At a joint meeting of the Clark County council and Planning Commission on Thursday, 11 speakers offered their comments on the Comprehensive Growth Management Plan update.
Five spoke in support of Alternatives 2 and 4, both of which are focused on making changes to rural Clark County. The two alternatives, according to the draft environmental impact statement for the plan, will help clean up inconsistencies on the map, and shrink rural, forest and agriculture.
Four spoke against Alternative 2 and 4, including three local elected officials, while the others offered other suggestions for how to best approach planning.
Howard Jones was among those in favor of Alternative 4. Jones lives on Kelly Road east of Yacolt. His property falls just short of 10 acres, but was zoned for five-acre parcels in 1997. That zoning has left him with no way to legally split and sell his property if he wishes to, he said.
Jones urged the county to rezone his property to allow him to split his land into 2.5 acre parcels, as would be allowed under Alternative 4.
“You’ve got me right between a rock and a hard spot,” Jones said. “I can’t literally do anything to it.”
Carol Levanen, executive secretary of land-use group Clark County Citizens United, spoke in favor of Alternative 4, saying the county has failed to adequately provide for the needs of rural landowners since the early 1990s.
“Rural and resource land has been locked in status quo,” she said.
She and CCCU president Susan Rasmussen have been frequent commenters at Clark County council meetings for months. The group, which claims to represent the needs of 6,000 rural citizens, has pushed for a land use alternative that would cater to rural residents.
Ridgefield Mayor Ron Onslow spoke in favor of Alternative 3, which would expand the urban growth boundaries of several small cities, including Ridgefield. The city in northwest Clark County requested pulling about 100 acres north of the city into its urban growth boundary to be used for future industrial growth.
Onslow also spoke against Alternative 4. Adding additional residents in unincorporated Clark County surrounding the city will put a strain on city services, as those people will rely on services within Ridgefield city limits, he said.
“There will be more impacts and more expenses to the city,” Onslow said.
Vancouver City Councilor Anne McEnerny-Ogle also spoke against Alternatives 2 and 4, saying they would strain the region’s aquifers, most of which are in the southwest part of the county just north of Vancouver city limits.
“Two of your proposed changes create sweeping impacts to urban area,” McEnerny-Ogle said, adding that Alternatives 2 and 4 will create “prohibitive structure costs.”
Chuck Green, who is running for the newly created District 2 seat on the Clark County council, urged the county to hold off on adopting a new plan until the two new councilors are seated. Though there “are merits” to all four alternatives, the county will be better served by adopting a “value-based plan” with input from the full council.
There will be a second joint hearing of the Clark County council and the Clark County Planning Commission at 6 p.m. Thursday, Sept. 10, at the Public Service Center on 1300 Franklin St., Vancouver.
The four alternatives
The Clark County council is considering four alternatives to the Comprehensive Growth Management Plan update, which will make changes to zoning and lot sizes throughout unincorporated Clark County.
In general, the more lots an alternative allows for, the greater its environmental impacts, according to the draft environmental impact statement released by the county last month. Seattle firm Environmental Science Associates compiled the 164-page environmental report.
The logic throughout is simple: The more people who live outside cities, where resources such as schools and shopping typically are, the greater the number of people will be who need to travel to those cities to use those resources. That strains roads and public transportation. More homes also mean more potential strain on water, energy, wildlife and other natural resources.
The council can pick a preferred alternative in late October that combines components of each of the four alternatives.
• Alternative 1, the “no-action” alternative, would leave Clark County’s map and zoning as is. It could lead to the creation of 7,073 new lots.
• Alternative 2 makes changes across unincorporated Clark County. It will add a “rural lands” designation, which will include 5-, 10- and 20-acre rural lots. Forest lots currently zoned 40 acres will be reduced to 20 acres. Agriculture lots zoned 20 acres will be reduced to 10 acres. It could lead to the creation of 8,220 new lots.
• Alternative 3 increases the urban growth boundaries of Battle Ground, La Center, Ridgefield and Washougal. It could lead to the creation of 7,043 new lots.
• Alternative 4, proposed by Councilor David Madore, makes sweeping changes to unincorporated Clark County. It creates rural lots of 1, 2.5 and 5 acres. It adds a 10- and 20-acre forest lots to the existing 40- and 80-acre zones. It replaces all 20-acre agriculture lots with 5- and 10-acre agriculture lots It could lead to the creation of 12,401 new lots.
How to weigh in
Clark County will accept comments on the draft supplemental environmental impact statement for the Comprehensive Growth Management Plan update until 4 p.m. on Sept. 17.
There are a number of ways to submit your comments.
• Visit clark.wa.gov/planning/2016update/alternatives.html and follow the link there to post a comment on Engage Clark County or through a form available on the website.
• Email comments to comp.plan@clark.wa.gov.
• Mail comments to Clark County Community Planning, Attn: 2016 Comp Plan Record, P.O. Box 9810, Vancouver, WA 98666-9810.
• Attend the second joint hearing of the Clark County council and the Clark County Planning Commission at 6 p.m. Thursday, Sept. 10, at the Public Service Center on 1300 Franklin St., Vancouver.
The Planning Commission will recommend a preferred alternative at a public hearing at 6:30 p.m. on Sept. 17. The Clark County council will likely vote on its preferred alternative at 10 a.m. on Oct. 20. After that hearing, Seattle-based firm Environmental Science Associates will prepare a final environmental report.
Correction: A previous version of this story gave the wrong title for Carol Levanen. She is the Executive Secretary of Clark County Citizens United.
