dollars, subject to the availability of funds appropriated for that purpose. The department shall develop grant criteria to ensure that grant funds awarded are proportionate to the level of effort proposed by a city, and the potential increase in housing supply or regulatory streamlining that could be achieved. Funding may be provided in advance of, and to support, adoption of policies or ordinances consistent with this section. A city can request, and the department may award, more than one hundred thousand dollars for applications that demonstrate extraordinary potential to increase housing supply or regulatory streamlining.
(7) A city seeking to develop a housing action plan under subsection (2) of this section is eligible to apply to the department for up to one hundred thousand dollars.
(8) The department shall establish grant award amounts under subsections (6) and (7) of this section based on the expected number of cities that will seek grant assistance, to ensure that all cities can receive some level of grant support. If funding capacity allows, the department may consider accepting and funding applications from cities with a population of less than twenty thousand if the actions proposed in the application will create a significant amount of housing capacity or regulatory streamlining and are consistent with the actions in this section.
(9) In implementing chapter 348, Laws of 2019, cities are encouraged to prioritize the creation of affordable, inclusive neighborhoods and to consider the risk of residential displacement, particularly in neighborhoods with communities at high risk of displacement.
[ 2022 c 246 s 1; 2020 c 173 s 1; 2019 c 348 s 1.]

catchline: Cities planning under RCW 36.70A.040—Increasing residential building capacity—Housing action plan authorized—Grant assistance.


title: RCW 36.70A.610

text:
(1) The Washington center for real estate research at the University of Washington shall produce a series of reports as described in this section that compiles housing supply and affordability metrics for each city planning under RCW 36.70A.040 with a population of 10,000 or more.
(a) The initial report, completed by October 15, 2020, must be a compilation of objective criteria relating to income, employment, housing and rental prices, housing affordability by housing tenure, and other metrics relevant to assessing housing supply and affordability for all income segments, including the percentage of cost-burdened households of each jurisdiction. This report may also include city-specific median income data for those cities implementing the multifamily tax exemption program under chapter 84.14 RCW.
(b) The report completed by October 15, 2021, must include an analysis of the private rental housing market for each area outlining the number of units, vacancy rates, and rents by unit type, where possible. This analysis should separate market rate multifamily rental housing developments and other smaller scale market rate rental housing. This analysis should also incorporate data from the Washington state housing finance commission on subsidized rental housing in the area consistent with the first report under this subsection.
(c) The report completed by October 15, 2022, must also include data relating to actions taken by cities under chapter 348, Laws of 2019 as well as detailed information on development regulations, levies and fees, and zoning related to housing development.
(d) The report completed by October 15, 2024, and every two years thereafter, must also include relevant data relating to buildable lands reports prepared under RCW 36.70A.215, where applicable, and updates to comprehensive plans under this chapter.
(e) The report completed by October 15, 2026, and every two years thereafter, must also include:
(i)(A) Except as provided in (e)(i)(B) of this subsection, an analysis of the estimated existing housing units and existing housing needs within each county at the following income levels: 0 to 30 percent of the area median income, 30 to 50 percent of the area median income, 50 to 80 percent of the area median income, 80 to 100 percent of the area median income, 100 to 120 percent of the area median income, and greater than 120 percent of the area median income;
(B) If a county's estimated existing housing units, existing housing needs, or both, cannot be determined at the income levels under (e)(i)(A) of this subsection or at the individual county level due to insufficient data, alternative thresholds may be used to best determine existing housing units and existing housing needs;
(ii) Each county's progress in closing the gap between estimated existing housing units within the county and existing housing needs; and
(iii) Each county's progress in meeting emergency housing, emergency shelters, and permanent supportive housing needs within the county.
(2) The Washington center for real estate research shall collaborate with the Washington housing finance commission and the office of financial management to develop the metrics compiled in the series of reports under this section.
(3) The series of reports under this section must be submitted, consistent with RCW 43.01.036, to the standing committees of the legislature with jurisdiction over housing issues and this chapter.
[ 2025 c 390 s 1; 2020 c 173 s 6; 2019 c 348 s 3.]
Notes:
Short title—2025 c 390: "This act may be known and cited as the affordable housing action act." [ 2025 c 390 s 3.]

catchline: Housing supply and affordability report.


title: RCW 36.70A.620

text:
Notes:
Reviser's note: RCW 36.70A.620 was amended by 2025 c 139 s 8 without reference to its repeal by 2025 c 204 s 6. It has been decodified for publication purposes under RCW 1.12.025.

catchline: Cities planning under RCW 36.70A.040—Minimum residential parking requirements.


title: RCW 36.70A.622

text:
(1) Cities and counties planning under this chapter shall enforce land use regulations for residential development as provided in this section:
(a) Garages and carports may not be required as a way to meet minimum parking requirements for residential development;
(b) Parking spaces that count towards minimum parking requirements may be enclosed or unenclosed;
(c) Parking spaces in tandem must count towards meeting minimum parking requirements at a rate of one space for every 20 linear feet with any necessary provisions for turning radius. For purposes of this subsection, "tandem" is defined as having two or more vehicles, one in front of or behind the others with a single means of ingress and egress;
(d) Existence of legally nonconforming gravel surfacing in existing designated parking areas may not be a reason for prohibiting utilization of existing space in the parking area to meet local parking standards, up to a maximum of six parking spaces;
(e) Parking spaces may not be required to exceed eight feet by 20 feet, except for required parking for people with disabilities;
(f) Any county planning under this chapter, and any cities within those counties with a population greater than 6,000, may not require off-street parking as a condition of permitting a residential project if compliance with tree retention would otherwise make a proposed residential development or redevelopment infeasible; and
(g) Parking spaces that consist of grass block pavers may count toward minimum parking requirements.
(2) Existing parking spaces that do not conform to the requirements of this section by June 6, 2024, are not required to be modified or resized, except for compliance with the Americans with disabilities act. Existing paved parking lots are not required to change the size of existing parking spaces during resurfacing if doing so will be more costly or require significant reconfiguration of the parking space locations.
(3) The provisions in subsection (1) of this section do not apply to portions of cities within a one-mile radius of a commercial airport in Washington with at least 9,000,000 annual enplanements.
[ 2024 c 274 s 1.]

catchline: Residential parking regulation.


title: RCW 36.70A.630

text:
(1) For purposes of this section, "design review" means a formally adopted local government process by which projects are reviewed for compliance with design standards for the type of use adopted through local ordinance.
(2) Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, counties and cities planning under RCW 36.70A.040 may apply in any design review process only clear and objective development regulations governing the exterior design of new development. For purposes of this section, a clear and objective development regulation:
(a) Must include one or more ascertainable guideline, standard, or criterion by which an applicant can determine whether a given building design is permissible under that development regulation; and
(b) May not result in a reduction in density, height, bulk, or scale below the generally applicable development regulations for a development proposal in the applicable zone.
(3) The provisions of subsection (2) of this section do not apply to development regulations that apply only to designated landmarks or historic districts established under a local preservation ordinance.
(4) Any design review process must be conducted concurrently, or otherwise logically integrated, with the consolidated review and decision process for project permits set forth in RCW 36.70B.120(3), and no design review process may include more than one public meeting.
(5) A county or city must comply with the requirements of this section at the same time as the jurisdiction's next periodic comprehensive plan update required under RCW 36.70A.130.
[ 2025 c 148 s 2; 2023 c 333 s 1.]

catchline: Local design review—Requirements and restrictions.