Why You Should Be Paying Attention Right Now
By Bernie O'Malley Vashon Mayor, 2016
Neighborhoods across Vashon and the rest of unincorporated King County will look very different if the King County Council approves proposed changes to Housing and Zoning Laws when it votes in December.
WAIT WAIT WAIT. STOP RIGHT THERE, MY NEIGHBORS. Put down the torches and pitchforks! This conversation is NOT about the Thunderbird Center. There’s already 600 of my neighbors who are having that “conversation.” I’m an 80-year-old man who cannot manage that kind of exciting, stressful narrative. Not an apology, I simply ain’t going there.
I’d rather talk with some smart people, our elected representatives, about a boring, slightly absurdist subject: the ZONING LAWS aka the King County 2024 Comprehensive Plan. Way better to talk now before it’s too late to speak up.
I’m a retired mayor, but I can’t stop thinking and talking about the major zoning changes King County Council has on deck for us–but is only talking to us about in obscure ways. They did publish a helpful “Executive Summary” about this stuff months ago. It’s 16 pages of small-print proposals, presumably taken from the 700+ page amendments. If passed, it becomes the new Comprehensive Zoning Plan and changes our Island lives bigly, forever. Maybe you are not aware. Maybe you have read all 700 pages by now. I’m more of a “Summary” person. So, I’ll start there.
What Council and Executive’s new LAWS are all about and why it matters
There’s a basketball phrase, “Rama Lama Slamma”, a power play: send in the “BIG GUY” as a power move, to ram up the lane to slam the dunk, win the game. The “Shaq Attack” is a famous example. Some residents have been vocal with fears that the KC Council and Executive have no interest in our ideas, that the 700-page proposal was “slam dunked” on residents in an attempt to hide “The Big Guy” (Council and Executive’s major changes of laws). Some residents complain that no helpful explanations of the plan have been provided ahead of the December Council vote on whether to adopt it, aka a final slam dunk for the win.
Personally, it sure looks like a power play. But I’m not inclined to doubt unknown intentions. My experience with our electeds is they are professional, critical thinkers and want to hold onto their constituents’ favor to keep their jobs, i.e., get reelected. No big mystery.
Fears about perceived intentions aside, I merely have some questions about why now, what’s good for Vashon-Maury, and what’s up for future debate in the coming years. I’m confident they have answers about these questions and that they only
need a respectful venue (like another meeting with Vashon)–well ahead of their December vote. That will help us understand their ideas about what these proposed new zoning laws and housing rules would allow on Vashon-Maury Island:
• 60-120 Mobile home parks
• Safe parking sites (for “cars” as residences)
• Micro-shelter villages
• Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) height limits of 40 feet or more
• Congregant housing
• Taller buildings uptown
KING COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 16-PAGE SUMMARY OF KEY CHANGES June 2024
This “summary” is hefty in its own way, 16 pages of more than 80 items, each item often in obscure code-speak, declaring changes the Council and Executive want to see in unincorporated King County, beginning in 2025. These new laws target an estimated 100,000 households in unincorporated areas of the county, including the 5,000 households on Vashon-Maury Island. I’m not going to review all 80+ of the amendment’s proposals. I’ve picked out just a few of those I, and maybe you, have questions about. And I hope we just need more clarity and can have a meeting soon to get that from our 9 Council members and County Executive Dow Constantine.
On page 2 of the Summary: “Allow manufactured home communities as a permitted use in the R-4 through R-8 zones. Change the residential density from 6 to 12 units per acre in these zones.”
Questions:
Does “permitted use” mean most 5-acre residential parcels on Vashon Maury can have a 60-unit Mobile-Home Park installed? Or that 10-acre parcels can hold more than 100-unit Mobile-Homes in a single Park?
Does the phrase “permitted use” mean these “communities” are only subject to basic site engineering, but the actual site placement is pre-approved?
Are comments from neighbors not applicable in a “permitted use” installation? What provides for comments that might alter the “permitted use”?
There are and were specific rules for “used” older homes, governing their movement to new sites. Are these rules still applicable here? Or are only newly manufactured homes allowed?
Are square foot sizes per home in the rules? Are garages/carports an optional “permitted” structure, or required?
Are on-site operations/management rules for large mobile home communities already established by existing zoning Laws, or to be newly established by a county agency?
Is nearby sewer required for these large communities on Vashon-Maury Island? Will individual septic systems be used, or major combined septic systems be built?
Will one water share per mobile home be required on Vashon-Maury Island? Can new water wells be drilled for each park under current rules such as required minimum GPM (gallons per minute)?
Staying on page 2: “Allow congregate housing (replaces ‘dormitory’ use, for which the definition is also repealed) in the R-1 through R-8 as a CUP (conditional use permit) with development conditions, in the R-12 through R-48 zones as a permitted use, and in the NB, CB, RB, and O zones as a permitted use with development conditions requiring mixed use.”
Council adds: “design standards for congregate housing requiring shared kitchen
and sanitation facilities and communal uses.”
Questions:
Is a CUP, ordinarily a complicated approval process, waived on larger parcels receiving a “permitted use”?
Do the phrases “development conditions” and “mixed use” expect commercial businesses to be required at each NB (neighborhood business) site? In West Seattle, for example, buildings over five stories must reserve the street level units to service-type businesses: restaurants, pet supplies, hardware stores. Will that be happening on Vashon?
Can “congregate housing” be any size/height/units? A 40 foot high building of 50 by 100 feet on a 5000 square foot lot in the Neighborhood Business district could house 100-140 individuals.
What are possible adjustments to the height limits and number of structures sited next door to existing single-family rural homes? I’m thinking about the five two-story, 8-bedroom houses at Vashon Highway and SW 188th–these are a few feet from a single-family house next door.
Is there an expected limit to how many “congregate housing” buildings would be allowed in a Rural Town such as Vashon? How would this change the look and function of our current neighborhoods going forward?
On page 3, Executive proposes: “regulation that a rural lot with an existing ADU is subdivided, the ADU would be required to be considered the primary unit on the new lot, and no further ADUs could be constructed. This would not apply if the ADUs are built after subdivision”. Also, “Remove the base height restriction, allowing detached ADUs to reach a maximum height of 75 feet in some zones.”
Council proposes: “Remove Executive proposal, and corresponding language.”
Questions:
Does this allow for “lot splitting” on any parcel defined as “rural residential”? Do most lots on Vashon-Maury meet that definition, except for the “Rural Town” part of Vashon?
Are there size and setback limitations of two, three or four-story ADUs on any lot for both “rural residential” and “Rural Town” Vashon?
What are possible changes to the height limits next door to an existing single-family home?
On page 5, Executive proposes: “Add ‘microshelter village’ as a use; prohibits in the R-1 zone; allows in the R-4 to R-8 zones in the urban area when only when on a site with a religious facility, public agency, or social service use and with a conditional use; and allow in the R-12 through R-48, CB, RB, and O zones in the urban area subject to use-specific conditions.”
Council proposes: “Allow ‘microshelter villages’ as a permitted use in the NB (neighborhood business) zone, and in rural towns.”
Questions:
How many existing Vashon residents are requesting space in a microshelter village? Are current/future residents of King County eligible to access any microshelter village In Rural Town Vashon?
Using the known defined area of Vashon Rural Town, which lots meet the criteria of space for a “village”?
What’s the design size limit for village dwelling units, e.g. 6’ x 10’ sheds? What’s the total design number of a Vashon village units and occupants?
Will these “villages” be in place temporarily or as permanent dwellings?
What’s the definition of a “village”? Common bathrooms or kitchens? What utilities are required, and what agency by law governs and supports villages?
Continuing on Page 5, Executive proposes: “‘safe parking’ as a use; prohibits in the R-1 zone; allows in the R-4 to R-8 zones in the urban area when only when on a site with a religious facility, public agency, or social service use and with a conditional use; and allow in the R-12 through R-48, CB, RB, and O zones in the urban area subject to use-specific conditions.”
Council adds: “Allow ‘safe parking’ as a permitted use in the NB zone, and in Rural Towns.”
Questions:
Is “safe parking” defined as sleeping in a vehicle: cars, trucks, RVs, trailers, tents?
Who defines the “specific conditions,” for example to a Rural Town like Vashon?
“Safe parking” may be casually perceived as residential. Are all the ordinary behaviors and possessions of residential living described in State and Federal laws included: meal preps and storage, legal weapons including firearms, rights to
resist evictions under due process, access to sanitation utilities and solid waste disposal?
The Executive’s proposal is directed towards “urban areas” and requires “specific conditions”. The Council instead proposes Safe Parking as a “permitted” use in Rural Towns like Vashon. Does the Council proposal eliminate the “specific conditions” as not applicable to Rural Towns for “Safe Parking”?
Must Rural Towns provide no-fee access to sanitation utilities (water, sewer, solid waste disposal)?
Are there already specific definitions to describe a “religious facility”, for example ad-hoc missionaries without portfolio or owned sites?
Does “social service” have a definition in ordinances elsewhere? Incorporation, site specific, for profit, not for profit, non-profit, IRS non profit?
Last but not least in my allotted space here, pages 12, 13 and 14:
Executive proposes: “Require a 10-foot step back for buildings above 2 stories in the Vashon Rural Town.”
Council proposes: “The height limit in Vashon Rural Town zoning would be changed to a maximum of 3 stories, not to exceed 40 feet. Would add new policy stating support for increased availability for behavioral and mental health services in the Vashon Rural Town. Would add a new policy stating support for emergency medical transportation for Vashon-Maury Island.”
Questions:
The Council wants the buildings on Vashon Town to get taller to accommodate its high density goals. Will this amendment incentivize Vashon downtown property owners to demolish their existing small buildings (Vashon Town as we know it) and to replace them with taller buildings?
What does “new policy stating support for emergency medical transportation” mean in terms of committing resources? New ambulances? Funding? Training?
No part of unincorporated King County is immune to the challenges concerning housing, homelessness, and substance abuse. The proposed amendments aim to address those countywide problems by greatly increasing density and allowing certain types of services and developments in unincorporated areas. If passed, the new Zoning Laws appear to greenlight a substantial increase in types of housing that could draw an influx of people to Vashon-Maury Island.
So, what’s my problem with that? Want just one example? I spent 20 years working at Seattle Public Utilities talking water, sewer, garbage. To me, 40,000 new peeps on the island is another 15,000 new septic drain-fields sitting over our sole-source aquifer, aka our drinking water. So, yeah, I’m talking some real STUFF.
As a remote bridgeless island, Vashon is unlike any other place in King County. We will appreciate hearing from our Electeds on how the proposed rezoning works with the island’s infrastructure issues which they’ve been hearing about for decades and we islanders face every day:
• Absolute limits of a sole source groundwater aquifer
• Very limited grey water collection allowances
• Only two King County Sheriff’s Officers on duty at any one time
• The struggles to create Urgent Care on-island
• No access to an ER or hospital less than an hour’s travel-time off-island by ferry via Medic One or our fire department
• Washington State ferry system’s problems with staffing and schedules
• The expensive ripple effect of staffing shortages for island businesses
IT’S TIME TO TALK with our elected KING COUNTY OFFICIALS:
Recognition of Vashon-Maury residents’ strong interest in getting answers about the Comprehensive Plan’s zoning law amendments warrants a facilitated meeting with interested community members, full Council and the Executive on Vashon within the next 45 days.
A full Council public forum meeting in downtown Seattle is already scheduled on Nov. 19. But for the 5,000 households of Vashon-Maury Island, half of which are seniors, there are significant barriers to in-person attendance off-island, including transportation costs and limited and unreliable ferry service schedules. Please meet us where we’re at, literally. Catch the extended hours of the Passenger Only boat–we’ll pick you up and get you back.
That’s all for today, my 11,000 neighbors. Thanks for reading all the way to this point. Get your copy of the Summary and consider your own questions between now and (ever the optimist) October when Council and the Executive catch the PO boats from overtown.
Bernie O’Malley
