Oak Harbor planning commission reviews preliminary draft of 2025 comprehensive plan update

The Oak Harbor Planning Commission on Sept. 9 reviewed a preliminary draft of the city—s 2025 comprehensive plan major update and discussed housing targets, urban design changes, transportation policy, utilities, environmental protections and next steps for public input.

Principal Planner Kat Kamak told the commission the draft is a staff-led preliminary document and that "the target that, we would be shooting for for the 20 year plan is 3,735 units," a number staff is using to test land use and infrastructure assumptions. Kamak said the county has calculated capacity inside the existing Oak Harbor urban growth area at about 464 units, which she described as a deficit relative to the allocation. "If 2 or more jurisdictions don't ratify it, then we go back to the original county wide planning policies," Kamak said, describing how countywide planning policy amendments move through Island County before jurisdictions ratify them.

Why it matters: the draft will guide the city—s policy direction for roughly 20 years and is intended to give staff and decision-makers more-specific policy language to use when reviewing projects, implementing design guidelines and defending regulations. Kamak noted the city is working with Island County and the Washington State Department of Commerce on growth-related topics and that some elements of the comp plan review are timed to reflect concurrent county work.

Key discussion points:

- Housing and urban growth area targets: Commissioners and staff discussed the numeric target and a shortfall between the county—s calculated capacity inside the existing UGA (about 464 units) and the city-targeted 20-year need (3,735 units). Kamak said the city is "continuing to work with the county" to address how that deficit should be handled in the allocation process and whether infrastructure limits should reduce the allocation.

- Urban design and trees: The draft shifts emphasis away from strict retention buffers for undeveloped woodland lots toward encouraging revegetation and native-species plantings as areas redevelop. Kamak explained that past edge-buffer retention approaches produced isolated remnant trees that later became hazardous and difficult to maintain, and staff and commissioners discussed focusing policy on historic, architectural or functional significance when recommending preservation of farm buildings or landmark structures.

- Transportation: Commissioners reviewed language tying the comp plan to the city—s transportation planning documents (for example the active transportation and safety action plans). The commission discussed adding language to emphasize coordination with Island Transit rather than only—supporting—its initiatives and refining references to Complete Streets standards for new projects. Staff said the city will pursue an RFP to update the standalone transportation plan (last updated in 2016) and that having a complete-streets standard will be important for some grant eligibility.

- Utilities and environment: The utilities and environment elements were revised to align with state Growth Management Act requirements, including added language on energy conservation and greenhouse-gas reduction. The draft retains the Garry Oak protections but is cautious about requiring tree retention that later creates maintenance or safety challenges. Commissioners asked for clarification about the city—s role in supporting Anacortes water rights (Oak Harbor receives water from Anacortes) and about how policies on nonpoint and point-source pollution would be measured; staff said those items reflect state and regional concerns and will be further refined.

- Capital facilities and equity: Commissioners suggested strengthening a proposed policy that calls for considering historical distribution of capital projects by adding language to target investments toward underserved areas when appropriate. Staff noted the comp plan and accompanying analyses can be used to identify opportunity areas and align capital investment priorities.

Process and next steps: Kamak described the current document as a preliminary draft and said staff will bring additional elements forward over the next two to three months: parks and recreation, economic development, government services and a new climate-resiliency chapter in October; and land use, housing and the urban growth area in November. Staff proposed a joint workshop with the city council later in the year to review maps and graphics; commissioners expressed a preference for evening meetings and suggested dates in early to mid-December.

Public input and timeline: Kamak reminded the public that the draft is open for comment and that the project team is using a steering committee and public meetings; she also said the city has grant funding to support the climate-resiliency work. Staff encouraged written comments via the city—s comprehensive plan page and a downloadable comment form.

Votes at a glance: The commission approved the Aug. 12 meeting minutes by voice vote and later voted to adjourn; both were routine procedural actions recorded as passed by voice vote during the session.

What remains unresolved: the treatment of the UGA housing deficit and whether county decisions will reduce Oak Harbor—s allocation; specific, enforceable approaches for protecting view corridors and private-property views; whether some existing policy concepts (for example local improvement districts or certain transportation-demand tools) should be retained even if not currently implemented; and final language for tree-canopy and Garry Oak policies that balances protection with practical maintenance and safety concerns.

The planning commission—s next scheduled meeting is Oct. 14, 2025; staff will return with revised policy text and additional element drafts leading up to a consolidated public-draft later in the year.