Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Annexation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Oak Harbor planner urges annexing 80 acres of UGA land to help meet county housing targets
Summary
Principal planner Rajesh Kakamak told the Oak Harbor City Council a targeted annexation of underdeveloped Urban Growth Area parcels would let the city plan infrastructure and zoning to absorb housing capacity the county's recent amendments left unallocated.
Oak Harbor Principal Planner Rajesh Kakamak told the City Council on March 10 that Island County's recent amendments to the countywide planning policies leave a portion of the county's housing allocation that Oak Harbor cannot accommodate under current infrastructure and development rules. He said the city's initial capacity analysis using existing development standards shows about 474 units and that local options increase capacity to about 3,735 units, leaving a remaining shortfall the amendment seeks to address.
Kakamak said one step the county recommended is annexing underdeveloped or undeveloped parcels inside the Urban Growth Area (UGA) into the city so Oak Harbor can apply city zoning, complete capacity analysis through its environmental impact statement and comprehensive-plan process, and account for infrastructure needs. "This will provide the city a chance to do the zoning and the capacity analysis for that as part of the EIS and the comp plan process," he said.
Council members pressed for details about scope and timing. Council Member Stucky asked whether the change would affect neighboring towns; staff said the revisions are targeted to parcels in Oak Harbor's UGA and should not change allocations for Langley or Coupeville. Stucky also asked what "immediate annexation" would mean in practice; staff said the ordinance language contemplated an effective date within days of signature for the parcels covered by the current proposal.
On size and ownership, staff said the immediate annexation package under discussion covers roughly 80 acres and fewer than 20 property owners, some owning multiple parcels; the city has sent letters to owners but does not know which intend to develop. Kakamak said the parcels proposed for annexation are largely underdeveloped and could be brought into the city and planned over time. He added that the county has indicated the balance of 1,541 housing units (as described in the presentation) would be removed from Oak Harbor's population/housing counts until capital facilities are planned or provided.
Council members asked about zoning after annexation. Staff recommended R2 (limited multifamily) as an initial designation to preserve flexibility: "R2 is the zoning that you will see duplexes and fourplexes," the planner said, noting R2 allows single-family uses to continue while permitting additional density if owners seek rezonings later in the comp-plan process.
Next steps: Kakamak said the annexation and related amendments will be discussed at a joint meeting next week and are expected to return to the council as an action item in April, when the council can take formal action to ratify or amend the proposal.
Ending: The council did not make a decision at the workshop. Staff emphasized that annexation would require phased infrastructure planning and interjurisdictional cooperation via interlocal agreements before development could proceed.
