Your Chance to Get Involved

The process of updating the City of Oak Harbor's Municipal Code is nearing its last few steps.  

The Planning Commission has received copies of the "staff draft" of the compiled Code amendments for review (OHMC 19.31 and OHMC 21 - see previous posts).  Shortly the City will hold a Public Hearing on the suggested Code amendments for City Council to make its final decision.  

The public hearing will be the last opportunity for the City to take your comments regarding the Code amendments associated with this Project.

Until the Public Hearing, Planning Staff are available to answer questions and receive your comments; contact Senior Planner Ethan Spoo at the City of Oak Harbor, 360-279-4513 or email: espoo@oakharbor.org.

Public hearing

The next draft of the amended Code will be presented to the Planning Commission at the regularly scheduled public meeting on July 28th. This draft will incorporate, as appropriate, the comments provided to staff by July 14th. 

During the July 28th Planning Commission there will be a public hearing to take further public comments prior to the Planning Commission forwarding a recommendation on the revised Code to City Council.

Comments on the draft Code

In the last post we provided copies of the completed first drafts of the revised Codes that deal with subdivisions and PRDs in Oak Harbor.  

Comments on these two drafts can provide meaningful insight and staff would appreciate these by July 14th.  

Comments can be left on the blog or sent directly to Senior Planner Ethan Spoo at the City of Oak Harbor, email: espoo@oakharbor.org , tel: 306-293-4513.  

Draft Code Language - Chapter 19.31 and Title 21

After a significant process that has included staff resources, stakeholder input and a series of public meetings with the Planning Commission a first draft of OHMC 19.31 and Title 21, with all the combined changes, are available for review (see below)

The Planning Commission received both drafts yesterday evening at the regularly scheduled public meeting. Hard copies of the legislative edits of these documents are available at City Hall.

Online Survey Findings

The following are the online survey responses. Since only two responses were received, the overall value of the statistics form the survey are not that meaningful. However, the comments were interesting. They are also listed below for information and open to further comment, as are all posts on the blog.

Comments:

Q1 - Naturally, the city should concern itself with the look and feel of new development. However, developers do a pretty good job of designing their sites as best as they can. Some of that depends on the type of homes and intended market. Extra money may be spent on implementing more costly designs if the market will support it. Oak Harbor already has some very stringent design standards dealing with open space, tree retention, parks, etc., which then dictate design.
Q2 - Identify main "corridors" to have these and place emphasis there, not on every development. Any such trail would need to be dedicated to the public and then add to further maintenance load for the City.
Q3 - The only way this can be successful is for the trail to be dedicated to the public or is within a right-of-way. Private owners will certainly not want the liability of inviting the public onto their trail. If an owner dedicates the land, the city should install the trail.
Q4 - Yes, it always looks nice. Perhaps some flexibility in amounts and locations could be incorporated. Is there long term effects to the Public Works - leaves in storm system or to be swept up.
Q5 - Yes, but don't over regulate it. Perhaps 50-75% of the perimeter should be screened by fence or vegetation. Or give incentives for creative designs. Developers already have large expenses into building the ponds. Perhaps creating an incentive program would work. Developers would incorporate many items if they felt that they received credit for them. Reducing impact fees may be a credit.
Q6 - It may depend on the location.
Q7 - Absolutely not, there are many ways to encourage LIDs. These "naturalized" areas would be too small to do anything and would look terrible. The more property taken from developers just drives up the cost of new homes.
Q8 - If street trees become required, doesn't that reduce some of env. impacts already? "Naturalized" areas often become eyesores.
Q9 - How about encouraging the above items by requiring a developer to incorporate a certain percentage of them. Require the project to include "5 out of 10 of the following items..." or something like that. Provide encouragement but allow choices and flexibility because each project is different. Too many requirements just adds to layers of hurdles already in place. Responsible development is good, but can also become so restrictive that the prices become unaffordable. Costs are always passed on to the consumer.
Q10 - Creating a landscape buffer requirement doesn't do anything if there isn't a design standard.

Results of Stakeholder Engagement

The online survey for this project has been closed. The Survey began on October 25th, and has been running since.

Although the blog for the Subdivision Code Update has been a very successful component of the stakeholder engagement process for this project (as detailed in the Status Report), this online survey has been less successful in generating input, receiving only two responses. A recent post described the characteristics of the online tools used for this project.

Tell a Friend

A new feature has been added to the blog to help readers share information with other community members - TELL A FRIEND.
It is a tool that allows you to forward a blog post without leaving the site. TELL A FRIEND provides a number of options for email and social networks to forward blog posts, just choose the one you need. Click on the TELL A FRIEND icon, which can be found at the end of each post, and share ideas and information with your community members.

Contact Information Change

As of November 2008 the primary contact address for this project has been changed to rob(at)robvoigt.com . Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns you may have.

Also, remember that you can always leave comments on the specific blog posts.

Coffeehouse Discussions Close

I enjoyed the opportunity to speak with community members at the coffeehouse sessions over the past weeks. With each conversation I learned something that will help me with developing the revised Subdivision Code.
As the Project is moving into another phase I will no longer be holding coffeehouse meetings. I thank those people that came out to provide or get information on the Project, and the manager and staff at the Starbucks (Harbor Station) 32650 SR 20 that provided the venue.

Short Plat Rules to Support Infill

Short plats (those subdivisions with nine or less lots) can assist with infill development to meet the requirements of the GMA for example in terms of density; reduced sprawl; and housing options.

However, the existing Code requirements (such as building streets and lot configuration, etcetera) are difficult to meet in these smaller developments, and therefore discourage this kind of infill.

Staff will be amending the Code to remove the obstacles, while still maintaining regulations that provide for fitting infill development patterns.

Fences

The concerns about fences along some of the major corridors in the city were raised early on in the project. The primary issue is how these fences, combined with landscape buffers impact the sense of place along the street when they vary greatly in terms of maintenance and location along the street.

Fencing is not addressed in the Subdivision Code; however, the PRD Code does require that fence design be defined.

Because of their close relationship, this issue will be addressed by the Code amendments focused on the concerns about landscape buffers.

Streetscape Characteristics - "Cute Streets"

The phrase "cute streets" was first brought up during an early Planning Commission meeting, referring to pleasant residential streetscapes. These streetscapes were described as being superior and creating more livable neighborhoods. This shorthand phrase refers to streets in residential neighborhoods that have a number of common favorable characteristics, in terms of there built form and design, for example:

• trees along the street;
• sidewalks;
• buildings that "address" the street with their windows and entrances;
• narrower drive and parking lanes;
• building facades that are not dominated by garages;
• landscaping along the street; and,
• access to parks, trails and/or open space from the street.

The same sentiment has been echoed to me a number of times during this project, by both the general public (at coffeehouse, and Rotary meetings); as well as, meetings with those involved in the business of developing residential neighborhoods (Realtors, and developers).

The Code changes resulting from the 10 areas of direction will combine to help the community achieve more livable "cute streets" with future subdivisions.

Landscape Buffers & Tracts

The Subdivision Code requires specific landscape buffers along some of the major streets in Oak Harbor. The purpose is defined in the Code:

"to minimize the impact of the arterial on the adjacent land uses and is not to allow access to individual parcels".

The aesthetic design of these landscaped areas has a significant impact on one's experience driving or walking through our community. The Code allows for a variety of design options; which has resulted in less than favorable continuity or quality of these corridors. The public, Planning Commission, Staff and City Council have dealt with these issues repeatedly.

As per item 1 on the list of recommended direction, staff will be refining the buffer/corridor design regulations to provide:

• more continuity (while maintaining some flexibility for site differences);
• better quality aesthetics;
• better maintenance regulations; and,
• a healthier urban forest.

Subdivision Entrance Designs

Early on in this Project the members of the Planning Commission expressed interest in developing design parameters for subdivision entrance features. Some of the concern was to ensure that these features are well maintained and fitting with adjacent buffer/landscape areas. These entrance features can act as reference points, or gateways into a new neighborhood/subdivision; and help define a sense of place for the area.

Over the past few years these features have become more prominent, and larger in scale. This may be due to changing aesthetic trends and larger development size. Staff are not aware of any instance of concern for these features in terms of negative impacts.

The location of any such feature must not conflict with sight lines for roadways and is regulated through the application review phase by engineering standards for road safety. Additionally, the maintenance of these features are the responsibility of the respective homeowners' associations. In fact the maintenance of all commonly owned property/tracks in new subdivisions are typically the responsibility of the homeowners' associations; and these requirements can be found on the recorded subdivision plats.

Staff will review the maintenance, buffer, and landscape requirements defined in the code to ensure there are no conflicts. This will fit within the ten areas of direction defined at the conclusion of the first phase analysis for this project.

Survey

Those of you that live within Oak Harbor will be receiving a short survey regarding the policy direction developed to this point of the project. These surveys will be sent through the mail over the next two months as part of your utility bills. Please take the time to respond and return your surveys.

I will also be posting a copy of the survey online and invite anyone viewing the blog to provide their input as well. We welcome input from all.

However, of course the findings from the surveys returned by the residents of Oak Harbor will be weighted differently than those gathered online.

Community Ideas

The next series of posts will focus on the items listed in the two virtual flip charts on this blog.

The charts were designed to track ideas and concepts raised during the project, provide accountability, and a form of action research whereby the stakeholders’ involvement directs the focus of the project more so than in “standard” planning processes.

This is done by using the charts to;
1) document concepts raised by participants;
2) present a reference list to guide project direction; and finally,
3) provide a way of assessing progress by comparing the stakeholders’ ideas with the actions taken during the project.

Municipalist Blog Post

Just as I am launching the blog for the update to the Design Regulations, a public sector focused blogger based in Washington DC has asked me a number of questions about how we are using this medium here in Oak Harbor.

For those of you interested in knowing more about how all this blogging stuff works, take a look at the post here.

Whidbey News Times Article

The May 15 edition of the Whidbey News Times (opinion section) has published an article about our use of blogs for engaging the public.

First Phase Findings

A companion site ( www.cohdelayered.blogspot.com ) detailing the findings of the first phase of subdivision analysis has been set up. This outlines the general characteristics of “existing conditions”, in terms of how our subdivisions look and function. The intent is to provide information on this major component of the project in a cohesive way and facilitate discussion.

The information on the companion site is essentially the same as presented to the Planning Commission on April 22, 2008. Some changes have been made to suit the blog format. Also, unlike a typical blog this second site is meant to be read from top to bottom as a single report. (see video of presentation)

Whidbey News Times Article

The April 9 edition of the Whidbey News Times (front page) has published an article about the use of blogs for various projects at the City http://www.whidbeynewstimes.com/portals-code/list.cgi?paper=84&cat=23&id=1190746&more=0.

Fellow Senior Planner, Cac Kamak was quoted in the article discussing this new use of blogs for City projects: “It’s like a virtual, on-demand City Hall. People can chime in at anytime and have their issues addressed”. This is evident in the fact that to date this blog has received over 150 unique visitors, with over half returning repeatedly to gather more information about this project.

You can now participate in conversations and meetings without being in the same place, or at the same time together, by coming to the blog when it's convenient. As more of you participate in the process the more complex, interconnected, and holistic the "solutions" can become. This way you can have a direct impact on your community.

When visiting also remember to check out the archive section for past posts!