[Note: This article first appeared on NWCitizen on Nov 16, 2015]
Over the past year, various groups (primarily a focus
group, the Planning Commission and the Mayor's Neighborhood Advisory
Commission) have met in work groups to discuss the advantages and
disadvantages of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and the need to update
the current ordinance. The last version of the ordinance
was passed by the City Council in 1995 but has not been updated since
and has largely been ignored, especially the requirement to register
such units with the city on a recurring basis. Notably, the city has
been complicit in not actively pursuing landlords who are not in
compliance except as the result of a complaint. The result is
unregistered and likely unpermitted dwelling units that put occupants at
risk.
For example, the ADU pictured at left was condemned several years
ago and declared uninhabitable after a long struggle between the tenant
and the landlord to effect repairs. Only about 94 ADUs are registered
in Bellingham although in neighborhoods such as South Hill, York and
Sehome, there are, according to neighborhood residents and association
officials, dozens of unregistered and therefore illegal units of poor or
unknown condition.
The current attention being paid to ADUs comes about primarily as a result of the requirement to review the ordinance once
there are 200 registered ADUs city-wide or any specific neighborhood
exceeds 20 ADUs. The South Hill neighborhood is nearing this number of
registered units, although as noted above, the proliferation of illegal
units means that quite likely South Hill already has many more than 20
ADUs.
The city is exploring ways to increase infill and density
within the city limits. Although the planning director himself has
said on several occasions that ADUs, in and of themselves, cannot
substantially add to density or cure the problem of insufficient
affordable housing, the city is moving ahead with the review process.
There is nothing inherently wrong with ADUs. There are, however,
problems when the number of existing units is unknown and the current
density of neighborhoods is not well understood or quantified. A
proliferation of ADUs in the York Neigbhorhood is not the same as an
equal number in Cordata or Edgemoor.
Increased density brings with it the inevitable nuisances
of noise, insufficient parking and litter. The city poorly manages and
mitigates these problems in that they are low on the list of priorities
for the police, code enforcement and public works. Problems linger for
weeks, months or even years. In some areas near the university, there
is no longer room for additional vehicles. This situation begs for some
sort of control on the number and spacing of ADUs as people who rent
them cannot be expected to just get rid of their vehicles. Statements
to the effect that ADU residents will for the most part take public
transportation, walk or bike are unsuppported and go against the
everyday experience of those now living in crowded neighborhoods,
replete with ADUs, many of which are not yet identified by the city in
spite of complaints. The limit of three people occupying an ADU also
says the possibility exists that three additional vehicles will be
brought into a neighborhood. In some cases both the main house and the
ADU are rented out, thus ignoring the code requirement that the landlord
live in either the house or the ADU. This further aggravates issues
related to noise and parking since the landlord is not present as a
calming agent and the house may well be stuffed with 5 or more renters,
most of whom have cars, who are seeking to lower their individual costs.
This is understandable economically, however, if allowed to continue
and proliferate, will radically change the character of a neighborhood.
Although there is no reason not to eventually bring
ADUs back into the realm of housing possibilities, a current inventory
is essential. The recently adopted ordinance on rental inspections may
uncover some units that have not yet been known to the city, however,
the rollout of inspections under this ordinance will play out over three
years. What mechanism will the city then use to identify (prior to
enacting an ADU ordinance) all existing units? Without that knowledge
an ordinance that specifies the number of ADUs allowed in a particular
area will be ineffective and destructive.
The city has to answer these questions before
proceeding. Saying that mitigation of problems will take place later
and that present density is not an issue are not acceptable responses.
A work session on this topic will be held before the Planning Commission on Thursday, 19 Nov 2015 at 7pm in the city council chambers of city hall. Agenda and materials here.