TACOMA, Wash. — Looks like it is going to take longer than hoped to finalize proposals to rezone Tacoma’s residential areas to allow for more development flexibility.
Recommendations for the city’s Home in Tacoma Project, a part of the city’s Affordable Housing Action Strategy, were approved by the Planning Commission on May 19 in a 6-3 vote and moved to the City Council for consideration.
In the original timeline, the project and its ambitious goals for revising Tacoma’s residential land use and final rezoning decisions would wrap up by December.
That is unlikely.
A new timeline offered by city staff highlights the next key dates, with more details to come in the coming weeks:
▪ The next City Council study session focusing on the commission’s Home in Tacoma recommendations will be June 15, followed by public notice and community engagement through June and July.
▪ General information sessions will be held July 6 and July 8, both at 5:30 pm on Zoom.
▪ A City Council public hearing on the proposals will be held July 13, starting around 5:15 p.m., pending approval of the date by council at its June 15 meeting.
RECOMMENDATIONS, OBJECTIONS
The July hearing will focus on the Home In Tacoma Project housing policy actions, including amendments to the One Tacoma Comprehensive Plan and the Land Use Regulatory Code, along with recognition of a housing action plan as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Home in Tacoma’s main objective is to revise the city’s land-use codes to allow for more types of housing options and to encourage more types of residential housing in the city. The hope is increased supply and options will help ease market pressures that are pushing rents and home prices up markedly each month.
The plan proposes low-scale and mid-scale land use to replace the current single-family and multifamily low-density designations.
Low-scale includes single-family homes, duplexes, triplexes, cottage housing and townhouses in some circumstances. Mid-scale includes low-scale structures, plus small multifamily units three stories in height as the baseline.
The commission recommended a hybrid growth scenario modified from two original options. The city now is at 90 percent single-family and 10 percent multifamily low density in its residential land use. The final recommendation suggests approximately 62 percent low-scale and 38 percent mid-scale.
The key action points from the recommendations, as outlined by city staff in a summary sent to council members:
▪ Support continued growth and promote affordability in centers and corridors.
▪ Allow diverse (Missing Middle) housing types, such as duplexes, triplexes, cottage housing and small multifamily, in most currently single‐family neighborhoods.
▪ Allow medium‐scale multifamily in areas near centers, corridors and transit.
▪ Ensure new housing is well designed and complements the scale of the neighborhood.
▪ Expand and strengthen affordability and anti‐displacement policies and programs.
▪ Guide housing growth to support multiple community goals and avoid unintended consequences.
The summary recommendation signed by commission Chair Anna Petersen noted: “The Home In Tacoma Project is a carefully crafted and well-balanced product that reflects the community’s desires and concerns garnered through an extensive and rigorous engagement process. ... The Planning Commission believes that the recommended package, as part of the City’s ongoing housing and related policy efforts, will help achieve the City’s strategic goals for a safe, clean and attractive city; a well maintained natural and built environment; a diverse, productive and sustainable economy; and an equitable and accessible community for all.”
Before voting to send recommendations to the City County, commission members acknowledged the challenging and accelerated pace set by council for the project to reach the finish line by December.
In their “minority report” opposing the recommendations, commission Vice Chair Jeff McInnis and Commissioners Carolyn Edmonds and Ryan Givens wrote: “We believe the project’s expedited timeline prevented the Planning Commission from fully discussing all issues attending this important issue and from arriving at a project that will respond to the needs of the majority of the residents of Tacoma.”
The opponents’ report also outlined concerns over the recommendations, specifically that they would not increase affordability to the extent the city might want.
“HIT does nothing to encourage developers to seek lower cost real estate nor does it provide any relief from ‘soft’ development costs (permits, etc.),” the opponents’ report said. “There are still significant development costs to overcome in these ‘market-rate’ projects, and HIT does nothing to respond to that. The projects that will be created as a result of HIT will be those with sufficient revenue to allow payback in the timeline required by lenders.”
It added, “We will see more development in Tacoma, but it will be of the type that we have seen recently in the Proctor District – higher end developments with expensive rents.”
Boosting affordability, the report said, called for trimming development costs via reductions in permitting fees and timelines, review neighborhoods “for opportunities to provide incentives for developers to pursue redevelopment of specific parcels,” and using other tools such as height bonuses and tax abatements.
SLOWER TIMELINE
In a presentation at the council’s June 8 study session, director of the Planning and Development Services Department Peter Huffman proposed a revised timeline for the process and its two phases, with the second phase’s original deadline of December moved into next year.
While Phase 1 is essentially focused on setting the city’s vision for growth, housing types, scale and general location based on the commission’s recommendations, zoning and standards will not change until after the next round of public engagement, policy and environmental review, which make up Phase 2.
The council can choose to adopt, modify or reject the Planning Commission’s recommendations. The new timeline proposed at Tuesday’s study session was to have a Planning Commission recommendations presentation on June 15, with the Infrastructure, Planning & Sustainability Committee to review the recommendations from July to September, wrapping up with full council consideration sometime in the fall instead of June or July, as was set in the original timeline.
Frustrations bubbled over at the study session over what’s already felt like a long run just to get to this point.
“I’m a little bit perplexed and a little bit frustrated with getting an initial presentation that says, ‘This is so complex, we’re going to delay it,’ without really even receiving a presentation on what it is,” Councilmember Chris Beale said. “It feels a little bit like we’re kind of moving the goalposts without really looking at what the game was on the field.”
Mayor Victoria Woodards responded, “This isn’t a done deal. We had to put everything out there so that we could look at every single thing — at every zoning, at every code that we might need to change or want to change — so we could look at all the options and decide what’s best for Tacoma.
“There’s a lot of work still to be done, but I think this council can handle complex issues; it’s just how many complex issues can you dive into and get through in one Tuesday in a three-hour meeting.”
Looking ahead, other council members noted the frustrations heard from residents about both a lack of understanding the proposals and lack of attention to concerns.
Council member Catherine Ushka said at the study session she appreciated a slower timeline and noted that the commission “came forward with some really courageous opportunities based on the urgency of need that we’ve expressed throughout our community.
“Now, is it startling? Yeah. Does everybody in the community even understand the problem that we were supposed to solve or why it matters? No. And so there’s this conflict in even coming to why we’re doing it.”
She added, “I do think that whole conversation now with the community about what is the problem that we’re trying to solve and why does it matter, is an important one to have.”
Not doing anything, she maintained, is not an option.
Home in Tacoma documents, including the Planning Commissions recommendations and the minority report from opposing commission members, meeting videos, project updates and an interactive map showing the commission’s recommended housing growth strategy are at www.cityoftacoma.org/homeintacoma.
This story was written and originally published by The News Tribune.