Plans to expand Oak Harbor’s urban growth by 180 acres, including a portion of the Fakkema Farm, are being challenged by two environmental groups.

Members of the Whidbey Environmental Action Network, or WEAN, and the Swan Lake Watershed Preservation Group filed separate appeals this week of Island County’s mitigated determination that expanding the city’s urban growth area into farmland is not significant to the environment.

Also, GayLynn Beighton, a member of Swan Lake Watershed group, may file a third appeal on her own.

Angie Homola, a founding member of the Oak Harbor-based Swan Lake group, said there is a growing awareness of the need to protect the environment among North Whidbey residents. Foes of the proposed expansion packed a planning commission meeting last fall to protest, but the commission members ultimately voted in favor of the recommendation.

“There are a lot of concerned citizens,” she said. “We are really concerned about protecting the watershed and bringing back salmon to the restored estuary.”

Yet the issue also has island-wide interest.

“One of the principles of the Growth Management Act is to create compact, urban areas, not these sprawling, amorphous blobs, like the city of Oak Harbor is trying to make,” said Steve Erickson of Langley-based WEAN.

Both groups argue that the proposed expansion would have dire impacts on the North Whidbey environment and wildlife, and that a complex and expensive Environmental Impact Statement should be prepared.

The underlying issue is whether the city should expand on its west side. Homola said the groups are appealing the mitigated determination of nonsignificance covering the entire seven properties, totaling 180 acres, but they are mainly focused on the Fakkema Farm because it is within the watershed for Swan Lake. The lake is a large, county-owned wetland that sits behind a long row of beach houses on West Beach Road.

The 105 acres of the Fakkema Farm could be developed at higher densities — up to 352 homes — if it is within the city. The first step in getting the farmland annexed into city is to place it within the urban growth area, or UGA, which is a ring of property around the city limits designated for annexation someday.

The Oak Harbor City Council approved the expansion of the UGA, as part of the comprehensive plan amendment process, and sent it on to the county to render a final decision.

From the point of view of city leaders, the main rationale behind the proposed expansion is to accommodate growth in the city over the next 20 years. Members of the county planning commission also felt that more room for homes would bring more affordable housing to the area.

City planning staff’s land use analysis found that the city’s current UGA could accommodate the city’s projected 2025 population, plus an additional 6 percent. The proposed UGA expansion would increase that capacity to 126 percent, the staff estimated.

WEAN, however, finds fault with this analysis.

Erickson said city planners greatly underestimated the density of future housing within the existing UGA. The staff’s land capacity study used data current to 2004, but Erickson looked at development permits since then.

He found that the proposed expansion of the UGA would be large enough to absorb more than 150 percent of the projected population. He found that the current UGA boundary is sufficient for population growth over the next 20 years.

“The expansion is simply not necessary and runs counter to various policies and laws intended to protect the environment, such as the Growth Management Act,” he wrote in his appeal.

Also, both WEAN and the Swan Lake Watershed Preservation Group propose that the mitigations, or conditions, suggested by the county aren’t adequate to prevent significant impacts, such as the loss of open space, erosion, degradation of water quality, faltering aesthetics, effects to hydrology and impacts to historic structures.

“We can plan carefully, retain our quality of life while still making room for more people,” Homola said.

In the final mitigated determination of nonsignificance, the county has proposed five mitigating conditions, one of which applies mainly to the 105 acres of the Fakkema Farm. The document states that the historic farm building cluster will remain intact within a protected reserve, not less than 10 acres be set aside for open space, a trail easement be granted to the public, and that no more than 352 homes be constructed on the property.

Another mitigation condition states that the city and county will enter into an amended interlocal agreement to address potential environmental impacts from development projects. “Project specific mitigation conditions are to be established prior to, or at the time of annexation,” the document states.

In addition, the document states that the county will continue surface water quality monitoring in the Swantown watershed to evaluate potential impacts from development. The Swantown watershed is the area of the west side of the city that drains into Swan Lake, a valuable wetland for birds and other creatures.

Yet WEAN feels these proposals fall short. First of all, Erickson argues that many of the measures are unenforceable because the county will no longer have jurisdiction over the land after it’s annexed into the city.

Also, Erickson said simply monitoring water quality doesn’t accomplish anything if there’s no mechanism to correct the problem.

Finally, Erickson argues that the county should consider a proposal to expand the UGA to cover the entire Fakkema Farm. Last year, the Fakkemas applied to the city to expand the UGA to cover the other 272 acres of the farm, for a total of 377 acres. They later requested that the consideration be delayed, so that only the 105 acres be considered.

Erickson, however, said that it’s still a “live application” for the larger expansion and should be considered together with the smaller expansion.

The next step in the appeals process is for the groups to go before the county hearings examiner. Erickson said he expects the hearings examiner to side with the county, and for the commissioners to approve the expansion. Afterward, the groups can appeal to the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board, and depending on that decision, possibly to a court.

You can reach News-Times reporter Jessie Stensland at jstensland@whidbeynewstimes.com or call 675-6611.