Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council vacates unused right-of-way to Vancouver Housing Authority for affordable housing
Summary
The council approved an ordinance to vacate about 16,663 square feet of unimproved right-of-way to the Vancouver Housing Authority for an affordable housing project, endorsing staff’s recommendation of no compensation while some councilors and public commenters raised concerns about future resale risk.
The Vancouver City Council voted April 28 to vacate an unused city right-of-way to the Vancouver Housing Authority (VHA) to support an affordable housing development, accepting staff’s recommendation to seek no compensation.
Transportation Engineering Manager Ryan LaPosa told council the request covers roughly 16,663 square feet of unimproved right-of-way that Clark County originally acquired in February 2009 for a potential parallel route. The County vacated adjacent portions over time; the remaining remnant is unused and contains no streets or utilities.
Staff recommended no compensation in part because the project is an affordable-housing use and because the city’s right-of-way vacation code allows no-compensation vacations where the property was not acquired at city expense and is not needed for public travel. LaPosa said a valuation exercise yielded an approximate value of about $9 per square foot and noted the county’s original purchase was $134,625 in 2009.
Council discussion focused on the county history, the justification for no compensation, and protections if VHA later sold the parcel. Councilmember Paulson summarized the timeline of acquisition and annexation and noted the Vancouver Housing Authority typically develops long-term affordable housing as distinct from privately developed projects with time-limited affordability. Councilmember Stober asked whether council could condition the vacation or otherwise protect the city if VHA sold the parcel; City Attorney Dean Driscoll and staff said the city’s code bullets and assurances from VHA limit gifting-of-public-funds liability under state law.
Public comment included opposition from Kimberly Elbon (La Center), who said the property was acquired at public expense and objected to vacating it without compensation, and a public speaker who asked the city to require VHA to follow through on affordable-housing commitments.
Outcome: Councilmember Paulson moved to approve and Councilmember Fox seconded; the council approved the ordinance by roll-call vote with all members voting aye.
Next steps: If the ordinance is finalized, the vacation will undo the public right-of-way and the underlying land will revert to the underlying parcel to be used by VHA; staff recommended establishing a pedestrian/mobility easement in the area and said the developer intends to extend pedestrian facilities west when they apply for an additional vacation for adjacent property.
