On July 23, the Lacey City Council reviewed the Draft Interlocal Agreement for the Draham Road and Cuoio Park North Island Annexations during a work session.
This agreement sets the stage for a joint public hearing with the Thurston County Board of Commissioners.
Earlier this year, on March 5 and June 4, the city council adopted ordinances approving the Draham Road and Cuoio Park North Annexations. These approvals resulted in the creation of islands of unincorporated property, which are areas surrounded by incorporated regions.
Under RCW 35A.14.460, a code city like Lacey can initiate the annexation of these unincorporated areas through an interlocal agreement with the county as provided in RCW 39.34.
According to the staff report, areas targeted for annexation are within an urban growth area and have boundaries that are at least 60 percent contiguous with city limits.
The draft interlocal agreement addresses three specific islands of unincorporated property.
The first, resulting from the Draham Road Annexation, encompasses approximately 253 acres north of 15th Avenue NE/Draham Road NE and includes the Woodland Creek Estates subdivision, along with several larger lots not connected to city utilities.
The other two islands, created by the Cuoio Park Annexation, total around 19 acres and consist of larger residential lots also lacking city utility connections. These areas collectively house an estimated 400 residents.
Key provisions include extending sewer service to Woodland Creek Estates and stipulating that Thurston County will retain ownership of the project until its loan is paid off. The agreement also outlines the transfer of records, open permits, stormwater fee transitions and unspent SEPA mitigation fees.
Lacey staff have collaborated with Thurston County staff to develop the draft interlocal agreement, ensuring it meets previous agreements specific to the area, according to Planning Manager Ryan Andrews.
2 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
danwdurham
Could you provide maps of these areas proposed for annexation?
Thursday, July 25 Report this
FirstOtter
Here it comes again. Anytime a 'city' proposes an annexation, it's not for the benefit of the people living in that area. It's to expand revenue for the city: increased property taxes, etc.
Just look at wahat Tumwater did to the area on Littlerock road. They 'surveyed' the property owners on Littlerock road all the way to 93rd, and the vast majority of us said we don't want to be annexed, thank you. 90% of us said no. 10% said yes, and so Tumwater usurped all that land homes, etc all the way to 93rd...and now you have warehouses, TWO big truckstops, rampant overbuilding, etc. in what was once a fairly mellow drive with homes and not much else.
It's that old saying, when the local government says to save your money, watch out..they have plans for it.
Thursday, July 25 Report this