County Picks Growth Plan Affecting Camas Housing

Land-use planning is usually sleepy until it suddenly isn’t. In Clark County, the fight is over where tens of thousands of future residents go — inside existing cities, at higher density, or farther out through urban growth boundary expansions. This week the County Council made the call that will shape the final 2045 plan. On April 28, after a hearing that started April 27, the council voted 3-2 for the Planning Commission’s preferred alternative package, not the “no action” option. (clarkcountytoday.com) ### What did the council actually choose? The vote picked “Alternative 2” as the county’s preferred land-use path for the 2025-2045 comprehensive plan update. In plain English, that means Clark County will carry forward a mix of city- and county-initiated changes into the next round of analysis, instead of freezing the current map exce(clarkcountytoday.com)il 28. (clark.wa.gov) ### Why does Camas matter here? Camas sits right in the middle of the argument because two separate housing questions got bundled together. One is mandatory — the city has to reflect Washington’s HB 1110 middle-housing rules in its plan and zoning work. The other is optional and much more controversial — whether the Camas urban growth area should expand to include G(clark.wa.gov)hanges in Camas, Vancouver, and Washougal. (clark.wa.gov) ### So what is HB 1110 doing? Basically, HB 1110 is the state law forcing many cities to allow more homes in areas that used to be dominated by detached single-family lots. Camas has already been updating its code to allow middle housing, and its 2045 planning page says the city passed an ordinance on December 15, 2025 to allow it in residential zones. So even if co(clark.wa.gov)e. (engagecamas.com) ### Why is Grove Field the flashpoint? Because Grove Field turns the debate from “more housing types” into “more land.” The Planning Commission backed expanding the Camas urban growth area to include the airport, and the council’s preferred-alternative table shows that item inside the package it adopted. That does not mean the expansion is final today. It means the airport-area concept stays alive for the final environmental impact statement and the remaining adoption process. (clark.wa.gov) ### Why are people fighting so hard about it? The split is basically infill versus outward expansion. Supporters of the chosen package argue Clark County needs room for housing and jobs as the population rises. Opponents say pushing urban boundaries outward chews up agricultural land, worsens sprawl, and raises long-run infrastructure costs. The county’s planning materials put the scale of the challenge at 718,154 residents and 269,000 jobs by 2045. (friendsofclarkcounty.org) ### What happens next for Camas? Now comes the technical part — but it matters. Clark County will prepare the final EIS around the selected alternative, then update land-capacity, transportation, and capital-facility analysis before final adoption. Camas is also finishing its own comprehensive plan and says final city adoption is expected in fall 2026. So this county vote narrows the map, but it does not end the local fight. (clark.wa.gov) ### Why was the vote close? Because this is one of those planning decisions where every option angers someone. A 3-2 vote tells you the council was not resolving a technicality — it was choosing a growth philosophy. Keep growth tighter and denser, or give some cities more edge room now and sort out the impacts later. Camas got both parts of that tension at once. (clarkcountytoday.com) ### Bottom line? The county did not simply approve “more housing in Camas.” It picked a growth path that locks in denser housing rules already coming under state law and keeps a bigger Camas expansion idea on the table. That is why this vote matters — it sets the frame for what Clark County will look like in 2045. (clark.wa.gov)