Shoreline’s parking code “doesn’t make sense”

A map from the city shows new NR2 and NR3 zones and quarter-mile and half-mile distances from transit stops and high activity areas

By Oliver Moffat

The Shoreline city council could allow commercial businesses in residential neighborhoods and will debate ending parking mandates citywide while possibly expanding tree protections

At the December 2 meeting, the Shoreline council discussed the 2044 Comprehensive Plan and changes to the city’s Development Code required to comply with new state housing laws. 

Like other cities across the state, Shoreline must update its comp plan and code to comply with new laws intended to address the housing affordability crisis. 

Most of the draft code changes were mandated by the Middle Housing (HB1110), ADU (HB1337), Permit Streamlining (SB5290), Parking Reduction (SB6015), and Supportive & Emergency Housing (HB1220) bills.

But the Shoreline city council plans to go beyond the minimum state mandates by allowing commercial businesses in residential neighborhoods, will consider ending residential parking mandates citywide and might expand tree retention rules at the December 16th meeting. 

Like other cities across the state, Shoreline will bring its code into compliance with the state’s Middle Housing (HB1110) and ADU (HB1337) laws, replacing existing single-family zones with new Neighborhood Residential zones (NR1, NR2, and NR3) that now allow ADUs, duplexes, triplexes, townhomes, cottage housing, and courtyard apartments.

But draft amendments from the planning commission and city staff would go further and allow some commercial businesses such as cafes, brewpubs, offices, markets, daycare and personal services in residential neighborhoods. 

The businesses would be allowed on all streets except dead-ends and cul-de-sacs and drive-throughs and gas stations would not be allowed. 

The current draft would limit the size of residential commercial spaces to 1,000 square feet but at a meeting with the Shoreline Chamber of Commerce in November, the council discussed expanding the size limits from 1,000 square feet up to 1,500 or even 2,000 along arterials. 

Councilmember Annette Ademasu questioned the low size limit saying, “If I wanted to buy an existing building on the corner lot that's bigger than 1,000 square feet. What happens if I want to build a restaurant there and it's a 1,500 square foot home I want to convert to a restaurant… using existing buildings … is less carbon intensive on the world for building materials.”

A map from the city shows neighborhoods within a half-mile of a “major” or “frequent” transit stops after transit changes in September

Another change to the city code will add a new definition for “frequent” transit stops that is different from the previous “major” transit stop definition. 

The distinction matters because the Middle Housing (HB1110) and ADU (HB1337) laws require cities to allow greater density near “major” transit stops and also forbids cities from requiring new parking for developments near “major” transit. 

Earlier this year, after light rail service came to Shoreline, Metro transit made several big revisions to its bus network, deleting bus routes to downtown Seattle made redundant by the Link 1 line. 

With the extra capacity, Metro added new routes and increased the frequency of dozens of routes including two Shoreline bus lines: the 348 and the new 333 now run every fifteen minutes during the weekdays, zigzagging north-south and east-west throughout the city. 

Metro also increased the frequency of the RapidRide E line on Aurora. 

Next year, Metro and Sound Transit plan to connect the ST Express 522 to the 145th street light rail station, adding another fifteen-minute frequent bus to the city and in the future, Sound Transit’s planned Stride S3 Line will replace the 522 with bus rapid transit (BRT) along 145th. 

The journey of a Shoreline transit rider is much different now than it was. According to a map from the city, all of Shoreline’s grocery stores (Costco, Fred Meyer, Trader Joe’s, Town and Country, QFC, Thriftway and both Safeways) are now served by transit that arrives at least every fifteen minutes during weekdays.

Last month, when the city realized the new buses would force the city to allow increased density in more neighborhoods across the city, the Planning Commission approved an amendment from city staff to add separate definitions for “major” transit stops and “frequent” transit stops, allowing the city to continue to stuff density into some neighborhoods and keep it out of others. 

Maps presented to the council showed the walking radius before and after the new more frequent bus routes: almost the entire city east of Aurora is now within walking distance of “frequent” or “major” transit.

 
Under the new state laws, the city can no longer require off-street parking for new middle housing and ADUs within a half mile of a “major” transit stop. 

But the city’s proposed rules do not end the existing parking mandates for other multifamily homes. As a result, the city’s parking rules don’t make sense according to Mayor Chris Roberts because a property with six townhomes would not require parking, but a six-unit apartment building next door would require parking.

 
Mayor Roberts is proposing an amendment to end minimum parking requirements throughout the city “like Port Townsend, like Spokane, like 77 other cities across the nation who have not seen any problems,” he said. 

“If you add in all the frequent transit, the number of places where parking is required, is going to be, I think, relatively small. And… it's almost easier in my mind to… say citywide we don't have a parking requirement,” Roberts said.

Not everyone on the council is ready to allow developers to build homes without parking citywide. 

Speaking in favor of parking, Councilmember Annette Ademasu said, “we have so many different areas and a lot of residential areas don't have an easy bus to get somewhere to go grocery shopping. So I think we're kind of unique versus other cities like Spokane and the 77 other cities in the United States that may have gone to no parking requirements.” 

Other code changes bring the city into compliance with a parking reduction law (SB6015) the state adopted earlier this year. 

That law will prompt cities to shrink the size of required parking spaces and allow grass block pavers as an approved parking surface. 

Also, under the new state parking law, if the city’s tree retention code combined with its parking mandates make a residential development “infeasible”, then the city must waive the parking mandates.

 
Under Shoreline’s current code, buildings in the R6 zone are allowed to cover no more than 35% of a parcel and hardscape coverage may not exceed 50% of the lot. 

But the proposed code introduces a sliding scale that would allow the hardscape coverage to increase with the number of units on the lot.

 
Two months ago Mayor Roberts told staff he opposed increasing hardscape maximums, wants the city to lift parking mandates city wide and instead encourage developers to build around trees. 

He repeated that criticism at this week’s meeting. “I think this is concerning if we are trying to preserve canopy, we're trying to preserve trees, we're trying to preserve green space… Having at least 60% lot coverage allowed throughout the entire city is a lot… we have climate goals. And we have tree canopy goals,” Roberts said. 

He said the city’s parking mandates are the reason why developers will need to remove trees and pave most of the lots. “I don't think that’s what people in the community want,” he said.

 
Councilmember Keith Scully agreed, “I don't have any problem with increased density in neighborhood residential 3, but I do have a problem with increased structure size and increasing hardscape just because everything from stormwater to tree canopy is just not structured around having big buildings there. 

"So I would like an amendment that gets rid of the sliding scale and caps it at 50%. That's still, in my view, a significant increase,” Scully said.

An amendment to increase tree retention rules could be introduced as well. The city’s current development code says at least 25 percent of significant trees on a property must be retained in residential neighborhoods. 

Last year, the city passed a law allowing cottage housing in residential neighborhoods but required developers to retain 35 percent of significant trees and imposed a $9000 fee for removing big trees. 

That kind of inconsistency is now illegal so the city will remove its Cottage Housing code to comply with the state’s Middle Housing laws. Councilmember Ademasu called for extending the more restrictive tree retention rules that currently only applies to Cottage Housing developments to all residential developments citywide. 

City staff pushed back and argue the tree code will be updated next year at which point the tree retention rules could be modified. 

At the December 16th meeting the city council will consider amendments and vote on adoption of the comprehensive plan and the new development code.