Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Moa topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council opens discussion on 2004 Coupeville MOA and potential for more dwellings and ADU incentives
Summary
Council and staff reviewed the 2004–05 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) that shaped a development area known as the Coupeville MOA; staff outlined options including doing nothing, dissolving the MOA, transferring credits, or incentivizing accessory dwelling units (ADUs).
The Coupeville Town Council on July 22 held an initial, staff‑led discussion about the town’s 2004–05 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) that established a special development area and allocated dwelling “credits.” Council did not take formal action but asked staff for further research and public engagement.
Staff told the council the MOA had originally allowed up to 108 dwelling credits and 11.88 acres of dedicated open space and that subsequent development has used roughly 49 dwellings (about 45% of the original credits). Of that original allocation, staff say about 28 dwelling credits remain available on three undeveloped parcels. Staff also said some credits appear to be unavailable or out of play because parcels were acquired by other public entities.
The town planning director reviewed several high‑level pathways the council might pursue: leave the MOA unchanged (do nothing), permit built‑out parcels under existing MOA rules, dissolve or alter the MOA so remaining parcels use standard code provisions, transfer development credits from parcels now out of play back into the developable parcels, or craft incentives for ADUs and smaller units inside the MOA framework.
Staff noted specifics about lot sizes and how the MOA previously allowed lot‑size averaging. As one illustrative example used in the staff presentation, parcels developed under the MOA could be smaller than the town’s standard minimum lot size (the director said the MOA allowed lots as small as 1,700 square feet compared with a 9,600‑square‑foot minimum outside the MOA). The director also reminded council that under the MOA and current town rules an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) currently counts as a full dwelling credit.
Council members and staff discussed tradeoffs: the MOA originally aimed to protect forested open space while promoting a mix of housing types (single‑family, cottages, higher‑density units). Council members asked for clarity on which parcels remain eligible, whether dwelling credits held by the county are permanently removed, and how changes would align with state housing goals and recent code changes that promote middle‑housing and ADUs.
Councilors requested additional research into several matters before any formal recommendation, including whether credits held by public entities can be reallocated, legal implications of adjusting the MOA, options to tie incentives to utility and parking impacts, and whether ADUs could be counted at partial credit (for example, treating ADU water use as a fractional equivalent residential unit). Staff also heard council interest in community outreach and possibly a workshop with affected neighbors and property owners.
No decisions were made; staff will return with more detailed analysis and potential code amendment language if the council directs further work.
