Shelters, Transitional Housing, Emergency Housing, and Permanent Supportive Housing.

Cities must allow transitional housing and permanent supportive housing in an zones within an urban growth area in which residential dwelling units or hotels are allowed.  Indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing must be allowed in any area within an urban growth area in which hotels are allowed.  Indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing must be allowed in additional zones if necessary to meet projected needs identified in the comprehensive plan.  Counties planning under the Growth Management Act are subject to the same requirements in urban growth areas.

Transitional housing, permanent supportive housing, indoor emergency shelters, and indoor emergency housing (STEP housing) may not be located in an area zoned for industrial use.  A county or city is not required to approve a permit application for STEP housing proposed in a critical area in which no residential development is permitted, an area of natural hazards that generally prohibit residential development, or on agricultural, forest, or mineral lands of long-term commercial significance.

A county or city subject to this requirement may generally not require any standards, conditions, or requirements for STEP housing that are more restrictive than those required for other types of lodging and residential development in the zone.  However, the city or county may apply any objective development regulations, including form-based codes, that are not required for residential development such as setback, lot coverage, stormwater, and tree canopy and retention requirements.  Similarly, the city or county may only apply the same development permit and environmental review processes to STEP housing that apply to lodging and residential development in the same zone, unless otherwise required by state law, such as shoreline regulations and building, energy, and electrical codes.

If applying design review for STEP housing, only administrative design review may be required.  "Administrative design review" for cities is defined as a development permit process in which an application is reviewed, approved, or denied by the planning director (or designee) based solely on objective design and development standards without a public predecision hearing, unless the review is otherwise required by state or federal law or the structure is a designated landmark or within a historic district established under a local preservation ordinance.  A city may approve requests for variances from locally established design review standards.

A county or city may require the sponsor or managing agency of an indoor emergency shelter or indoor emergency housing to certify in writing that it has, between the date the permit application was approved and the date the certificate of occupancy was issued:

• notified residents within 500 feet of the facility;
• conducted no more than one public meeting;
• designated at least one point of contact;
• provided at least one telephone number to be used in emergencies; and
• provided documentation of operational policies or procedures for health, fire, safety, and occupancy. 

The written certification constitutes full compliance with this requirement—the county or city may not require additional certifications or for any of the items to be repeated or revised. 

"Transitional housing" is defined as a project that provides housing and supportive services to homeless persons or families for up to two years and that has as its purpose facilitating the movement of homeless persons into independent living.

Permitting Requirements on Existing Buildings.

The prohibition against a city imposing permitting requirements on the use of an existing building for residential purposes beyond those requirements generally applicable to all residential development within the building's zone is made applicable to all residential uses, including emergency housing and transitional housing.

Local Requirements on Affordable Housing Developments.

The types of requirements a city, county, or local governmental entity may impose and enforce on affordable housing developments are limited to income qualification, coordinated entry, reporting, and monitoring requirements.

Updates to Local Requirements.

Counties and cities must incorporate the requirements of the act into their development regulations, zoning regulations, and other official controls within 2 years of the effective date of the act or at the next comprehensive plan update, whichever is sooner.  The requirements of the act supersede, preempt, and invalidate any conflicting local requirements regardless of whether a county or city has incorporated the requirements of the act into its development regulations, zoning regulations, and other official controls.

Application.

The requirements of the act do not apply to the siting of STEP housing in operation on the effective date of the act.  A county or city may not deem STEP housing in operation on the effective date of the act as unlawful or noncompliant due to ordinances, regulations, or controls adopted or amended pursuant to the act. 

As part of a pilot project, testimony in this section of the bill report was summarized by generative artificial intelligence and reviewed for accuracy by non-partisan legislative staff.  Generative artificial intelligence was used only in this section of the bill report; all other sections were prepared by non-partisan legislative staff without the use of any generative artificial intelligence.

(In support) The testimony emphasized broad support for the legislation as a necessary response to persistent barriers that delay or prevent the development of emergency shelters, transitional housing, emergency housing, permanent supportive housing, and step housing. Testimony described how inconsistent local regulations, discretionary permitting processes, shifting requirements, and unequal standards are often used to obstruct housing intended for people experiencing homelessness or disabilities, resulting in higher costs, prolonged timelines, and lost opportunities to address urgent needs. Speakers highlighted that these housing types are critical to stabilizing individuals, reducing reliance on emergency services, jails, and hospitals, and improving public safety and community well-being, particularly in smaller jurisdictions with limited resources. The testimony further underscored that housing is foundational to recovery, treatment, and long-term stability, and that discriminatory land-use practices may violate civil rights and fair housing laws. Overall, the testimony argued that the bill would create clearer, more consistent statewide standards, support regional solutions, protect the rights and dignity of vulnerable populations, and ensure that already funded and proven housing models can be built efficiently and equitably across communities.

(Opposed) The testimony raised concerns about the bill as drafted, emphasizing the need to preserve a degree of local authority to ensure public safety, effective operations, and appropriate siting of step housing and shelter facilities. Testimony argued that the ability to require operational agreements—such as on-site supervision, security plans, and codes of conduct—is essential to maintaining safe, well-managed facilities that support successful transitions to permanent housing, and that these requirements are not intended to block housing but to ensure accountability. Concerns were also expressed about eliminating the ability to apply spacing or distribution standards for shelters, with testimony noting that concentrating facilities in limited areas can create broader public safety and community impacts. Additionally, testimony questioned provisions requiring step housing to be allowed in nearly all zones, characterizing this as a significant preemption of local control that could force jurisdictions to allow shelters in areas lacking transit, services, or appropriate infrastructure. Finally, testimony warned that the bill could function as an unfunded mandate by increasing code enforcement and public safety demands without providing corresponding state oversight or funding, and urged the legislature to consider amendments and proposed revisions to address these issues.

(Other) The testimony categorized as "other" expressed general support for expanding access to permanent supportive, transitional, and emergency housing, while raising concerns that the bill as drafted could unintentionally limit local governments' ability to ensure safety, accountability, and successful operations. Testimony emphasized that cities often invest significant public funds, land, and staff resources into step housing projects and rely on operational agreements, safety plans, and community engagement processes to protect residents, meet audit and contractual obligations, and build neighborhood trust. Concerns were raised that prohibiting such agreements could undermine proven local practices that have contributed to successful and widely accepted shelter and housing programs, including measures to prevent predatory behavior, ensure on-site management, and maintain clear communication with surrounding communities. Additional testimony highlighted that different types of step housing have different operational impacts, that location and access to services matter, and that some provisions could conflict with existing planning requirements or force reactive enforcement rather than proactive management. Overall, the testimony urged targeted amendments to preserve effective local tools while continuing to advance the bill's goal of addressing homelessness and housing instability.

(In support) Representative Strom Peterson, prime sponsor; Dan Wise, Catholic Community Services; Sarah Dickmeyer, Plymouth Housing Group; James Lovell, SeaTac City Councilmember; Jenn Hendersen, Disability Rights Washington; Alexia Diorio, Washington State Attorney General's Office; and Joe McDermott, State Relations Director.

Joe Tovar, Washington Chapter of the American Planning Association; Mary Anito, ROOTS Young Adult Shelter; and Erin Chapman-Smith, ROOTS Young Adult Shelter .