On Friday afternoon the Planning, Land Use, and Sustainability (PLUS) Committee had another look at recommendations from the Department of Planning and Development on microhousing. Here is what DPD is proposing:

1. Define “micro-housing unit” and “micro” under Residential Use within the Land Use Code.
2. Prohibit micro-housing developments in single-family zones.
3. Apply a design review threshold for micro-housing and congregate residences by the size of the building (not number of dwelling units).
4. Update development standards for micro-housing and congregate residences to add a minimum size requirement for shared kitchens and common areas.
5. Limit kitchen components in individual micros and sleeping rooms to differentiate from dwelling units.
6. Update development standards to ensure appropriate size of refuse collection areas in micro- housing and congregate residence developments.
7. Update development standards for quantity of required vehicle and bicycle parking in micro- housing and congregate residence developments.
8. Clarify eligibility for Restricted Parking Zone (RPZ) passes for occupants of micro-housing and congregate residences. (To be carried out in SDOT procedures or Director’s Rule).
9. Account for micro-housing and congregate residence sleeping rooms in progress towards residential growth targets. (To be carried out in DPD procedures or Director’s Rule).
10. Deepen the required affordability levels for participation in incentive zoning for affordable housing for projects with micro-housing or congregate residences, and for very small studio apartments.
11. Apply green factor landscaping requirements to congregate residences.

Here’s the bottom line for DPD: They’re finding it hard to review proposals for microhousing. The one overriding reason for most of these rules and regulations is to help people trying to enforce rules and regulations. The problem with that is that DPD is trying to make it’s work easier while complicating everyone else’s work.

None of this is necessary. There isn’t a single harm that opponents of microhousing can point to that outweighs the facts that microhousing is performing well as a reasonably priced, safe, and innovative alternative for people who are willing to buy less space to live in already densely populated neighborhoods.

Design review, the main effort to appease the angry anti-housing movement, won’t accomplish anything except raising prices. We’ll continue to tackle these in more detail, but you can read our response to most of these requirements in a previous post.