A misunderstanding of the city of Black Diamond’s recently-passed Comprehensive Plan led to a charged meeting earlier this month.

There was nearly an hour of public comments during the Oct. 16 meeting, much from residents — and, surprisingly, Maple Valley’s city administrator and mayor — who were worried that passing the Comprehensive Plan would allow Ten Trails developer Oakpointe to build out the neighborhood under less restrictive development requirements.

However, Black Diamond City Attorney David Linehan said this was not the case, and that it seems a map inside the Comprehensive Plan was misconstrued. Additionally, it also appears flyers and mailers distributed around town also contained incorrect or misleading information, according to Oakpointe.

A Comprehensive Plan, required by the state under the Growth Management Act, is not a binding document. Instead, it’s more like a set of goals that elected officials try to work toward for the next two decades.

Because it’s not set in stone, nor does it have any legal standing, Comprehensive plans are often altered as a city’s needs and wants change over the years.

That said, Comprehensive Plans do give cities the chance to receive grants from the state as it moves towards its stated goals; without them, those grants are unavailable.

Black Diamond’s Comprehensive Plan was due last year, but it was delayed in part due to the departure of the city’s community development director, according to Mayor Carol Benson.

Much of the discussion at the meeting was about wether the city was removing the Master Plan Development overlay from the Ten Trails neighborhood.

The overlay is a set of development requirements, laid out in the Master Plan Development (MPD) agreement, on top of the development requirements of the zoning underneath the overlay.

“We believe by preserving this overlay, it will preserve existing agreements [that] provide predictability to the community about what will be developed, the densities at which they will be developed, and help us properly mitigate the transportation impacts both our communities will face,” Maple Valley City Manager Laura Philpot, just one of many people concerned about this issue, said. “… We believe that if you do remove the Master Plan Development Overlay that there is potential impact that we could lose significant dollars for transportation mitigation… and mitigation projects have a positive impact to Maple Valley residents, as well as Black Diamond residents, as they travel.”

But this was not the city’s plan, at least at this time.

“There’s a little bit of miscommunication that has happened between Black Diamond and Maple Valley, and some of that is perhaps due to the way the overlay was… presented in the [Comprehensive] Plan,” City Attorney Linehan said, after public comment was over and many commenters had left. “… There’s nothing in the [Comprehensive] Plan that indicates that the MPD overlay is going away if this draft [Comprehensive] Plan is adopted.”

The city could lift the overlay in the future. This is recommended by staff in order to update development regulations in the future based on the community’s wants and needs, interim Community Development director and Master Development Review Team head Andy Williamson said, but not at this time.

While the Comprehensive Plan was not recommending to remove the overlay, the council approved the plan with an amendment clarifying that it was not doing so.

In a later interview, Philpot said she appreciated the council adding the amendment.

“Prior to them adding that language, my understanding was that [the Comprehensive Plan] could be open for interpretation,” she said. “… I think it was great that the city attorney clarified that it was in there, but it was even better that the city council added some stronger language to make it crystal clear to anyone who is reading the document.”

MOVING FORWARD

Oakpointe still has a long way to go before the full buildout of more than 6,000 units is complete.

However, as of the start of October, the developer submitted plat applications for the remaining 4,000 units, meaning that the future homes are now vested and will be required to be built under the MPD regulations — even if the contract expires in 2026 as scheduled or if the overlay is lifted, Oakpointe spokesperson Tyler Pichette in an interview.

Pichette stressed this point because there are claims that the developer wants to build homes under less restrictive requirements.

“Oakpointe claims that it will file permits for the remaining 4,000+ lots before the contract expires, but after 2026, they can withdraw permits and re-apply under weaker, more profitable rules,” reads a flyer that was mailed to city residents urging them to attend the Oct. 16 meeting.

Pichette said this is not the case.

“It would be very costly for Oakpointe to withdraw their applications and reapply later. It would add on years of additional (and expensive) staff and consultant time to withdraw the current plat applications they worked hard to submit in early October only to start all over again,” Pichette said. “… It’s unfortunate but there is a lot of misinformation that has been circulating in the community regarding the comprehensive plan update – and misinformation can lead to confusion, as seen by the mailer that was sent out.”

The same mailer also claimed that the Compressive Plan would “approve a quadrupling of Oakpointe’s developments”.

This is also incorrect, Pichette said, because the MPD has always planned for a little over 6,000 units, and no more.

As more homes are built and more people move into the area, Oakpointe and elected officials will continue to discuss recreational facilities like parks and ballfields; the MPD requires the developer to build these amenities when Ten Trail’s population hits certain benchmarks.

Since the MPD was approved 15 years ago, Oakpointe has suggested that the city re-visit where fields and playgrounds should be located, as opposed to following the original plan.

One of the big discussion items is whether or not the city and Oakpointe should jointly make Lake Sawyer Regional Park a destination point by constructing athletic fields and improving the trail system.

“… [T]he city has an outstanding obligation to the county to develop a portion of Lake Sawyer Park for active recreation that it hasn’t yet fulfilled,” Pichette said. “We think it would make sense for the city and Oakpointe to both meet their obligations through developer funding, effectively killing two birds with one stone.”

An argument against further developing the park is that the city does not have the infrastructure or funds to maintain it.