The Ridgefield Planning Commission met on Wednesday, Feb. 5, to discuss two land use alternatives that may shape the city’s growth over the next two decades. However, after reviewing the proposals, the seven-member commission was unable to reach a decision to recommend to the Ridgefield City Council, largely due to differing views on annexation, property rights and how to balance structured growth with flexibility.
The discussion was part of the city’s effort to finalize Envision Ridgefield 2045, a 20-year plan to guide population growth, housing development, and job expansion while addressing zoning and infrastructure needs from 2025 to 2045. Future zoning must be based on assumed infrastructure needs, including housing units and job sites, assigned by Clark County under the state’s Growth Management Act.
As Community Development Director Claire Lust explained, the goal is to determine how to best accommodate this growth.
“How much is the area projected to grow in the next 20 years in terms of people, housing, jobs? And given those numbers, where does that growth make sense? Where does it not make sense?” Lust asked.
At the heart of the debate were Alternative 2 and Alternative 3, two differing visions for Ridgefield’s Urban Growth Area (UGA):
• Alternative 2 proposes increasing housing density throughout the UGA while keeping existing land use patterns, just at a higher intensity.
• Alternative 3 promotes a more focused approach, creating mixed-use hubs in key locations — such as Pioneer and Royle, Clark College, downtown, and the waterfront — while limiting UGA expansion.
Alternative 1 proposed a general increase in density across the city and UGA while maintaining existing land use patterns at a higher intensity, but it was not favored by the city council. A key point of division within the planning commission was the reliance on property owner-driven annexation under Alternative 3, with members debating its feasibility and impact on long-term growth planning.
• Alternative 2 includes all property owner-initiated UGA expansion requests, allowing undeveloped land to be annexed in the future.
• Alternative 3 limits expansion to just two areas west of I-5 — the Maul Property in the south and the Northern Urban Reserve in the north. To offset the removal of three other proposed expansion areas east of I-5, it assumes that certain low-density residential properties outside of the UGA will eventually be annexed.
This distinction became a major sticking point. Some commissioners questioned whether the city should assume these areas would request annexation, as they are currently neither within city limits nor part of the UGA. Others believed annexations could happen sooner than expected and should be considered more heavily in planning decisions. A key concern was Ridgefield’s limited capacity to bring additional property into the UGA, adding another layer of complexity to the debate.
Lust acknowledged that this assumption carries uncertainty, as annexation ultimately depends on property owners:
“This alternative basically assumes that at some point over the next 20 years, which is our planning horizon, that property owners in those areas would annex. Again, an assumption is an assumption. Annexation is at the behest of property owners or groups of property owners.”
The commission remained split on whether the city should prioritize predictable zoning expansions (Alternative 2) or a more limited UGA footprint with a greater reliance on annexation (Alternative 3).
With no consensus on the best path forward, the commission opted to delay its decision and reconvene in a future meeting. Members sought more information on the tradeoffs between UGA expansion and annexation outside of the UGA before making a final recommendation to the City Council.
Balancing growth, housing affordability
Envision Ridgefield 2045 will be used to address the current housing affordability gap. While the current UGA has space for the 5,820 housing units projected by 2045, there remains a deficit of 2,652 affordable units for residents earning below 80% of the area median income (AMI). Meanwhile, there is an oversupply of housing for higher-income residents.
Employment growth also presents challenges. The city’s zoning allows for 7,998 new jobs, but this falls short of the 8,175 jobs needed to sustain future economic growth according to Clark County’s designation.
Another key issue was the impact of potential UGA expansions on agricultural land, as rezoning would require de-designating those areas — a process with strict requirements.
“Bringing them into the urban growth area would require an [agricultural] de-designation, which is something with a fairly high bar to achieve,” Lust said.
While property owners requesting UGA expansion have provided analyses on the feasibility of de-designation, Clark County is conducting its own agricultural study, which could influence final decisions.
Under the Growth Management Act, Ridgefield’s City Council must approve a final plan before 2026.
