Issaquah Council Debates Housing Reforms Amidst Calls for Bolder Action

Issaquah’s City Council recently approved an ordinance that eases some building requirements for new residential developments, including reducing mandatory “stepbacks” and private outdoor amenity space. However, the decision was met with dissent from two councilmembers who believe the reforms do not go far enough and are urging for a more thorough exploration of bolder options to tackle the city’s housing and affordability crises.

The new ordinance, which modifies regulations for buildings over five stories, scales back the requirement for stepbacks—where upper floors are set back from lower floors to create visual interest and transition. Previously, buildings facing natural areas had to incorporate stepbacks. Under the new rules, only one stepback is required along a street face, and it can be located anywhere between the second and sixth floors. Similarly, the mandate for private outdoor amenity space has been reduced. Developers will now only need to provide a certain amount of outdoor space for 30% of planned units, with smaller buildings (eight units or fewer) exempt from this requirement. This change aims to reduce construction costs and mitigate risks associated with water intrusion from balconies.

These reforms are the initial steps in a broader work plan initiated by Mayor Mark Mullet’s administration, which took office at the start of 2026. This approach signals a shift from the previous administration, which was perceived as more hesitant to reduce housing development barriers, particularly aesthetic ones.

Dissenting Votes and Concerns

Councilmembers Kevin Nichols and Tola Marts cast the dissenting votes, expressing their dissatisfaction with the process and the limited scope of the approved changes. Both councilmembers argued that the council had not been presented with a full spectrum of potential housing reform options, including the complete elimination of stepback requirements.

Councilmember Nichols emphasized the importance of a rigorous review process for these initial reforms. While acknowledging the added flexibility, he noted that substantial stepback requirements remain in place. Nichols shared his research into the origins of stepback regulations in Issaquah, expressing concern over historical comments from a 2017 Development Commission meeting. He cited a commissioner’s remark that such design standards could aggregate costs, making the city “very self-selective” and a “boutique” place. The consultant’s response at the time, that affordability was “out of scope,” deeply troubled Nichols, who believes affordability should never be excluded from such discussions. He argued that this oversight, dating back a decade, continues to impact residents and demands a more comprehensive approach.

Councilmember Marts, known for his skepticism towards unchecked development and advocacy for affordability, echoed Nichols’ concerns. He questioned the logic of implementing an “interim step” when a more significant review of regulations is scheduled for the near future. Marts stated that the current approach lacks the urgency and severity needed to address the city’s pressing housing and affordability crises.

The ordinance ultimately passed with five votes in favour.

Past Challenges with Building Requirements

The council’s re-examination of stepback requirements was partly influenced by a recent experience with the King County Housing Authority (KCHA). Last year, the Issaquah Council granted KCHA a request to waive stepback requirements for a planned development near the Issaquah Transit Center. Despite the city’s long-standing efforts to facilitate this project since 2016, the stepback mandates would have incurred an additional $1.2 million in costs for KCHA, primarily due to utility relocation. The requirement would have also resulted in the loss of six housing units and the downsizing of 12 three-bedroom units. This incident highlighted the tangible financial and physical impacts of the existing regulations.

Councilmember Kelly Jiang referenced this KCHA experience as a key factor in the decision to review stepbacks, viewing the current ordinance as a necessary interim measure. She expressed anticipation for the upcoming comprehensive review of architectural design standards, which may offer a wider “menu of options” for developers.

Historical Context of Design Standards

Councilmember Jiang also provided historical context for Issaquah’s stringent design standards in a 2025 post on her Substack account, Cascadian Abundance. She noted that many of the current regulations were implemented as a reaction to the Atlas Apartments, an apartment building that opened a decade prior. Jiang drew a parallel to cities like Seattle, where strict design regulations have led to a homogenization of building appearances, with developers adopting standardized floor plans that meet all requirements. She expressed a desire to move beyond such prescriptive approaches and is looking forward to exploring more flexible design standards in the fourth quarter. For the interim period, she found the current adjustment to stepbacks, allowing them to be placed anywhere between the second and sixth floors, to be acceptable.

The council is slated to consider broader architectural design standards later in the fall, which may introduce a more flexible framework for what buildings can look like in Issaquah.

Key facts

The recent ordinance represents a step towards easing development barriers in Issaquah, particularly in its central core, an area historically dominated by large retail stores and surface parking. By modifying stepback and amenity space requirements, the city aims to encourage more residential construction. However, the debate among councilmembers underscores the ongoing tension between streamlining development processes and ensuring that reforms adequately address pressing housing needs and affordability concerns. The forthcoming review of architectural design standards will be crucial in determining the future of building aesthetics and the ease of housing delivery in Issaquah.

Source: The Urbanist, https://www.theurbanist.org/issaquah-push-for-bolder-housing-reforms/