HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 06/08/2004 AGENDA
ORT x .GELESari CITY COUNCIL MEETING
June 8, 2004 '
Continued from June 1, 2004 Meeting
REGULAR MEETING - 6:00 p.m.
A. CALL TO ORDER - Regular Meeting (6:00 p.m.)
ROLL CALL -
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE -
ANDPUBLICpRoCLAMATIoNsCEREMONIES' PRESENTATIONSI
B. WORK SESSION
C. LATE ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON THIS OR FUTURE AGENDAS (By Council, Staffqr Public) AND
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA (This is the opportunity fo~d members of the public to
speak to the City Council about anything not on the agenda, please keep comments to 5-10 minutes.)
D. FINANCE
1. RFP/Q for Solid Waste (Continued from June Approve Proposal
1, 2004)
E. CONSENt AGENDA
F. CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
G. ORDINANCES NOT REQUIRING PUBLIC
HEARINGS
H. RESOLUTIONS
I. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
J. PUBLIC HEARINGS - QUASI-JUDICIAL
(7:00 P.M. or soon thereafter)
1. Olympic Memorial Center Rezone (RS-7 Conduct Public Hearing
Residential Single Family to CO Commercial & Adopt Ordinance
Office) - Race Street and Caroline Street
(Continued from June 1, 2004)
NOTE: HEARING DEVICES AVAILABLE FOR THOSE NEEDING ASSISTANCE
MAYOR TO DETERMINE TIME OF BREAK
June 8, 2004 (continued from June 1, 2004) Port Angeles City Council Meeting Page - 1
K. PUBLIC HEARINGS - OTHER PLEASE RETAIN K.1. INFORMATION
(7:00 P.M. or soon thereafter) FOR JUNE 14, 2004 MEETING
1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment - CPA 04- 29 Conduct Public Hearing
02:68 Proposed Map and Policy Changes & Continue to June 14, 2004
(Continued from June 1, 2004)
2. Conduct Workshop and on 2004-2010 171 Close or Continue Public Hearing
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
& Capital Facility Plan (CFP) (Continued
from June 1, 2004)
L. INFORMATION
1. City Manager's RePorts: None
M. EXECUTIVE SESSION (As needed and determined by City Attorney)
N. ADJOURNMENT
G:\CNCLPKT~.GENDA'O.004~June 8 '04.wpd
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Public hearings are set by the City Council in order to meet legal requirements pertaining to matters such as, land use permit applications, proposed
amendments to City land use regulations, zoning changes, annexations. In addition, the City Council may set a public hearing in order to receive
public input prior to making decisions which impact the citizens. Certain matters may be controversial, and the City Council may choose to seek
public opinion through the public hearing process.
NOTE: HEARING DEVICES AVAIl,ABLE FOR THOSE NEEDING ASSISTANCE
MAYOR TO DETERMINE TIME OF BREAK
June 8, 2004 (continued from June 1, 2004) Port Angeles City Council Meeting Page - 2
pORTANGELES,: . CITY COUNCIL MEETING
WASHINGTON, U.S.A.
June 8, 2004
(Continued from June 1, 2004)
I. CALL TO ORDER - REGULAR MEETING:
II. ROLL CALL:
Members Present:
Mayor Headrick
Councilmember Braun
Councilmember Erickson
Councilmember Munro
Councilmember Pittis
Councilmember Rogers
Councilmember Williams
StaffPresent:
Manager Quinn
Attomey Bloor
Clerk Upton
B. Collins
M. Connelly
G. Cutler
D. McKeen
T. Riepe
Y. Ziomkowski
III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Led by:~~~~~.~
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Attendance Roster
PLEASE SIGN IN
DATE OF MEETING: June 8, 2004 (Continued from June 1, 2004)
LOCATION: City Council Chambers
Please Note: IF I plan on testifying by signature below, I certify that my testimony is true and
correct under penalty of perjury by the laws of the State of Washington.
NAME: ADDRESS: I would like to
testify on
Agenda Item
City of Port Angeles
'ORT. A?G. ELES Ordinance/Resolution Distribution List
WASHINGTON, U.S.A.
City Council Meeting of June 8, 2004
Ordinance /
ResOlUtion No~
City Manager
City Atty. (1)
Planning
City Clerk (2)
Deputy Clerk (1)
Personnel
Cust. Svcs.
Finance
Dir./Mgr.
Police Dept.
Fire Dept.
Light Dept.
Parks & Rec.
MRSC (1)
PDN (Summary)
Extra Copies
Solid Waste
Processing Facility
Development and
Management Services
Request for Proposals
June 8, 2004
Presentation Agenda
1. Service Component Descriptions
2. Technical and Cost Proposals
3. RFP & Service Agreement Schedules
4. Rate Adjustments
5. City Council Approvals Needed
6. Recommendation
Service Components Overview
I Transfer Station, Transfer Station Operation,
and Special Waste Handling/Disposal
II Waste Transport & Disposal
III Blue Mountain Drop-Box Facility Operations
IV Curbside & Drop-Off Facility Recycling
V Co-Compost Facility Operation
'VI Post-Closure Maintenance
VII MRWF, Operation, Transport & Disposal
Service Component I Description
Transfer Station Design/Build
Transfer Station Equipment
Transfer Station Operation
Special Waste Handling & Disposal
City Staff Scale House Operation
Personnel Transition Plan
Service Component !1 Description
- Long-Haul Transportation
- Disposal @ Landfill Outside of Clallam County
Service Component II! Description
- Blue Mountain Drop Box Operations
- Contractor Scale House Operation
- Waste Transport to Transfer Station
Service Component IV Description
Curbside Residential Recycling
Curbside Residential Yard Debris I,,.. Only Within
Curbside Commercial Cardboard r~ Port Angeles
Curbside Recycling City Facilities...,I
Transfer Station Drop-Off Box Recycling
Blue Mountain Drop-Off Box Recycling
Recycling @ Community Events
Contractor Sale of Recyclable Materials
Service Component V Description
Operation of Co-Composting Facility
Production of Class A Compost
Customer Loading
City Sale of Compost @ Scale House
Service Component VI Description
- Landfill Post-Closure Maintenance
- Groundwater Testing & Reporting
Service Component VII Description
- MRWF Design/Build
- Operation of the MRWF
- MRWTransport & Disposal
City Staff Scale House Operation
Technical and Cost Proposals
- Qualifications & Technical and Cost Proposal
Competitive City Cost Proposal
Request for Proposal Draft Schedule
City Council Approval June 8, 2004
Proposals Due August 27, 2004
Evaluation September 17, 2004
Negotiation October 1,5, 2004
Service Agreement October 19, 2004
Award
Service Agreement Draft Schedule
Design Approval March 1, 2005
Construction Complete April 15, 2006
Transition from Landfill June 6, 2006
Anticipated LandfillDecember 31, 2006
Closure
Rate Adjustments
Pre-Closure Revenue Requirements Study
- Landfill and Collection Divisions
- 2005 & 2006 Proposed Rate Adjustments
Post-Closure Cost of Service Analysis
- 2007 Unbundled Rates - Commercial Hauler &
Self-Haulers (MSW, Special Waste, Yard Debris,
Biosolids, MRW, etc...)
- Rates Known Prior to Service Agreement Award
City Council Approvals Needed
RCW 35.21.156
1. To proceed with RFP
2. To proceed with evaluations
3. To proceed with negotiations
4. Public hearing and findings
5. To award Service Agreement
Other City Council Approvals Needed
A. To approve rate adjustments
Recommendation
City Council authorize staff to proceed with the
request for proposals.
Becky Upton
pORTiNG ELES- City Clerk
WASHINGTON U.S.A.
CiTY GOUNGIL MEMO
DATE: June 1, 2004
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Glenn A. Cutler, Director of Public Works and Utilities
SUBJECT: Solid Waste Processing Facility Development and Management Services RFP
Summary: A request for proposal (RFP) has been prepared to solicit Contractors to design,
construct and operate a solid waste processing facility in accordance with the Long-Range Plan
for Solid Waste Management. The RFP also includes services for waste transport and disposal,
recycling, composting, and landfill post-closure maintenance. The next step in the RFP process
is to solicit contractors to prepare and submit proposals to the City. A presentation on the topic
will be, conducted on June 8, 2004.
Recommendation: Authorize staff to proceed with the RFP.
Background/Analysis: The "Solid Waste Processing Facility Development and Management
Services" RFP was prepared in accordance with the Long-Range Plan for Solid Waste
Management and the Solid Waste Export and Transfer Station System Interlocal Agreement.
The agreement was presented to Clallam County and the City of Sequim. Discussion with the
organizations are ongoing and a current status will be presented at the Council meeting.
Analysis: Staff will provide a presentation of the service components included in the RFP that
are summarized below:
I. Design, construct, and operate a new Transfer Station.
II. Municipal solid waste received at the Transfer Station will be transported and disposed of at a
regional disposal site.
III. Operation, maintenance, and waste transport from the existing Blue Mountain Drop Box
facility to the Transfer Station.
IV. Curbside collection of recyclable materials and yard debris within Port Angeles, operation of
recycling drop-off facilities at the new Transfer Station and Blue Mountain facility, and
collection of recyclable materials at various community events.
V. Operate the City's existing co-compost facility to produce Class A compost materials from
yard debris and biosolids.
VI. Maintenance services in accordance with the City's landfill post-closure plan.
VII. Design, construct, and operate the new moderate-risk waste facility.
Per the Revised Code of Washington 35.21.156(2) the City Council must authorize proceeding
with the RFP. On May 25, 2004 the Utility Advisory Committee provided a favorable
recommendation to proceed. A complete copy of the RFP is available for review in the Public
Works and Utilities office.
1
N:\CCOUNCIL\FINALXSolid Waste RFP.wpd
DORT ANGELES
WASHINGTON, U.S.A.
CITY COUNCIL MEMO
DATE: June 8, 2004
To: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: SUE ROBERDS, ASSISTANT PLANNER
SUBJECT: REZONE OF PROPERTY - OLYMPIC MEDICAL CENTER
NW CORNER OF CAROLINE AND RACE STREETS
Summary: Rcqu<~ £or rezone of approximately 7,000 square feet of property from RS-7
Residential Single Family, to CO Commercial Office. ,
Recommendation: Following close of the public hearing, staff recommends that the City
Council concur with the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve the rezone as proposed
citing the findings and conclusions that are attached to this memorandum which were adopted by
the Planning Commission on May 12, 2004.
Background / Analysis:
An application for rezone of approximately 7,000 square feet of property Was proposed for
rezone from Residential Single Family to Commercial Office by the Olympic Medical Center on
March 11, 2004. The property is owned by Mrs. Virginia Fitzpatrick and is being purchased by the
Olympic Medical Center for an expansion of the Center's medical campus.
State law allows for only one public hearing in the case of site specific rezone requests which
is conducted by the City Council. On June 1, 2004, the City Council opened the public hearing,
reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval along with staff's report, and
listened to testimony provided by Mr. Scott Smasel, a neighbor in the area, and then continued the
public hearing to June 8, 2004.
The previously submitted background information has been recopied for your information
along with an excerpt of the June 1, 2004, City Council Minutes which contains the public hearing
testimony. As the public hearing remains open, Council may continue to take public testimony prior
to deliberation on the application.
Staff will be available for questions.
' ~u{~ Roberds,/~s~stant planner
Attachments: Ordinance and map
6/1/04 CC Minutes
5/12/04 Minutes excerpt
Department report
Comment letters 3
4
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Port Angeles rezoning
Lot 17, Block 32, Norman R. Smith Subdivision from
RS-7 to CO and amending the Official Zoning Map,
' Ordinance 2801, as amended.
wHEREAs, the Planning Commission of the City of Port Angeles held a
public hearing on May 12, 2004, and follc~wing that hearing the Planning Commission adopted
Findings and Conclusions and recommended that the City Council approve and adopt this
application for rezone; and
'WHEREAS, the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (Chapter
43.21C RCW) have been met; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, after conducting a public hearing, considering
the Planning Commission's recommendation, and entering its own findings and conclusions,
finds that said rezone is in the best interest of the City and its citizens and is consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT
ANGELES DO HEREBY ORDAIN as follows:
Section 1. The Official Zoning Map, Ordinance No. 2801, as amended, is
I .
hereby amended to change the zoning of Lot 17, Block 32, Norman R. Smith Subdivision from
RS-7 to CO, as shown in the attached Exhibit "A".
Section 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to attach a copy of this Ordinance
to the Official Zoning Map and to file a certified copy with the Clallam County Auditor and
the Clallam County Assessor.
Section 3. - Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect five days
following the date of its publication by summary.
Section 4. - Severabilitv Ifanyprovision of this Ordinance or its application
to any person or circumstances is held invalid, the remainder of the Ordinance, or application
of the provisions of the Ordinance to other persons or circumstances, is not affected.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Port Angeles at a regular meeting
of said Council held on the day of June, 2004.
Mayor Richard Headrick
ATTEST:
I
Becky J. Upton, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
William E. Bloor, City Attorney
PUBLISHED:
By Summary
G:~Lcgai_Backup\ORDINANCES&KE$OLUTION$~OO4-OS.wpd
-2-
6
7
EXHIBIT "A"
8
DRAFT Excerpt of 6/1/04 Council Minutes
June 3,1004
The following is an excerpt from the draft minutes of the City Council meeting of June 1, 2004,
on the matter of the Olympic Medical Center Rezone (RS-7, Residential Single Family, to CO,
Commercial Office) - Race Street and Caroline Street:
"Mayor Headdck opened the public heating at 7:25 p.m. , '
Scott Smasal, 418 N. Race Street, advised the Council that he resides on the lot just north of the
area to be developed. Understanding the Hospital planned to make this a parking !ot, he was
concerned as to the possible location of the access to the parking lot. Victoria Street runs behind
his house, and he described it as being a fairly narrow alley - 14 feet wide at the most narrow
point. Mr. Smasal was concerned there would be an entrance to the parking lot just off the alley,
and he inquired as to whether a decision had been made in that regard. '
Director Collins indicated there is no specific proposal for the site as this point; however, the '
location of an access would be subject to the City Engineer's determination. A parking lot would
be subject to a Conditional Use Permit, so there would be another opportunity to address the
matter during a public hearing on the CLIP. Director Collins further explained that the first step
would be to determine whether to allow a parking lot, and the second step would involve
determining how the parking lot would be developed. If the property is rezoned, it would not
have been rezoned specifically for a parking lot, as it could accommodate another use as well.
Director Collins continued that it was the City's understanding that the hospital wanted to make a
parking lot which, again, would require a Conditional Use Permit for the CO Zone, with a public
heating before the Planning Commission. Mayor Headrick provided further clarification of the
process for Mr. Smasal, and Councilmember Rogers assured Mr. Smasal that the City Council
record would show that he stated his concerns this evening regarding the issue. Mr. Smasal
provided additional information for Councilmember Braun, indicating the alley, right off his
driveway, is narrow and is used by animals and children. He was concerned there would be a lot
of traffic, with employees hurrying into the parking lot.
At 7:30 p.m., Mayor Headrick continued the public hearing to June 8, 2004."
9
10
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS IN SUPPORT OF REZONE PROPOSAL - REZ 04-01 -
OLYMPIC MEDICAL CENTER, Northwest comer of Race/Caroline Street:
Based on the information provided in the public record including the application, staff report,
comments made received during the public comment period, the Planning Commission's deliberation
at a public hearing, and information presented at the City Council's public heating, the City of Port
Angeles City Council makes the following findings and conclusions in support of Rezone REZ 04-
01:
Findings:
1. The Olympic Medical Center requeste,d rezone of an approximately 7,000 square foot
property located at the northwest comer of the Race Street/Georgiana Street intersection
identified as being Lot 18, Block 32, Norman R. Smith Subdivision to Port Angeles from
RS-7 Residential Single Family to CO Commercial Office on March 1, 2004.
2. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Commercial. A narrow band of Low Density
Residential property is located directly west of the sur~ject site that is developed with a
narrow band of existing marine bluff residential uses consisting of mainly older homes.
Comprehensive Plan policies that have been identified as being most relevant to the proposal
include Land Use Plan Goal A and Policy A.2; Commercial Goals and Policies Goal D, and
' Policy D.2; and Capital Facilities Element Goals A and D.
3. Properties to the east are developed as the Olympic Medical Center and a variety of medical
office uses. Properties south of the site and north of the Caroline/Georgiana alley are
developed with a mix of commercial office uses clustered around the Race Street corridor
extending mainly east but also west in this area to Francis Street. All properties along and
particularly east of Race Street are zoned Commercial Office north of Georgiana Street in
the area with properties west and southwest of the site being zoned RS-7, Residential Single
Family. I
4. The subject site is flat and is vacant with two smaller, older single-family residences north
of the site along the Marine bluff, west of the north end of Race Street in this location.
5. Race Street is designated as an arterial street and serves as the main traffic corridor to the
Olympic Medical Center. Race Street dead ends at the location with the site being located
on the opposite comer of the street directly across from the entrance to the Medical Center's
emergency room, ambulance parking area, and main administration office.
6. The SEPA Responsible Official issued a Determination of Nonsignificance for the proposal
on May 7, 2004, which satisfies the City's responsibility under the State Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA).
7. Public notification was provided by mailing to neighboring property owners on March 30,
2004, posting of the property on April 2, 2004, and publication of the proposal in the
Peninsula Daily News on April 4, 2004. Two letters in opposition to the proposal were
received from Carl Haarstad and Michelle Surette who objected to the continued expansion
of commercial zoning in the area.
3_1_
8. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing in consideration of the rezone.
groposal on May 12, 2004, and forwarded a recommendation of approval to the City Council.
9. The City Council conducted a public heating in consideration of the rezone pr'oposal on June
1, 2004.
Conclusions:
A. The rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and policies,
specifically Land Use Plan Goal A and Policy A.2; Commercial Goals and Policies Goal D,
and Policy D.2; and Capital Facilities Element Policy D.
B. The rezone would allow a low intensive commercial activity to be located on the subject site
that would provide a buffer between existing residential uses and the main Race Street
arterial corridor and access to the Olympic Medical Center.
C. Expansion of the Olympic Medical Center and its services to the community have caused the
need for expansion of the Center's facilities.
D. The rezone is in the public use and interest and is compatible with the surrounding zoning
and land uses.
Adopted by the Port Angeles City Council at its meeting of June 1, 2004.
Richard Headrick, Mayor
Becky J. Upton, City Clerk
T:\FORM SkF&Colymed.wpd
pORTANGELES
WASHINGTON, U.S.A.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Sue Roberds, Assistant Planner
DATE: . May 12, 2004
RE: REZ 04-01
APPLICANT: Olympic Medical Center
OWNER: Olympic Medical Center
LOCATION: Lot 17, Block 32, Norman R. Smith Subdivision to the Townsite.ofPort Angeles
NW Comer of Race and Caroline Streets '
REQUEST: A rezone of approximately 7,000 square feet of property, from RS-7, Residential
Single Family, to CO, Commercial Office.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Department of Community Development recommends approval of the rezone citing the findings
and conclusions listed in Attachment "A" to this staff report.
BACKGROUND:
The area proposed for rezone is located at the northwest comer of Race Street between Caroline Street
and the Marine bluff. The site is fiat and vacant. Properties to the south and west are zoned and
developed with single family residences. Properties to the east are zoned CO Commercial Office and
are mainly developed with office/medical uses. With the exception of lots along the marine bluff in the
area, the vacant lot is the only property along the Race Street corridor north of Front Street that is not
zoned Commercial Office (see attached map).
DEPARTMENT AND PUBLIC COMMENT:
Reviewing City Departments had no objection to the proposed rezone. City utihties are available and
adequate to serve additional commercial uses in the area.
i -3-
Olympic Medical Center - REZ 04-01
May 12, 2004
Page 2
Public notification of the proposal was mailed to surrounding property owners on March 30, 2004, the
site was posted on April 2, 2004, and notice was placed in the Peninsula Daily News on April 4, 2004.
Written comments were received from neighboring property owners who objected to the continued
expansion of commercial zoning in the area. The written comment letters are attached for your review.
ZONING:
.RS-7 Zone - "This is a low density residential zone intended to create andpreserve urban single family
residential neighborhoods consisting of predominantly single family homes on standard Townsite size
lots. Uses which are compatible with and functionally related to a single family residential environment
may also be located in this zone."
CO Zone - "This is a commercial zone intended for those business, office, administrative or professional
uses which do not involve the retail sale of goods but rather provide a service to clients, the provision
of which does not create high traffic volumes, involve extended hours of operation, or contain impacts
that would be detrimental to adjacent residential areas."
The Commercial Office zone was created to allow for business uses that are considered to be
compatible with and offer the least impact to adjacent residential areas such as: financial
institutions, professional offices, child day-care centers, pre-schools, medical/dental clinics,
offices, and laboratories. Such uses can create a needed buffer between arterial streets and
residential uses. In this instance, emergency activities associated with the location of the
Medical center emergency entrance being directly across Race Street couM be significantly
disruptive to a typical residential use on the site and the use of a site as a buffer could improve
the residential atmosphere further west of the area.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The SEPA Responsible Official issued a Determination of Nonsignificance for the proposal on May 7,
2004. This satisfies the City's responsibility under the State Environmental Policy Act (RCW 43.21C).
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site as Commercial. The entire area north of Front Street from
the east City limits to Laurel Street in this area is designated Commercial as can be seen on the attached
map. Only a small area west of Race Street is identified as having the potential of remaining Low
Density Residential (LDR), which is an area located along the marine bluff where mainly older
residences are found west of the subject site.
A principal goal of the Commercial land designation is to create and maintain a healthy and diverse
commercial sector for a balanced and stable local economy. Although the entire Comprehensive Plan
goals, policies, and objectives have been reviewed with regard to the proposal, in the interest of
conciseness, only those policies found to be most relevant to the proposal have been cited herein.
Olympic Medical Center - REZ 04-01
May 12, 2004
Page 3
Land Use Map Goal, Policies and Objective
Goal fi,, Policy 1 - "The Comprehensive Pima Land Use Map Should be used as a conceptual guide for
deten~ning current and long range zoning and other land use decisions. The map's land use designations
are intended to show areas where general land use types are allowed. The area between land use
designations should be considered an imprecise margin in order to provide flexibility in determining the
boundary of such areas. When determining appropriate zoning designations for an area near a margin,
the goals, policies and objectives of the Land Use Element should take precedence."
The subject site is identified on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map in a commercially
(C) designated area that borders a bubble of low density residential (LDR). The LDR
designation in this location identifies an established bluff property residential area with all other
property in the neighborhood identified as commercial.
Goal A, Policy No. 2. - "All land u~e decisions and approvals made by the City Council and/or any of
its appointed Commissions, Boards or Committees should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
and its land use map."
Stqff's recommendation is based on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and land use
elements.
Policy 2. Public uses such as government offices, public service buildings, and other public and quasi-
publ/c facilities and services may be allowed in commercially designated areas.
Commercial Goals and Policies
Goal D: To create and maintain a healthy and diverse commercial sector for a balanced and stable local
economy. I
Policy D.2: Public uses such as govenmaent offices, public service buildings, and other public m~d
quasi-public facilities and services may be allowed in commercially designated areas.
The prot~osal is to rezone property owned by the Olyml2ic Medical Center to a commercial
designation that would allow not only typical Commercial Office uses, but at]vresent, to be used
in conjunction with Medical Center activities.
Capital Facilities Element
Goal A. "To provide and maintain safe and financially feasible urban services and capital facilities at
or above stated levels of service to all City residents and the general public."
Goal D. To participate with the County, State, and Federal governments as well as other public agencies
to provide adequate regional public services.
-15
Olympic Medical Center - REZ 04-01
May 12, 2004
Page 4
The rezone proposal would provide additional commercial j~roperty in an area designated for
such use. In this particular instance, the rezone is being requested i, associatio~ with an
established public facility, the Olympic Medical Center, for expansion of that facility.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS:
The Comprehensive Plan Lm, d Use Map designates the entire area north of Front Street as Commercial
from the City limits to Laurel Street with a small node of low density residential identifying existing
residential bluff sites west of Race Street directly west of the subject site. Although the entire area has
been identified as having the potential to develop to commercial uses since 1995, it was determined that
rezone of the area, particularly west of Race Street and east of Jones Street, would be do~e on a case by
case basis depending on requests from property owners. The current application is a request for such a
change.
Two small, older homes exist north of the alley north of the subject property while the subject site is
vacant with larger residential sites located to the west of the property. Areas west or. the site would be
required to be buffered from arterial street activities if the subject site were to be developed as
commercial because the commercial zoning classification requires additional buffering where buffering
between residential uses is not required. Commercial uses on comer lots are often prefelTed as,buffers
for interior residential uses. Commercial activities permitted in the Commercial Office 'zone tend to be
the type of activities that are "good neighbor" uses that normally occur during the weekday with little
or reduced weekend activities. CO uses are normally well maintained properties because, as part of the
business atmosphere, it is important to present an attractive exterior to clients. Furthe .rmore, activities
that can be permitted conditionally in the Commercial Office zone would likely contain conditions that
would make them even more compatible with adjoining residential uses due to the ability to require
additional buffering, landscaping, hours of operation, and specific use of the site could be conditioned.
_16
Olympic Medical Center - REZ 04-01
May 12, 2004
Page 5
't ATTACHMENT "A'
r~tN~,~tNGo1 4ND ~j~e~c IN ~ITDD~DT OF P~Z~N~ P~OP~/~. '~g 04-01
OLYMPIC MEDIC~ CENTER:
Based on the info~ation provided in the public record including the application, the staff repo~,
conmaents made received duhng the public cogent period, and the Plying Co~ission's
deliberation, the. Ci~ ofPo~ ~geles Plm~g Co~ission re&es these fmdin~ and conclusions:
Findings:
1. The Ol~pic Medical Center requested rezone of an approximately 7,000 square foot prope~y
located at ~e no~hwest comer of the Race StreeffGeorgiana Street intersection identified as
being Lot 18, Block 32, No~ R. Smith Subdivision to Po~ ~geles kom RS-7 Residemial
Single Fmily to CO Co~ercial Office on March 1, 2004.
2. The Comprehensive Pi~ desi~ates the site as Co~ercial. A n~ow b~d 6fLow Densi~
Residential prope~ is located dkectly west of~e subject site that is developed with a n~ow
b~d of exist~g mmne bluffresidenti~ uses consist~g ofma~y older homes. Comprehensive
Pi~ policies that have been identified as berg most relev~t to the proposal include L~d Use
PI~ Goal A and Pohcy A.2; Co~ercial Goals and Pohcies Goal D, and PolicyD.2; ~d,Capital
Facihties Element Goals A md D.
3. Prope~ies to the east ~e developed as the Ol~pic Medical Center ~d a vme~ of medical
office uses. Prope~ies sou~ of the ske ~d no~h of the C~ol~e/Geor~a alley ~e developed
with a ~x ofco~ercial office uses clustered ~o~d the Race Street condor extend~g ma~y
east but also west ~ ~s ~ea to Francis Street. All prope~ies along ~d p~icul~ly east of Race
Street ~e zoned Co~ercial Office no~ of Georgi~a S~eet in the ~ea Mth prope~ies west
and southwest of the site being zoned RS-7, Residential Single Family.
4. The subject site is tim ~d is vac~t with ~o smaller, older single-f~ly residences no~h of ~e
site along the Mmne bluff, west of the no~h end of Race S~eet in t~s location..
5. Race Street is desi~ated as ~ a~eriM street ~d se~es as the main traffic co~idor to the
Ol~npic Medical Center. Race S~eet dead ends at the location wi~ fl~e site being located on the
opposite comer of the street directly across kom the entrance to the Medical Center's emergency
mom, ambulance p~g ~ea, and main admi~s~ation office.
6. The SEPA Responsible Official issued a Dete~ination of Nonsi~ficance for the proposal on
May 7, 2004, wl6ch satisfies the Ci~'s responsibihty under ~e State Enviromental Policy Act
(SEPA).
Conclusions:
A. The rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive PI~ L~d Use Map and policies, specifically
Land Use PI~ Goal A ~d Policy A.2; Co~ercial Goals ~d Policies Goal D, ~d Policy D.2;
~d CapitM Facilkies Element Policy D. _]j
Olympic Medical Center - REZ 04-01
May 12, 2004
Page 6
B. The rezone would allow a low intensive commercial activity to be located on the subject site that
would provide a buffei bem~een existing residential uses and the main Race Street arterial
corridor and access to the Olympic Medical Center.
C. Expansion of the Olympi,c Medical Center and its services to the community have caused the
need for expansion of the Center's facilities.
D. The rezone is in the public use and interest and is compatible with the surrounding zoning and
land uses. '
This action constitutes a recommendation to the City Council, which has final attthority.
Attachments: Attachment "A" - findings and conclusions
Attachment "B" - application
Attachment "C" - Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code citations
rezreed9.603
Surrounding Zoning
Olympic Medical Center
REZ 04-01
Site
ATTACHMENT "A"
· Fee: $450 & Sepa ($150)
CITY OF PORT GELES
Rezone Application
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
PLEASE READ ALL INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COMPLETING THIS FORM Dept. of Community Development
1.(A) APPLICANT 0}~CC '~c~to;(. C~..~'~ DaytimePhone'3~0,
Address G~q ~x~r~'~o¢ $~ Phone 3/;~.
(B) PROPERTY OWNER (if other than applicant)
Property Owner's Address (if,other than applicant)
Daytime Phone
(C) APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE if other than applicant or property owner ~.~.
Phone ~bO. q/7.77/.~'
2. (A) Legal Description of Subject Property
(B) General Location of Subject Prope~
3. Size of Subject Prope~ ~ ~0~0 sq.~. blocks acres.
4. Zoning of Subject erope~ ~'~ ~ Proposed Zoning Desi~atiOn
5. Ch~actefistics of Subject Prope~y (how is it developed)
6. Characteristics of Surrounding Area (what uses are around the property)
7. Comprehensive Plan Designation of Property ~o
8. Comprehensive Plan Designation of Surrounding Properties
9. Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies
10. JUSTIFICATION FOR ZONiNG CHANGE
(A) Relationship to Camprehensive Plan
(B) Suitabiliw of PropeW for Proposed Zodng
(C) Ch~ge in Circumstances Since Original Zoning
(D) ~appropfiateness ofCu~ent Zo~ng
11. I CERTIFY that all of the above statements are tree to the best of my knowledge and acknowledge that
wilful misrepresentation of information will immediately terminate this application. -
SIaNATURE
Date
May 11, 2004
I Virginia Fitzpatrick am aware and do not object to the requested rezone of the Lot #17
of Block 32 that I am in the process of selling to OMC.
I~AY t ~ 200~
CiTY OF PORT ANGELES
Dept. of Community Development
_24
316 North Race Street ~ ~,~vt. cT c0mr ' velopment
Port Angeles, WA 98362
(Tel: 360-452-0931)
To the City of Port Angeles:
As residents of 316 North Race Street, we would like to register our opposition to the
proposed rezone of an approximately 7000 square foot lot at the northwest comer of
'Caroline and Race Streets. It is our understafiding that the immediate purpose of the
proposed rezone is to permit the construction cfa parking lot for the Olympic Medical
Center. We are opposed to this rezone as we feel it encourages the haphazard,
shortsighted, and unnecessary expansion of the Medical Center at the expense o£the
surrounding neighborhoods. '
Issues that we would like to have addressed before this decision is made include:
1 .) How can the city approve a rezone for parking in the absence of any a Master Site
.Plan for the campus of the Medical Center. There should be a more farsighted
development plan in place for such a large institution before the city permits the
paving of the neighborhood lot by lot.
2.) An assessment of the longer term parking needs of the Medical Center. Clearly,
this assessment needs to be made in light of potential area population growth and
expansion of services offered by the Medical Center. But additionally, it is not
preposterous to request that this assessment include a consideration of the
depletion of world oil supplies and the likely change in the economics of
commuting. I
3.) What policy and code revisions could the city make that would help the Medical
Center implement more environmentally friendly and sustainable solutions to their
current parking problems. Specifically, how can the city encourage the Medical
Center to make a good faith exploration into the increased use of carpooling and
public transit.
Sincerely,
Carl Haarstad and Michelle Surette
-25
-26.
Carl _aarstad and Ms. Michelle Surette - 200~t
316 North Race Street l
Port Angeles, WA 98362 CITY OF PORT ANGELES
Dept. of Community Development
(Tek 360-452-093 ])
Dear Council Members of Port Angeles:
Thank you for the opportunity to address you. These are the issues we would like to
speak about at tonight's meet/ng.
As homeowners and the proprietors of the Thor Town International Hostel, a Be.d and
Breakfast located at 316 North Race street, we are disheartened by the design and
location of the recent and proposed expansion plans of Olympic Memorial Hospital.
During the summer of 2003, the hospital built a 60 space parking lot on the property SW
of the intersection of Caroline and Chambers streets. We believe that this tot was b'ail; in
violation of two and perhaps thi-ee items of the city code.
1 .) The parking lot is devoid of any vegetation, whereas the code Section i7.20.230
Design and Landscaping, item G. requires "One tree shall be provided for each ten
par'king spaces, exclus.ive of any perimeter landscaping. Trees shall have a minimum,
caliper of two .inches, and a height of at least twenty feet at maturity." AttaChed is a
copy of an email correspondence with Mr. Scott Johns of the planning department
concerning this topic. In it he asserts that the Community Development Department
has the authority to permit the substitution of trees planted on public property in the
right-of-way for the trees required on the owner's property as specified in th~ city
code. We question this.
2.) The lights illuminate the property of the adjacent residence at 1022 Caroline Ln
violation of City Code 17.20.230 item B. "All lighting on the site shall be so
directed as to reflect away from adjoining properties and public rights-of-way."
As shown in the attached photos, taken at two am, the adjacent property is lit
brightly enough to permit reading a book in the middle of the night. When we
spoke with the current resident to get permission to take these photos, her
comment about the lighting was "Tell me about it. It drives me nuts." ..
3.) Although the architect wrote in the SEPA application for the project that the
"Storm water system to be designed to City of Port Angeles requirements", the
design plans contain no mention of the storm drains which are located in the
center of the parking lot. Furthermore, the planning and public works departments
have been unable to provide any documentation on the design or inspection of the
storm drains, leading us to question whether or not appropriate stormwater
protection is being provided.
Because of these perceived violations of the city code, we request that the council
exercise its 0versiglit of the planning and public works departments and request a report
on how these decisions to accommodate the hospital at the eXpense of the neighborhood
came to pass. This is mn especially pressing concern for us since the hospital has recently
purchased the property and residence adjacent to our home with the intentions of building
a sknilar parking lot. We would like to prevent that style of development.
We would also like to raise the broader issue of the factors pushing' the hospital in its
current development direction. We've spoken briefly with staffin hospital
administration, to better understand the current par ~k_ing problem, and intend to further
'address the issue at the meeting of their comrr)ssioners tomorrow evening (4/7/2004).
Apparently, there are at least two factors pushing the hospital to choose to raze what in
many communities would be a Heritage House in favor of a parking lot for approximately
20 vehicles at a cost approaching $10,000 per stall. First, there are residents in the
neighborhood who are unhappy wkh the employee's cars parked on the street during
~,orking hours. Secondly, the city zoning code ks requ/ring additional off stree/ par ~k_ing
prior to issuing any additional building permits. We feel these statutes are no longer
appropriate in light of the growing opinion among scientists, including petroleum
geologists, that production of oil will peak during this decade and th.is time a shortage of
supply and soaring prices are truly here to stay. In light of the possibility of an enduring
fuel shortage, as well as all of the detrimental effects of sprawl encouraged by car
centered policies, we request that the city initiate discussions with the hospital and
Clallam Transit on how the transportation needs of the hospital might be met without the
further destruction of our neighborhood. At present, we still live in a beautiful
neighborhood with walking access to the waterfi'ont and do,~mtown. As a large employer
and a public service institution, we hope that the hospital may have the size and spirit, as
well as the organizational ability to make a switch away from individual automobile use
and toward transportation that will be sustainable and enhance the livability of our city.
As someone wrote on the website for the City of Port Angeles, "Conservation matters,
and it matters now!" This is an opporturfity for the city to make that more than a slogan.
Sincerely,
Carl Haarstad mxd Michelle Surette
-28
Planning Commission Minutes
May 12, 2004
Page 21
PUBLIC MEETING:
REZONE PROPOSAL - REZ 04-01 - OLYMPIC MEDICAL CENTER -
Northwest comer of the intersection of Race and Caroline Streets: Rezone fi.om RS-
7, Residential Single Family to CO, Commercial Office.
Commissioner Nutter noted that a relative works at the Olympic Medical Center but she
thought she could act fairly on the application. No one in the audience objected and so she remained
at the dais.
Assistant Planner Sue Roberds reviewed the Department's report. Following brief review
of issues relating to the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map and the need for rezone or
conditional use to allow certain uses in the CO zone, Commissioner Norton moved to recommend
approval of the rezone as proposed citing the following findings and conclusions:
Findings:
1. The Olympic Medical Center requested rezone of an approximately 7,000 square foot
property located at the northwest comer of the Race Street/Georgiana Street intersection
identified as being Lot 18, Block 32, Norman R. Smith Subdivision to Port Angeles from
RS-7 Residential Single Family to CO Commercial Office on March 1, 2004.
2. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Commercial. A narrow band of Low Density
Residential property is located directly west of the subject site that is developed with a
narrow band of existing marine bluff residential uses consisting of mainly older homes.
Comprehensive Plan policies that have been identified as being most relevant to the proposal
include Land Use Plan Goal A and Policy A.2; Commercial Goals and Policies Goal D, and
Policy D.2; and Capital Facilities Element Goals A and D.
3. Properties to the east are developed as the Olympic Medical Center and a variety of medical
office uses. Properties south of the site and north of the Caroline/Georgiana alley are
developed with a mix of commercial office uses clustered around the Race Street corridor
extending mainly east but also west in this area to Francis Street. All properties along and
particularly east of Race Street are zoned Commercial Office north of Georgiana Street in
the area with properties west and southwest of the site being zoned RS-7, Residential Single
Family.
4. The subject site is flat and is vacant with two smaller, older single-family residences north
of the site along the Marine bluff, west of the north end of Race Street in this location..
5. Race Street is designated as an arterial street and serves as the main traffic corridor to the
Olympic Medical Center. Race Street dead ends at the location with the site being located
on the opposite comer of the street directly across from the entrance to the Medical Center's
emergency room, ambulance parking area, and main administration office.
Planning Commission Minutes
May 12, 2004
Page 22
6. The SEPA Responsible Official issued a Determination of Nonsignificance for the proposal
on May 7, 2004, which satisfies the City's responsibility under the State Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA).
Conclusions:
A. The rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and policies,
specifically
Land Use Plan Goal A and Policy A.2; Commercial Goals and Policies Goal D, and Policy
D.2; and Capital Facilities Element Policy D.
B. The rezone would allow a low intensive commercial activity to be located on the subject site
that would provide a buffer between existing residential uses and the main Race Street
arterial corridor and access to the Olympic Medical Center.
C. Expansion of the Olympic Medical Center and its services to the community have caused the
need for expansion of the Center's facilities.
D. The rezone is in the public use and interest and is compatible with the surrounding zoning
and land uses.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Honnold and passed unanimously.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENTS (and Green Crow):
It was decided that this item should be continued to a special meeting to be held on May 19,
2004, 6 p.m. along with the preliminary subdivision for Green Crow discussed earlier in the agenda.
Commissioner Honnold moved to continue discussion on the two issues to a special meeting
to be held on May 19, 2004, 6 p.m. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Norton and
passed 6 - 1 with Commissioner Nutter abstaining. (She did not state her reason for abstaining other
than she stated earlier that she would not be able to attend a meeting on May 19, 2004, due to a
previous commitment.)
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
None
STAFF REPORTS
None
REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS
None
pORTANGELES
WASHINGTON, U.S.A.
CITY COUNCIL MEMO
DATE: June l, 2004
To: CITY COUNCIL
1
FROM: Brad Collins, Community Development Director~_,~
SU}UECT: Comprehensive Plan Amendment 04-02 - City of Port Angeles ,
Summary: After several months of intensive public outreach by the Citizen Advisory Committee,
sixty-eight proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments were drafted that included both Land Use
Map and policy changes. Attachments A (new policy language/analysis) and B (new maps/figures)
provide not only these 68 amendments but also additional administrative policy changes and new
analysis updating the 1994 Comprehensive Plan. Following sixty days of public review and a public
hearing on May 12, 2004, before the Planning Commission, all of the proposed amendments are
subject to this public heating on June 1, 2004, before the City Council. Because of the large public
involvement in the Comprehensive Planning process to date, it is expected that quite a number of
citizens and groups will want to testify at the Council's public heating. To accommodate the large
public interest, the City staff report on CPA 04-02 will be presented as scheduled at the June 14,
2004, City Council meeting.
Recommendation: The Department of Community Development recommends that the City
Council open the public hearing on CPA 04-02 and take testimony for one hour on a first come, sign
up basis and continue the public hearing to another meeting of the City Council on June 8, 2004,
before the matter goes as scheduled to the Council's June 14, 2004, meeting for action.
Background / Analysis:
The background information contains copies of public comment letters (Attachment C) which
have been received to date and a description of the public participation process in the Citizen
Advisory Committee report (Attachment D). A more detailed analysis of the issues that have been
raised in the public participation process will be provided in the City staff`report for the June 14,
2004, City Council meeting.
Attachments: 2004 Draft Comprehensive Plan (CPA 04-02)
Excerpts of May 12 and 19, 2004, Planning Commission Minutes
Public Comment Letters
Citizen Advisory Committee Report
THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
FOR
THE CITY ~ '
OF
PORT ANGELES
AMENDED
JUNE, 2004
31
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Update to include the participants of the 2004 update process
The following citizens, past and present elected officials and staff are acknowledged for their
various contributions to the development of this comprehensive plan, many of which devoted
literally hundreds of volunteer hours over the past four years. EveryOne's efforts have made this
planning effort a success and are greatly appreciated.
City Council Members
Gary Braun Jerry Cornell Larry Doyle Kelly Gabriel
Jim Hallett Jim Hulett Mike Lemon Cathlene McKeown
Larry Nicholson Prosper Ostrowski Joan Sargent Larry Schueler
Dick Wight
Planning Commission Members
Carl Alexander, Jr. William Anabel Orville Campbell Roger Catts
Ray Gruver Jim Hulett Larry Leonard Linda Nutter
Robert Philpott Cindy Souders Bob Winters
Growth Management Advisory Committee Members
Carl Alexander, Jr. William Anabel Roger Catts Margaret Crawford
Pat Downie Gay Knutson Bill Lindberg John Pope
Ken Schermer Cindy Souders
Capital Facilities Plan Committee Members
Carl Alexander, Jr. Gary B0raun Lorraine Ross Jewel VanOss
Staff
Brad Collins, Planning Director Kay Godbey, Finance Director
Jeff Pomeranz, City Manager David Sawyer, Senior Planner
Jack Pittis, Public Works Director Nancy Ryan, EIS Consultant
Bob Titus, City Light Department Director Sue Roberds, Planning Office Specialist
Tim Smith, Contracts/ProjeCts Administrator
2004 updates
The following citizens, past and present elected officials and staff are acknowledged for their
various contributions to the 2004 updating of this comprehensive plan, many of which devoted
volunteer hours to provide assistance to staff and develop a citizen participation process that
would reflect the wishes of the community in the Comprehensive Plan. Everyone's efforts have
made this planning effort a success and are greatly appreciated.
Cit~ Council Members
Richard Headrick, Mayor Larry Williams
Gary_ BIaun, Deputy Mayor Karen Rogers
Jack Pittis Grant Munro
Lauren Erickson
Planning Commission Members
Robert Philpott Linda Nutter
Charles Schramm Leonard Rasmussen
Fred Hewins Dylan Honnold
Fred Norton '
Citigen A dviso~ Corn tnittee Members
Cindy Souders Ray Gruver Nason Beckett
Orville Campbell Bill Sallee Jack Pittis, Ci_ty Council
Betsy Reed-Schultz Jim Haguewood Fred Hewins, Planning
Commission
Staff
Brad Collins, Community Development Director Tim Smith, Economic Development Director
Mike Quinn, City Manager Scott Johns, Associate Planner
Glenn Cutler, Public Works Director Sue Roberds, Assistant Planner ,
Yvonne Ziomkowski, Finance Director
ADOPTING ORDINANCE
AMENDMENTS
DATE OF AMENDMENT
June 20, 1995 #2873
June 4 1996 #2917
June I7 1997 #2960
June 2 1998 #2992 (Map change only)
June 1 ' 1999 #3021 (Map change only)
June 19 2000 , #3056 (Map change only)
June 18 2001 #3082
, June 17 2002 #3118
June 25 2003 #3142
TABLE OF CONTENTS
City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan 36 Table of Contents
- Page v
LIST OF FIGURES
(update List of Figures as needed)
City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan 3 7 List of Figures
Page vi
LIST OF TABLES
(updated List of' Tables as needed)
City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan 38 List of Figures
-_ Page vii
LIST OF APPENDICES
City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan List of Appendices
39 -- Page viii
INTRODUCTION
Compliance with the State Growth Management Act
In 1990 the Washington State Legislature enacted the State Growth Management Act (GMA),
which requires all cities and 'counties subject to the Act to develop and adopt comprehensive
plans and implementing ordinances that will regulate and guide future growth and development.
In accordance with the Act, each county must also establish independent urban growth areas
capable of containing future growth projected for cities, and other urban areas, for the next 20
years. To ensure compatibility between various comprehensive plans, the cities, county, and
other affected agencies cooperatively developed a set of county-wide planning policies to guide
this process.
To ensure orderly developmeni, the City of Port Angeles agreed to work with the County in the
development of comprehensive plan goals and policies for the Port Angeles Urban Growth Area
(UGA).
The Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan has been developed to meet the requirements of the
Grow:th Management Act and is consistent with the Clallarn County-Wide Planning Policy.
In 2004 the City undertook a public participation program to seek input into updates to the
Comprehensive Plan. Citizen comments were received during public meetings, through written
comments, and over the Interact.' Various opportunities for community involvement were
provided and comments were received represented several hundred people.
The following sections of this chapter will hopefully help users of this document better
understand what a Comprehensive Plan is and how it relates to other rules and regulations of the
City. I
Purpose of the Comprehensive Plan
A City's Comprehensive Plan serves as the core of the land use controls which all other city
plans, ordinances, and regulations must be in compliance with and support (See Figure 1).
Prior to the passage of the State Growth Management Act, such compliance was considered
desirable but actual consistency was not required. GMA now makes such compliance a
requirement.
If subordinate planning or regulations, such as the City's Zoning Ordinance or Capital Facility
Plan, are not consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, then those
documents may be determined to be illegal and rendered invalid.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
INSERT GRAPHIC HERE
The Co~nprehensive Plan is the basis upon which local governmental decisions are, to be made.
it sets forth the City's goals and policies and visualizes directions the City will take over the next
two decades.
It is, therefore, important that the Comprehensive Plan truly reflect the goals and desires &the
community. In order for that to take place, it is vital that citizens take an active role in
determining the quality, context, and vision incorporated within this Comprehens. ive Plan.
A community is a diverse and heterogeneous grouping of people. Individually, each of us has a
set of treasured values. Together, we give the community a set of shared values.
In a community, individual values often clash and indeed must confront each other if the shared
values of the community are to develop. Good planning uncovers the values we share as a
community and uses the shared values to guide development of the Comprehensive Plan.
No plan can be expected to last for all time. Times change, conditions change, and what w.e
value in our community changes. Even though this Comprehensive Plan covers a 20-year
period, it must be reviewed at least every te~ seven years and can be amended every year. This ,
allows the City to adjust the Comprehensive Plan as conditions, needs, and desires of the
community change.
Through the on-going development of this Comprehensive Plan, the City of the Pgrt Angeles
reaffirms that it is the rightful goal of the people of our community to take an active role, sharing
the work and responsibility involved in determining the character, quality, and destiny of this
community.
Development of the Comprehensive Plan and Public Participation
'~"7 ............ urve Plapm ng ........... su.wey. ..... over a un re
..... · : ...... .-1-.., ..el ........ .-1 ..1.~.1 C~, .......... *^ each; 1' ,,1 .... I.,~,-I ¢^ ....... 1
TI,.-; ..... ;+ .... ,-1 +1~ ...... 1+ ......... ;~+.,,.1 .1~ o 4'I~1 .... ~ 2~ ~/1'~1` 100,1
r ovi c-,-,'IP,~
tho
Th= t-Nh,
242
Thc Comprehensive PI~ was initially updated ~om its 19% wrsion under thc Gro~h
~anagcmcnt Act in June of ~ ~4. The Cit~ has been involved in a t~ee ye~ pro~ to update
the Comprehensive P]~. ~ 2002 the City focused its Comprehensive P]~ ch~ges on the
downtown ~d water~ont ~eas. ~ 2003, the City focused its mendments on the east side and
east UGA. The 2004 updates reflected a CiW wide approach wi~ an ambitious public
pa~icipation pro,am.
The City of Po~ ~geles unde~ook the task of making major updates to its Comprehensive PI~
over a t~ee year period begi~ing in 2002. ~endment to the Comprehensive Plan made that
year focused on the Do--town and shoreline areas of the City. ~ 2003, the pdm~ focus was
on the eastern potion of the City and the use of low impact development tec~iques to address
sto~water issues and development costs. The third ~ear, 2004, inco¢orated Cit~ide changes
that were developed t~ough an intense public pa~icipation pro,am as required by the State. To
do this, the City appointed a Citizen Adviso~ Committee comprised of nine members who
helped desi~ the Proem specifically to reach a large number of citizens ~d solicit responses
that could be used in crafting ~y proposed amendments. The adviso~ commi~ee was made up
of citizens involved with neighborhood issues, local business and economic development, past
Planning Commission and City Council members, and a sitting member of both the City Council
and Planning Commission. This group was given the task of designing a program to involve
citizens in contributing their ideas to the planning process and to assist staff in crafting proposals
for changes to the Comprehensive Plan.
The program that was developed consisted of a week-long open house, followed by three
weeks of neighborhood meetings. The open house and meetings were advertised by several
means, including placing a large banner across Hyw 101~ the main street through the City. Press
releases were issued weekly to the newspaper and local radio station. The Peninsula Daily News
published seven articles on the'planning process over the five week period and carded two City
sponsored advertisements. Additionally, planning meetings were announced in the Things To Do
column on three occasions. The Department of Community Development participated in the
two-day Home Showheld at the Port Angeles High School gymnasium. The meeting times,
dates, and locations were scheduled so that a broad section of the population could participate.
Times were varied from early afternoon (1:00 pm to 3:00 pm), later afternoon (4:00 pm to 6:00
pm) and later evening (7:00 pm to 9:00 pm). Meetings were held on various days of the week
and seven different locations were used to hold meetings. A web page was developed and linked
to the City's Homepage' listing the meeting dates, times and focus. The web page was updated
throughout the process and the comment questions were made available on-line to provide an
additional and easy method of response to the written comments form made available at all the
meetihgs and various public locations such as City Hall.
Members of the Citizen Advisory Committee volunteered their time to contact and attend
meetings of 21 organizations that were identified as potential stakeholders. Those organizations
were informed of the planning effort being taken by the City and were invited to participate in
the process by suggesting changes that might be made to the Comprehensive Plan. A three-hour
forum specifically for these civic and business organizations to comment on or make proposals
was held at the end to the three-week public meeting period.
The Comprehensive Plan update process has had contact with 300 - 400 individuals
through open houses, public meetings, organization/stakeholder presentation, comment forms
returned, and use of the Ihternet. Eighty-five people attended at least one public meeting as
indicated by sign-in sheets. A total of 58 comment sheets were submitted. In addition, five
different organizations made formal presentations to the Citizen Advisory Committee. As a
result, 68 specific amendments were drafted and submitted to the Planning Commission for
review.
OrganiZation and Requirements of the comPrehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan is organized as an introduction, a community profile, a definition
section a series of elements, and various appendixes including the Capital Facilities Plan,
Housing Needs Assessment, and Environmental Impact Statement. Each element addresses a
particular topic and contains a general comment section and one or more goals with various
related policies and objectives. Some of the elements have an associated map or plan.
The Growth Management Act requires that a comprehensive plan consist of a map or maps and '
descriptive text covering objectives, principles, and standards used to develop the comprehensive
plan. The plan shall be an internally consistent document, and all elements shall be consistent
with the future land use map.
Each comprehensive plan shall include a plan, scheme, or design for each of the following:
1. Land Use Element,
2. Housing Element,
3. Capital Facilities Plan Element,.
4. Utilities Element, and
5. Transportation Element.
Additionally each plan shall co, ntain a process for identifying and siting essential public facilities.
This plan contains each of the required elements as well as three additional optional elements, a
conservation element, an economic development element, and a growth management element.
Each of the elements have been developed to be consistent with the Growth Management Act
and to reflect the needs and desires of the City of Port Angeles and its citizens. 'Following are
the Minimum requirements for the various elements as listed in the State of Washington
Administrative Code (WAC). Included with the requirements for each mandated element is a
table which shows how this comprehensive plan meets these requirements.
1. Requirements for the Land Use Element
This element shall contain at least the following features:
A. Designatit~n of the proposed general distribution and general location and extent
of the uses of land, where appropriate, for agriculture, timber production, housing,
commerce, industry, recreation, open spaces, public utilities, public facilities, and
other land uses (WAC 365-195-305 1, a).
B. Population densities, building intensities, and estimates of future population
growth (WAC 365-195-305 1, b).
C. Provisions for protection of the quality and quantity of ground water used for
public water sUpplies (WAC 365-195-305 1, c).
D. Where applicable, a review of drainage, flooding, and storm-water mn-off in the area
covered by the plan and nearby jurisdictions, and guidance for corrective actions to
mitigate or cleanse those discharges that pollute waters of the state, including Puget
Sound or waters entering Puget Sound (WAC 365-195-305 1, d).
Table 1
GMA Requirements for the Land Use Element
How the above listed land ,
use requirements are
Legislative addressed in the Page
Requirement ComPrehensive Plan Number
lA Land Use Text 45-48
lA Land Usc Map 46
1B Community Profile Text 19
lB Appendix A II-68-74
lB Land Use Text 45-48
lB Land Use Map 46 , ,
Conservation Goals, Policies
1 C and Objectives 68-71
Conservation Goals, Policies
1D and Objectives 68-71
1D Appendix A 11-130-132
1D Appendix E 78
2. Requirements for the Housing Element
This element shall contain at least the following features:
A. An inventory and analysis of existing and projected housing needs (WAC 365-
195-310 1, a).
B. A statement of the goals, policies, and objectives for the preservation,
improvement, and development of housing (WAC 365-195-310 1, b).
C. Identification of sufficient land for housing, including, but not limited to,
government-assisted housing, housing for low-income families, manufactured
housing, multifamily housing, and group homes and foster care facilities (WAC
365-195-310 1, c).
Adequate provisions for existing and projected housing needs of all. economic
segments of the community (WAC 365-195-310 1, d).
Table 2
GMA Requirements for the Housing Element
How the above listed housing , '
Legislative requirements are addressed Page
Requirement in the COmPrehensive Plan Number
2A Community Profile Text 24
2A Appendix A 11-68-74
2A Appendix C 41-51
Housing Goals, Policies and
2B Objectives 65-67
2C Land Use Text 45-48
2C Land Use Map 46 : ,
2C ' Appendix A 11-68-74
Housing Goals, Policies and
2D Objectives 65-67
2D Land Use Map 46
3. Requirements for the Capital Facilities Element
This element shall contain at least the following features:
A. An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities showing the
locations and capacities of the capital facilities (WAC 365-195-315 1, a).
B. A forecast of the future needs for such capital facilities (WAC 365-195-315 1, b).
C. The proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities (WAC
365-195-315 1, c).
D. At least a six-year plan that will finance such capital facilities within projected
funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such
.purposes (WAC 365-195-315 1, d).
E. A requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of
meeting existing needs and to ensure that the land use element, capital facilities
plan element, and financing plan within the capital facilities plan element are
coordinated and consistent (WAC 365-195-315 1, e).
Table 3
GMA Requirements for the Capital Facilities'Element
How the abbve listed Capital
facilities requirements are
LegiSlative addressed in the Page
Requirement Comprehensive Plan Number
3A Appendix E 35-39
3A Appendix E 63-96
3B Appendix A II- 101-140
3 C Appendix A II- 101 - 140
3D Appendix E 99-10 !
Capital Facilities Goals and
3E Policies 76
4. Requirements for the Utilities Element
This element shall contaih at least the following features:
The general location, proposed location, and capacity of all existing and proposed
utilities, including, but not limited to, electrical lines, telecommunication lines, and
natural gas lines (WAC 365-195-320 1).
Table 4GMA Requirements for the Utilities Element
How the above listed utilities
Legislative requirements are addressed page
Requirement in the Comprehensive Plan Number
Capital Facilities Goals,
4 Policies and Objectives 74-75
4 Appendix E 63-96
5. Requirements for the Transportation Element
This element shall contain at least the following features:
A. Land use assumptions used in estimating travel (WAC 365-195-325 1, a).
B. Facilities and services needs including: '
1) An inventory of air, water, and land transportation facilities and services,
including transit alignments, to define existing capital facilities and travel
levels as a basis for future planning;
2) Level of service standards for all arterial streets and transit routes to serve
as a gauge to judge performance of the system. These standards sn6uid be
regionally coordinated; '
3) Specific actions and requirements for bringing into compliance any
facilities or services that are below an established level of service
standard; . ,
4) Forecasts of traffic for at least ten years based on the adopted land use
plan to provide information on the location, timing, and capacity needs of
future growth; and
5) Identification of system expansion needs and transportation system
management needs to meet current and future demands (WAC 365-195-
325 1, b).
C. Finance, including:
1) An analysis of funding capability to judge needs against probable funding
resources;
2) A multi-year financing plan based on the needs identified in the
comprehensive plan, the appropriate parts of which shall serve as the basis
for the six-year street, road, or transit program required by RCW
35.77.010 for cities, RCW 36.81.121 for counties, and RCW 35.58.2795
for public transportation systems; and
3) if probable funding falls short of meeting identified needs, a discussion of
how additional funding will be raised or how land use assumptions will be
49_
reassessed to ensure that level of service standards will be met (WAC 365-
195-325 1, c).
D. Intergovernmental coordination efforts, including an assessment of the impacts of
the transportation systems of adjacent jurisdictions (WAC 365-195-325 1, d).
E. Demand-man.agement strategies (WAC 365-195-325 1, e).
Table 5
GMA Requirements for the Transportation Element
How the above listed
transportation requirements
Legislative are addressed in the Page
Requirement Comprehensive Plan Number
5A Appendix A 11-84-91
5A Appendix E 63-96
. Capital Facilities Goals,
5B Policies and Objectives 74-77
Transportation Goals, Policies
5B and Objectives 55-60
5B Appendix A 11-84-91
5B Appendix E 63-96
Capital Facilities Goals,
512 Policies and Objectives 74-76
5C Appendix E 99-101
Transportation Goals, Policies
5D and Objectives 55-60
Transportation Goals, Policies
5E and Objectives 59
6. Requirements for Siting Public Facilities
The Comprehensive Plan shall be consistent with the following:
A. Essential public facilities include those facilities that are typically difficult to site
_.5_{1
'\ such as, airports, state education facilities, state or regional transportation
t facilities, solid waste handling facilities, and in-patient facilities including
substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities, and group homes. (WAC 365-
195-340 1, a).
B. The office of financial management shall maintain a list of those essential state
public facilities that are required or likely to be built within the next six years.
Facilities may be added to this list at any time (WAC 365-195-340 1, b).
C. No local comprehensive plan may preclude the siting of essential bublic facilities.
Table 6GMA Requirements for Siting Public Facilities
How the above listed siting of
public facilities requirements
Legislative are addressed in the Page
Requirement Comprehensive Plan Number
6A Definitions 33
6B NA -
Capital Facilities Goals, : ,
6C ' Policies and Objectives 79
Use of the Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan is designed to be used by the public as a way for citizens to learn the
long-range goals and policies of the City, as a base upon which City officials make land use and
other decisions, and as a tool which City staff uses to insure the desirable development of the
City.
The Plan's Environmental Impact Statement (EIS, Appendix A) is designed as a programmatic
ElS and may be used as a phased reviewed environmental document for any plans, ordinances,
programs, or development projects that are consistent with the goals and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan. Any project proposed in the City will have to show that it is consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan. If it is not, it cannot be approved unless the Comprehensive Plan
is amended and additional environmental review is completed.
COMMUNITY PROFILE
History of the City
The City of Port Angeles has long been the primary urban center of the North Olympic
Peninsula.
The earliest residents of the area were Native Americans such as the Klallam ("Strong People")
and Makah Indian tribes, who were sustained bS' the region's abundant natural resources. These
same natural resources - the naturally protected deep-water harbor, abundant coniferous forests,
prolific wildlife and marine resources, and an overall natural beauty also attracted the first non-
natives to the area and continue today to encourage visitors and new residents alike from all
walks of life. .
Known variously as "Old Dungeness," "False Dungeness," "Cherbourg," and "Port Angeles,"
settlement was intermittent and sporadic throughout the early history of the City.
In 1862 (due largely to the efforts of one man: Victor Smith, the "Father of Port Angeles"),
President Abraham Lincoln signed an executive order setting aside 3,520 acres of land on the site
as a U.S. Government Lighthouse and Military Reservation. Soon after, Port Angeles was
established as the "Second National City" for the nation, and the original townsite layout has
endured to this day.
Patterned after the plan of Cincinnati, Ohio (substituting the Harbor for the Ohio River), the
streets are arranged and named the same: Front, First, Second, etc. and at right angles to these are
Tumwater, Cedar, Pine, Valley, Cherry, Oak, Laurel, Vine, and Race.
While the City has benefi[ed greatly from that original planning with its grid-pattern street
layout, various challenges were also created such as utility service provision and circulatory
problems, due to the topography of the land. Seven different streams, with associated ravines,
travel through the community running south-to-north as they wend their way to the Strait of Juan
de Fuca. They are: Dry Creek, Tumwater Creek, Valley Creek, Peabody Creek, Ennis/White's
Creek, Lee's Creek, and Morse Creek.
Despite such early planning, major settlement did not take place within the City until 1887 with
the a~val founding of the Puget Sound Cooperative Colony. A social experiment in communal
living the Colony contributed greatly to the expansion of Port Angeles.
Although short-lived, this settlement near the mouth of Ennis Creek built a sawmill, lathe-mill,
and shipyard; constructed a 58-foot propeller-driven schooner, "The Angeles;" started the first
newspaper in town (The Model Commonwealth); and built the first schoolhouse, office building,
and a City Opera House, in addition to founding four different churches in Port Angeles. The
Colony was largely disbanded by 1889 due to internal disputes, but many of the colonists stayed
-52
and blbnded with the rest of the thriving community.
By 1890, the City population had soared to over 3,000 people, and the Government Reserve
established 28 years earlier had become a bottleneck to progress, completely restricting further
development of the City since it could not legally be homesteaded. The result was a "land rush"
onto the federal property as citizens took matters into their own hands as "Reserve Jumpers" that
4th of July, moving en masse onto the reserve, platting lots, and establishing homesteads:
Eventually, forced to recognize this matter officially, Congress conceded ownership to the
squatters and opened the Reserve for sale to the public. .
The year 1890 was also notable as the year Port Angeles was officially incorporated as a City in
the newly established State of Washington, and that same year it also became the County Seat of
Clallam County.
Thereafter, the City grew more slowly and developed much as did other small towns in the
Pacific Northwest. Gone were the early pretensions of becoming a great seaport or Second
National City patterned after Washington, D.C.
Logging and timber have long been important industries, and in 1912 Port Angeles was home to
the world's largest sawmill. In 1920, a large pulp and paper mill was built by Washington Pulp
and Paper Company. Purchased a few years later and operated by Crown Zellerbach for over 60
years, the mill is now owned by Nippon Paper Mill.
The City experienced sporadic growth until the linking of Port Angeles with the transcontinental
railroad in 1914 brought increased prosperity. As rail transport increased and sea travel waned,
Port Angeles surpassed Port Townsend as the major center for trade and commerce on the
Olympic Peninsula. tnsmadrs Sustained largely by marine trades and the lumber and fishing
industries, Port Angeles became a classic American small town and the center of urban life on
the North Olympic Peninsula. In 1922, the Port of Port Angeles was formed. The natural deep-
water harbor has always attracted shipping and both commercial and sports fishing. The Port
operates a marina, boat haven, and international airport.
The first Coast Guard air station on the Pacific Coast was established at Ediz Hook on June 1,
1935. It is the oldest United States Coast Guard Station in the country. The piece of land
occupied by the Coast Guard Station is the one remaining part of the military reservation that
once included all of what is now Port Angeles. The station officially became Coast Guard Group
Port Angeles in September of 1944 and received its first helicopter in 1946.
By far, the largest civic project was the regrading of the downtown streets, which occurred in
1914. The Olympic Power Company was formed in 1911 to construct the Lower Elwha Dam.
The county Courthouse was built on Lincoln St. in 1915. A new fire station was built in 1931. A
new Police station and jail was built in 1954 and a new city hall in 1987. In 1953 Port Angeles
received the All American City Award.
Over the past forty years, except for a few periods of more rapid growth in the 1920's and 30's, '
the City has grown at a fairly stable rate of approximately 1 per cent per year, to its present
population of 18,270.
The City has used zoning to coordinate development and growth since the 1930's, and in the
early 1960's made a determined effort to improve planning efforts through development of a
"701" master plan along with a new zoning ordinance and subdivision ordinance. In 1976 the
City again reviewed its planning goals and process and adopted the 1976 Comprehensive Plan,
which is the immediate predecessor of this Comprehensive Plan.
Even before the State passed the Growth Management Act of 1990, requiring cities and counties
to revise or adopt comprehensive plans, the City of Port Angeles had decided it was time to
revise the existing Comprehensive Plan and had already begun that process when the Act
established new requirements for comprehensiveplans. In response, the City has continued to
move forward consistent with {he Growth Management Act meeting all of its requirements,
including the mandated completion dates.
Current Characteristics of the City (Update this section as needed)
descriptions are.intended to provide the users of this document a general view of the community.
For a more detailed analysis, one should refer to the BEIS and the 2004 update addendum.
Location
The City of Port Angeles lis located in Clallam County on the northern coast of Washington's
Olympic Peninsula (See Figure 2). It is less than three hours driving time from Seattle or
Olympia and sits at the base of the Olympic Mountains overlooking the Strait of Juan de Fuca
with one of the deepest naturally protected harbors on the West Coast. Immediately to the north
is the coastal marine environment of the Strait of Juan de Fuca. To the south are the pristine
alpine wilderness areas of the Olympic National Park, to the east is the semi-arid climate of the
Sequim-Dungeness Valley, and within two hours time to the west is the Hob Rain Forest and the
beaches and rugged beauty of the Pacific Coast.
Air
The circulation of air around the Olympic Mountains and through the Strait of Juan de Fuca
results in mostly easterly or westerly winds in the vicinity of Port Angeles. Highest winds are
generally associated with intense winter storms and may be from either an easterly or westerly
direction. On most summer afternoons, a moderate to fresh westerly breeze can be expected.
Wind velocity and direction vary with the season. Winds from the west predominate and are
strongest during the summer, averaging about 14 miles per hour. Winds from the south and east
occur more frequently during the winter with an average velocity of about 9 miles per hour.
Water
Port Angeles is located in the Port Angeles watershed which drains 65,000 acres (101.5 square
miles). The topography of the immediate Port Angeles area is characterized by a gradually
descending slope from the Olympic Mountains north to the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Steep
hillsides and bluffs of S0 to 150 feet in elevation mark the northern edge of the slope. This
region is segmented by streams which flow from the mountains toward the strait and have
formed V-shaped ravines that are much lower in elevation than the surrounding areas. The
ravines contain the following major creeks which pass through the community to the Strait of
Juan de Fuca and Port Angeles Harbor; Dry Creek, Tumwater Creek, Valley Creek, Peabody
Creek, Ennis/White's Creek, Lee's Creek, and Morse Creek. The Elwha River is located just
west of the City.
t VICINITY MAP
Page le intentionally blank - insert vicinity map
FIGURE 2
56_
Wildlife
ma~ine wetlands are primarily Marine Intertidal Beaches or Marine Intertidal Aquatic Beds.
The
There--ai'e a few Estuarine Subtidal Open Water wetlands (the log ponds) near the ~horeline at the
Daishc, wa Nippon Industries and K-ply mills and various Class II, III, and IV freshwater
wetlands scattered through the City.
Identification and classification of all fish and wildlife habitats within the City has not been
developed.. The Pentec Shoreline Habitat Assessment has been completed since the original
drafting of the Comprehensive Plan and provides a much better basis for understanding the Port
Angeles Harbor nearshore environment. The City of Port Angeles Wetland Inventory developed
in 1995 by Sheldon and Associates of Seattle, Washington, provides a foundation for protection
of local surface and ground waters from degradation, identifies habitat areas to protect and
restore and to develop a City wide stormwater management plan. ~ Thc~ presence of
t-he wooded ravines with a water source provide areas of riparian habitat and corridors for
wildlife movement.
Riparian areas help provide most of the food, cover, spawning, breeding, and rearing for a,wide
variety of wildlife species. Trees and other plant which shade streams help keep water cool
while stabilizing banks and providing food (leaves, twigs, etc) for insects that fish eat. Trees
also provide cover for wildlife. When trees die and fall into the streams, the logs 'create small
dams and pools that offer fish rearing habitat and cover from predators. Logs that remain on
land provide cover for wildlife. Wildlife from the ravines typically make use of surrounding
properties and undeveloped lands for foraging.
Within the general area, the Washington State Department of Wildlife (Priority Habitats and
Species program) has indicated that there are specific Eagle and Pileated Woodpecker habitats.
In addition, the region includes habitats for prioritw species of State Candidates being studied for
inclusion as threatened or endangered and other species that are being monitored. PrioriW
habitats for several game species are located in the viciniW. State Candidate species (for
inclusion as threatened or endangered) include the Marbled Murrelet and Fisher, and the Great
Blue Heron is a State Monitored species. Due to an agreement with the Department of Wildlife,
the location of these habitats is not immediately available. The locations have been reviewed
and considered as part of this analysis. Habitat for the State Endangered Spotted Owl occurs
within, but is not limited to, the National Forest.
The location of other less sensitive species has been identified in the DEIS. In particular, there
are two areas that harbor seals use for haulout. One is near the Rayonier Mill and the other is at
the base of Ediz Hook in Port Angeles Harbor. The Department of Wildlife maps identify an
area along the Harbor side of Ediz Hook that has "regular large concentrations" of shorebirds.
The bluff along the shoreline also provides a special and valuable habitat for shorebirds.
Within the Olympic National Park, Roosevelt Elk roam the slopes of the mountains. Other
wildlife include black bears, cougars, coyotes, beavers, minks, raccoons, otters, wolves, eagles,
hawks, ravens, and grouse. ~-u~ residence ..r,h~ ~..~ ...... a o~^.~-~A .... 1 .......... l,l~l. 1~.., lo
57
All of the creeks are used i'or fish habitat, but most have barriers which limit migration. Dry
Creek is used by Coho, Cutthroat and possibly Steelhead. Tumwater Creek provides
anadromous use by Coho, Cutthroat, and Steelhead well upstream of the City limits. Valley
Creek may be used by sea run Cutthroat and Steelhead, and some Coho return to the lower
reaches of Peabody Creek. However, these runs are not felt to be self-sustaining. Some of the
ravines, such as the White's Creek and Ennis Creek ravines, are recognized by the State as
sustaining significant populations of resident fish and potentially having salmon runs restored,
once downstream impediments are removed. T,he resident fish currently present in Ennis Creek
are Coho, Cutthroat, resident and sea run Steelhead. The fish migrate up to 4.9 miles from the
Port Angeles Harbor.' White's Creek, which joins Ennis Creek contains Coho, Steelhead, sea run
Cutthroat up to Front Street. Significant restoration efforts have been undertaken along Valley
Creek. In exchange for a log st~orage area, K-ply Mill cooperated with local citizen groups to
reestablish the Valley' Creek estuary. Extensive restoration has been accomplished upstream
from the end of Valley Street to the Hwy 101 crossing. This effort is accompanied by land
acquisitions along the lOwer portions of Valley Creek with the intent of future restoration
projects.
Natu~'al Resources
There arc very limited forest areas, and no mineral lands located within the City. Those that do
exist are discussed in thc DEIS.
Diverse scenic resources arc abundant in Port Angeles. Notable visual elements include the
Strait of Juan de Fuca, Ediz Hook, Vancouver Island, San Juan Islands, Mt. Baker, Hurricane
Ridge, and the Olympic National Park.
There arc numerous public and private panoramic views of both thc Strait of Juan dc Fuca and
Hurricane Ridge from various places in the city. Of special note are thc views along thc bluffs to
thc west, east, and above Port Angeles Harbor. The Ocean View Cemetery at the west edge of
town provides unobstructed views northward and along the coastline. The beaches and
bcachfront trail along thc shoreline also offer spectacular views of Ediz Hook, the Strait, and
distant Vancouver Island. Ediz Hook has superlative views of the ocean, mountains, waterfront,
and City. Exceptional views are also available from the roads around Lincoln School and Port
Angeles High School, the City Hall area, and Lauridsen Boulevard.
The vegetated creek ravines offer wooded open space that provides attractive views as well as
wildlife habitat and corridors. Other open space amenities includes wetlands, steep slopes,
marshes, hilltops, and even open fields.
Noise
The primary sources of noise in Port Angeles are the airport, industrial activities at thc mills, thc
Port Angeles Harbor, vehicular traffic, and construction activities. Thc ambient noise levels
within ~the City of Port Angeles would be expected to vary depending on location within the City.
In 1986 a Noise Compatibility Planning Study was conducted for the Fairchild International
Airport under the guidelines of the Federal Aviation Regulations. The Planning Study included
analyses of both existing and projected noise levels associated with the aviation traffic.
The mills along the waterfront are a source of noise and are in a difficult place to provide noise
attenuation. Since the mills are visible from many residential areas on the hill to the south, these
residences dan be expected to receive the greatest noise impacts. Rayonier Mill closed in late
1990s leaving no noise producing industries east of the downtown area. Redevelopment of the
mill site to heavy industrial uses may once again create a noise source there.
Higher noise levels are allowed for motor, vehicles operations on public roads. Warning sirens
and temporary construction equipment are generally exempt from the noise regulations. Traffic
levels would be expected to be highest along Highway 101, First Street, Front Street, Lincoln,
Lauridsen Boulevard, Race Street, Tumwater Truck Route, and Marine Drive.
Population ,
The population for the City of Port Angeles in 1993 was 18,270, this is an increase of 3 per cent
over the 1990 population of 17,710. The population for Clallam County in 1993 was 61,400,
~-~~. The percentage o£the County population residing in the City has dropp6d to
28.5% in 2004. The 2000 population of 18,397 is a 3.7% increase over the 1990 'population.
The State Office of Financial Management has projected a 5 per cent growth rate over the next
20 years for Clallam County, this along with a linear projection for Port Angeles is illustrated in
Table 7. Note, the City has already exceeded projected growth rates.
Population Projections
Table 7
Clallam Co. 56A64 bC-,g-54 58r2-46 58-,¢-5-3 59¢g9 59-,-,-,-,-,-,-,-,-~
Population ,2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025
Port Angeles 18,397 18,516 19,309 22,138 21,190 22,159
-59
The population figures in the above table are based on Washington State Office of Financial
Management's projected medium population growth for Clallam County and using the 2000
percentage of Clallam County population attributed to the City of Port Angeles (28.5%). The
portion of the County population occurring in the City has been declining in recent years from a
high of 47% in 1970.
Land Use
The City of Port Angeles contains 9.5 square miles or 6,070 acres of land, 26 miles of marine
shoreline including Ediz Hook, a 4 mile sand spit and 17 miles of streams. There are residential
areas, industrial areas which include-3_2 large pulp, paper and wood product mills ~-~tm'q'~
gayov,~, Daiskc, wa P~me~ca Nippon Industries, and K-Ply), and commercial areas with a fairly
well defined Central BUsiness District (CBD). Community facilities include 10 public school
facilities (including a college), a 126-bed hospital, 1 public library, 1 fire station, 1 police station,
~ 2~2. parks fac4J, it4es, the Senior Services Community Center, the William Shore Memorial Pool,
the Vern Burton Community Center, Ocean View Cemetery, 1 private golf course, 3 cultural
centers (Port Angeles Fine Arts Center, Arthur D. Fiero Marine Lab, and the Clallam County
Historical Society Museum), the William R. Fairchild International Airport, 2 ferry terminals
(Coho Ferry and Victoria Rapid Transit), a 16.1 acre boat haven, t~housing approximately 569
355 boats with 74 boat houses, and 3,000 feet of dock for tie-ups:}, and public boat yard for repair
and .maintenance.
The Comprehensive Plan divides the City into 8 planning areas. For the purpose of description,
the individual planning areas are identified as the Harbor, Northwest, Southwest, North Central,
South Central, East, Eastern Urban Growth Area and SouthwWestem Urban Growth Area
planning areas. These areas are located on Figure 3 and are described as follows.
The Harbor planning area contains the Coast Guard Station, the Port and Salmon Club boat
ramps, Ediz Hook Park, and Da~s~e;va Nippon Industries Mill on Ediz Hook. The historic
downtown and waterfront are also essential parts of this sub area. The boat haven marina, log
export terminal, the K-Ply mill, the Coho Ferry terminal, and City Pier, and Rayonier Mil! line
the waterfront. The Rayonier Mill site was closed in 1997 and is undergoing site remediation for
clean-up of materials left from the previous mill operation. The site will become available for
redevelopment in the future. Entertainment activities (movie theater, bookstores, antique shops,
galleries, an historic underground tour and restaurants) abound within the pedestrian oriented
central business district.
The Northwest planning area covers the western edge of town lying beyond Tumwater Creek and
north of the airport. This area is comprised largely of older homes, however, recent growth
pressure has led to new subdivisions and home construction in the area. There is a commercial
area se~ing the residents along C Street. A pocket of industrial/commercial activities are is.
locatedlalong the Tumwater Truck Route/Highway 101 junction. This area of town has limited
access because of the Tumwater Creek ravine and the bluffs. It also has the largest segment of.
undeveloped residential land within the current City limits.
The Southwest planning area includes Fairchild Intemational Airport, the Clallam County
Fairgrounds and Lincoln Park. Industrial development is located at the airport industrial park. A
few homes lie within the City limits along Lower Elwha Road, but otherwise this planning area
contains predominantly industrial and park (recreation) land uses. .
The North Central planning area is the older more denser portion of town. It is an area divided
by Valley, Peabody and Ennis/White's Creek ravines. It contains all of the municipal buildings,
and Clallam County building and courthouse, and the recently renovated Carnegi6 Library. The
commercial uses along Lincoln Street provide community shopping opportunities. Recreation is
provided by a number of parks. Much of the city's multifamily housing is within this planning
area.
The South Central planning area is the area of town with newer homes, on larger lots. This is
where the street pattern changes from traditional blocks to cul-de-sacs. Many views of Port
Angeles Harbor and the Strait of Juan de Fuca are available. The Port Angeles High School lies
within this planning area. The Olympic National Park Headquarters and Visitors Center is along
the Heart of the Hills Road. '
The East planning area is the area of the existing city limits easterly of Race Street. This area
has a mix of older homes and newer residential subdivisions and development, as well as a
portion of the main commercial corridor. Marine views from upper elevations are possible,
along with mountain views. This planning area includes Peninsula College facilities and
Peninsula Golf Club.
The Eastern Urban Growth Area is generally the area east of the city limits. Remnant properties
in the UGA that are located south of the city limits and east of Valley Creek are considered to be
in this area until annexation occurs whereby they will be considered to be part of the adjacent
planning area. Policies for this planning area are adopted by Clallam County as a part of the Port
Angeles Regional Comprehensive Plan.
The Western Urban Growth Area is generally the area west and south of the city limits.
Remnant properties in the UGA that are located south of the city limits and west of Valley Creek
are considered to be in this area until annexation occurs whereby they will be considered to be
part of the adjacent planning area. Policies for this planning area are adopted by Clallam County
as a part of the Port Angeles Regional Comprehensive Plan.
The Regional Transportation Planning Organization has designated Port Angeles as a primary_
center of mixed use development and the Urban Growth Areas as secondary center of mixed use
development in the Regional Transportation Plan. Goals and Policies in the Growth
Management Element of this Comprehensive Plan support focusing new growth and mixed use
opportunities in the City and UGA
Update the above information as necessary
_62
CITY PLANNING AREAS MAP t~
(Blank Page)
ACREAGE BY TYPE OF LAND USE
FIGURE 4 , ,
FIGURE 5
Figure 6 compares the current amount of land zoned for residential, commercial, industrial and
public uses with the amount of land currently used for those same purposes, regardless of the
land's zoning.
Housing (update housing analysis)
In 1990, 7,553 dwelling units were located in Port Angeles. By 1992 the dwelling units had
increased by 422 units (or 5.6%) to a total of 7,975 dwelling units. By 2004 the dwelling units
have increased by another 797 units (or 10%) to a total of 9,479.
Tran'sportation (Comment on consistency with the RTP and 1487 Regulations)
The road network in the City of Port Angeles is characterized by a grid pattern that is oriented
east-west (parallel to the waterfront) and north-south. This pattern shifts slightly south of
Lauridsen Blvd. where the streets shift to match the platting pattern established by the County
before the City boundaries were expanded. The regular geometry of this pattern is generally
retained, excePt where the topography of the foot hills, the deep ravines or the bluffs along the
Straight of Juan de Fuca cause the road realignment. The street pattern is shown on Figure 7.
The street grades are moderate in most areas, as they adapt to the topography which goes up
from the waterfront and gently undulates as the foothills flatten to meet the Strait of Juan de
Fuca. The most unique characteristic of the street network is the way it is interrupted by several
deep ravines which bisect the east-west street network resulting in a limited number of streets
that run continuously from one end of the City to the other. There is one are three routes of
regional significance through the City (State Route 101, State Route 117 Tumwater Truck
Route, and Race Road leading to the Olyrnpic Park Visitor Center and Hurricane Ridge).
There is one designated truck route in the City that runs from east to west along the Front/First
Street couplet to Tumwater Truck Route (State Route 117) and along Tumwater Truck Route
south to SR 101. The link from SR 101 to the Coho Ferry terminal (South Lincoln
Street/Railroad Avenue) is also a significant connection.
LAND USE & ZONING ACREAGE COMPARISON
(Within City limits)
FIGURE 6
CITY STREET MAP fl ~,,
The City of Port Angeles is served by Clallam Transit, the Public Transit Benefit Area Agency
that seryes the Clallam County with a combination of scheduled and para-transit services.
'Clallam Transit currently identifies four routes that circulate within the City limits. These routes
all originate at the Oak Street and Railroad Avenue terminus in the downtown area. The four
routes provide service to east City limits at the Plaza shopping center, the west side to the Elwha
Tribal Center and Fairchild International Airport, the near west side to the fairgrounds, and south
through the central portion of the City to Ahlvers Road. x~, .... ~ ~ .... ~ .... ;m;~ ~ r-;~.,
but4heh~,m~ A Second function is to move people between Port Angeles and other smaller
cities on the Peninsula.
The Port of Port Angeles is responsible for the port operations along the waterfront, including
ownershiP of the Black Ball Ferry Terminal, the boat haven, and other properties supporting
water related industry, and at the Fairchild International Airport including the Airport Industrial
Park.
The William R. Fairchild li~tcmational Airport is located southwest of the central city and serves
a combination of commercial and private aviation demands in the re ~lanements ,
Because of its international status, this airport has a unique market for passengers traveling
between Canada and the United States. With a full time U.S. and Immigration sta. ff, regional
airlines serving Victoria stop in Port Angeles for clearance to avoid the congestion and delay at
SeaTac. Air Cargo is an ever increasing component of airport operations with a 58 percent
increase in air freight tonnage in the past 10 years. The two runway airport is well situated to
serve increased volume because the long runways remaining from this original military airfield
can serve the trend to larger aircraft.
Land uses surrounding the William R. Fairchild International Airport include residential,
industrial and open space. The main landing approach area for the airport is over the most
densely populated portion of the City, located east of the airport. The area to the west of the
airport (the primary_ take-off area contains the City's landfill. This landfill is currently planned to
be closed in 2006 and converted into a solid waste transfer station to reduce the hazards
associated with conflicts between airplanes and scavenger birds feeding at the landfill. Farther to
the west, the area is located in the County and is zoned Rural Low and Moderate density and
Rural Character Conservation (RCC3) to maintain low-density residential areas in the flight path
area. The lands adjacent to the airport on both the north and south are designated and zoned as
industrial to minimize the impacts that may be expected from more intensive land uses adjacent
to an airport.
Urban Services (Add statement about regional water supply)
The Port Angeles Police Department currently provides police protection within the city limits of
Port Angeles and operates PENCOM, the emergency dispatch for eastern Clallam County. The
police headquarters are located at City Hall. The Department has 54- 53.5 personnel, of which 2--7
29 are'tsworn officers and 5.5 are volunteers.
The Po~t Angeles Fire Department currently provides fire and Medic 1 protection within the city
limits of Port Angeles. The headquarters are located at 5th and Laurel Streets. The department
has g4 23 full-time personnel, of which -1-9 15 are fire fighters, seve-a six of which maintain
paramedic certification, and all are emergency medical technicians.
The City Parks and Recreation Department maintains over 194 acres of park land, 14 playground
equipment'sites, 1'3 baseball and/or softball fields, 9 football fields and/or soccer fields, 12 tennis
courts, and an indoor pool. The City also provides excellent general recreation ahd senior
ti ity p gr · ,. ..... ,~ ...... ,~,~,; ........c~.,;^./t~ ......;,., r,,..,,,.. A i of
ac v ro ams. a..,~.~ ,o ......... j ............. o ........................... j ,~,~_,,~.. rev ew
the parks, and recreation facilities is included in the DEIS, and the location of the facilities is
shown on Figure 8. '
The City of Port Angeles water service area includes the land within the city bOundaries, along
with services within Clallam County P U D No. 1, ~n ,~,;a~,;~ ~,~ ,~ ....... ;~ ....... .-
52 Dry Creek customers, 5 Black Diamond customers, and one govemment account outside the
city limits. The City also provideds wholesale water to P.U.D. No. 1. In the City's 1956 2002 ,
Water Comprehensive Plan, the future service area limit was from Morse Creek to the Elwha
River and bordered on the south by the Olympic National Park.
The current water supply for the City is from the Elwha River. The Elwha River Ranney,Well
System with a minimum yield of 11 million gallons was constructed in -1-ggg 1977. This source
provides for domestic and commercial and some industrial needs of the City. There is also a
separate industrial water supply line for the mills. The source is a small diversion dam on the
Elwha River approximately eight miles from the city limits. Water treatment plants are being
planned to treat the Elwha River waters once the Elwha dams are removed in 2006.
The City maintains all public storm sewers and culverts. The City maintains the WSDOT
conduits and culverts along Highway 101 within the city limits. The City has only limited legal
access to al! cf t~e bu;2t or natural drainage courses throughout the city. Public access is
available for some of the sites and areas.
Sanitary or combined sewers serve approximately 3,700 acres in Port Angeles. The city has
mostly 8-inch local sanitary sewers and even some small 6-inch. However, the city's original
collection system was designed as a combined sewer system with storm water. This occurs
primarily in old downtown in an area approximately bounded by the waterfront on the north,
Valley Street on the west, 'Peabody Street on the east and 6th Street on the south. There were no
storm sewers in the city until the 1959': 1950's. The existing storm sewer system grew in bits
and pieces as individual renovation projects and LIDs responded to local problems. The storm
sewers t~emselves are small are 6" and 8" diameter do due to the steep terrain of the city. The
existing storm sewers run primarily in the north/south "short block" orientation picking up catch
basins which happen to be at the east/west "long block" intersections.
a! 0 15' *~ ......
~ In summary, the old downtown has combined sewers and the rest of the city has varying
degrees of partially separated sewers.
The sewage collection system has 10 pumping stations. Eight are operated and maintained by
the City, with Rayoni.er and D~' is~owa Nippon Industries mills each having one private pump.
Three of the City's stations are along the main interceptor leading to the treatment plant.
The existing interceptor system was constructed in 1969 for the purpose of eliminating six major
and numerous minor outfalls of raw sewage into Port Angeles Harbor. These outfalls are now
used 'for the combined sewer overflows. Overflows occur during high intensity storm conditions
because of the hydraulic limitations of the interceptor system. Newer storm systems are
separated from sanitary sewer systems.
The treatment plant is located on. a 3.5 acre site on the eastern city limit of Port Angeles and just
east of the forr0er Rayonier mill site. The treatment plant wi!! be was completed in Apr4 1994 to
provide secondary level treatment of sewage, and ,v,,~ e,~ cmn ,~on ~,-:~, .....
........ ,""",-'"" v-": ...... expanded to
accommodate 10.6 million gallons peak capacity per day of sewage. In the future, the City
intends to construct.. ...... ;.,. ~+~,; .... a,.. ..... a ....... a
facilities to reduce the co~mbined sewer overflows, replace *~ ....
Solid waste services are provided by the Solid Waste Utility through the Port Angeles Public
Works Department. Refuse collection is mandatory for the residents of Port Angeles. The City
of Port Angeles also has a policy of not accepting quantities of out-of-county waste at the Port
Angeles landfill.
The City of Port Angeles owns and operates the Port Angeles landfill. This site provides
disposal services to residential, commercial, and industrial customers throughout Clallam
County. In addition to disposal, a recycling program is conducted at the landfill site. White
goods, aluminum, glass, cardboard, newsprint, catalogues, magazines, used oil, and used car and
truck batteries are the primary target materials. The landfill is scheduled to be closed in 2006.
Transfer facilities are being planned to be in place at the time of closure. Following closure all
waste will be transported to regional landfills in Eastern Washington.
_68-
Port Ahgeles ~ Light Utility is the electric power provider within the City limits. Clallam
CountYtP.U.D. is the electric power provider for the unincorporated areas surrounding Port
AngeleS. However, there are several areas outside the City that the City ~ serves. These
include an area near the Peninsula Golf Course, homes south of the City along Mount Angeles
Road, west of the airport and the Fairmont Trailer Park. The power used by both Port Angeles
City Light and Clallam County P.U.D. is delivered by the Bonneville Power Administration
(BPA) via its transmission lines. The PUD has one substation within the PAUGA at Monroe
Street. There are 8 electrical substations within the City of Port Angeles.
The Port Angeles School District Number 121 serves the City of Port Angeles and its
surrounding community. The District operates six elementary schools, two middle schools
(grades 6r8), one comprehensive high school, one alternative high school, and is host to the
North Olympic Peninsula Skills Center. '~nd one high ~chco!. There is also a small a!terative
the City of Port Angeles there are three elementary schools; these are Franklin Elementary,.
Hamilton Elementary, and Jefferson Elementary. ~;tevens Middle School~ and Po~ Angeles
High School, ~ .... :.4 ...... .4 .... .4 .... *:~--~ and Choice Alternative School provide for secondary
education. The Skills Center, working closely with Peninsula College, provides' the latest
vocational/technical education in a competency based learning environment.
The Peninsula Community College is a t-wo-ye~ comprehensive community college located in
Port e es., .................. ~ ....... o,~, ....................... .~ ......... e, .....
Peninsula College offers four transfer degrees: an Associate of Arts, Associate of Arts Honors,
Associate of Science Transfer, and Associate in Applied Science CT degree. Certificate
programs are also available in the college's 18 Professional Technical programs. The campus is
located at the east edge of the city.
By partnering with community organizations and other institutions of higher education,
Peninsula College is helping to enhance and strengthen educational and training opportunities for
everyone on the peninsula. Recent initiatives include developing the Applied Environmental
Technologies Center of Excellence by working in collaboration with several local entities,
including the Clallam County Economic Development Council and private businesses,
collaborating with the North Olympic Peninsula Skills Center and Business Incubator Network
to provide training programs for young people, the work force, and growing local businesses,
and partnering with the Workforce Development Council to provide services to expand the use
of technology in the Medical Assistant Program and to provide training as part of the Work
Source Affiliate Site.
Peninsula College also collaborates with several-four-year colleges and universities to provide
opportunities for local residents to earn bachelor degrees on the peninsula. These collaborations
include a new partnership with Western Washington University's award-winning Huxley
College of the Environment that allows peninsula residents to earn their B.A and B.S. degrees on
the Peninsula College campus without having to leave the area or face long commutes to
Bellingham. The program will commence effective with the start of the 2004 fall quarter. It is
also possible to earn a bachelor's degree in education. Collaboration with City University allows
Olympic Peninsula residents to earn a bachelor's degree in education, University of
Washington--Bothell allows individuals to earn a bachelor's degree in Nursing, Washington
State University allows residents to earn eleven different degrees via distance learning, and the
East Jefferson Education Consortium allows individuals to pursue a variety of degree
opportunities through the 12 Universities and educational organizations that have partnered with
Peninsula College in this consortium. The partnering entities, in addition to Peninsula College,
include Centrum Center for the Arts, Chapman University Bangor Campus, City University, Port
Townsend Marine Science Center, Southern Illinois University Program in Workforce Education
and Development offered at Bangor, University of Washington, Washington State University,
and Western Washington University.
The college currently employs 4-5 66 full-time faculty, and 75 to 100 146 part-time faculty and
66 96 persons as staff and administration on the Port Angeles campus.
Economic Development
Clallam County and the City of Port Angeles are rich in natural resources. The Olympic
Peninsula has proved to be one of the country's most productive timber growing areas, while the
Strait of Juan de Fuca has provided the area with a vast fishery. However, recent declines in
these resource industries has had a major impact on the economy of both Clallam County and the
City of Port Angeles. The Rayonier mill closed in 1997 putting up to 200 people out of work.
The decline of salmon and the subsequent listing of Chinook salmon, and bull trout as
endangered species has reduced the commercial fishing industry_ dramatically. These economic
declines are being replaced to some extent by service industries that are driven by tourism and
the popularity of the Olympic Peninsula as a retirement destination. Port Angeles is also striving
to strengthen its marine trades and industries. A new boat builder, Westport Shipyard, recently
located a yacht manufacturing facility in Port Angeles.
In the past, the area's natural resources provided the majority of jobs in the area. The three
largest manufacturing firms in Clallam County are all located in Port Angeles or the PAUGA.
(Rayoai~, Daisho':,'a Currently, Nippon Industries employees 270, and K-Ply Plywood
employees 175 and Crown Pacific employees another 96). Port Angeles' newest employer,
Westport Shipyard now employees approximately 200. These *~,.~,,~,~
~,...~ ..... · Ac ...... :_n,~., ~ ann .... ~ Major shipments of forest products to Japan,
Korea, and China have historically provided a strong market, bolstering the log export segment
_7O
of the lo~:al economy. Export and old growth harvesting are expected to be reduced significantly
in comin~ years due to various government restrictions.
In light of the recent developments in the timber and fishery industries, it is important for Port
Angeles to develop and improve its other economic resources, such as tourism and
manufacturing.
Port Angeles is part of a major international tourist route. The presence of the Olympic National
Park with over three million visitors a year, t-he two ferry terminals and with service to Victoria
and Vancouver Island which carries approximately 500,000 passengers per year, combined with
the local freshwater and ocean sport fishing brings a steady flow of tourists to the City, creating
an important economic resource.
In general, the local economy appears to be relatively stable despite much uncertainty in the
timber harvesting and log exports. Growth in the retirement community has been continuing,
and tourism is expanding rapidly. The forest products industry will most likely stabilize at a,
lower level of activity.
71_
't DEFINITIONS
General Comments
The following definitions are for terms, which are used in the document and are provided
for clarification purposes in the interpretation and implementation of the various goals
and policies.
Definitions of Terms '
Adequate Public "Adequate Public Facilities" means, facilities which have the
Facilities: capacity to serve development without decreasing levels of
service below locally established minimums.
Affordable Housing: "Affordable housing" means the adequacy of the ,
community's housing stock to fulfill the housing needs of all
economic segments of the population.
Accessory Residential "Accessory residential unit" means a residential unit, which is
Unit: subordinate in area, extent, or purpose to a principal
residential unit and is located on the same zoning }ot as the
principal residential unit.
Available Public "Available Public Facilities" means that facilities or services
Facilities: are in place or that a financial commitment is in place to
provide the facilities or services within a specified time.
Best Available Science: That scientific information applicable to the critical area
prepared by local, state or federal natural resource agencies, a
qualified scientific professional or team of qualified scientific
professionals, that is consistent with criteria established in
WAC 365-195-900 through WAC 365-195-925.
Best Management Conservation practices or systems of practices and
Practices: management measures that:
A. Control soil loss and reduce water quality degradation
caused by high concentrations of nutrients, animal
waste, toxics, and sediment;
B. Minimize adverse impacts to surface water and
ground water flow, circulation patterns, and to the
chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of
wetlands;
C. Protect trees and vegetation designated to be retained
during and following site construction; and
D. Provide standards for proper use of chemical
herbicides within critical areas.
City: "City" means the City of Port Angeles, Washington.
Community Services: "Community services" means cultural, social and recreational
services necessary to enhance the quality of life, such as
libraries, parks and recreation services, fine arts, and
festivals.
Concurrency: ."Concurrency" means that adequate public facilities are
available when the impacts of development occur. This
definition includes the two concepts of "adequate public
facilities" and of "available public facilities" as defined
above.
Consistency: ~ '"Consistency" means that no feature of a plan or regulation is
incompatible with any other feature of a plan or regulation.
Consistency is indicative of a capacity for orderly integration
or operation with other elements in a system.
County: "County" means Clallam County, Washington.
District: "District" means a portion of a planning area, which is
defined by the primary uses located in that portion of the
planning area.
Development: "Development" means any activity which would alter the
elevation of the land, remove or destroy plant life, cause
structures of any kind to be installed, erected, or removed,
divide land into two or more parcels, or any use or extension
of the use of the land.
Development Rights: "Development rights" means a broad range of less-than-fee-
simple-ownership interests.
Domestic Water System: "Domestic water system" means any system providing a
supply of potable water, which is deemed adequate pursuant
to RCW 19.27.097 for the intended use of a development.
Emergency Services: "Emergency services" means services which are a City
responsibility and consists of provisions for police, fire,
emergency medical and disaster services.
Essential Public "Essential public facilities" means public capital facilities of a
Facilities: county-wide or state-wide nature which are typically difficult
to site. Essential public facilities include the following:
* Airports
* Hazardous waste facilities
* State education facilities
* State or regional transportation facilities
* State and local correctional facilities
* Solid waste handling facilities
* In-patient facilities including
- substance abuse facilities
- mental health facilities
- group homes
Facility: ."Facility" means something designed, built, installed or
utilized for the specific purpose of providing a service.
Financial Commitment: "Financial commitment" means that sources of public or
private funds or combinations thereof have been identified
which will be sufficient to finance public facilities necessary
.to support development and that there is reasonable assurance
that such funds will be timely put to that end.
Growth Management "Growth Management Act" and "Act" means the Growth
Act: Management Act as enacted in Chapter 17, Laws of 1990 1st
ex. sess., and chapter 32, Laws of 1991 sp. sess., state of
Washington.
Level of Service: "Level of Service" means an established minimum capacity
of public facilities or services that must be provided per unit
of demand or other appropriate measure of need.
Manufactured Home: Factory built, single-family structures that meet the National
Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards Act
I (42 U.S.C. Sec. 5401), commonly known as the HUD (U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development) Code, and
that also meets the following requirements:
1. Consists of two or more fully enclosed parallel
sections each of not less than 12 feet wide by 36 feet
long;
2. Bears an insignia issued by the appropriate federal
agency indicating compliance with the construction
standards of the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) as amended and as
approved by the State of Washington.
3. Is placed on an on-grade permanent foundation or on
footings and piers or on blocks in accordance with
HUD's specifications for the specific home and has
skirting installed so that no more than one foot of the
skirting is visible above grade;
4. Has all support appurtenances removed;
5. Is served by underground electrical power;
75.
~ 6. Was originally constructed with and now has a
t composition or wood shake or shingle, coated metal,
or similar roof of not less than 3.12 pitch; ahd
7. Has exterior siding similar in appearance to siding
materials commonly used on conventional site built
Uniform Building Code single-family residences..
Medical Services: "Medical services" means licensed professional medical
services and retail services directly related to medical
services, such as hospitals, physicians' clinics, and
pharmacies.
Neighborhood: "Neighborhood" means an area located within a district
where people live, which is defined by the primary type
and/or density of the residential units located in that
particular area of the district. ,
Planning Area: "Planning Area" means a large geographical area of the City
which is defined by physical characteristics and boundaries.
Public Capital Facilities: "Public Capital Facilities" means existing, new or expanded
physical facilities which are owned, licensed or sanctioned by
a public entity, are large in size and serve a county-wide or
statewide population. Public capital facilities of a county-
wide or state-wide nature may include but are not limited to
the following:
· Airports
· State educational facilities
· State and federal transportation facilities
· Regional transportation facilities
· State correctional facilities
* Local correctional facilities
* Solid waste handling, disposal and storage
facilities
* In-patient facilities including:
- abuse facilities
- mental health facilities
- group homes
* National, state and regional parks and
recreational facilities
* Marine terminals
* Libraries
* Fairgrounds
* Hospitals
· County courthouse
Public Services: "Public services" includes fire protection and suppression,
16_
law enforcement, public health, education, recreation,
't environmental protection, and other governmental services..
Public Facilities: "Public facilities" includes streets, roads, highways,
sidewalks, street and road lighting systems, traffic signals,
domestic water systems, storm and sanitary sewer systems,
parks and recreational facilities, and schools.
Regional Transportation "Regional transportation plan" means the transportation plan
Plan: for the regional designated transportation system ,which is
produced by the regional transportation planning
organization.
Regional Transportation "Regional' transportation planning organization (RTPO)"
Planning Organization: means the voluntary organization conforming to RCW
47.80.020, consisting of local governments within a region
containing one or more counties which have common ,
transportation interests. .
Regulatory Reform Act: Engrossed Substitute House Bill, ESHB 1724 was enacted in
1995 to establish new approaches to make government
regulation more effective, and to make it easier and less
costly for citizens and businesses to understand arid comply
with requirements. ESHB 1724 amended a number of laws,
including the Growth Management Act (GMA), Shoreline
Management Act (SMA), and State Environmental Policy
Act (SEPA). Commonly referred to as the Regulatory_
Reform Act, ESHB 1724 amended the Growth Management
Act and State Environmental Policy Act to more thoroughly
integrate the SEPA process into the planning process.
Appeals of SEPA determinations or permits must also be
consolidated so that only one public hearing is held. ESHB
1724 is codified by the City of Port Angeles in Chapter 18.02
PAMC.
Residential Services: "Residential services" shall mean the providing of residential
care on a daily or live-in basis including special needs
housing such as group homes, adult-care homes and day-care
facilities.
Sanitary Sewer Systems: "Sanitary sewer systems" means all facilities, including
approved on-site disposal facilities, used in the collection,
transmission, storage, treatment, or discharge of any
waterborne waste, whether domestic in origin or a
combination of domestic, commercial, or industrial waste.
Scattered Site Housing: "Scattered site housing" means smaller scale, publicly
assisted housing new construction and conversion which is
77-
dispersed throughout the community as opposed to high
density, public housing "projects" concentrated on one large
site or in one area of the City.
School District: "School District" means the Port Angeles School District No.
121.
Service: "Service" means the supplying or providing of utilities,
commodities, accommodations and/or activities.
Shall: "Shall" means the statement is mandatory, and the action so
stated is required to be done without discretion by decision-
makers. The use of"shall" in a statement indicates that the
action is imperative and ministerial.
Should: "Should" means the statement ought to be done. hut the
action so stated is not required to be done by decision-
makers. The use of "should" in a statement indicates that
discretion may be used in deciding whether or not to take
action. The use of "should" is intended to give decision-
makers discretion in matters where exceptions are warranted
by such factors as physical hardships and special
circumstances or when funding must be taken into
consideration.
Solid Waste Handling "Solid waste handling facility" means any facility for the
Facility: transfer or ultimate disposal of solid waste, including landfills
and municipal incinerators.
Social Services: I "Social services" means those services necessary to support
life and health, such as food banks, hospices, home health,
congregate care, and day care services.
Transfer of Development "Transfer of development fights" means the conveyance of
Rights: development rights by deed, easement, or other legal
instrument to another parcel of land and the recording of that
conveyance.
Transportation Facilities: "Transportation facilities" includes capital facilities related to
air, water, or land transportation.
Transportation Systems "Transportation systems management (TSM)" means the use
Management: of low capital expenditures to increase the capacity of the
transportation system. TSM strategies include but are not
limited to signalization, channelization, and bus turnouts.
Urban Growth: "Urban growth" refers to growth that makes intensive use of
land for the location of buildings, structures, and
impermeable surfaces to such a degree as to be incompatible
'" with the primary use of the land for the production of food,
'~ other agricultural products, or fiber, or the extraction of
~ mineral resources. When allowed to spread over wide areas,
urban growth typically requires urban governmental services.
"Characterized by urban growth" refers to land having urban
growth located on it, or to land located in relationship to an
area with urban growth on it as to be appropriate for urban
growth.
Urban Growth Area: "Urban growth area" means those areas designated by the
County pursuant to RCW 36.70A
Urban Services: "Urban services" or "urban governmental services" means
services that are normally available in an urban environment
which include provisions for sanitary waste systems, solid
waste disposal systems, water systems, urban roads and ,
pedestrian facilities, transit systems, stormwater sy. stems,
police and fire and emergency services systems, ~ electrical
and communication systems, school and health Care facilities,
and neighborhood and/or community park.
Utilities: "Utilities", "utility services", and "public utilities" :means '
enterprises or facilities serving the public by means of an
integrated system of collection, transmission, distribution,
and processing facilities through more or less permanent
physical connections between the plant of the serving entity
and the premises of the customer. Included are systems for
the delivery of natural gas, electricity, telecommunications
services, and water, and for the disposal of sewage.
Will: "Will" means the statement is an action decision-makers
intend to do to implement plan goals and policies. The use of
"will" in a statement indicates that the outcome can be
measured.
79_
80
IV. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
General Comments
This Comprehensive Plan has been developed in accordance with the requirements of the State
Growth Management Act. The City has met all of the Act's required deadlines for compliance
and has participated with Clallam County, the City of Forks, the City of Sequim, the Tribes and
various other agencies in the development of a County-Wide Planning Policy.
Early in the planning process the City agreed with the County to address only areas within the
current city limits in the City's Comprehensive Plan and to work with the County on a Joint
Comprehensive Plan for the Urban Growth Area.. On April 13, 1993, the Board of Clallam
County Commissioners adopted an Interim Port Angeles Urban Growth Area (see Figure 9).
When completed, the J'oint Comprehensive Plan for the Port Angeles Urban Growth Area will
identify land use designations and locations.
The following goals and policies are included in the Comprehensive Plan to insure continued
compliance with the Growth Management Act and compatibility with the County's
Comprehensive Plan outside of the PAUGA.
Goals, Policies, and Objective
Goal
A. To manage growth in a responsible manner that is beneficial to the community as a
whole, is sensitive to the rights and needs of individuals and is consistent with the State of
Washington's Growth Management Act.
' Policies '
1. In all its actions and to the extent consistent with the provisions of this
,-,h.ll
comprehensive plan, the City ...... should strive to implement the following goals of the
State Growth Manalgement Act:
a. Urban growth. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate
public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner.
b. Reduce sprawl. Reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land
into sprawling, Iow-density development.
c. Transportation. Encourage efficient multimodal transportation systems that
are based on regional priorities and coordinated with county and city
comprehensive plans.
d. Housing. Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic
segments of the population. Promote a variety of residential densities and
housing types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock.
e. Economic development. Encourage economic development throughout the
region that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote
economic opportunity, especially for unemployed and for disadvantaged
persons, and encourage growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic
growth, all within the capacities of the region's natural resources, public
services and public facilities.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Pla--~ ]_ Growth Management Element
Page 38
't f. Property rights. Private property should not be taken for public use without
just compensation having been made. The property rights of landowners
should be protected from arbitrary and discriminatory actions.
g. Permits. Applications for both state and local government permits should be
processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure predictability.
h. Natural resource industries. Maintain and enhance natural resource-based
industries, including productive timber, agricultural, and fisheries industries.
i. Open space and recreation. Encourage the retention of open space and
development of recreational opportunities, conserve fish and wildlife
habitat, increase access to natural resource lands and water, and develop
parks.
j. Environment. Protect .the environment and enhance the state's high quality
of life, including air and water quality, and the availability of water.
k. Citizen participation and coordination. Encourage the involvement of
citizens in the planning process and ensure coordination between ,
communities and jurisdictions to reconcile conflicts.
1. Public facilities and services. Ensure that those public facilitie~ and services
necessary to support development should be adequate to serve.the
development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use
without decreasing current service levels below locally established
minimum standards.
m. Historic preservation. Identify and encourage the preservation of lands,
sites and structures that have historical or archaeological significance.
2. The Port Angeles Urban Growth Area (PAUGA) should be established based at a
minimum upon land use demand as determined by the Clallam County 20-year
population forecast for Clallam County and specified sub-areas, so long as the
county-wide forecast is not less than the most recent forecasts available from the
State Office of Financial Management.
3. The City shall should work with the County to develop an annexation plan which
allows the annexation of land characterized by urban development and which is
consistent with the extension of services and the land development policies of the
City's Comprehensive Plan and Capital Facilities Plan.
4. The City should work with the County to ensure appropriate techniques for
managing future growth consistent with the urban density, such as a minimum
density within the PAUGA and a maximum density outside the PAUGA. A range
of densities should be provided by the City for lands within the PAUGA,
including some lands for relatively low density single-family development and
some lands at a range of densities both allowing and encouraging multi-family
development.
5. Urban services/facilities shall should be provided consistent with the Capital
Facilities Element.
6. The City should work with the County and other service providers to determine
the appropriate levels of service for such facilities and services and to ensure
consistency between service provision within the City, the PAUGA, and the
County.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plar~9- Growth Management Element
Page 39
g. The City's preferred policy is to recognize a density of one unit per acre as
urban/suburban and to use this density as the demarcation between urban and
rural for purposes of establishing or amending the PAUGA; however~ the City
will continue to discuss this issue with the County with the goal of arriving at a
consistent City/County policy prior to finalization of the UGA.
8. The PAUGA should include areas characterized by urban growth adjacent to the
existing City boundaries and should take into account the area's physical features.
9. Land designated for commercial or industrial Uses which encourage, adjacent
urban development shall should be located within the PAUGA.
10. The amount of acreage designated for commercial, industrial, or other non-
residential uses within the PAUGA shall should be based upon the Land Use
Element and Economic Development Element in the City's Comprel~ensive Plan.
11. The PAUGA should be established to avoid critical areas, unless addressed as part
of the City's Comprehensive Plan, and to exclude resource lands.
12. Urban services to be provided within the PAUGA should include, at .a minimum,
sanitary sewer systems, solid waste collection/disposal systems, water systems, .
urban roads and pedestrian facilities, street cleaning services, transit systems,
stormwater systems, police and fire and emergency services systems, electrical
and communication systems, school and health care facilities, and neighborhood
and/or community parks. '
13. The City should be the ultimate provider of urban services within the City limits
and the PAUGA for those services the City provides except to the extent
otherwise provided in a UGA Urban Services and Development Agreement that is
reached pursuant to the County-Wide Planning Policy.
14. Urban services/facilities for which the City is the ultimate provider should be
provided and constructed to meet the design and construction standards of the
City.
15. The City or service provider should demonstrate the financial capability for
continued operation of the facility following construction.
16. Regulations to protect critical areas which occur within the PAUGA should be
developed to ensure protection of such areas.
17. All development regulations ,shall should be promulgated with due regard for
private property rights in order to avoid regulatory takings or violation of due
process and to protect property rights of landowners from arbitrary and
discriminatory actions.
New 18. The City and County should together designate and set aside additional lands on
the west side of the City for industrial purposes, both inside the City limits and in
the UGA.
New 19. The City should establish performance measures to review progress toward
accommodating growth and to ensure appropriate actions are taken to achieve the
goals of our community.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plat83 Growth Management Element
Page 40
Objective
1. The City will continue its efforts to comply ina timely manner'with the
requirements of the State Growth Management Act.
2. The City will work with Clallam County and affected special districts to
extend the eastern PAUGA boundary from its current location at the west rim
of the Morse Creek Canyon to include the areas zoned GC, R-l, and RLC as
shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A, including the Deer Park Road
right-of-way ~outh of the GC zoning.
New 3. The City will recommend exphnsion of the southwestern Urban Growth Area
to include the area between Edgewood Drive to U.S. 101 from the City limits
to Laird Rd. (RCC3, RCC5, RLC, and RNC zones east of Laird Rd., plus the
area west of Laird Rd. currently zoned by Clallam County as RNC
New 4. The .City will'conduct a Buildable Lands Inventory to examine the need for
UGA expansions.
Goal
B. To ensure the orderly transition of land within the PAUGA into the City of Port Angeles.
Policies
1. Annexation of land, which is outside the established boundaries of the PAUGA,
shall not be allowed.
2. Annexation of land from within the established boundaries of the PAUGA shall
be in accordance with the established adopted Aannexation
laws.
3. AnnexationI of land, which is not adjacent to and/or contiguous with the
established City Limits boundary-line, shall should not be allowed.
4. At the time of annexation, the City shall should appropriately classify and zone
such land, based upon the City Comprehensive Land Use Map and the City
Comprehensive Plan. Thereafter, the provisions, restrictions, and requirements of
City Ordinance #1709, The Port Angeles Zoning Code, shall apply to
development of the annexed area.
5. Annexation and development of land shall should be consistent with the orderly
extension of urban services/facilities and in accordance with the City's
Comprehensive Plan and capital facility planning.
6. No annexation of land shall should be allowed in which existing development
cannot meet the established concurrency requirements of the City within six years
from the time of annexation.
7. No annexation of land shall should be allowed which results in decreased
minimum standards for City streets, water service, sewer service, and/or electrical
service provided to existing residents of the City.
8. No annexation of land should be allowed which results in decreased minimum
standards for City solid waste collection, stormwater management programs,
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plaps_~ Growth Management Element
' - Page 41
emergency services and/or telecommunication services provided to existing
residents of the City.
9. Annexation boundaries should be drawn to eliminate boundary,
interjurisdictional, and service problems.
10. Necessary rights-of-way and easements should be obtained prior to or at the time
of annexation.
New 11. The City should facilitate any annexation in a manner that will minimize financial
impact to all residents and businesses.
New 12. The City should annex its urban growth areas as facilities are extended into those
areas and as new urban development takes place.
Objectives:
1. The City will work with Clallam County and affected special districts to
develop fair and equitable interlocal revenue sharing agreements to insure the
ordcriy transition of land within the PAUGA into the City.
3. As the ultimate provider of urban services within the City limits and the urban
growth areas, the City will work with Clallam County and the affected special
districts to facilitate economic growth and new residential conStruction and to
encourage annexation of land within the PAUGA into the City.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plapl:l~ Growth Management Element
- Page 42
V. LAND-USE ELEMENT
General Comments
The Land Use Element establishes City policy regarding how land may be developed. This
element and its Land Use Map establishes the following six comprehensive plan land use
categories:
Low Density Residential,
Medium Density Residential,
High Density Residential,
Commercial,
Industrial, and
Open Space.
These land use categories are described below and located on the Land Use Map (See Figure 10).
Low Density Residential- I.~p to 9 _7 Units per Net Acre)
The Land Use Map identifies three separate categories of residential development. The first is
Low Density Residential which allows an overall residential density of a project or property to
range up to 9 7 units per ae~ acre. The high majority of residentially designated property in the
City will be of this designation. It is intended for the development of single family homes., It
also allows for the development of duplexes and planned residential developments in accordance
with the underlying zoning.
Medium Density Residential Error! Bookmark not defined. (Up to 1-5 13 Units per ~ Acre)
The primary intent of this designation is for the development of multiple residential unit projects
including but not limited to duplexes, townhomes, condominiums, apartments and planned
residential developments at a density up to 4-5 13 units per ae~ acre.
High Density Residential (Up to 43 39 Units ,-~
__ }, ...... Acre, Except that Existing Motel or Hotel
Units May Be Converted to Residential Units at a Density Greater than-43 39 Units per Net
Acre)
The primary intent of this designation is for development at a density up to 4-3 39 units per
acre and is intended for areas where a higher concentration of residents is compatible with the
surrounding area and uses. Condominiums, apartments, and planned residential developments
are the types of building designs appropriate for this category.
Commercial
The Land Use Map contains one commercial category, thus providing maximum flexibility to the
City's Zoning Ordinance in regulating the types of commercial uses and their permitted
locations.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element
Page 43
86_
IndustriaI The Land Use Map also designates only one industrial category, thus again providing
maximur$ flexibilitY to the City's Zoning Ordinance in regulating the types of industrial uses and
their permitted locations.
Open Space
The Open Space category includes areas of the City that contain unique or major physical '
features, such as marine shorelines, bluffs, ravines, major streams, wetlands, critical wildlife
habitat, and Other natural areas deemed of significant importance to the community. This
category also includes park and recreational uses. The development of natural open space areas
should be limited to only that which is necessary and does not degrade the significance of the
area.
Land Use Map Goal, Policies, and Objective
Goal
A To guide current and future development within the City in a manner that provides
certainty to its citizens about future land use and the flexibility necessary t.o. meet the
challenges and opportunities of the future.
Policies
1. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map should be used as a concept~ial guide for
determining current and long range zoning and other land use decisions. The map's
land use designations are intended to show areas where general land use types are
allowed. The area between land use designations should be considered an
imprecise margin in order to provide flexibility in determining the boundary of such
areas. When determining appropriate zoning designations for an area near a
margin, the goals, policies and objectives of the Land Use Element should take
precedence.
2. All land use decisions and approvals made by the City Council and/or any of its
appointed Commissions, Boards or Committees should be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and its land use map.
Objective
1. The City will review and revise as necessary the existing Zoning
Ordinance, Zoning Map, and other development regulations to ensure
consistency with the Comprehensive Plan.
Residential Goals and Policies
Goal
B. To have a community where residential development and use of the land are done in a
manner that is compatible with the environment, the characteristics of the use and the
users, and the desired urban design of the City.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element
Page 44
Policies
1. Urban services shall should be available for all residential areas as required by the
Capital Facilities Element concurrency policy.
2. Single family lots should be of reasonable shape and should have access provided
by an alley or by a local access street or a collector arterial.
New 3. Large lots should allow for future subdivisions at the densities permitted for the
zone in which they are located.
4_. All residential developments should be designed with the provisions of fire
protection and service vehicle access as key factors in street design and
circulation pattern.
'5_. For efficient circulation, rights-of-way should be obtained and improvements
made to further the grid street pattern in the central Townsite area of the City.
Cul-de-sacs and curvilinear streets may be permitted when designed as an integral
part of the maior ghd street pattern in the outlyin~ areas of the City, where low
impact development standards may apply.
46. All residential developments should be encouraged to preserve and capitalize on
existing unusual, unique, and interesting natural, historic, archaeological, and/or
cultural features, should preserve and utilize natural vegetation, should utilize and
preserve scenic views, should maximize southem exposures and solar efficiency,
should offer protection from prevailing winds, and should be designed to
minimize energy use.
:S7. Pl:rme~ T T_;, r, .... ~ .....* and Planned Residential Development techniques
should emphasize the overall density of the development rather than
~^*° ^' '~ .... ~; ..... ;*" minimum lot sizes.
Goal
C. To have a community of viable districts and neighborhoods with a variety of residential
opportunities for personal interaction, fulfillment and enjoyment, attractive to people of
all ages, characteristics and interests.
Policies
1. Residential land should be developed on the district and neighborhood concept.
Although such districts may be composed primarily of residential uses of a
uniform density, a healthy, viable district should be composed of residential uses
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element
Page 45
88-
of varying densities, which may be augmented, by subordinate and compatible
uses. Single family and multi-family homes, parks and open-spaces, schools,
churches, daycare and residential services, home occupations, and district
shopping areas are all legitimate components of district development and
enhancement. A neighborhood should be primarily composed of low, medium, or
high density housing.
2. Medium and high density housing should be located in areas of the community
most suitable for such uses, based on existing services; public facilities, and
transportation.
3. Medium and high density housing should be served by arterial streets of sufficient
size in order to satisfy traffic demand and to lessen neighborhood traffic
congestion.
4. Medium and high density housing could be a transitional use between different
land uses, provided such other uses would not adversely impact the residential
nature °'f the housing.
5. Medium and high density housing policies should apply to mobile home parks.
6. Manufactured homes homes that meet current state regulations should be treated
as ar}y-other site constructed housing for land use zoning purposes.
Objective
1. The City will develop a Residential, Single Family (RS-12) zone with
minimum 12,000 square foot lots.
Commercial Goals and Policies
Goal
D. To create and mainlain a healthy and diverse commercial sector for a balanced and stable
local economy.
Policies
1. The City should encourage new and existing commercial developments and
businesses, which are consistent with the goals and policies of this
Comprehensive Plan.
2. Public uses such as government offices, public service buildings, and other public
and quasi-public facilities and services may should be allowed in commercially
designated areas.
3. The City should vacate rights-of-way to facilitate retention of existing businesses
and location of new businesses where land assembly is necessary to achieve the
desired urban design of the City.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element
Page 46
I Objectives
1. The City will work with the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe to devel'op a cultural'
center and marina for large pleasure boats in Port Angeles Harbor.
2. The City will develop an Ediz Hook master plan that designates land uses,
improves public access to shorelines, abates deteriorating structures, and
allows for expanded recreational and commercial uses.
3. The City will develop a Commercial Regional (CR) zone to allow and
encourage land intensive commercial uses (e.g. large regional shopping
centers or "big box" stores), where sufficient vacant, buildable, commercial
designated land and adequate transportation facilities exist.
Goal
E. To provide shopping opportunities which meet the needs of all City residents and visitors
in safe, usable shopping areas that are compatible with the surrounding area and use~, the
environment, and the desired urban design of the City.
Policies
1.Urban services shall should be available for all commercial areas as required by
the Capital Facilities EIement concurrency policy. . ,
N i 1 d I p ld ^"~ ..... ~' ...... *' ......: ......
2. ew commerc a eve o ments shou ,~.,~,. ...... .~.~j ,..,~. ...............
,,,,,~,~ ......................................... v .............. ow a custer
configuration rather than a strip pattern.
3. Commercial development should buffer its impacts on adjacent residential uses.
Where commercial development is adjacent to residential uses, the commercial
development should incorporate elements in the site design to soften the impacts
on the residential uses.
4. Service access should be distinct from parking areas and separated from
pedestrian areas wherever and whenever possible to accommodate pedestrian and
vehicular traffic.
5.Commercial development outside the Highway 101 corridor should not be in a
strip pattern.
6.New Comprehensive Plan commercial area designations should not be located
along the alternate local crosstown route or the crosstown truck route.
7. District shopping areas should be located at the intersections of arterial streets of
sufficient size to satisfy traffic demand and at the boundaries of neighborhoods so
that more than one neighborhood may be served.
8. District Neighborhood shopping area uses she, u!d may be allowed in residentially
designated areas as long as they are in accordance with the planning
area/district/neighborhood land use concept and as long as they do not encourage
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element
Page 47
90
d ....... neighborhood or increase traffic congestion within
lI traffic from outside the ;~'-;~
residential neighborhoods.
Objective
1. The City will increase the commercial area available for development of new
businesses or the expansion of existing businesses by extending the
Commercial Arterial (CA) zone a half block to include the whole blocks north
of Front Street (from Francis Street east to White's Creek Ravine) and south
of First Street (from Eunice Street east to Chambers Street). .
Goal
F. To Provide a pleasant, safe, and attractive shopping environment in the tradi.tional
downtown waterfront area which provides a wide variety of shopping, dining,
entertainment, and housing opportunities for visitors and residents alike.
Policies
1. Commercial development in the traditional downtown should reemphasize its ,
waterfront location and historic heritage, should be oriented to pedestrians and
tourists, and should provide maximum enjoyment of the environment and public
amenities as well as protection from adverse weather conditions.
2. The City should continue to promote improvements to the traditional downtbwn
area, through beautification projects and in cooperation with downtown business
merchants.
3.Residential uses should be encouraged for the downtown area as part of a mixed-
use development concept.
4. The City should work with the Port Angeles Downtown Association to develop
urban design review guidelines that facilitate architectural elements/features,
which should encourage complimentary and aesthetically pleasing new
development in the Central Business District (CBD).
Objectives
1. The City will assist the Chamber of Commerce and the Port Angeles Downtown
Association in developing heritage tourism and the Downtown an histc~c
underground walking ~
2. The City will assist the Chamber of Commerce and the Port Angeles Downtown
Association in developing a waterfront promenade along the Downtown
waterfront.
3. The City will encourage community events such as holiday ceremonies, town
gatherings, arts and crafts displays, and special business activities such as a
Farmer's Marker during the tourist season, particularly in the Downtown and on
Laurel Street.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element
Page 48
91
4. The City will consider various parking options to mitigate parking impacts from
the GatewayProject and other Downtown proiects.
Industrial Goals and Policies
Goal
G. To create and maintain a healthy and diverse industrial sector for a balanced and stable
local economy.
Policies
1. The City should promote a cooperative intergovernmental plan for comprehensive
development of industrial infrastructure and amenities to attract and support light
and hea~y industry.
2. Office and commercial uses may be allowed in specific designated industrial
areas.
.3. The William R. Fairchild International Airport should be considered an essential
public facility as referenced in Appendix B (Clallam County-Wide Planning
Process).
Goal
H. To provide opportunities for industrial development in a manner which efficiently uses
the community's various attributes and natural resources, has minimal impact on the
environment, an~ contributes to the City's quality of life, and is compatible with the
desired urban design of the City.
Policies
1. Urban services sha!l should be available for all industrial areas as required by the
Capital Facilities Element concurrency policy.
2. Infrastructure, which makes sites attractive and ready to develop, including
transportation facilities and utilities, should be available at industrial parks.
Industrial development should be encouraged to follow industrial park design
concepts.
3. Industrial areas should buffer their impact to mitigate nuisance and hazardous
characteristics such as noise, particulate matter in the air, water or odor pollution,
or objectionable visual material.
4. Industrial activity should be located in two major areas: adjacent to the harbor and
around the airport.
5. Because they are hazardous to the community and detrimental to the general
environment of the area petroleum refineries, liquefied natural gas and liquefied
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element
Page 49
99
petroleum gas facilities, energy facilities, energy plants and their associated
facilities and associated transmission facilities, as defined in Chapter 80.50 RCW,
should not be permitted outside the heavy industrial use area and without
conditional use review.
6. The City should discourage the siting of incompatible uses adjacent to the
William R. Fairchild International Airport recognizing the need to coordinate
airport related .uses and other existing land uses that are already established in the
vicinity.
Objectives
1. The City will develop an industrial marine (lM) zone for shoreline uses
similar to the upland industrial park (IP) zone, which allows for mixed
commercial and industrial uses.
2. The City will establish a Harbor Study committee comprised of private and
public stakeholders in harbor uses and activities to review and revise the
Harbor R~so~rce Management Plan, considering changes that have occurred
it,,-the-past ~ since its adoption and visions that now seem possible.
New Goal
I ' To facilitate and encourage redevelopment and reuse of large closed or isolated industrial
areas within the City in a manner that fosters the local economy and a stable job base.
New Policies
The City should consider a wider range of uses for redevelopment of large closed
or isolated industrial areas than would otherwise be permitted under industrial
zoning, including mixed-use development, commercial development and/or
residential development as well as industrial uses.
The City should consider proposals for any needed amendment of the
Comprehensive Plan and zoning concurrently with an application for a binding
site plan for some or all of the site of a large closed or isolated industrial property,
provided that any change to the comprehensive plan will be acted on as part of the
City's annual Comprehensive Plan amendment cycle.
3_ The City should approve mixed-use or nonindustrial development of large closed
or isolated industrial sites where it is shown that permitting a wider range of uses
on the site will not contribute to or encourage the conversion of other industrial
areas to nonindustrial use.
New Objective
_1 The City will create a planned industrial development overlay zone for the
purpose of allowing mixed-use development for large closed or isolated
industrial sites.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element
Page 50
93
Open S~ace Goals, Policies, and Objective
Goal
/-:.J To create open space for relief within the urban landscape, to retain natural landscapes, to
preserve fish and wildlife habitat, and to provide natural corridors, which connect wildlife
habitats.
Policies '
1. The City should further public interest by designating open spaces to preserve
unique or major physical features, such as marine shorelines, bluffs, ravines,
streams, wetlands, wildlife habitat and other environmentally sensitive areas
deemed of significant importance to the community.
2. The City s~all should limit the use of and access to such natural areas to only that
which does not degrade the significance of the area and which protects the rights
of property owners.
3.Wooded areas serve a functional purpose in climate, noise, light, habitat, and
pollution control and should be preserved as part of the urban landscape.
4.The City s hall should discourage intensive recreational uses and impervious
surfaces in sensitive open space areas. '
Objectives
1. The City will develop a program of land banking, transfer of development
rights, or other innovative techniques, which preserve open spaces.
2. The City will support development of a public golf course.
3. The City will develop an Ediz Hook master plan that designates land uses,
improves public access to shorelines, abates deteriorating structures, and
allows for expanded recreational and commercial uses.
Goal
:I K__~. To encourage the development of parks and recreational opportunities for all residents of
the City and to increase access to natural areas in a manner that minimizes adverse
impacts, and to achieve the desired urban design of the City.
Policies
1.The City s~a!! should include all City-owned parks in its designated open spaces
and establish development standards that discourage conversion of open spaces.
2. Development and planning of parks and recreational facilities should follow a
comprehensive service and facility plan consistent with the Capital Facilities
Element.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element
Page 51
3. Public parks and recreational facilities should be equitably distributed throughout.
the City to afford access to all residents.
4. Every effort'should be made to consolidate and utilize land donated for public use
which provides common open space, public buildings, parks, and recreational
opportunities.
5. The City should preserve and maintain unique or major physical features
contained within the boundaries of City parks and recreational areas for access
and enjoyment by residents of the community.
6. The City should cooperate with the County and other jurisdictions in planning,
funding, constructing, and managing multi-purpose recreation and transportation
trails which link together various areas of the City, the Port Angeles Urban
Growth Area (PAUGA), and other areas of the County and region.
Objective
1. The City will establish standards for development of trails, which minimize
the impact on designated open spaces.
New 2_:. The City will develop neighborhood parks for the developing areas on the
west, south and east sides of the City to support new subdivisions
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element
Page 52
95
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP Figure 10
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element
Page 53
96
VI. ][RANSPORTATION ELEMENT
General Comments
The intent of the Transportation Element is to define in a comprehensive manner how vehicular
traffic and nonmotorized means of travel are to be routed from one portion of the community to
another in the most efficient, economical, and compatible manner. The City's Circulation Plan in
accordance with the Statewide National Functional Classification System identifies the City's
principal arterial streets, minor arterial streets, and collectors with the remaining streets classified
as locals (See Figure 11).
Goals, Policies, and Objectives
Goal
A. To develop a coordinated, multimodal transportation system, which serves all areas of the
city and all types of users in a safe, economical, and efficient manner.
Policies
1. Pedestrian and bicycle paths, bike racks, storage facilities, drinking fountains, and
benches should be an integral part of thc circulation system.
2. Thc safety of non-motorized modes of transportation should be a primary '
consideration in thc circulation system. Adequate sidewalks, crosswalks, and
handicapped access should bc provided.
3.Thc collector arterial streets and local access streets should serve primarily local
traffic with special emphasis on safety for pedestrian traffic.
4.A multimodal transportation center should bc located in or near thc downtown
core and public transportation system.
5. Thc City should consider securing rights to the usc of air space where it may be
valuable to the community.
6. Planning for transportation services and facilities (including public streets,
bikeways, pedestrian walkways, and public and private air, marine and land
transit services and facilities) shall should be performed consistent with the goals
and policies of the Capital Facilities Element.
New 7. The City should update the Transportation Element to be consistent with Bill 1487
and the Regional Transportation Plan.
Objectives
1. The City will be an active partner in the development of the Olympic
Discovery Trail which passes through and along key parts of its park, street,
pedestrian, and nonmotorized transportation systems and facilities. The City's
Circulation Plan acknowledges that such a regional trail system serves many
functions. It is a means of intercity commuting, a way to promote economic
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
Page 54
97
development, a means to promote a healthy lifestyle, and a way to provide
future utility right-of-way.
New 2_ The City will support the extension of the Waterfront (Olympic Discovery)
Trail from Marine Drive at Hill Street to the western City limits.
New 3_ The City will designate 'N' Street as a bike route on the Nonmotorized
Transportation Plan Map.
i! 4. The City's Comprehensive Plan will continue efforts to improve or provide
access to Valley, Tumwater, Peabody, Ennis, and White's Creeks and the
development of the Foothills Trail System.
tr .... F .......... .~ ........
4 _5. The City will work with the property owner to assure completion of the
Waterfront Trail through the former Rayonier Mill site.
~ 6. The City will incorporate bicycle friendly amenities including bike path
development and maintenance, signage, and storage into new transportation
facility improvements.
6 7. The City will encourage public streetscape improvements as street trees,
seasonal displays, and pedestrian amenities through a comprehensive
development and maintenance plan.
Goal
B. To improve circulqtion patterns across and within the community, and to achieve the
desired urban design of the City.
Policies
1. Traffic flow modifications such as signalization, signing, parking restrictions,
channelization, and one-way couplets should be made before physical alterations
are made to existing streets.
2. The City should divert crosstown truck traffic around the downtown area.
3. The City should facilitate the development of a crosstown truck route with
improvements, which provide full access to Highway 117 to and from Highway
101, and improvements to the Lauridsen Boulevard Bridge over Peabody Creek
and the intersections of Lauridsen Boulevard at Race Street and Highway 101.
4. The City should facilitate an additional route for local crosstown traffic along
Lauridsen Boulevard across White's Creek ultimately connecting with Highway
101.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
Page 55
98
5. In association with these two proposed crosstown routes the City should require
adequate mitigation measures to reduce any negative impacts on existing land
uses, including buffer areas, pedestrian sidewalks and crossings, bikeways, and
reduced speeds.
Amend 6. The City should facilitate the development of an alternate local crosstown route
with improvements, which provide full access at Highway 101 and Highway 117
(the Tumwater Truck Route). Improvements should be made to the intersections
of Lauridsen Boulevard at Lincoln and Peabody Streets. Improvements should be
made to the Lauridsen Boulevard bridge over Peabody Creek. Improvement
should be made for the development of a crossing over White's Creek. The City
will should revise its development regulations as necessary to preserve the right-
of-way within an identified US 101 corridor.
7. Alternate local crosstown route and crosstown truck route improvements should
be given a high priority in capital facility planning.
8. The City shall sh'ould coordinate with the State Department of Transportation,
Clallam County, and the Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning
Organization transportation planning efforts. This includes recognition of SR 101
and SR 117, along with connecting roadways of Front, Lincoln, Railroad, Oak,
and First Streets to and from the ferry landings, and along Front Street and Marine
Drive and First Street between SR 101 and SR 117, as transportation facilities of
state-wide significance which are declared essential public facilities under the
Growth management Act. Review of potential impacts these facilities and LOS
standards will be incorporated with future updates to the City's Comprehensive
Plan, as required by the Act.
9. Traffic circulation to and from the airport and around associated industrial areas
should be improved.
10. The City should complete the arterial circulation system for westside
developmeht.
11. New arterial streets, local access streets, and alleys should be designed and
constructed to conform to the Statewide National Functional Classification
System for Federal Aid Systems, WSDOT, and Transportation Improvement
Board minimum design standards and standards as adopted by the City.
12. Arterial street rights-of-way should be acquired by the City in advance of the time
of development in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan's Circulation Plan
Map.
13. Principal, minor, and collector arterial streets should be located on the edge of
district boundaries wherever possible.
14. Off-street parking should be sufficient and accessible within business and
residential areas to ensure that the traffic flow of the street is not impaired.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
Page 56
99
1~5. Road improvements should provide for alternate modes of transportation, and
new roads should be evaluated for the ability to accommodate alternate modes of.
transportation.
16. Parking requirements should make allowances for shared parking facilities.
17. The City should assist the public transit system by providing convenient access
between neighborhoods, residential, commercial, and industrial areas and between
major community facilities. .
18. Police and fire protection should be a key factor in residential subdivision street
designs and circulation patterns.
19. The development of the City's comprehensive service and facilities plan for
streets, bikeways, pedestrian walkways, and the overall transportation system, and
regional transportation plans should all be consistent. These plans, as adopted and
hereafter amended, are incorporated herein. ,
New 20. The City should work with other jurisdictions to identify and protect a right-of-
way for a second street accessing the City from the east. '
Objectives
1. Secondary and primary arterials will be designed with an appropriate balance
for moving through traffic and providing local access to uses that front on
these arterials. In commercially zoned areas, policies for consolidating access
and providing for joint access and maintenance of driveways would be
considered.
2. The City will develop a variety of funding techniques available for new
development projects to provide mitigation for transportation impacts
resulting from new development or redevelopment. The funding techniques
could include but are not limited to developer provided fight-of-way and
partial improvement to the street along the frontage of their property,
establishing a road development or trip end fee, use of latecomers agreements,
waivers of protest to the formation of LID's and bonding. The intent would be
to match the technique to the development circumstance in order for the City
to fund the transportation improvements that ensure concurrency. Whichever
approaches are taken, they must be equitable and proportional to the level of
impact.
3. The City will develop road improvement design standards, which will include
accommodation for pedestrians and non-motorized transportation. Pedestrian
facilities design will be appropriate for the safety, volume and character of
non-motorized/pedestrian traffic in each neighborhood or district.
4.The City will phase the implementation of the alternate local crosstown route
and crosstown truck route in a west to east progression.
5. A study to evaluate options for easterly access across Whites and Ennis
Creeks in the vicinity of Golf Course Road will be prepared.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
Page 57
1110
'~ 6. The City will consider a variety of traffic management alternatives to increase
1 the existing street system capacity and implement appropriate options as
feasible. Such alternatives may include:
a. Taking into account nonmotorized use;
b. Remove parking at controlled intersections to provide auxiliary
turn lanes to increase capacity;
c. Remove parking during selected periods of the day .(i.e.,noon and
PM peak hour) to create additional through land capacity;
d. Modify signal timing to respond to seasonal and/or daily peak
traffic periods to favor major flows and expand the n.umber of
signals that are coordinated as part of a system, while assuring
enough time for a handicapped citizen to cross when a signal
button is pushed.
7. The City will coordinate with the County, RTPO, and State and Federal
agencies in the study of a possible future US 101 corridor including the Heart
of the Hills Parkway and Coastal Corridor concepts. East of Race Street, the
alternate local crosstown route (along Lauridsen Boulevard) will not be
considered as a future US 101 corridor.
8. The City will implement street improvements planned to provide accesS; to
and improve circulation around the south side of the airport along Lauridsen
Boulevard and Airport Road and the west side of the airport along Milwaukee
Drive to Lower Elwha Road.
9. The r,;~ ..... :. ~,~.~:~. ~ +~
,_,,,j ..................... force to develop a
New 9. The City will update the adopted Nonmotorized Transportation Map from
time to time.
10. The City will update transportation policies to refocus circulation patterns,
street improvements, essential state highways, truck routing, and traffic
controls throughout the City.
11. The City will facilitate the implementation of City-adopted transportation
plans.
New 12. The City will seek funding to evaluate and improve West 18th Street,
including the addition ofnonmotorized facilities.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
Page 58
101
CIRCULATION PLAN MAP Figure 11
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
Page 59
102
INCLUDE NoNMOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION MAP HERE Figure 12
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
Page 60
103
UTILITIES AND PUBLIC SERVICES ELEMENT
General Comments
The Utilities and Public Services Element identifies and addresses the various services that make
a community a safe and desirable place to live. It also establishes policies that define which
services are the responsibility of the City to provide and which should be provided by the
community as a whole.
Goals, Policies, and Objectives
Goal
A. To provide or allow the opportunity for services and facilities which enhance the quality
of life for Port Angeles citizens of all ages, characteristics, needs, and interests and to achieve the
desired urban design of the City.
Policies
1. Public facilities should be equitably distributed across the City's planning areas
including designated Urban Growth Areas.
2. Public facilities shall should contain provisions for citizens with disabilities and
should be constructed according to accepted standards.
3. Social services providing home care should be located in residential
neighborhoods in a manner that maintains the character of the immediate
neighborhood.
4. Comprehensive service and facility plans shall should be consistent with the
City's Comprehensive Plan and should be implemented through applicable land
use approvals and construction permits.
New 5. The City should plan and seek funding to expand its existing infrastructure, to
ensure economic vitality, and to improve the quality of life in Port Angeles.
Goal
B. To support services and facilities through different levels of participation in cooperation
with other public or private agencies.
Policies
1. The City should be the "primary responsible agency" and should take the lead in
cooperation with other governmental entities to provide:
· utility and emergency services (water, sewer, electrical, stormwater,
police, fire and emergency medical response services)
· transportation infrastructure, including trails and sidewalks and
· parks and recreation
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Utilities and Public Services Element
Page 61
2. The City should participate as a "financial partner" to support essential programs
'and services including:
· youth recreation programs and facilities
· library facilities
· senior programs
· low and moderate income housing programs
· facilities for senior programs
· utility assistance for low income households and
· social and public health services.
3. As a "supporter," the City should, promote and cooperate in providing programs
and services including:
· . library programs such as information and assistance
· affordable housing information and referral
· economic and business development services
· ., tourism information and services
· schools and community learning
· fine arts
· community recreation
· public and private youth, family and senior services
· telecommunications and
· crime prevention programs.
4. The City should develop and use public facilities cooperatively, in the promotion
of social and community services.
Goal
C. To provide safe, clean, usable, and attractive public facilities which enhance the cultural,
educational, economic, recreational, and environmental attributes of the City.
Policies t
1. Industrial diversification should be supported by the development of urban
services.
Amend 2. All ne-:,' util:~ty ~er-,Scc~ :~cu!d be underground. The City should place a high
priority on installing new utility lines underground to increase safety and
reliability and to improve neighborhood appearance.
3. Where possible, new utilities should be located in alleys.
4. Major parks and large open spaces should provide for a variety of outdoor
activities and be located to take advantage of natural processes (such as wetlands
and tidal actions) and unusual landscape features (such as cliffs and bluffs).
5. The City park and recreation system should provide a variety of settings and
activities suitable to people of all ages, characteristics, and interests.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Utilities and Public Services Element
Page 62
i. The City should place special emphasis on the recreational needs of the youth of
the community, including bicycle safety education programs.
Objectives
1. When development warrants, the. City will coordinate the efforts for a new fire
station to the west with the Port of Port Angeles at Fairchild International
.Airport and a new station to the east with Fire District No. 2.
2. The City will develop and implement maintenance programs for all public
facilities under its jurisdiction.
Goal
D. To provide utility services in an efficient and cost-effective manner.
Policies
1. Urban services should be designed for the maximum planned density and/o{ land
use intensity of a given area as designated on the Comprehensive. Plan Land Use
Map.
2. The City should provide urban services only in areas that are logical extensions of
areas, which are currently served by such services or needed to implement a
specific goal of the Comprehensive Plan.
3.The City, at its sole discretion, should extend urban services outside the City
without annexation.
4. The City shall should promote energy conservation and recycling efforts
throughout the community. The City's own practices shall should serve as a
model.
5.The City should promote the joint use of transportation fights-of-way and utility
corridors for all forms of transportation, including nonmotorized.
6.The City should promote coordination between road construction and utility
installation.
7. The City should allow for simultaneous processing of all development permits.
8. The City should promote coordination among adjacent planning jurisdictions to
3. encourage consistency between each jurisdiction's utility plans and standards and
the development of a coordinated process for siting utility facilities.
9. The City should identify lands useful for public purposes, such as utility corridors,
landfills, sewage treatment facilities, transportation (including nonmotorized),
recreation, schools, and other public uses.
10. Planning for utility services shall should be consistent with the goals and policies
of the Capital Facilities Element.
11. New development should be served by sanitary sewers.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Utilities and Public Services Element
Page 63
106
12. The City, at its sole discretion, should provide sanitary sewer service to urban
I development and outlying areas within the City limits and in the urban growth
areas and to areas of intensive rural development, while prohibiting service to
other areas of rural development.
13. Urban services provided in areas outside the City limits and not designated for
future and land uses on the Comprehensive Land Use Map should be sized for
potential urban growth in those areas, while generally prohibiting service to areas
of rural development. ,
New 14. The City should implement the policies adopted in the Water Resources Inventory
Area 18 Watershed Management Plan, including the provision of water supply to
the urban areas in and between the Elwha River and Morse Creek drainage basins.
New 15. The City should provide infrastructure to all industrial lands to encourage
development.
New 16. as sewer is extended into Urban Growth Areas, those hooking up should be,
required to sigh a no-protest annexation agreement.
Objectives
1. The City will develop a phased plan for the extension of urban services.
2. The City will institute a program to promote water and energy conservation
techniques in new development. '
~3. The City ;;'il! work "';P' the '~ ~*" ,~. .........
...... ou,,,: on .... d,...2%.
.... n.~, ........ plan See
............ or .... Pc,~ Ang..,,.s
new policy D.14
43. Recycling programs will be used to reduce solid waste disposal.
New 4~ The City will extend sewer into the eastern Urban Growth Area.
New 5_ The City will extend sewer into the southwestern Urban Growth Area.
New 6~ The City will close the Port Angeles landfill and establish a solid waste
transfer station at the landfill site per the Public Works and Utilities
Department plan.
Goal
E. To provide quality customer service with honesty, integrity and flexibility.
Policies
1. The City should promote efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of
customer service.
2. The City should promote responsibility and fiscal accountability in the provision
of customer service.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Utilities and Public Services Element
Page 64
107
3. ~The City should encourage a positive attitude, trust, initiative, and compassion
with a high standard of professionalism and open communication among its
employees and with the public.
4. The City should respect diversity and foster a safe environment.
5. The City should work in partnership with the community as stewards of the area's
unique environment and quality of life.
Objectives
1. The City will implement a customer commitment program that promotes
internal and external customer service.
2. The customer commitment program will include the development of a city-
wide statement of values which should be incorporated in all aspects of
customer service.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Utilities and Public Services Element
Page 65
108
VIII. HOUSING ELEMENT
General Comments
The City recognizes the extreme importance of available clean, safe, and affordable housing in
the community. In April of 1991, a Housing Needs Assessment Study was conducted for the
Port Angeles area as part of a larger two county study. This report is included with the
Comprehensive Plan as Appendix C.
The results of this study and public comments greatly influenced the development of the
following goals and policies, which strive to improve the quality, affordability, and availability
of housing for all segments of the community. '
Goals, Policies, and Objectives
Goal ,
A. To improve the vari_'ety, quality, availability, and affordability of housing opportunities in
the City of Port Angeles.
Policies
' 1. The City should expand the residential land use options in the Zoning Code by
classifying residential zones by allowed density rather than by housing types.
2. Residential uses should be allowed in all non-industrial zones, including
commercial and office zones.
3. The retention and development of safe and attractive mobile home parks should
be encouraged.
4. The City should develop a program to improve substandard housing in the City of
Port Angel~s.
5. The City sliould plan for sufficient urban services to support future housing in a
variety of allowable densities.
6. Accessory residential units should be allowed in certain residential zones, upon
approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
7. The City should promote acceptance of low and moderate income housing
through public information programs.
8. The City should consider the effect of impact fees on the affordability of housing
prior to establishing such impact fees.
9. In State and Federal publicly assisted housing under current contracts, the City
should require property owners who demolish, substantially rehabilitate, change
the use of residential property, or remove use restrictions developments to provide
relocation assistance to those tenants displaced as provided for in sections 49 and
50 of the Growth Management Act (See RCW 59.18.440 and .450).
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Page 66
109
New ] 0. The City should increase densities in some areas of the sparsely developed
southwestern UGA along Lauridsen Boulevard from low density to medium
density.
Goal
B. To participate with Clallam County and other entities in programs to increase the
availability and affordability of public assisted housing and rental units as well as other
affordable housing opportunities. '
Policies
1.' The City should participate in a county-wide housing task force comprised of
representatives from government, financial institutions, business, construction,
real estate, non-profit housing entities, and other citizens interested in housing
issues. A major goal of the task force should be coordinating efforts to prov, ide
affordable housing, e,;c,~uraging rapid review of low and moderate income
housing projects throughout the County, and promoting public education and
awareness regarding the need for and nature of affordable housing.
2. The City should cooperate with the county-wide housing task force and other
agencies in assembling packages of publicly owned land which could be used for
low and moderate income housing and for shelter or transitional hOusing. '
3. The City, in cooperation with the County, should promote innovative housing
techniques and should explore creative regulatory programs for the purpose of
creating affordable housing opportunities. Such programs may include the
transfer of development rights into high density receiving zones, density bonuses
and regulation allowances for guaranteed low and moderate income housing
projects, planned unit developments, and high density detached single family
residential developments.
4. The City should invite the Clallam County Housing Authority to participate in a
variety of affordable housing opportunities.
5. The City should seek representation on the Clallam County Housing Authority
and non-profit housing organizations.
6. Adequate low and moderate income housing opportunities should be provided
within the Port Angeles Planning Area.
7. A scattered site housing construction program should be promoted.
8. The City should support affordable housing by developing utility cost savings
programs.
. 9. The City should help support the provision of transitional and temporary housing
for the homeless and/or displaced families.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Page 67
110
Objectives
1. The City will work with the housing task force to determine that, the supply of
land will be sufficient for all housing needs including but not limited to
government-assisted housing, housing for low-income families, manufactured
housing, multifamily housing, group homes, foster-care facilities, and single-
room occupancies (SRO).
2. The City will reference the Clallam County Housing Needs Study and
subsequent analyses that update the information in evaluating l;he type,
amount, and location of needed housing.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Page 68
lll
IX. CONSERVATION ELEMENT
General Comments
The Conservation Element establishes the importance of quality of life to the people of Port
Angeles. A clean, healthy, and diverse natural environment along with a variety of historical and
cultural amenities is critical elements of a high quality community.
Goals, Policies, and Objectives
Goal
A. To create and 'maintain a community with a high quality of life where the land is used in a
manner that is compatible with the area's unique physical features, its natural, historical,
archaeological, and cultural amenities, and the overall environment.
Policies
1. The City should require all development, including the location and design of all
structures and open space areas, to be compatible with the unique physical
features and natural amenities of the land and complement the environment in
which it is placed, while recognizing the rights of private ownership.
2. The City should promote compatibility between the land and its use by regulating
the intensity of the land use.
3. The City should adopt development criteria, which promote the use of innovative
design techniques to provide for the use of the land in a manner compatible with
any unique physical features or valuable natural, historical, and/or cultural
amenities.
Objective!
1. The City will encourage streetscape improvements to beautify entryway
corridors. Incentives may be developed to encourage private property
participation in such beautification projects.
Goal
g. To protect and enhance the area's unique physical features, its natural, historical,
archaeological, and cultural amenities, and the overall environment.
Policies
1. The City should further the public interest by protecting and enhancing the area's
unique physical features, valuable natural historical, archaeological, and cultural
amenities, and the overall environment, while recognizing the rights of private
ownership.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Conservation Element
Page 69
112
2. The City should maintain and preserve its unique physical features and natural
amenities, such as creeks, streams, lakes, ponds, wetlands, ravines, bluffs,
shorelines, and fish and wildlife habitats.
3. The City should protect and enhance the characteristics of its unique residential
neighborhoods.
4. Building density should decrease as natural constraints increase.
5. The City shall should establish minimum Standards for development of properties,
which contain or adjoin critical areas for the purpose of protecting such areas and
enhancing their natural functions.
6. The City should regulate site design, preparation, and development to avoid or
minimize damage to wetlands and other environmentally sensitive areas.
7. Recognizing the functions and values of wetlands, the City should strive to
achieve no net loss of wetlands.
8. The City should preserve uniquely featured lands, which still exist ~n their natural
states and which are notable for their aesthetic, scenic, historic, or ecological
features and should prohibit any private or Public development, which would
destroy such qualities, while recognizing the tights of private ownership.
9. The City should promote public access to the shoreline, while preserving a
healthy shoreline environment.
10. The City should enhance and preserve the quality of its air and water as two of its
unique physical features.
11. The City should protect its air and water quality by minimizing potential new
pollution from new and existing sources.
12. The City shall should develop and implement a plan to improve water quality,
which incl]udes measures to reduce and minimize stormwater pollutants and
combined sewer overflow pollutant discharges.
13. The CitY should use regionally consistent requirements for industrial and
commercial sewer discharge pretreatment and require new indirect dischargers to
locate where appropriate sewer service can be made available.
14. The City should maintain and enhance the quality of water resources through the
regulation of cleating, grading, dumping, discharging, and draining and the
provision of flood and erosion control measures and regulations to protect
wetlands and other environmentally sensitive areas.
15. Through the retention of existing vegetation, the City should protect water quality
and prevent erosion.
Amend 16. The City should designate open space areas to preserve major or unique physical
features, an~/cr to serve as natural greenbelts and wildlife corridors, and to
establish an urban edge to the PAUGA.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Conservation Element
Page 70
113
7. The City should identify and significant public scenic view corridors.
preserve
18. The City should encourage identification, preservation, and restoration of sites
and structures that have historical or cultural significance.
19. The City should give precedence to long-term environmental impacts and benefits
over short-term environmental impacts and benefits.
20.. The City should promote and utilize environment enhancing conservation
practices such as waste recycling and energy conservation and should encourage
the development and use of alternative forms of energy and transportation.
21. The City should coordinate its environmental regulations with County, State, and
Federal regulations to simplify the permitting process and to reduce associated
costs to the land user.
New 22. The City should reference the Washington State Citations o_fRecommended
Sources of Best A va ilable Scien ce_for Designating and Protecting Critical ,~ :'cas
(as periodically updated) and other research identified as more locally appropriate
and applicable (when it is available) as Best Available Science in the Critical '
Areas Ordinance.
Objectives
1. The City will work closely with State agencies on further development.of
regulations and coordinated enforcement of air quality standards.
2. The City will adopt and enforce adequate regulations designed to maintain
and enhance water quality.
3. The City will identify and implement site specific requirements for individual
development proposals to mitigate any negative impacts created by the
development, particularly to an area identified as an environmentally sensitive
area.
4. The City will adopt and enforce regulations, which require all new
development to provide adequate stormwater retention/detention facilities
necessary to protect water quality.
5. The City will complete an inventory and identification of areas identified as
Habitats of Local Importance to assure that important habitat connections are
not severed.
6. The City will complete an inventory and identification of wetlands.
7. The City will encourage clustering of residential development where
necessary to protect environmentally sensitive areas, or to avoid hazardous
areas, or to preserve open space areas.
8. The City will develop a stormwater management plan.
9. The City will develop guidelines to evaluate new development that occurs
near scenic resources.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Conservation Element
Page 71
114
10. The City will establish regulations that allow the preservation of identified
historically significant buildings/sites.
11. The City will participate in various watershed planning and salmon recovery
efforts. The City will incorporate appropriate measures for the protection of
habitat for listed or threatened species under the Federal Endangered Species
Act when providing public services and administering land use and
development regulations.
New 12. The City will add the definitions of Best Available Science and Best
Managemeni Practices to the Critical Areas Ordinances.
New 13. The City will incorporate the' 1995 Sheldon Wetland Report with the inclusion
of site specific wetland delineations as addendums into its Critical Areas
Ordinance as Best Available Science.
New 14. The City will incorporate the 2001 Pentec Environmental Shoreline Habitat
Assessment ,;vith the inclusion Of site specific shoreline habitat assessments as
addendums into its Critical Areas Ordinance as Best Available Science.
New 15. The City will incorporate the Washington State Department of Ecology
Coastal Atlas photographs into its Critical Areas Ordinance as Best Available
Science.
Goal
C. To promote community awareness of the importance of environmental, historical and
cultural amenities, the responsible use of such resources, and the use of the land with minimal
impact on its unique physical features, its natural, historical and cultural amenities, and the
overall environment.
Policies
1. The City should inform the public concerning the long-term benefits of protecting
and improving the quality of the region's air, land, and water.
2. The CitY should encourage the development and implementation of
environmental, historical, and cultural awareness programs which fOcus on local
and regional issues.
Goal
D. To preserve and enhance the City's shoreline, its natural landscape, and flora and fauna
and to minimize conflicts with present and planned uses in a manner consistent with the State
Shoreline Management Act.
Policies
1. Shoreline areas should be preserved for future generations by restricting or
prohibiting development that would interfere with the shoreline ecology or
irretrievably damage shoreline resources.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Conservation Element
Page 72
115
~. possible, riparian vegetation areas on tributary streams,
Where
in
shoreline
and
which affect shoreline resources, should be maintained and restored'.
3. Where possible, techniques to rehabilitate degraded shorelines for the purpose of
shoreline stabilization and habitat enhancement should be employed.
4. Where possible, aquatic habitats including shellfish habitat, and important marine
vegetation should be preserved and protected:
5. Development patterns and densities on lands adjacent to shorelines shOuld be
compatible with shoreline uses and resources and reinforce the policies of the
Shoreline Management Act and the City's Shoreline Master Program.
6. Where possible, urban service facilities located in shoreline areas should utilize
common utility corridors.
7. Adequate shoreline area for water-oriented commercial and industrial
development should be designated based o~ tho Land Use Element.
8. Shoreline uses and activities should be located to avoid environmehtally sensitive
and ecologically valuable areas and to insure the preservation and protection of
shoreline natural areas and resources.
9. Where possible, utility facilities and rights-of~way should be located outside of
the shoreline area. '
10. Shoreline ecology and resources should be protected when locating utilities in
shoreline areas.
Objective
Amend 1. The City will devetolya update its 1995 Shoreline Master Program t~at is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan: and the Shoreline Management Act,
and the Growth Management Act by 2011.
2. The City will develop an Ediz Hook master plan that designates land uses,
improves public access to shorelines, abates deteriorating structures, and allows for
expanded recreational and commercial uses.
CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT
General Comments
The Capital Facilities Element consists of two parts. The first part is the listing of goals and
policies regarding the City's provision of urban services and its planning of capital
improvements. The second part is the Annual Capital Facilities Plan which is adopted separately
from the Comprehensive Plan but is included as part of the Plan as an attachment.
The Comprehensive Plan defines urban services in its definition section, which includes a listing
of the following services and facilities, which should be available in an urban environment:
* Surface transportation facilities;
* Water facilities;
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Conservation Element
Page 73
116
l * Sewer facilities;
I * Stormwater facilities;
· Solid waste facilities;
· Parks and recreational facilities;
· Emergency services (police, fire and medical response);
· Public service buildings;
· Public schools facilities; and
· Regional facilities (libraries, corrections, and mass transit).
The following goals and policies provide guidance on how these services and facilities should be
provided. This includes the establishment of minimum levels of service standards for each
service. The policies also call for the development of individual comprehensive service and
facility plans which take an in-depth lookat the current status of each service and the projected
future demand for each service and which include a financial feasibility analysis on the costs of
providing each service.
The Capital Facilities Plan is a six-year plan, which establishes how, where, and when the ,City
will develop the facilities necessary to provide its various services.
Goals, Policies, and Objectives
Goal
A. To provide and maintain safe and financially feasible urban services and capital flcilities
at or above stated levels of service to all City residents and the general public.
Policies
1. The Comprehensive Plan shall should establish general level of service standards
for each urban utility and service. Such standards shall should be used to
determine the impacts of development.
2. The City should, at a minimum, ensure the continuation of established level of
service standards for all urban utilities and services to the extent and in the
manner provided herein.
3. The City shall should develop individual comprehensive service and facility plans
for the following capital facilities and/or services:
· transportation, including streets, and nonmotorized (bikeways and
pedestrian walkways),
· water system,
· sanitary sewer system,
· electrical system,
· parks and recreation services, and
· emergency services (police, fire, and medical response).
4. The City should co-operate with the appropriate private and/or public agencies to
develop individual comprehensive service and facility plans for each of the
following utilities and/or services:
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Capital Facilities Element
Page 74
, * telecommunications,
· schoo!s,
· transportation (air, marine and public transit), and
· solid waste collection and disposal.
5. Comprehensive service and facility plans shall should be consistent with the
general level of service standards established in the Comprehensive Plan and
should establish detailed level of service standards which, at a minimum, meet all
local, state and federal health and safety requirements. Each plan may also
establish desired level of service standards and shall should include an inventory
of current facilities, measuremerits of current and future service capacities, the
determination of future service and facility improvements necessary to serve the
twenty-year vision of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, and a financial
feasibility analysis.
6. The comprehensive service and facility plan for streets and nonmotorized
facilities (bikeways, trails, and pedestrian walkways) shall should alt, c, include
specific actions and requirements for bringing into compliance any street facilities
that fall below the required level of service, including demand management
strategies which encourage reduced reliance on single occupant vehicle trips and
encourage use of alternate modes of transportation such as the bicycles,
walkways, and transit riding with incentive programs for and from local
businesses.
7. The comprehensive service and facilities plan for streets, bikeways, and
pedestrian walkwa'ys should include a future US 101 corridor to meet long-term
local and regional transportation needs.
8. Each comprehensive service and facility plan r~hall should be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, the County-Wide Planning Policy, and the State Growth
Management Act.
9. The City shall should require concurrency at the time of development for the
following utilities and services:
· streets,
· water service,
· sanitary sewer service, and
· electrical service.
10. The City should require the following utilities and services at the time of
development:
· solid waste collection,
· stormwater management,
· telecommunications service, and
· emergency services (police, fire and emergency medical response).
11. The City should require the following services and facilities within six years from
the time of development:
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Capital Facilities Element
Page 75
118
* parks and recreation services and facilities, and
* transit system.
12. The City shall should adopt an annual CaPital Facilities Plan conSistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and State Growth Management Act. The Capital Facilities
Plan's financing schedule may be corrected, updated, or modified without being
considered as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, following a public
hearing before the City Council.
13. If projected funding fails for a capital project listed as funded in the City's
approved Capital Facilities Plan and development permits have been issued reliant
upon that capital project for concurrency, the City shall should take necessary
actions to minimize further degradation of the impacted service or facility. This
may include one or any combination of the following actions:
a) reduce the level of service standard,
b) · increase'funding by increasing revenues,
c) reduce demand by revising the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and/or
Zoning Map, and/or
d) reduce demand by reducing consumption (i.e., conservation).
New 14. Where existing capital facilities are deficient, the City should remove obstacles to
economic development in an area with City participation through a New
Improvements for Community Enhancement (N.I.C.E.) Neighborhoods Program.
New 15. The City should adopt a Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Plan consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan and the Growth Management Act as an Element of
the Comprehensive Plan.
Objectives
....... i'''''''''~''''' "'-'"'""*'1"" ,.~,,.,..,...,.o.,. ....... .~,..,., ,.,.*,,, -.~-~j --,,,..* ',~,-, ,--.,,,j ~ ~ .~ ,-' ..... ,-.',...-,
~-~o~*.-~+~-,,~ ~1-, .-~,-~.-,~, +'1~ D~,.-+ A~I~ C~1-,..-,,.-,1 T~;o+,-~+ '~T,~ 1 "')1 I-~1~11~
j_ -3. The Capital Facilities Plan will be updated on an a~mua] basis and should
implement the goals, policies, and objectives o£the Comprehensive ?]an.
2 3. The City will develop a schedule for preparation and adoption of each
required comprehensive service and facilities plan.
~ 3 4. The City will study the development of a seasonal or permanent ice skating
rink facility.
4:5. The City will establish a review process with a more comprehensive analysis
of Capital Facilities Plan projects to address new mandates for environmental
protection such as the Endangered Species Act, extension of urban services
into the Urban Growth Area and new residential areas within the City, and
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Capital Facilities Element
Page 76
119
preservation and maintenance of service levels impacted by changes such as
the Elwha Dam removal, landfill closure, and aging facilities.
Goal
B. To provide urban streets and utilities at minimum levels of service for all city residents
and the general public.
Policies '
1. All arterial streets shall function at an average daily level of service olD or better.
2.. Development on all arterial streets and any other streets identified a,s school
walking routes sba!! should include pedestrian sidewalks.
3. The City shall not approve any development that is not served with water service
at or greater than the following level of service standards at the time of
dc;-zlcpment: '
Single family units: 2 gallons per minute ~ 30 psi
(fire-1000 gallons per minute ~ 20 psi for single family residential >- 3,600
square feet.) (Fire - 500 gallons per minute ~20 psi for single family
residential -< 3,600 square feet.)
Multi-family units: 1 gallon per minute ~ 30 psi
(fire per Uniform Fire Code)
Commercial: per Uniform Fire Code
Industrial: per Uniform Fire Code
4. The City shall not approve any development that is not served with sewer service at
or greater than a level of service standard of 300 gallons per day per person at the
time of development.
5. The City shall not approve any development that is not served with electrical service
at or greater than a level of service standard of 118 volts (120 volt base) at the time of
development.
6. The City should not approve any development that increases a site's post-
development stormwater mn-off beyond that allowed by the Stormwater Management
Manual for the Puget Sc'and Easin as adopted by the City.
7. The City should not approve any development that cannot be served with
telecommunications service at or greater than the following level of service standards
at the time of development:
Telephone Residential: 1 service per unit
Commercial: 1 service per business
Industrial: 1 service per business
Cable Television Residential: 1 service per unit
Commercial: 0 service per business
Industrial: 0 service per business
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Capital Facilities Element
Page 77
120
New /8. Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS) should function at Level of Service
(LOS) D or better, consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).
New 9. The City should develop a Capital Facilities Plan list, with public input, for
prioritizing pedestrian walkway needs.
New 10. The City should seek funding to increase the provision of sidewalks in already
developed areas where sidewalks do not occur.
Objective
1. The City will,~,, '~ .... · ,~,,-v~ .... ,,,,'~'~ ,-,-,,v~'~* update design standards for street, water,
sewer, and stormwater facilities from time to time.
Goal
C. To provide urban services at minimum levels of service for all city residents and the
general public.
Policies
1. The Port Angeles School District should develop a capital facilities plan, which '
the City will consider for inclusion in the Comprehensive Plan. The capital
facilities plan should contain at least a six-year plan for public financing of such
facilities as may be necessary to provide adequate public schools at or greater
than the following level of service standards in order to meet anticipated ' '
increases
in student enrollment, which may be anticipated based on the SchOol District's
projected enrollment figures and residential growth as provided for in the Land
Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan:
High School: 125 square feet of permanent, appropriate
educational space per student,
Middle School: 104 square feet of permanent, appropriate educational
space per student, and
Elementary School: 100 square feet of permanent, appropriate educational
space per student.
If capacity is inadequate to house students at the established level of service
standards (LOS) and adequate school funding is not available, then the demand
for new facilities will be reduced (e.g. through year round use of schools or by
matching grade and enrollment to facility capacities) or the level of service
standards will be reduced to keep both schools and housing development
affordable to the majority of Port Angeles School District residents. Imposition
of Growth Management Act impact fees on or denial of new development will not
be used as a measure to prevent further degradation of school services, unless the
reduced level of service standards are deemed unacceptable to Port Angeles
School District No. 121, Clallam County, and the City of Port Angeles.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Capital Facilities Element
Page 78
121
2. . The City should not approve any development that will not be served with
adequate transit service as determined in the comprehensive service and facilities
plan for transportation within six years from the time of development.
3. The City should not approve any development that will not be served at or greater
than a city-wide level of service standard of 9 acres of parks per 1,000 population
within six years from the time of development.
4. The City should not approve any development that will not be served at or less
than the following level of service standards at the time of development.
Police: 677 perso'ns per one officer
Fire: 4 minute response time or residential sprinkler system
installation
5. The City should not approve any development that will not be served with solid waste
collection ~service at or less than a city-wide level of service standard of 400 pick up
accounts per 1000 population within six years from the time of development.
6. The City :hall should participate with the County in the development, maintenance, and
implementation of a regional solid waste plan, which addresses collection, disposal,
and recycling of solid waste.
7. The City should consider the cumulative effect of development on the City's need for
adequate public service buildings.
Goal
D. To participate with the County, State, and Federal governments as well as other public
agencies to provide adequate regional public services.
Policies
1. The City should cooperate with the County and the community's health care
providers to ensure quality health care facilities within the City that serve the
region as a whole.
2. The City should cooperate with the County in planning regional library facilities
within the City.
3. The City should cooperate with the County in planning for adequate correctional
facilities.
4. Essential public facilities of a county-wide or state-wide nature must meet
existing state laws and regulations requiring specific siting and permit
requirements consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Objective
Move and added to Transportation Element as part of Policy B.6;
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Capital Facilities Element
Page 79
]22
Goal
E. To reduce the amount of impervious surface created by new developments and thereby
reduce stormwater management costs and environmental impaCts to the City and its natural
resources, reduce development costs to private property owners, and provide safe and more
attractive streets through traffic calming, safe pedestrian amenities, and improved street edge
landscaping.
Policy
1. The city should further revise its existing urban development standards in low
density residential areas to include low impact development standards for street,
pedestrian and nonmotorized access, sewer, and ftc suppression to more nearly
reflect the needs of suburban densities and conditions in outlying undeveloped
areas ~ o__f the City and the PAUGA.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Capital Facilities Element
Page 80
123
XI. ] CONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
General Comments
The intent of the Economic Development Element is to benefit the community through the
diversification and strengthening of the local economy. The following policies address a variety
of subjects, some stand on their own, while others require coordination with other elements of
the Comprehensive Plan.
Goals and Policies
Goal
A. To create and maintain a balanced and stable local economy with full employment and
emphasis on strengthening the community's traditional natural resource related industries ~ well
as diversifying the overall economic base. ,
Policies
1. The City of Port Angeles should remain a major economic center on the North
Olympic Peninsula, meeting regional and local needs.
2. The City should promote the retention of employment in all sectors of the local
economy.
3.The City should promote long-term economic stability by encouraging businesses
and industries to invest in modernization and environmentally sound technology.
4. The City should promote the diversification of the community's economic base by
encouraging the location, retention, and expansion of both timber and non-timber
related businesses. This could include various types of manufacturing businesses
such as value-added natural resource related products, computer related products,
and technical devices and components and other businesses such as research and
development, retirement, tourism, retail trade, marine, and ecology related
enterprises.
5. The City should promote the location, retention, and expansion of small and
medium sized businesses, which access their markets and suppliers through
telecommunications and available shipping and transit.
6. The City should promote in the traditional downtown retail, dining, and
entertainment oriented activities that are attractive to both tourists and local
residents.
7. The City should develop sufficient utilities, improve traffic circulation, and
identify environmental constraints in the airport industrial area in cooperation
with other governmental agencies.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Element
Page 81
124
8. The City should encourage training and educational opportunities, which
. strengthen and increase the variety of skills available in the work force.
9. The City should promote the motivation and availability of the community's work
force as a major economic development strength.
10. The City should encourage inter-jurisdictional discussion and cooperation with
other governmental agencies to foster the economic development of the region.
11. The City should work with other community organizations in developing an
effective business assistance program directed toward the commercial business
owner.
New 12. The City should recognize the ec~onomic importance to the community in the
redevelopment of the Rayonier Mill site and take an active role in assisting
property owners to clean up the site to attract the interest of many potential
investors.
New 13. The City should' pursue a management agreement with Clallam County as a first
step to a partn~'~ifip for developing the eastern UGA.
New 14. The City should support continued development of a strong marine related
industry_ in the Port Angeles Harbor.
New ' Obiective
New 1_ The City will work in cooperation with other stakeholders to update the
Harbor Resource Management Plan in 2005.
New 2~ The City will work with the Port of Port Angeles, Clallam County, and the
Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe (LEKT) to study the future of the William R.
Fairchild International Airport, update the Airport Master Plan, and
accommodate the Terminal Relocation Plan.
Goal
B. To have a healthy!local economy that co-exists with the community's high quality of life
through the protection, enhancement, and use of the community's natural, historical, and cultural
amenities.
Policies
1. The City should promote the region's quality of environment and available natural
resources as factors in attracting and retaining business, industry, and individual
enterprises.
2. The City should promote the community's quality public school system and its
diversity of other educational opportunities as factors in attracting and retaining
business and industry.
3. The City should encourage the enhancement of the existing two year community
college through such means as the expansion of its technical curriculum and
additional four year degree opportunities.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Element
Page 82
125
't4. The City should promote development of planned office, business, and industrial
parks, while conserving unique physical features of the land and maintaining
compatibility with other land uses in the surrounding area.
5. The City should encourage the availability of housing that meets the needs of the
entire spectrum of the community's work force.
6. The City should preserve and promote its historic and cultural properties as a
measure of its quality of life.
New 7. The City should support landscaping and detailing of the streetscape at the City's
east and west entries.
Objective ,
1. The City will encourage streetscape improvements to beautify entryway
corridors. Incentives may be developed to encourage private property
participation in such beautification projects.
New 2~ The City will identify specific standards for street and parking lot tree
plantings and other landscaping requirements.
New 3. The City will support the development of a covered arena.
Goal New
C__:. To create and promote a strong tourism industry for Port Angeles, as well as to recognize
and support existing and prospective tourism attractions.
Policy New
New 1. The City should support improved access to the Olympic National Park,
particularly to Hurricane Ridge.
New 2. The City should work to enhance the commercial and public use of Ediz Hook.
New 3. The City should take a leading role in enhancing visitors' first impression of the
community by maintaining and upgrading the City's public facilities, and infrastructure, and
strengthen the nuisance abatement program.
Ob.[ective New
New 1_. The City will support the creation of a skate park.
New Goal
D_~. To strengthen and enhance the restoration and reinvigoration of our downtown historic
buildings, infrastructure improvements, and beautification projects.
Objectives
New 1_:. The City will develop incentives for downtown building exterior restoration to
improve the overall appearance of the downtown.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Element
Page 83
1:>6
New , _2. The City will enhance the downtown waterfront by encouraging the removal
'I of derelict structures.
New 3. The City will work cooperatively with the property owners to support the
repair and use of the Landing Mall pier.
New 4_. The City will continue to support the Gateway Visitor Center project.
The City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Element
Page 84
127
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation
Low Density Residential t ...... l Commercial
Medium Density Residential ~'/////~ Industrial
High Density Residential [iiiiiiiili~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiil Open Space
128
~~~ ~ BAKER ST
GALES ST ~
~ONROE CARNE
CITY OF PORT ANGELES SCALE
PUBLIC WORKS Co~reheDsive ~J~D JsDd use
0 1200
~ 12~ Amendments -
500
CHESTNUT ST
;o BEECH ST
m BOURCH]ER ST
T BAKER ST
GALES ST
MONROE CARNE
-F
~ A
CITY OF PORT ANGELESf SC LE Comprehensive plen lend use mep
PUBLIC WORKS O0
~ J 1800
L PLot Dote: 05/26/04 RevisiD~ Dote: 04/~6/01 correction FiLe:COM_PLN
F-z
> '~~ /~'" ~1 I/"~~ ~' ~ ,,~, I I I
, ,'~ , ~
. ~.. .... ~.~, r -~ ....... ~ .... . ~ I I 1",
~ .~ ..L_, .... ~ ,~ . ~,~ ,, ,
_ __~ .......... ?- ,- -,-~ ~ ~
~'' ' ' .L, '-~4- ' ' ~'. s ~ ,
..~-~-~. ~-~,~ I I I I t
- ' ~?~L~/~' ' ~ ' '~ '~' ~ '~ ,,,
~'~'~'~-~'~'~ '~ ~ ,/ ~., , , , ,
~'~'~fl -:~-~ ~, ,~ ~ _.
~'= __.~.~, ,---~,..,~ / , ~-.~ ~/? ~ .... ~_~ ( .~ ,,"'
~ ~'--/i ~' ~ ITM ~z~ I /] · · f~.'-.~,~.'~'-,&~ , , ','
1~, ~ ~ ~ ~i "~ ~~1 /~ ,, "'
' ~ I I I ~ i~, CHESTNUTST
~ ' · ~ I I~,~ ~ ~ BEECH ST
~ ~ ~ BAKER ST
GALES ST ~
MONROE CARN/
CITY OF PORT ANGEL~ SCALE
PUBLIC WORKS Comprehensive plen lend use mep
0 3600
~ $~ndments - 2004 elterne{ive
1800
PUBLIC WORKS Comprehensive plan land use map
0 1200
60O
L P~ot [}ate: 05/~6/04 Revi~ ~nte: 03/B4/04 Fi~e:COH_PLN ~
c,~ oF ~o** *.CEkESSC*LE
PUBLZC WORKS Comprehensive plen lend use mop
D ~00
~ ~ 133 Amendments - 2OO~
~ gOO
L Plot Dote: 05/~6/04 Revi~ ~.+o: 04/~6/0] correction File:COM_PLN ~
134
CITY OF PORT ANGELESI SCALE
PUBLIC WORKS UGA Revision
~ Io ,200
,.~ i~ 135
P~ot Date: 10/0]/02 Revision Date: 04/;~6/0! correction Fi[e:CEIM_PLN ~1
--
,
/ i / I l-e~end
/ ' I City of PA
/ ~
Thi$ #tap i .... inlended to b ..... cl as aJe~v~ptio~.
This mapMrm~,ing i$ prod.ced by the Ciq of Pon AngeTes fot-- -- ~l ts o~vn I~$e and Intrposes.
Any other .se of this map dran~,ing shall not be the responsibility of the City,
Planning Commission Minutes
May 12, 2004
Page 4
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CITy'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND
LAND USE MAP - CPA 04-02 - CITY OF PORT ANGELES: City wide
amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map.
Associate Planner Scott Johns presented the Department's staff report identifying all of
the proposed amendments and identified specific proposed amendments to the City's
Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map based on the public review process.,
Director Collins stated that Rayonier would not oppose that area above the bluff along
Water Street being redesignated for residential development but would oppose any redesignation
of the main mill area being anything but industrial at this time.
Chair Hewins opened the public hearing. '
Robbie Mantooth, 2238 E. Lindberg Road, stated her thanks for the opportunity to
participate in review of the City's Comprehensive Plan update process as a newly annexed
resident and noted that the effort that was made gathering information during the public ,
participation process earlier in the year. She felt strongly that the Rayonier mill site should be
cleaned up to a higher standard than industrial to allow for more variety of event/~al uses. She
encouraged more public parks now rather than in the future, a proactive approach t'o stream
corridor restoration, a wider transportation corridor rather than an alternate crosstown route, and
hoped that the annexation process could be structured such that others would desire to annex to
the City who live in developing areas to avoid excessive septic tank usage. Finally, she noted
that the most beautiful beach in the county is located within the shoreline of the Rayonier
property and she encouraged the City to work with Rayonier to open the area to the public.
Andy Brastad, 1622 Milwaukee Drive, Port Angeles, WA spoke in favor of a change in a
residential area off Milwaukee Drive that is proposed to be redesignated from Resi'dential
Medium Density to Low Density Residential. He characterized the area as rural and hoped that it
would remain so with relatively little future development. He appreciates the low impact
development standards allowed for infrastructure development in the area.
Ed Tuttle, 3909 Old Time Place, Port Angeles, WA presented a petition against
annexation and noted that a like petition was being submitted to the County Commissioners
asking the county to eliminate the City's eastern Urban Growth Area. He stated that he is not
against future development of the area east of the Port Angeles city limits but does not want
annexation. Instead, it is preferred that services be extended without annexation. The City
should take care of what is already within the City limits before looking at annexation.
Chair Hewins asked Mr. Tuttle what proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan he
is addressing, to which Mr. Tuttle answered that he was addressing the eastern expansion of the
UGA. Chair Hewins pointed out that the issue was discussed during last year's Plan changes and
is not currently under consideration by the City.
Jack Anderson, Rayonier Mill, 700 North Ennis Street, spoke on behalf of the Rayonier
Mill management and asked that the Comprehensive Plan Map designation for the mill site
remain unchanged at this time. He explained that the Model Toxic Control Act (MTCA) clean
up regulations outline only two methods of clean up: industrial and commercial. To identify the
site as commercial would significantly slow redevelopment of the site. The Rayonier
management prefers to allow a prospective purchaser and the property owner to agree to a clean
up plan based on future use of the site and is not in favor ora redesignation at this time.
137
Planning Commission Minutes
Mt~y 12, 2004
Page .5
Ava Traughber, ! 636 Milwaukee Drive, Port Angeles, I/VA agreed with a previous speaker
regarding the redesignation Of an area north of Milwaukee Drive being proposed for
redesignation from RMD to LDR. The area is not prepared for higher density development and
should remain rural and sparsely developed.
Bill Henry, 2206 East Sixth Street, Port Angeles, WA was concerned that neither the
County nor the City has proven to residents in the eastern UGA that there is a need to exPand the
City's boundary to the east. An ,excess of vacant residential land exists within the City for
development at this time without annexation. Residents in the eastern UGA would like to
petition for a LAMRID (Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development) and would like the
City's support. Port Angeles should utilize vacant land before looking to annex additional area.
The eastern UGA boundaries might better have been set at the existing City limits. At this point,
Chair Hewins asked the speaker what item he was speaking to on the hearing agenda. Mr. Henry
indicated that he was speaking to the entire scope of the Comprehensive Plan. Chair Hewins
noted that expansion 0fthe eastern UGA is not currently under consideration having been
decided during the review process in 2003. The expansion of the western UGA boundaries is an
item under review. Mr. Henry presented written information to be entered into the hearing
record to the Chair.
,Kathe Smith, 607 East Fourth Street, Port Angeles, WA strongly supported amendments
to the Transportation Element as proposed.
Harley Oien, 215 Rife Road, Port Angeles, WA presented a petition opposing expansion
of the western UGA boundary and urged the Commission to leave the area in the County for rural
preservation.
~leff Bohman, 3 753 Canyon Circle, Port Angeles, WA represented the Peninsula Trails
Coalition and spoke in favor of the proposed amendment to the Transportation Element of the
Comprehensive Plan. He encouraged that the Economic Development Element, in particular
proposed Goal C, or the policies that derive from that goal, include the benefits of the Olympic
Discovery Trail and other t~ails and parks as an element of the economic plan. He noted that
some references in the 1990 Sheldon Wetland Report have become outdated. It has recently
become apparent that the old report is not a comprehensive reflection of existing wetlands within
the City boundaries. It may be appropriate to include wording in the Plan to recognize that site
specific analysis should always occur whether or not the Sheldon report indicates that wetlands
are present on a site.
Jean Fairchild, 3524 Mt Pleasant Road, Port Angeles, WA represented herself and others
in the audience on behalf of the Jet Set Soroptimist Club in support of changes to the
Transportation Element.
Hugh Haffner, 402 Goa Way Road, Port Angeles, WA suggested that some type of
bonding be required of the Rayonier Mill owners to assure adequate clean up of the mill site.
There being no further comment, Chair Hewins closed the public hearing and announced
a break at 7:40 p.m. The meeting resumed at 7:50 p.m.
Due to the number of other issues on the agenda, Commissioner Schramm moved to
continue discussion of the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map amendments to last on
the agenda. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Norton and passed unanimously.
138
Planning Commission Minutes
May 19, 2004
Page 1
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AND LAND USE MAP - CPA 04-02 - CITY OF PORT ANGELES: City
wide amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map. Item
Continued from May 12, 2004, meeting.
Chair Hewins asked the.Commission if due to the large number of proposed amendments
and having had previous discussions regarding the proposed amendments if the Commission
would prefer to discuss each amendment individually and vote on each proposed amendment
separately. The Commission concurred with reviewing and voting on each item separately.
Item 1. Add a definition of Manufactured Home into the Comprehensive Plan. No
discussion Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
item 2. Add definition of Best Available Science. No discussion. Commission voted 4 -
0 to recommend approval.
Item 3. Add definition of Best Management Practices. No discussion. Commission voted
4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 4. Add definition of Regulatory Reform Act. No discussion. Commission voted 4 -
0 to recommend approval.
Item 5. New Growth Management Element Policy A.18. Commission voted 3 - 1 to
recommend approval. Commissioner Rasmussen voted nay, stating that adequate industrial
lands' existed and that the Port could sell its land to private interests.
Item 6. New Growth Management Element Policy A. 19. No discussion. Commission
voted 4 - 0 to recommendlapproval.
Item 7. New Growth Management Objective A.3. No discussion. Commission voted 4 -
0 to recommend approval.
Item 8. New Growth Management Objective A.4. No discussion. Commission voted 4 -
0 to recommend approval.
Item 9. New Growth Management Policy B.11. No discussion. Commission voted 4 - 0
to recommend approval.
Item 10. New Growth Management Policy B.12. No discussion. Commission voted 4 - 0
to recommend approval.
Item 11. Comprehensive Land Use Map Change. Change Land Use Map Medium
Density Residential (MDR) land use designation in the "P" Street area north of 16th Street and
east of the Residential Trailer Park Zone to Low Density Residential (LDR) to facilitate
designation ora new RS-I_2 Zone in the west end of the City. Commission voted 3 -1 to
recommend denial, stating that prior testimony before the commission had indicated that there is
a lack of Medium Density Residential designated lands in the City.
139
Item 12. Comprehensive Land Use Map Change. Change the Land Use Map for the
area of the Rayonier Mill from Industrial to Commercial recognizing that the future use will
likely be a mix of commercial and residential uses. The Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend
denial indicating that changing the land use designation could force Rayonier into making'
undesirable decisions. It was pointed out that Commissioner Philpott's written comment
supported the land use designation change. ,
Item 13. New Land Use Element Policy B.3. The Commission recommended denial on a
split 2 - 2 vote. Commissioner Philpott's written comment supported the new policy.
Items 14 a & b. Amend existing Po}icy B.3 to become two reworded policie§, Policy B.4
and B.5. The commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval of both newly worded policies.
Item 15. Amend existing Policy B.5 to reworded Policy B.7. No discussion.
Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 16. Amend existing Policy C.6. No discussion. Commission voted 4 - 0 to
recommend approval.
Item 17. Amend existing Policy E.2. The Commission recommended denial 4 - 0 stating
that there was no clear definition of either strip development or cluster developmen.t.
Item 18. New.Land Use Element Goal I. The Commission recommended denial 3 - 1
with the consensus being that the Goal was unnecessary, lacked definition and was a defensive
move on the part of the land owner Rayonier to counter the previously proposed land use
designation change.
Item 19. New Land Use Policy 1.1. The commission voted 4 - 0 for denial based on the
above discussion.
Item 20. New Land Use Policy 1.2. The commission voted 4 - 0 for denial based on the
above discussion.
Item 21. New Land Use Policy 1.3. The commission voted 4 - 0 for denial based on the
above discussion.
Item 22. New Land Use Objective 1.1. The commission voted 4 - 0 for denial based on
the above discussion. Director Collins pointed out that without the above Goal, Policies, and
Objective that it would be likely that more support for changing the land use designation of the
former Rayonier mill site from industrial to commercial would exist.
Item 23. New Land Use Objective K.2. After discussion about the ability of the City to
take financial responsibility for additional park acquisition and development, the Commission
voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 24. Adopt the Nonmotorized Transportation Map as part of the Comprehensive
Plan. The Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 25. New Transportation Element Policy A.7. Discussion of the correct terminology
for the name of EHSB 1487 followed. The Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
140
It!m 26. New Transportation Element Objective A.2. No Discussion. The.Commission
voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 27. New Transportation Element Objective A.3. Discussion of'N' St. and
Milwaukee Dr. as bicycle routes and potential improvements to either street followed. Director
Collins suggested that the improvements be added to the Capital Improvement Plan. The
Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 28. New Transportation Element Policy B.20. Discussion pointed out that this
proposed route is not for an alternate cross town route or an alternate SR 101. The Commission
voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 29. Replace existing Transportation Objective B.9 with updated wording. The
Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 30. New Transportation Element Objective B.12. No Discussion. The Commission
voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval. ,
Item 31. New Utilities and Public Services Element Policy A.5. No Discussion. The
Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 32. Amend the language of Utilities and Public Services Element Policy C.2. After
making slight modifications to the wording, the Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend aplSroval.
Item 33. Replace Utilities and Public Services Element Objective D.3 with new Policy
D.14. A short discussion indicating that the City Council had adopted the Watershed
Management Plan followed. The Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval..
Item 34. New Utilities and Public Services Element Policy D.15. No Discussion. The
Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 35. New Utilities and Public Services Element Policy D. 16. Director Collins
indicated that this is a change from past policy where the City required annexation before the
City would extend sewer services into the UGA. This would not preclude the City from using
higher rates and current City policy is that any service extension outside of the City would pay
150% of the City rate. Commissioner Hewins pointed out that the policy is not intended to force
anyone onto the sewer system but to provide an option for failing systems and an opportunity to
build where septic systems would not work properly. Commissioner Rasmussen acknowledged
that this is not a popular idea especially in the eastern UGA but that it is a necessary step for the
City to take. It was noted that Commissioner Philpott's written comments stated to "try no-
protest or require higher rates if that fails" The Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 36. New Utilities and Public Services Objective D.4. No Discussion. The
Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 37 New Utilities and Public Services Objective D.5. No Discussion. The
Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 38. New Utilities and Public Services Objective D.6. Director Collins indicated
141
that an agreement between the City and the City of Sequim and Clallam County had been
reached to make the land fill site the regional transfer station, at the City Council meeting of
April 18, 2004. Discussion of this issue focused on whether the City should truck materials
from the entire east end of the County through the City to the landfill site located on the extreme
west side of the City and then truck the same materials back through the City a second time. It
was suggested that possibly a,site on the east side of the City might relieve some of the trucking
redundancy on the substandard 18th Street. It was also pointed out that comments received
during the public participation process questioned this policy direction. The Commission
recommended denial of this amendment based on a split 2 - 2 vote.
Item 39. New Housing Element Policy A.10. No Discussion. The Commission voted 4 -
0 to recommend approval.
Item 40. New Conservation Element Policy B.16. No Discussion. The Commission
voted 4 - 0 to recomme.,nd approval.
Item 41. New Conservation Element Policy B.22. No Discussion. The Commission
voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval. Director Collins stated that this and the following
amendments including Best Available Science into the Comprehensive Plan is supported by the
Port A,ngeles Association of Realtors and that this support is forward thinking and a bold
decision that needed to be recognized.
Item 42. New Conservation Element Policy B.13. No Discussion. The Commission
voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 43. New Conservation Element Objective B.14. No Discussion. The Commission
voted .4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 44. New Conservation Element Objective B.15. No Discussion. The Commission
voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 45. New Conservation Element Objective D.1. No Discussion. The Commission
voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 46. New Capital Facilities Element Policy A.14. A minor change to the proposed
language was made. The Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 47. New Capital Facilities Element Policy A. 15. Director Collins indicated that
under the new Growth Management Act rules the City is encouraged by the State to incorporate a
Parks Element into the Comprehensive Plan. He further indicated that staff had intended the
Comprehensive Parks Plan would be completed by this time but that has not been accomplished.
The Park Plan should be complete by the end of the year. The Commission voted 3 - 1 to
recommend approval. Commissioner Rasmussen voted no, indicating that he felt by adding the
Comprehensive Park Plan as a Comprehensive Plan element would tie the hands of the Parks
Department in that a Comprehensive Plan change would be required to change the Park Plan.
Item 48. New Capital Facilities Element Policy B.8. Commissioner Rasmussen asked
for clarification of highways of State-wide significance. Director Collins indicated that highways
of State-wide significance were identified in the Comprehensive Plan and that the level of service
standards on the City and the State for roadways in the City were the same. This amendment
142
brings t~e Comprehensive Plan into compliance with Regional Transportation Organization '
requirem~,nts. If the level of service standards are not met, then the City must decide whether
new development should be approved or the level of service reduced. The Commiskion voted 4 '
0 to recommend approval.
Item 49 New Capital Facilities Element Policy B.9. Commissioner Rasmussen asked
how this related to the low impact development standards. Director Collins indicated that the
low impact development standards would provide more pedestrian walkways than the sidewalk
program. The Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval. .
Item 50. New Capital Facilities Element Policy B.10. No Discussion. The Commission
voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 51. New Economic Development Element Policy A.12. No Discussioh. The
Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 52. New Economic Development Element Policy A.13. No Discussion. The
Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approw!. '
Item 53. New Economic Development Element Policy A.14. No Discussion. The
Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 54. New Economic Development Element Objective A.1. After a slight
modification to wording, the Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval. : ,
Item 55. New. Economic Development Element Objective A.2. Director Collins
provided clarification of the issues regarding this amendment. The Commission voted 4 - 0 to
recommend approval.
Item 56. New Economic Development Element Policy B.7. After a slight modification
to wording, the Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 57.New Economic Development Element Objective B.2. Associate Planner Scott
Johns provided additional information regarding the need for improved landscape standards and
indicated that the task of developing the standards would fall to planning staff. The Commission
voted 3 - 1 to recommend approval. Commissioner Rasmussen noted no indicating that he felt
that enhanced standards could potentially become requirements that could be onerous to property
owners.
Item 58. New Economic Development Element Objective B.3. No Discussion. The
Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend denial of this amendment, stating lack of support from
various organizations and a lack of specificity as to the location, use and purpose of a covered
arena.
Item 59. New Economic Development Element Goal C. No Discussion. The
Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 60. New Economic Development Element Policy C.1. The Commission
recommended denial of this amendment after a split 2 - 2 vote. Discussion indicated that this
amendment was not specific.
143
Item 61.. New Economic Development Element Policy C.2. Commissioner Rasmussen
indicated that he felt the pQlicy should state that the City develop a specific plan for Ediz Hook.
Director Collins indicated that there is a plan for Ediz Hook that is a part of the Parks Plan and
that development of a plan would be part of the work required to enhance the Hook. The City
has supported both commercial and public uses on the Hook. Commissioner Hewins pointed
out that during the public participation process, that two different points of view were expressed.
Those were for increased public uses and view retention find those supporting increased
commercial/industrial uses. The Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 62. New Economic Development Element Policy C.3. No Discussion. The
Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval.
Item 63. New'Economic Development Element Objective C.1. The Commission voted 4
- 0 to recommend denial of this amendment, stating a lack of specificity about a skate park and
the fact that the City h,as studied the need for a skate board park and determined that a need exists
and a location has been designated.
Item 64. New EConomic Development Element Goal D. The Commission voted 3 - 1 to
recommend approval. Commissioner Rasmussen voted no, stating that it should be up to the
Downtown Association to promote these concepts without City interference.
Item 65. New Economic Development Element Objective D.1. The Commission
recommended denial of this amendment on a 2 - 2 vote, stating that incentive programs tended to
be give-away programs and it is not the taxpayers job to provide incentives. Commissioner
Rasmussen pointed out that improvements in the downtown area are taking place currently
without incentives. Commissioner Philpott's written comments indicated support.
Item 66. New Economic Development Element Objective D.2. The Commission
recommended denial of this amendment on a 2 - 2 vote, stating that the amendment is redundant
and unnecessary. I
Item 67. New Economic development Element Objective D.3. Discussion provided
clarification of the proposal. The Commission voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval..
Item 68. New Economic Development Element Objective D.4. The Commission
recommended denial of this amendment 3 - 1, indicating that the City is highly involved in this
project and therefor the amendment was redundant and unnecessary. The Commissioners
indicated that this vote against this specific amendment did not indicate that the Commission is
not in support of the Gateway project.
Commissioner Hewins commented that he had participated in the public process and indicated
that he was pleased by the level of public involvement, the staff's efforts in organization and
preparation, and the support shown by the Peninsula Daily News.
144
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY, CITY OF PORTANGELES
I KAL)I- AINU I-~UINUMIt~ L)EVI-LUKIV~b N I ~ ......... ,,,unuyDeveioprnent
128 - loth Avenue 5£ · PO Box 42525 · Olympia, Washington 98504 * (360) 725-4000
April 2, 2004
Scott Johns
Associate Planner
Department of Community Development
321 East 5th Street
Post Office Box 1150
Port Angeles, Washington 98362
RE: Submittal of Documents to the Washington State Department of Community, Trade, and
Economic Development for City of Port Angeles
Dear Mr. Johns:
Thank you for sending this department the following:
Draft Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan
Proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments for 2004 update. Received on 04/02/2004. Please keep this
letter. It is your record of when the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED)
received this material.
We have forwarded a copy of this notice to other state agencies. Adopted development regulations should
be sent to CTED immediately upon publication, as well as to any state agencies that commented on the draft
regulation. A jurisdiction does not need to send its regulation to the agencies which have been called ahead
and that have indicated the local plan will not be reviewed. The jurisdiction should keep a record of this
contact with state agencies and the state agencies' response.
If you have any questions or poncerns, please call me at (360) 725-3046.
Sincerely,
Doug Peters
Growth Management Planner
Growth Management Services
Enclosure
145
P.O. Box 1836, Pt. Angeles, WA 98362
Community Development Director
City of Port Angeles
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
32 ] East 5th Street Dept. of Community Developmen!
Pt. Angeles, WA 98362
Dear Brad, ,
Peninsula Trails Coalition is pleased to provide the following recommendation~ to the
City of Port Angeles and to the Port Angeles Planning Commission. As you know we
have been supporting Port Angeles for the last several years in planning for the extension
of the Waterfront Trail west to meet the Olympic Discovery Trail at the west city limits.
We have explored and evaluated numerous potential routes. We have conducted two ,
neighborhood m~etings in West Port Angeles to inform residents about the trail and have
reported comments and suggestions back to the city. Now the time has come to put firm
plans in place. The Waterfront Trail is connected going east all the way to Sequim. The
County is actively planning and building trail west of Port Angeles. We need to plan for
completion of this trail link in the next 3-4 years.
The rome through west Port Angeles that utilizes Hill St, Fourth St. and the Milwaukee
Road fight of way all the way to the city limits at Lower Elwha Road and Kacee Way is
the best route for the following reasons:
1. It is the most direct route
2. It has the best grade available
3. The city already owns all the right of way required
4. It has been a designated bike rome in your comprehensive plan for several years
5. It provides a largely isolated rome through this urban area, avoiding vehicle
traffic
6. It currently sees significant usage as a bike and walking trail
7. It connects properly at the waterfront and with the county plans going west
Route selection is the responsibility of the city, and we will, of course, support the city's
selection. However the above considerations seem compelling to us.
We believe the city should take the following specific steps this year:
(1) Include the extension of the Waterfront Trail west to the city limits in the
current comprehensive plan update.
146
Page 2
{9'~ Fetahllch n pla,,,,i,,g ,~,-,-,io,-t h~ Pnhllt- Wc~rl~ tr~ p,-m,ld~ preliminary
and estimates.
(3) initiate efforts to get federal and state funding grants for trail completion.
I£this link, which connects to the Olympic Discovery Trail segments currently being
built by the county west o£?ort Angeles, is not completed by :2007 it will begin to impact
the ability to promote the trail and the hoped for economic impact from out of area trail '
users.
A priority effort should be to establish a bridge over Dry Creek. We will be bringing
recommendations on affordable ways to accomplish this to the city soon. As your plans
progress, please call on us for assistance and volunteer support at any point.
Sincerely,
Peninsula Trails Coalition Board of Directors,
Chuck Preble, President
363-683-4549
147
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
Dept. of Cornmur~i!y Development
March 1 g, 2004
Mr. Brad Collins
Planning Director
City of Port Angeles
321 East 5th Street
Port Angeles, WA 98362
Dear Planning Commissioners:
The Clallam County Trails Advisory Committee urges the Planning Commission and City Council
to include policies in the Comprehensive Plan that require the timely development of a signed
route for the Olympic Discovery Trail (ODT) westward from Marine Drive to the west City
boundary.
Specifically, we strongly recommend an Olympic Discovery Trail route along Hill Street to West
4t~ Street, and milizing the entire length of Milwaukee Drive to Lower Elwha Road. Striped
bicycle lanes are needed on West 4t~ Street and the initial paved section of Milwaukee Drive.
Undeveloped portions of Milwaukee Drive need to be the subject of preliminary engineering
studies to determine roadWay cross sections and the permanem location of the Olympic Discovery
Trail within the 100 foot right away available.
In the meantime, as the City's plarming and funding come together for the permanent ODT rome
on Milwaukee Drive, we would like to recommend these interim options:
A signed bike rome with painted bike lanes along N Street, intersecting with a separated
bike/pedestrian path along the south side of 18th Street--wNch would connect to
Milwaukee Drive. (Preliminary discussion between the Port Angeles Soroptimists and the
Port of Port Angeles for use of this property has been encouraging.)
A signed, graded, graveled path through the undeveloped portions of the existing
Milwaukee Drive right-of-way for the use of pedestrians and fat tire bicycles.
148
Page 2
Clallam County is currently surveying the Trail beyond the Elwha River. They are finishing their
firaal sectior~s just west of Sequ'hm. The Tra~ s,,, uL be,~,~,.~,,,~,,~ from ............. Way ~,
Marine Drive in 2005. To finish this priceless resource locally, Port Angeles needs to settle on a
route westward from the waterfront lo the west City'limits.
The economic benefits of the Olympic Discovery TraJ] are well-known. We have already seen
several thousand visitors with the first marathon. The Waterfront Trail' 'is in continuous use by
residents and 'dsitors. The Trail is an economic boon to our community, and a tremendous asset
for .healthy living.
Let's finish the job!
Sincerely,
Rich James for the Clallam County Trails Advisory Committee
Senior Planner - Transportation
149
Robbie Mantooth
2238 E. Lindberg Road ~/~¥ ~ I Z[~'
' Port Angeles, WA 98362
3 6 0 - 4 5 7 - 5 4 ! 5 O. ITY OF PORT ANGELES
D~l~t'. ~f Cbrnrnunity DeYel0pment
ennis@olypen.com
May 11, 2004
To: Port Angeles Planning Commi..~sion, Planning Department, City Council ,
FrOm: Robbie Mantooth
Subject: Comprehensive PlalCfar~e~m~t'~'?~t*~4~
Appreciation
First, I want to express appreciation for the ~vork that has brought the updating of the
Comprehensive Plan to this point. The effort to involve the public has been impressive. The scope
of the recommendations also reflects broad vision as well as attention to details.
Strongest support for proposed amendments
The following proposals are especially important to my vision of what the City of P.od Angeles
should be as we head toward 2020. My vision focuses on locations and concerns of particular interest,
and I am grateful to those who have made sure other locations and concerns are well covered.
Page 2, Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map change, second bulleted item:
Changing the Rayonier mill property to commercial seems essential to provide flexibility for this
important site. I belie3e, and certainly hope, that such a change will prove to be in the long-term
best interests of Rayonier, as well as the City. It should attract a much broader pool of potential
buyers of the site, which should provide much greater potential for contributions to the local
economy.
Page 4, Land Use element -- Open Space
New objective K.2, related to neighborhood parks, is welcome, but I suggest a very small change in
wording, so it is clear that these parks would support "newer" subdivisions. Otherwise I fear that the
lack of any parks south of Highway 101 and east of Race will continue to leave the sizable
population in the area between Whites and Ennis creeks with no easily accessible park even though
much of this area was developed 10, 20 or even 40 years ago.
Page 5, Conservation Element, first bulleted item, Amend Policy B.16
The City of Port Angeles has an especially important role in extending habitat protection for
riparian corridors that begin in Olympic National Park but otherwise lose protection outside the
Park's borders.
Page 6
Economic Development Element, first bulleted item, New Policy A.12:
The Rayonier site's cleanup is essential for attracting potential investors and also for contributing to
the attractiveness of the City as a place to live and visit. Although I will comment on other elements
of the former millsite in my later recommendations, I think it is important to recognize the
economic importance of the site beyond its purchase and development for future jobs.
New Policy, C.l: Improved access to Olympic National Park is important through continuation of
the ski buses, assistance with keeping the parkway open, and better transportation options for people
arriving on ferries or buses. Even though other entities may have major responsibilities for some
services, the City's support is important.
150
Concern~s about proposed amendments
Page 2, fi[st item, regarding Regulatory Reform Act '
I hope thetproposed limitation to only one public hearing for SEPA determinations or permits does
n0! mean {.hat the public will be deprived of an opportunity to present concerns directly to the City
Council. Council members are our elected representatives, and it is important that we be able to bring
our concerns to their attention in some way. Perhaps written comments will be or could be accepted,
if not a public hearing.
Page 4
Land Use Element ~ Open Space, New Objective K.2: Per earlier comment, please replace "new"
with "newer" to make it clear that existing subdivisions will not be excluded from park expansion.
Transportation Element, New Policy B.20: This relic from earlier comprehensive plans seems a
foolish waste of limited resources. A much higher priority should be support for a minimum of four
lanes on Highway 101, especially when so many people are being killed and injured by v. ehicles
attempting to pass in two-lane areas and hitting oncoming vehicles.
Pushing for another eastern access into the City will leave property owners in doubt about the future
of their tranquility and property values and contribute to blight. ,
It's time to focus on far more important goals.
Page 5, New Policy D.16: Instead of requiring a no-protest annexation agreement, couldn't sewage
hookup fees for non-City residents make annexation attractive enough that it isn't necessary to
continue to alienate people opposed to annexation? Of course, septic systems that leak into streams
and groundwater or cause other health hazards shouldn't be permitted to continue to pollute, arid
those property owners need to be required to hook up to a sewage system, if that is the only way to
take care of their problems.
Continuing concerns from comments submitted earlier
· Bike lanes: Do transportation plans include provisions for bicycle lanes?
· Stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces: Does the stormwater ordinance include penalty
for abandoning such impervious surfaces as parking lots? That might discourage the tendency for
business owners to build more parking than is feasible and then abandon it to move to areas farther
out, where land is always cheaper and regulations may be looser.
· Stormwater-sewage separation: Does the stormwater ordinance do everything it should to
separate stormwater runoff from sewage, so raw sewage won't overflow and cause pollution?
· Water conservation: Are water conservation provisions adequate?
· Pollution protection: Is language protecting residents and visitors from air, water and noise
pollution adequate? (Change "should" to "shall" in Item 3, Page 49.
· Landfill contaminants: Is oversight adequate to protect the public from landfill contaminants?
· Stream restoration and protection: Although the statement about protecting wildlife corridors
and implementing the recommendations of this area's watershed planning unit, could the City take a
stronger stand favoring protection and restoration of streams, especially those given highest priority
by the watershed planning unit (WR/A 18)? I think this might contribute to efforts by watershed
groups to obtain grants that would contribute to salmonid enhancement -- certainly important to our
area.
151
· Trails must not harm riparian areas: A statement needs to be added to Page 56, Proposal'2,
Transportation Element, to make it clear that any trails should be created only after making sure
that they will not have a deleterious effect on riparian habitatS. Many streamsides, including Ennis
Creek, have sensitive soils and vegetations that would be vulnerable to erosion and stream
sedimentation if trails were created and pedestrian or even bike and motorcycle use opened up.
· Fish and wildlife passage: My earlier suggestions urged a statement requiring all new or
renovated streets to provide for ~fish and wildlife passage through proper culverts. Failure to do this
will compromise the larger effort we need to make to protect and restore' important habitat areas and
is likely to waste money on later alterations when projects should have been done properly in the
first place.
· Essential estuarine environment for Ennis Creek: A specific statement favoring the return
of the essential estuarin~ environment for Ennis Creek could be valuable. The area salmonids need
for getting acclimated as they travel from Ennis Creek to saltwater and back has been covered with
landfill and structures. Pilings still remain where the estuarine area should be. The landfill never
should have been permi~ed, and the City should take'a firm stance to make sure approaching
opportunities to undo some of the damage are not lost.
· Beautifnl beach for public enjoyment: The City also should take a pro-active stance favoring
protection of the longest and most unspoiled beach close to downtown. Of course, private property
rights must be upheld, but City support could increase opportunities for grants to purchase that part
of the Rayonier property or at least obtain a purchased or donated (with tax benefits) conservation
easement, which would pro~ect both the beach and the estuarine area while still making more suitable
land available for development.
152
Andy and Colleen Brastad
'/ 1622 Milwaukee Drive
t Port Angeles, WA 98363
/
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
Port A.Qge]es CJt~ CollQcil Dept. of Community Deveiopmem
Port Angeles City Hall
Port Angeles, WA 98362
RE: City of Port Angeles Comprehensive Plan Update
Honorable Council Members:
This correspondence pre. i__~ you our comments regarding the City s Comp Plan
updates. I live at 1622 Milwaukee Drive which is accessible from West 18th S.tr6et. Our
neighborhood is characterized by ½ acres or larger lots, a gravel road with shallow
ditches for catching storm water and provides for a rural setting. My comments are
regarding this area of Milwaukee Drive and to the north toward the bluffs. My comments
are as follows: ; ,
We recommend that the City promote low development density standards. This
will result in maintaining larger lot sizes as our neighborhood develops in the
furore, while maintaining rural settings.
· We recommend that the City adopt Low Impact Development standards and
irffxastmcture for our area. As you know, these standards promote roads of 20 or
25 feet in width, gravel verses pavement, allow storm water to be collected and
treated in ditches. We do not support the development of wide, curb and gutter-
type roads and infrastructure.
This is important to us because it preserves the existing rural setting that we and our
neighbors enjoy, decreases storm water impacts which save the City costs and improves
the environment, and maintains or increases our property values.
Thank you for this oppommity to provide these comments.
S.~.incerely, ~ .
Andy and Colleen Brastad
153
Clallam County
Department of
Community Development
Robed Robertsen, Director 223 East 4th Street, Suite 5
Building Division/Fire Marshal Port Angeles, WA 98362-3015
Planning Division 360.417.2321 Fax: 360.417.2443
E-mail: development~co.clallam.wa.us
F,A¥ I 2 2004 ,
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
City of Port Angeles Dept. of Ccm~unily Deve opment
Planning Commission
cio Department of Comm. Development
P.O. Box 1 t 50
Port Angeles, WA 98362
Re: Comments on City's Proposed Amendment to the Comprehensive
Plan and Land Use Map
Dear Chairman 'Hewins:
On May 3, 2004, City Planning Staff provided us with a copy of the draft
amendments proposed td the City's Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map. It is our
understanding that these will be considered by the Planning Commission at a public
hearing scheduled for May 12, 2004. On behalf of the Depadment of Community
Development, we appreciate the opportunity to provide the following comments for the
City's consideration:
IV- Growth Manaqement Element
1. Pages 43, 44 and 45
There are a number of existing policies that provide guidance for the
establishment and maintenance of the City's Urban Growth Area (UGA).
The Department of Community Development would just like to reaffirm
the impodance of these policies in guiding any amendments being
considered to the City's UGA. Furthermore, we would suggest providing a
reference in the City's Plan to the adopted County-wide planning policies
that outline the process and procedures for UGA amendments. This
would help clarify the public understanding of the relationship between
these two plans as they relate to UGA issues.
154
2. p.age 45; New Policy # 18
It should be clarified whether this policy is intended to apply to the existing
UGA or als0 includes the proposed UGA areas? Fudhermore, if the lands
involved are adjacent to, or within the UGA, then the policy should be
reworded to include a reference to working with Clallam County as County
actions/impacts will be involved.
3. Pa.qe 45; Obiectives 2 & 3, and Related Land Use Map Changes
As the County has reiterated before, DCD staff believes that these policies
are premature at best in that nb analysis or evaluation has been done as a
part of the record that explains the need for these expansions. As
mentioned previously, the County-wide planning policies contain
procedures for evaluating the need for expansion, and in our opinion, this
should be done before policies such as these are added to the
Comprehensive Plan.
4. Pa.qe 45; Qbiective 4
This should be amended to reduce the appearance of a policy chasing a
foregone conclusion. Change to "The City will conduct a Buildable Land
Inventory to examine the need for UGA expansions".
5. Pa.qe 46; Policy 12
This policy should be amended to include timeframes on performance
benchmarks to assist landowners in understanding what timeline/criteria to
anticipate for annexation to proceed.
Utility and Public Services
1. Page 70; Policy 16
This policy should be reconsidered, and replaced with one which
advocates a fee-based incentive for annexation; perhaps charging
differential and higher rates for non-city properties served by sewer.
2. Page 70; New Obiectives 4 & 5
These should include performance or timeline criteria outlined in the
Capital Facilities Plan to provide more certainty for affected property
owners.
Housinq Element
1. Page 73; New Policy 10
This policy should be reworded to clarify whether it applies to the existing
or proposed UGA, and should reference coordination with Clallam County.
The wording should also clarify the actual definition of Iow and medium
density, as well as where the policy is applicable; existing UGA?
Proposed?
155
2. pa.qe 90; Economic Development; New Obiective 2
This policy should be reworded to include the County as a jurisdiction to
coordinate within this process.
3. Pa.qe 92; New Policy 2 '
Consider rewording this policy to clarify what is intended by this statement
"...work to enhance the use of Ediz Hook'; as what? Imprecise
wording leads to potential confusion. ,
Again, thank you for the opportunity to comment, and we look forward to wo,rking
with the City on your Comprehensive Plan amendment process.
Sincerely,
,
Planning Director
cc: Rob Robertsen; Director, DCD
Board of County Commissioners
Dan Engelbertson
Steve Gray
Brad Collins, City of Port Angeles
156
i 2 20 4
CITY OF PORT ANGELES
Dept. of Community Development
Port Angeles Association of REALTORS®
127 East First St., Suite 2-W, Port Angeles, WA 98362
R E A LIO R (360) 452-744 ]
May 12, 2004
TO: City of Port Angeles Planning Commission
City of Port Angeles Department of Community Development
FROM: Port Angeles Association of REALTORS® '
RE: Recommended Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed amendments to the City of Port
Angeles Comprehensive Plan. We applaud the commitment the City has made to the public
participation process and feel that process has produced some strong recommendations.
The Port Angeles Association of REALTORS® supports most of the proposed amendments'.
Overall, they reflect a desire to maintain a strong and diversified economy, a commitment to
provide infrastructure necessary to accommodate quality growth and an understanding of what
amenities make a better community.
We offer the following comments on specific proposed amendments:
Growth Management Element
New Policy A.19: The City should establish performance measures to review progress toward
accommodating growth and to ensure appropriate actions are taken to achieve the goals of our
community.
This policy is commendable in that it recognizes the City should incorporate a systematic process
for reviewing progress toward achieving each of the goals listed in the plan. Wherever possible,
goals in the plan should be accompanied by performance measures. Performance measures have
not been included in the list ofrecomrnended amendments. Should this policy be adopted, we
trust City staff will work toward identifying appropriate measurements and including those into
the plan.
New Objective A.4: The City will conduct a Buildable Lands Inventory to support UGA
expansions.
Port Angeles Association of REALTORS®
May 12, 2004 '[ 57 I
Monitoring growth patterns and the supply of buildable land is essential for assuring growth is
accommodated. We suppon and encourage ongoing inventories of commercial, industrial and
residential lands well ahead of any possible inventory shortage.
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Chan~e: Change the Land Use Map for the area of
Rayonier Mill fi'om Industrial to Commercial recognizing that the future use will likely be a mix
of commercial and residential' uses.
We oppose this rezone change a{ this time. Proposed amendments to the Industrial Element
(New Goal I and Policies I: 1-3; Objective I:1) are more flexible and appropriate amendments for
addressing the Rayonier Mill site. The annual Comp Plan amendment cycle will provide timely
opportunities to review site specific changes where specific site plan proposals can be considered
in a less restrictive manner.
Land Use Element - Residential
New Policy B.5: For efficient circulation, rights-of-way should be obtained and improvements
made to further the grid street pattern in the central Townsite area of the City. Cul-de-sacs and
curvilinear streets may be_permitted u, hen designed as an integral part of the major grid street
pattern'in the outlying areas of the City, ~4,here Low Impact Development standards may apply.
Wherever possible, the City should allow Low Impact Development standards to help reduce the
costs of development while reducing the amount and the affects of stormwater run-off. We
support this amendment and hope the City will look for further opportunities to incorporate LID
standards in the development regulations.
Land Use Element - Industrial
New Goal I; New Policy I.!1-3; New Objective I. 1
We support this thoughtful approach for addressing re-development of industrial sites. It
provides flexibility for any number of development proposals, is sensitive to the special
considerations necessary for infill development and honors the processes in place for
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map changes. In a spirit of cooperation and progress, we
recommend the City consider adoption of these recommendations.
Utilities and Public Services Element
New Policy A.5: The City should plan and seek funding to expand its existing infiAastructure to
ensure economic vitality, and to improve the quality of life in Port Angeles.
This policy reflects a proactive commitment to sustaining and improving the employment base of
the City. We are aware of the financial commitment this policy will require and are certain
investment in our infrastructure will reap benefits for the entire community.
Port Angeles Association of REALTORS® '1 ~J8 2
May 12, 2004
New Policy D.14: The City should implement the policies adopled in the Water Resources
inventory Area 18 Watershed Management Plan, including the provision of water supply to the
urban areas in and bem, een the Elwha River and Morse Creek drainage basin.
We believe it is premature to consider adoption of this amendment until the WRIA 18
Management plans have been completed and reviewed by all stakeholders in the comanunity.
We oppose this amendment.
New Policy D.16: As sewer is extended into Urban Growth Areas, those hooking up should be
required to sign a no-protest annexation agreement; New Objective D.4: The CiO, will extend
sew. er into the eastern Urban Growth Area; and New Objective D. 5: The CiO, will extend
sewer into the southwestern Urban Growth Area.
This policy and its objectives are important measures for ensuring the UGAs can accommodate
growth as intended by the Clallam County, County-wide Planning Policies (CPP). Under the
section Policies Related'to the Implementation of an Urban Growth Area the CPPs statel
Policy No. 12
"Public facilities and services necessary to support urban development will be specifically
identifie, d for provision within the designated urban growth areas of Clallam County in
accordance with the policies for Joint Planning and Contiguous and Orderly Development."
Policy No. 13
"Urban services to be provided within UGAs should include, at a minimum, provision for
sanitary waste, solid waste disposal systems, water systems, urban roads and pedestrian
facilities, transit systems, stormwater systems, police and fire and emergency services systems,
electrical and communication systems, school and health care facilities, and neighborhood
and/or community parks. "
Additionally, this policy and its objectives assure concurrency requirements of the Growth
Management Act can be met in a manner that will not prevent new business and residential
development. We support these amendments
Conservation Element
New Policy B.22: Should be amended to read:
The City should reference the Washington State Citations of Recommended Sources of Best
Available Science for Designating and Protecting Critical Areas (as periodically updated) and
other research identified as more localIv appropriate and applicable (when it is available) as
Best Available Science in the Critical Areas Ordinance.
The citations provided by the state should be considered guidelines. The list is not all-inclusive
and does not come with any automatic indicators as to applicability or appropriateness of
recommendations to local circumstances. Nor does the publication of the list identify the full
Port Angeles Association of REALTORS® ] 59 .3
May 12, 2004
range of 41ternatives available to accomplish the necessary protection. For these tasks, local
expert opinion may be more appropriate.
Thank you for your consideration. We look forward to working further with the Commission
and Department of Community Development on this important work.
Port Angeles Association of REALTORS® ] 60 4
May 12, 2004
DRAFT
May 26, 2004
The Honorable Mayor Richard Headrick
City of Poi[ Angeles
321 }~ast 5th Street
PO Box 1 I50
Port Angeles, WA 98362 ,
RE: Proposed Comprehensivc Plan amcnclmcnts for 2004 update.
Dear Mayor Headri ~ck: '
Th:ink you for sending the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic
l)eve]opment (CTED) the proposed amendments to Port Angeles's comprehensive plan that we
received on 04/02/2004. We recognize the substanlial investment of time, energy, and resources
that these documents represent.
We especially like the following:
· Adding definitions for Best Management Practices and Best Available Science, which can
help to increase the understanding and use of these measures to integrate land uses with
environmental systems.
· Growth Management Element new Policy A.19' to establish performance measures to review
progress towards accommodating growth and achieving comprehensive planning goals.
· Growth Management Element new Objective A.4 to conduct a Buildable Laads Inventory to
examine the need for Urban Growth Area (UGA) expansions will help quantify existing
amounts of lands in various zoning classes w/thin the city and its UGA, land vacancy st.atus,
and existing gaps in available land categohes. Enclosed is our Buildable Lands Progr,'un
Gtfidelines. Although these were developed to assist counties with a statutory mandate to
develop a buildable lands program, you may find some useful tools and techniques to assist
with yoar program.
l'lH¥-~O-EUUq N~U U~;qU Yl'I UI~U LUUflL UUVI ~fl~ HU, 6~U lb6 Eb~U ~, Ud
May 26, 2004
Page 2
We have concerns about thc following that should bo addressed before adopting thc plan
amendments:
Growth Management Element
,, New Policy B. 12 promotes, the city annexing its UGA as .city services and facilities extend
iulo the area to meet the needs ol~ new urban development. While [his is a preferred policy,
the actual determination of appropriate areas mid timing for annexation requires an analysis
by thc city to determine the priority areas and sequence for actual aJmcxation. There have
been several concerns raised by citizens within the city, residents in thc eastern UGA, arid
by thc county planning staff, about the need to address provision of urban services to
existing city areas first, prigr to annexation ofnew land into the city from the UGA, We
recommend the ci. ty first conduct thc inventory proposed in new Objective A.4 and analyze
the existing city and UGA needs for services and infrastructure facilities, in support of
policies such as this favoring UGA annexation. We refer you to our guidance paper on
Capital Facilities Planning on our website at:
ht'lp://www.cted.wa.£ov/uploads/GMA Capital Facililies.pdf
· New Policy A.5 recommends the city plan for and seek funding to expand its existing
infrastructure, with the implication such expansion should occur into the UGA. This is a
good policy if it sets priorities based on a cra'rent capital facilities plan and addresses current
city areas first. Those propeiXy owners benefiting from Ibc new services should pay the
costs for such service expansion. As stated previously, ire city capital facilities plan should
address how and when existing city areas will be provided with re'ban services, prior to
Cxpauding these services into the UOA.
Utilities and Public Service
· New Policy D. 16 and new Objectives D.4 and D.5 all relate to this sm'ne issue of services
wilhin the UGA, and adopting them now is premature without doing the land capacity
· 'malysis and capital facility planning steps to determine priority areas for urban sm'vice
expm'~sion. We support the idea expressed by Clallam County staff to include timelines and
performance benchmarks to guide future urban service expansions in to thc UGA. As
expressed in the new Objective A,4 (to conduct a Buildablc Lands Inventory to examine the
need for UGA expansions), that work should precede adopting policies such as the new
Objective A.3 recommending expansion of the city UGA.
We have some suggestions for strengthening thc plan amendments that we encourage you to
consider either in these or future amendments:
· In thc Community Profile, Urban Services section, page 31 states that there arc five
retention/detention facilities for ston~water in the city. Subsequently two facilities are
mentioned as being maintained by others. It is unclear if the National Park Service facility
is included in the list of five facilities or not. We suggest clarifying if this is a separate sixth
facility or not.
162
~RY-~-~UUq W~ U6;G~ F~ UI~D LUUHL UUVl ~ HU, ~U lb5 EbUU Y, Uq
May 26,. 2004
Page 3 't
· Thdre are several notes within thc Plan text indicating text additions are intended. Until
Ihose are actually added to the Plan, it is impossible to critically review them for consistency
within the city comprehensive plan or with the Clallam County Comprehensive Plan.
Congratulations to you and your staff for the good work these amendments embody. If yeti have
any questions or concerns about our comments or any other growth management issues, please
call me at (360) 725-3046. We extend our continued support ~o the City of Po;I Aqgelcs in ,
achieving thc goals of growth management.
Sincerely,
Douglas L. Peters
Senior Planner
Growth Management Services
dp:lw
cc: Michael Quinn, Port Angeles City Manager
Scott Johns, Associate Planner
Andy Meyer; Clallam County Planning Director
John Cambalik, PSAT
163
2020 VISION FOR PORT ANGELES
PROJECT REPORT
Public participation
As required by the State, the City of Port Angeles undertook to update its Comprehensive
Plan with guidance from the State. The first requirement of GMA was to establish a public
participation process to help craft amendments to the plan that would meet the expectations of
the citizenry. To do this, the City appointed a Citizen Advisory Committee comprised of nine
members who helped design a Public Participation Program specifically to reach a large number
of citizens and solicit responses that could be used in crafting amendments to the City's
Comprehensive Plan. The advisory committee was made uP of citizens that are i~Jvoived with
neighborhood issues, locai business and economic development, past Planning Commission and
City Council members, and a sitting member of both the City Council and Planning
Commission. This group was given the task of designing a program to involve citizens in
contributing their ideas to the planning process and to assist staff in crafting proposals for
changes to the Comprehensive Plan,.
. The program that was developed consisted of a week-long open house, followed by three
weeks of neighborhood meetings. The open house and meetings were advertised by several
means, including placing a large banner across Hyw 101, the main street through the City. Press
releases were issued weekly to the newspaper and local radio station. The ?eninsula Daily News
published seven articles on the planning process over the five week period and carried two City
sponsored advertisements. Additionally, planning meetings were announced in the Things To
Do column on three occasions. The Department of Community Development participated in the
two-day Home Show held at the Port Angeles High School gy~nnasium. The meeting times,
dates, and locations were scheduled so that a broad section of the population could participate.
Times were varied from early afternoon (1:00 pm to 3:00 pm), later afternoon (4:00 pm to 6:00
pm) and later evening (7:00 pm to 9:00 pm). Meetings were held on various days of the week
2020 Vision for Port Angeles Project Report Page 1
April 14, 2004
165
and seve~ different locations were used to hold meetings. A web page was developed and linked
to the City's Homepage listing the meeting dates, times and focus: The web page was updated
ttu'oughout the process and the comment questions were made available on-line to provide an
additional and easy method of response to the written comments form made available at all the
meetings and various public locations such as City Hall.
Members of the Citizen Advisory Committee volunteered their time to contact and attend
meetings of 21 organizations that were identified as potential stakeholders. Those organizations
were informed of the planning effort being taken by the City'and were invited to paiticipate in the
process by suggesting changes that might be made to the Comprehensive Plan. A three-hour
forum specifically for these civic and business organizations to comment on or make propo~ls
was held at the end to the three week public meeting period.
The Comprehensive Plan update process has had contact with 300 - 400 indlviduals
through open houses, public meetings, organization/stakeholder presentation, comment forms
returned, and use of the internet. Eighty-five people attended at least one public meeting as'
indicated by sign-in sheets. A total of 58 comment sheets were submitted. In addition, five
different organizations made formal presentations to the Citizen Advisory Committee. As a
result, 68 specific amendments were drafted and submitted for review by March 31, 2004.
Public Comment Responses
Several major topic areas came to light from the comments received through the public
participation process. The major topics have a thread of commonality binding them together. As
an example, the appearance of the City was mentioned several times in connection with the
ability to attract tourists which would stimulate economic development. Tourism, including
outdoor recreation and eco-tourism, were suggested as ways to stimulate economic development.
This led to suggestions of what to base tourism on, including the City's history, preservation of
its small town character, and protection and enhancement of its local environmental assets.
There was a sense that the City should not have a shabby, decrepit look and feel to it.
This was seen as a detriment to attracting and maintaining a strong tourist market. The eastern
2020 Vision for Port Angeles Project Report Page 2
April 14, 2004
166
entry to tt~e City was specifically mentioned as needing improvement, as it is often the first
impressiori that visitors have of the City. Few specific suggestions for how the City could make
improvements were included. However, the need for additional street trees was mentioned more
than once.
The City's small town character was mentioned several times with a concern that there is
a need to limit or control growth patterns. This small town character is cited as a r. eason that
people come here and stay here. This idea is connected to another reason that people are here,
namely the open space and natural environment, which tied in with a strong feeling of protecting
that open space, providing more park space, and ensuring public access to the waterfront. These
concepts also were tied to tourism and again back to economic development. While most people
responding to our questions indicated that growth would be guu~, there was a theme of constraint
and caution so that the growth would be orderly and planned for and that the small town
character not be lost to large mega-stores and malls and that the local scenic environment be
protected. It also seemed, to those individuals who currently lived in areas where it was qui, et
and private, and the ci~aracter was somewhat rural, that any potential growth should not be in
those areas.
Quiet, safe neighborhoods was also a common theme. The lack of sidewalks, specifically
in the west end, was a neighborhood issue that also came up several times. Other neighborhood
comments included noise as an issue. Noise from several sources was mentioned, including
general traffic noise, large trucks idling for long periods, motorcycle riding off-road on vacant
lots, loud car stereos, and airport noise.
Annexation of the eastern UGA and extension of the sewer into this area had mixed
responses; however, the majority of respondents encouraged the annexation of the UGA.
Annexation and sewer extension were often tied to environmental health and economic
development issues. It was typically felt that the City would be in a better position to provide
services that would improve the general conditions of the eastern UGA in both aesthetic and
environmental ways.
Transportation issues generally focused on finding more efficient ways to move trucks
out of the downtown area and moving traffic through the City more efficiently. The use of the
2020 Vision for Port Angeles Project Report Page 3
April 14, 2004 ] 6 7
term by-pass or alternate Hwy 101 route were used synonymously, but no specific solution
surfaced. Many different scenarios were discussed and there was'disagreement as to the scale,
location, and purpoge of a route. There was a consensus that an additional route out of town to
the east would be advantageous, if there were a need for emergency evacuation of the Cily or if
Hyw 101 were closed for any length of time. Whether that rome would function as a bypass of
the City, a route for truck traffic to avoid the downtown area, Or an easy way for locals to meet
their commuting needs was never clear. Several ~tisadvamages to an alternate traffic pattern were
pointed out. They included reducing tourist traffic from fully experiencing the City, encouraging
sprawling land development to the south, the expected high cost of land acquisition and
construction associated'with such a project, and impacts from noise and traffic to existing quiet,
semi-rural neighborhoOds..
The Rayonier Mill site received comments from citizens and organizations including the
propert~ owner Rayonier. Citizens generally expressed the idea that expanded public use of
some kind is desired. Suggestions included park and recreational uses, residential use,
educational and research uses, public access to the waterfront, and uses that would specifically
attract tourism. While these ideas were popular with citizens, the political and economic leaders
of the community were advocating caution and patience in changing the existing Comprehensive
Plan designation or zoning to avoid the appearance of forcing Rayonier into a more costly
cleanup scenario and possit}le abandonment of the site. Rayonier itself proposed allowing for a
method of overlay zoning for planned industrial development that would allow something other
that a blanket cleanup to an impractically high standard. Business leaders encouraged the City to
consider keeping the site available for marine related light industry, as it is the last available
waterfront on the harbor.
The extension of the Olympic Discovery Trail from Marine Drive to the western edge of
the City received extensive discussion at several of the neighborhood meetings. This issue is
supported by two citizen organizations, and some residents along portions of the proposed route
expressed their opinions. Trail users also voiced their opinion at several meetings. Currently the
undeveloped Milwaukee Drive is designated on the Nonmotorized Transportation Map as the
approved route for the trail. Strong support for an alternative route from 4th and 'N' Street,
2020 Vision for Port Angeles Project Report Page 4
April 14, 2004 ] 68
following 'N' Street to 18th Street and then west to Milwaukee Drive was proposed and well
supported. Adv'antages to this route included the existing infrastructure, the need for
improvements to the existing infrastructure, existing property ownership along the route, and
potential early timing of the improvements. Although property owners along Milwaukee Drive
are aware that Milwaukee Drive will be improved at some point in the future, their desires to
keep the area quiet and private for as long as possible and to make sure that development there
happens in a well planned, orderly fashion support the 'N'/18~h Street route.
Discussion of the future of the William R. Fairchild Airport took place at several
meetings. These discussions ranged from the short term needs of the terminal and hanger
relocations to the possible need tg) relocate the entire airport in the long term future. Potential
population growth in the area, coupled wi*.h existing land aVailability and growth patterns, and
the airport's impact on surrounding land uses prompted these discussions. There is a need to
control the land uses surrounding an airport, especially in the restricted flight zones. Discussion
of land use controls led to considerations of planned growth in the areas directly west of the City
limits and the airport. There was discussion also as to whether the County or the City would be
best suited to control that land use and what the best method would be. The Washington State
Department of Transportation Aviation Division and the FAA concluded that there would be
little State and Federal support for relocation of the airport and those taking part in the discussion
agreed that the County wou~d most likely be able to control the land use for less intensive
development west of the.airport. The City, therefore, limited its proposed expansion of the UGA
west of the airport. This also led the City to recommend limiting its sewer extension outside the
City limits to the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribal Reservation to the smallest size required to serve
the Tribal Reservation and not provide potential hook-up capacity to residents living between the
City and the Tribal Reservation.
Next Steps
The 68 proposed amendments have been submitted to Washington State Department of
Community Trade and Economic Development (DCTED) to be reviewed for consistency with
2020 Vision for Port Angeles Project Report Page 5
April 14, 2004 '1 69
the Growth Management Act and to the Washington State .Department of Transportation
(WSDOT) to be reviewed for consistency with the Regional Transportation Plan. A SEPA
review of the potential impacts of the amendments on the environment must be conducted. Each
proposal must be analyzed as to its impact on the City and must be found to be in the public
interest. A public hearing on the proposed amendments will be held at the Planning Conunission
meeting on May 12, 2004. The Planning Commission will then make a recommen'dation to the
City Council regarding the proposed amendments. The City Council will hold a public hem'ing
on June 1, 2004, before taking a final action on the proposals. '
After the final amendments to the Comprehensive Plan have been adopted, the City will
then take up the task of reviewing and amending the zoning ordinance, the subdivision ,
ordinance, and the critical areas ordinance. These tasks will once again require s.upport and input
from the citizens of Port Angeles.
T:\COMPPLAN~2004 up dateskcomments recieved\Comment synopsis.wpd ~
2020 Vision for Port Angeles Project Report Page 6
April 14, 2004 ] 70
Submitted to City Council at its meeting of
June 8, 2004 by Ed Tuttle
BAY LOOP NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOC.
407 N. Lees Creek Road
Port Angeles, WA. 98362
"NO TO-ANNEXATION"
I am the President of Bayloop Neighborhood Assoc. Before you are 523 signatures
of residents, business owners and property owners in the disputed area. I
them. Only 4 came forward and favored Annexation. Several Indicated they wanted
Sewer but not if it means Annexation. Also there are 200 signatures of people West
of the Western UGA who are terrified of just being in a UGA.
The Bayloop Neighborhood Assoc. is here representing not only our own
neighborhood but also the neighborhoods of Gales Addition, North Monroe and
North Mount Pleasant.
In 1998, when we put Clallam Citizens Coalition to bed and I disappeared from the
scene, our local governments seemed to work together as a team. We still had the
outlanders who come here to promote change. Usually to promote their special
interests and not the good of the community as a whole. Its all about money.
As you should be aware, the area East of Port Angeles is the County's Primary
source of sales tax revenue. It is the county's "DOWNTOWN" and the revenues are
used to provide services to the Rural area's of the County. The County does not
possess authority for many taxing options that the city does. The city looks at us and
sees a big cash cow. To the County, it is survival and to us, our way of life.
We all know that as citizens we only have one thing that gives us any say in what
government does. A Vote It is a fundamental right and its all we have. Mr.
Hedrick & Ms. Rodgers have stated that we are a vocal minority- If so, then the city
should have no problem letting us vote on the annexation question. It is the morally
right thing to do. Absentee property owaaers, should not decided policy and who
governs who.
Those of us that live is area's served by the PUD consider the infrastructure to be
ours. Our taxes and paying for the service paid for it. The only way the city is
going to get it, is through condemnation and paying the full market value. In doing
so, the city would be doing a great disservice to city residents and just might break
your bank.
We all know that the city's request to enlarge the UGA's and pre-annexation
agreements are tied to Revenue & Annexation and it is time for the city' to shut off
the BS machine, that says otherwise.
If the city was smart, it would work with the PUD (instead of telling them to get
lost) and the County' to assist in the installation of a sewer trunk line. Sharing
revenue and charging for processing the sewage (with out pre-annexation
agreements) would fill the city's coffers in short order and stop the threats,
intimidation and blackmail by city government. Our community is all of Clallam
County, not just the city of Port Angeles and we need to work together respecting
the wishes and rights of others, when we can and do what's best to everyone.
Majority rule is our way of life and that means a vote.
The Mayor has stated that we are a vocal minority. If this is true, why is the city
afraid of a vote of the people. It is morally- right and fair that we determine who
governs us, not large absentee property owners and outlanders new to our
community.
I will bet everyone sitting up there a Steak Dinner, that if you take the time to sit
down with" all "parties and pencil this out, you will see that working together is a
win, win situation for all concerned. Never can tell what might happen if we work
together for the good of the many, instead of the greedy few.
Sincerely:
Edwin E. Tuttle
President- Bay Loop Neighborhood Assoc.
// \ ~ ?! Submitted to City Council at its meeting of
,.~L,2 ~q/,,x,..),~,~ -~ ~ ~ June 8, 2004 by Ed Tuttle
STOP ANNE TION NOW I
It is time to tell our elected Coun~ Commissionem that the residents of Bay Loop,
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the Ci~ of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
Coun~ jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the Coun~
to establish our neighborhoods as a Coun~ based "~imited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or L~~ for sho~. This option was not available when the
Coun~ first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~I~ option allows our neighborhoods to re,in their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the Ci~ and avoid costly Ci~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAM~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supposed by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be se~ed by the Coun~ (roads, zoning, sheri~, the P~ (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Coun~ based L~I~ from the Ci~.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on ~our elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land U~es are retained, that you
will' continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive se~ices at ~own cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
:,q-, ~- ..-: ,r ~: ~ .~:~ ~',~' ~ ~/-~-?_~-~ /:~: >.,~' V-~.~l':,x~~
RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD ~v'-~/.x-~,~
PORT ANGELES,. WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,
Gales AdditiOn, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petitiou below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our"neigl~borhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LA/VIIRD from the Cit~.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
lmv as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
,Name (Print) Signatur, e~.. Address . Date
:_.. .... _: ...... ....,.....
~. .' ~ ~ . . ~-~. ,;t~. - 'ir ...............
~ .~,~-,,., ,~..~ ~/';,c~ ~ ~.~ ....... [/,~ ....~l ! M,~'~..~._, C~..,~-- .iTi. :2', ~ ~' ~.
RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD 48~'5/,,w'..~ :5'
PORT .ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County COmmissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North 'Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD oPtion ~vould allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued, use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will.remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date~ ~ ·
-'"" -%?/-' ._~ - :" "'- ~- ':' -'" .'~" "?' Z ' 5'~'.. "'~-, , " </
~ ."?-,, /:-', : . ' , ,
': 2'- ', ' ' '"" - ",','. ' ~"~'" ~ '"-- ' ~ '
,/,.,,-:, .._- .,_ ..., , - ._ ,., ,. :.
RETU~N TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,~ '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a Count3, based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option ~vas not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid cosily City sewer, stormwaIer and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
· . -~~.~
Name (Pnnt) S~nature Address .. ,y' ~ '~ Date
· . . - ,~,. -,l,~ , : ' , ....... . !
RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW*.!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'"
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth ~vithin our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdietion and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short.. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LA1VIIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Enni$ Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
!
f
'"
t~ RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD-
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to telI our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North l~lount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City °fPort Angeles.
By signing the petitiOn below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth ~vithin our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a Connty based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short, This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The I,AMIRD option allows our neighborhoOds to retain their iarge 'lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow Continued development at the 1/2 acre
ldt size that can be supported by continued use of individual sePtic systems. The area
would continue to Be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the exist, in, g fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine ~vould separate our
County based LAMIRD from the .City,
By signing the petition belo~v you can exert pressure on your'elected 'representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densitieS and land Uses are retained, tlaat you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you ean continue to receive .services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (print)' Si, nature ~, , Address . , Date
' ' l ~' f~ / ' ' £ , ' ' ' ~ ' "
- RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK'ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition beloTM you Will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for.growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition r. equests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAM1RD for short, This option was not available when the
County.first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option alloWs our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costlY City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades'. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lOt size that can be supported bY .continued use of;individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served-by, the County (rOads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected ~-epresentatives
t° enSUre that your existing housing densities' and land uses are retained, that you
· '~vill continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
loTM as possible and that you can continue to r~.ceive services at knOwn cost from the
institutions that currently provide th'em. ".. -~ ..
Name (Print) Sig Address Date
¥.
..
TLm2' _TO
· 407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
it is time to tell our elected C°unty Commissioners that the residents of. Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North' Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods~ do not'
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other lekal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based ,'Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD. for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
'The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, storm~vater and road
~grades. The LAMIRD option would allo~v continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot' size that can be supported by continUed Use of individual septic systems. The area
woaid continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the pUD (electric
and water)' and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine xvould separate our
County baSed LAMIRD from the City.
By. signing the petition below you can' exert Pressure on your elected representatiVes
to ensure that your existing.housing densities and-.~land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road sysf~in, that your taxes Will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Address Date
RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you svill be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that ,vould leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option svas not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition belo;v you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signaturg Address Date
" '"'i
RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORt .ANGELES, WA 98362
-'-- STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'"
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighbo.,.r~oods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petitio~ requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "l.,imited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option wonld allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
wOuld continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the .p...etitiOn below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that yOur existing housing densities and land Uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name'(Print) ~ Signature Address . Date
RETURN TO ...
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County COmmissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -'
Gales Addition, NOrth Monroe and North Mount Pleasant_Neighborhoods, do not ·
want to be .part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are .
other l.egal options for growth within our neighborhoods that woUld leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods aS a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to.retain iheir large lot suburban
character, remain'outside the City and avoid costly City sewer,?tormWater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can. be' supported by. continued use of individual septic system"s. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densitieS and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy .d well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
iow as possible and that y6u can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address .- .,:i!::' Dat/e
' .' ~'1- I '
RETUR~ TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make. annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, storm~vater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
w~ould Continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUl) (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Si~nat~ur, ~ Address r7 Date
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOWV.
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North ~{ount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to he part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition belo~v you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the Count3'
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or L.43~[IRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count)' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the Cit3' and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served .by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LA_MIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain, as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print] Sianature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN 'FO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,~"
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling Ihe Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited/[rea of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert- pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained' road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that current ~rovide them.
Name (Print) Address Date
. .iL b-' ?/:,: ,Y
RETURN TO ~.~.
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth ~vithin our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
svill continue to enjoy a svell maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
lmv as possible and that you eau continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) S~n~ature Address Date
RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW'!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that tl~ere are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of ]M[orc Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
,viii continue to enjoy a ~veli maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Sigmltur?.:~ ~ Address Date~
-
RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
Iris time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will bevelling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation~ illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. ~The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature -- Address Date
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
~ PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
It is tkne to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the Ci~ of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
o~her legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More l~ntense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option ;vas not available when the
Count)' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside t, he City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LANIIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that eau be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the Coun~ (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representath, es
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at 'known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) S'~ure ~ Address Date
z
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition anti
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 im
order for it to be presented at the May st~ Clailam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time t° tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay I~oop,' -'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, dc not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available ~vhen the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LA1VIIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
up~rades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
svill continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
losv as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name(Print) Si~natt}re. Address Date
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
"l~t is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' '-
':Gales Addition, North Monroe and North M[ount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petit[on below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
~ other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
~ Coun~ jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the CounW
}~ to establish our neighborhoods as a CounW based "Limited Area of More !ntense
'~ ~ural ~evelopment" or L~I~ for short. This option was not available when the
Count' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LM~[~ option alIows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
· :': character, remain outside the Ci~, and avoid costly Ci~ sewer, stormwater and road
/:upgrades. The L~~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
~ lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
'~would continue to be se~ed by the CounW (roads, zoning, sherif0, the P~ (electric
~ and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
CounW based LAMI~ ~om the CiW.
'By signing the petition betow you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
· ~ to ensure that your ex[sting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w[II continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you eau continue to receive sera, ices at k=nown cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Prin0 Signature Address . ~ Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
tt is ~ime to tell our elected county Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and NotCh Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods'as a County based "Limited Area of More _Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LA_MIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire- district.: The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LA1VIIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and Iand uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print); Signature._ ' -, Address D,ate
, '-'" ~ :'' "-- " '
;
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29t~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5ta Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW o
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illeg~l. Tl~e petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Couaty first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the Ci~r and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L.~{IRD option would allow contiaued developmeat at the 1/2 acre
lot size tl~at can be supported by Continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be.setw~ed by the County (roads, zoniag, sheriff), the PUB (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Couaty based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elecf~ed representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive ser~qces at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Sigaature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the U(;A (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you,' please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay I~oop,'"
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us xvithin
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available svhen the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be .served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine svould separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature . Address Date
RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!.*
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'"
'Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Coramissioners that there are
other legal options for gro~vth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a Count~ based "Limited Area of 5__~ore Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for'short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by lhe County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure oa your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Sigogture/~ ~ ~Address . ~ Date
.... flt $ ~ O
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!.*
It is time to tell our elected County Cofi~missioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' ~-
Gales Addition, North l~onroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the CiD' of Port Angeles.
BY signing the petition below yon'will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for g:~owth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the CounW
to establish our neighborhoods as a C°unW based "Limited Area of More intense
gural Development" or L~iI~ for short. This option was not available when the
CounB' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~~ option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and.avoid costly CiW sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~i~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be se~ed by the Coun~ (roads, zoning, sherif0, the P~ (electric
and water) and the existing fire district~ The Ennis Creek ravine wouId separate our
CounW based L~{[~ from the CiW.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected represen~tives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w/ti continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you eau continue to receive scm, ices at ~own cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW , !
~t ~s time to tell our elected Connty Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
GaIes Addition, North 5~onroe and North M:onnt Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the Ci~ of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
Coun~ jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the Coun~,
~o establish our neighborhoods as a Coun~ based "~imi~ed Area of 5~ore ~ntense
~ural ~evelopment" or L~I~ for short. This option was not available when the
Count' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~~ option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the Ci~' and avoid costly Ci~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be se~ed by the County (roads, zoning, sherif0, the P~ (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Count- based L~I~ from the CiW.
By signing the petition betow you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w[II continue to enjoy a Well maintained road system, t~at your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive sera, ices at ~own cost from the
institutions tkat currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th. 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW.V o
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By sigaing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would lea'ye us~within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LA2~[1RD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
wiIl continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature /Q ~ Address D;~te
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Ciallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
tt is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and NOrth Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave Us withha
County jurisdiction and make annexa:tion illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a COunty based "L_imited Area of More _Intense
Rural Development" or LAMI~ for'short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allo;vs our neighborhoods to retain their iarge lot suburban
character, remain outside the CiD, and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Itt size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served, by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LA_MIRD from the citY.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, tlmt your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them. ¢~t.q ~'~
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
7_44: ee
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW ..
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount PIeasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
' By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within, our neighborhoods that would leave us within
Coun~ jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighb6rhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More l:ntense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for: short. This option was not available when the
CoUnty first adopted i~s growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAS~ILRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~I~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot s~ze that eau be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be se~ed by the CourtW (roads, zoning, sherifO, the P~ (electric
and ware0 and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Coun~ based L~M~ from the CiW.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive se~qces at ~own cost from the
insti~tions that currently provide them.
NaT (Print, Signature Address D¢~/A~
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29m~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5ta Ciallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
it is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay
Gales Addition, North r~[onr°e and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition beIow you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth' within our neighborhoods that would Ieave us within
County jurisdiction and make-annexation illegal. The petition requests the (.ounty
to establish our neighborhoods as a Count5' based "Limited Area of More Infense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count)' first adopted [ts growth pIan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option alIows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot subu:ban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAS~IIRD option would allow continued developraent at the 1/2 acre
Iot s,.'ze that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be set?ed by the County (roads, zoning, sherif0, the PUD (electric
and water) and the ex[sting fire district. The Enn[s Creek ravine woutd sepa>' ate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By Signing the petit[on betow you can exert pressure on 5'our elected representatives
to ensure that 5'our existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive serwices at known cost fi'om the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29ts~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5ts Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'"
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us ~vithin
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of M~re Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, storm;vater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Printl~ Sianatur. e,~. ~ Address Date
RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'"
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods.as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option svas not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and :avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by:the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district.: The Ennis Creek ravine svould separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition beloxv you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
svill continue to enjoy a well mgintained road system, that your taxes svill remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at knoxvn cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) S~nature Address Date
ILE'I~UILN '1'O
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' "'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adOpted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature ,~ Address Date
· - . ~ 'c, , -'- ~
,: 'x'~ ./.,.~
... · ~ ' . rt ~-~ - ~- -
RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' --
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of B/j~ore Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes ~vill remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
%ame (Print) Silllmture ,--~ r~ Address Date
407.-.NwL~~;~
PORT ..ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNE .XA, TION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be t.elling the Co~:~missioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our,neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexatiog illegal. The Fetition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area oflSlore Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborh{~ods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighbor,hoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly Ci~/sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
'lot size that can be supported by continual use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the Coun~ (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive sera'ices at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (PrinO Signature Address Date
/
'RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CRiBEK ROAD.
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our ele, cted CountY Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -'
Gales Addition, North Monroe/and North Mount Pleasant Neighborho°ds, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By Signing the petitioa below you will be telling the Commissioners that .there are
other legal options for;growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us-Within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neigh,borhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" qr LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted'.i,ts grow'th plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option:.~alloWs our neighborhoods t° retain their large lot suburban
character, remain out, side the City and avoid costly City sewer, Stormwater and road
upgrades. The .LAM ~IRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that ea'n be supported by continued use of individual, septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the eXisting'fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would Separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing- housing densities and land uses are retained, ihat you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as poSsible and that you can conifinue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NO W .
It is time to tell.our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
GaIes Addition, North 5~onroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
fo establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More I_ntense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count)' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAJVIIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LA~IRD option ~'ould allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. T~e Ennis Creek ravine would separate o-ur
County based LA_MIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on 3'our elected representatives
to ensure that 3'our existing housing densiffes and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue eo receive ser~,ices at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Sign~ature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29tb~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5t~ Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
v~ant to be part of the City 'of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make .annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited &rea o£b~ore [~..~tense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character~ remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of' individual septic systems,. The area
would continue to be served by the County {roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
,. /.-. - . ',~ " . / ' ~- - ,
b:'' ': ' ' · J '~ . - ~ .
· ./ ,I ....
/'"~' '' '~ " > ~' . ,, "
RETURN TO /-"
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
' ' It is time to tell our elected Count5' Commissioners that the residents of Bay I~oop, '
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
· ~'~ By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
"~:" o~her legal options for growth within our :neighborhootts that would leave us within
': County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
;'~' to establish our neighborhoods as-a Count~ based "Limited A~rea of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
~:~'" 'The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
~ ~' character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
: upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
~ would continue to be served by ti~e County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
~' and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
~' By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
· will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
· low as possible and that you can continue, to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
~ ~ Na,me (Print) Signature, , Address Date
. i :, ~ '
~' RETURN TO .. /
""' 407~1. LEES C~EK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected:County Commissioners that the residents of Bay. Loop, ....
Gales Addition, North Mon~roe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition bel~O~ you will be telling the COmmissioners that there are
other legal options for grOwth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction~ancl make anne-xation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhO'ods as a 'County based "Limited Area of More _Intense
Rural D__evelopment" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available whe~ the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LA1VIIRD optioh allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outsider-he City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater~and road
up~rades. The LAMIRD ~:ption ~vOuld allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be s;Upporfed by cOntinued use ot' individual septie systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the'existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
· vill continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
l~ame (Print) Signature Addre~ , Date
t . j ~ '.'
RETURN iO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay-Loop,~ -'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By Signing the petition below you ~vill be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighbOrhoods as a County based "Limited Area of]~re Intense
Rural D__evelopment" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allo~v continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems~ The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and svater) and the exiSting fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LANIIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your eXisting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
· vili continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
RETURN TO /'
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD \//
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County,Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,~ ~'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and,North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth ~vith[n our neighborhoods that would leave us within
COunty jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a,County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our ne/ghborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City.and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
B3' signk~g the petition belo~r' you ~an exert pressure On your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signa.~ure r-, Address Date
-~ ~ ..' ,7~- . .
Z° Pr . - 4
..... ,....j . ~, ,- ,,} . ~-, .," ,.,,- - ._ .-, f.,., ,
¥ - RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop, ....
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition belo~v you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows.our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be' served by the'County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine ~vould separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petiti,qn below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name(Print) S~gn.atu~% ~,d Address Date
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW !
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales AddRion, North h{onroe and North Mount Pleasant NeighBorhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the CommissiOners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
Coun~ jurigdiction and make annexation illegal. T~e petition requests th~.Coun~
to establish our neighborhoods as a Coun~ based "Limited ~rea or,ore ~[ntense
~urai ~evelopment" or L~~ for short. This option was not availab~:,': when the
CounD' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~~ option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot s[:~urban
character, remain outs[de the Ci~ and avoid costly Ci~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size t~at can be supposed by continued use of individual septic system~. Th'e area
would continue to be sera'ed by the Coun~ (roads, zoaiag, sheriff, the PUD (electric
and water)'a~d the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would s~:~:parate our
Coun~ based L~M~ from the Ci~.
By signing the petition below you can exe~ pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densR[es and land uses are refained, ~'hat yon
w~II continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possi.ble and that you can continue to receive se~ices at ~own cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Sigaature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Ciallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW .
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be tdl~ng the Commissioners tI~at there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
> County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural l~evelopment" or LAMIRD for short: This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighbortmods to retain, their large lo~ suburban
character, remain outside the CiD, and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at ~'he 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continueduse of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be scm'ed by the County'(roads, zoning~ sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine wouId separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition be[ow you can exertpressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your ex[sting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue to receive semqces at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name(Print) S[~ature~ Address . Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5t~ Ciallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
PdgTURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NO d v
it is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
GaIes Addition, North Monroe and North:Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition beIow you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for shm-t. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large Iot suburban
character, remain outside the Ci~, and avoid costly City' sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would alloW continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that eau be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served,by the County !(roads, zoning, sraerifO, true PUD (electric
and water) and the existing:fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LA_rV[I[RD from the City.
By signing the petition betow you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your ex~sting~housing densities and land uses are retained, that yot~
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5ta Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
aETU TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW. .
It is time to tell our elected Count), Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and'make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
R__ural Development" or LA_MIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count)' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LA_MIRD :option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can De supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you eau continue to receive semqces at known cost from the
instit-utions that currently provide them.
Name (Prin0 Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clailam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW. !
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North 1V[onroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborlmods, do not
want to be part of the Ci/T of Port Angeles.
By Signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners 'that there are
other legal oPtioas for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
CoUnty jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of 1Y[ore ]intense
Rural Development" or LA~/IIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count)' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The:LAMIRD option atlows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the C[t-5, and avoid costly City sewer, storm~vater and road
upgrades. The LAI~ilRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot Size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by tI~e County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire distr.;ct. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate ~ur
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possibIe and that you can continue to receive sera, ices at I~mown cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
It is time to tell our elected County :Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and:North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telI~ng the Com~issioners t[~at there are
other legal options for growth ~q~ithin our neighborhoods that woutd leave us within
County jurisdictioa and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as.a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
~ural Development" or LAM1RD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted [ts growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the Cit-y and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LA!~IIR_D option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by theCounty (roads, zoning~ sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire distrieL The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City-.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW .v
[t is time to tell our elected C°unty Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the Cif-y of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below:you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and makeannexation illegal. The petition requests the County
~o establish our neigkborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its grow.th plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIltD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain ou.tside the Ci~, and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAS~rIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be' served by the Connty (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Enn~s Creek ray,ne would separate our
County based LA_MIRD from the City.
By signing the petition be[ow .you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
~ ensure that yot~r exbdng housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w~II continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue ~o receive services at '~,own cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) S~gnature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
.. PORT ANGELES,_WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More. Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count5' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormWater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
[or size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sherifQ, the PUIt (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can-continue to receive services at knoxvn cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) S!gn tur // . dd ess/O 9
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Ciallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN' TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATI[ON
l~t is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North l~[onroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborl~oods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners tI~at there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods-that would leave t~s v¥ithin
County jurisdiction and make ,tnnexat~on illegal. The petition requests the Coun~~
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
l~ural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
CounB' first adopted its gro~vth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot sul~urban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAI~{IR option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems.. The area
'~vould continue to be ser~,~ed by tl~e County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PU~ (electric
and ,~vater) and the existing fire district. The Ertnis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected ~-epresentatives
to ertsure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
~v~II continue to en~oy a 'f~'ell maintained road system, that your taxes '}viii remain as
Iow as possibIe and that you can continue ~:o receive services at known cost from the
institutions ti-tat currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by _April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5ta Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NO :VV..
It is time to teI! our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North h{onroe and NOrth Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you willbe telling the Commissioners that there are
' '~ other legal options for growth-: within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
~' County jurisdiction and make,annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
~.: to establish our neighborhood's as a County~based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural I)evelopment" or LAMIRD for Short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows oiJr neighborhoods to retain their large Itt suburban
cl~aracter, remain outside the-~City and' avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAI~{IRD option would, allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Itt size that can be supported by continued,use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine wouId separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City..
By signing the petition below you can 'exert pressure on your eIected representatives
; to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w~[! continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
~' Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive sera, ices at 'known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address ./..- Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!.
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North ~[onroe and North Mount PIeasant NeighBorhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petit[on below you will Be telling tke Commissioners t~at there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us -within
Coun~ jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the Coun~
to establish our neighborhoods as a Coun~ based "Limited ~rea of More Intense
~urai ~evelopment" or L~I~ for short. This option was not available when the
Coun~ first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~~ option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the Ci~, aad avoid costly CiW sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~'I~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Iot size that eau be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be sem,~ed by the Coun~ (roads, zoning, sherifO, the P~ (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
CounW based L~{I~ from the Ci~.
By signing the petitioa below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w[II continue to.enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive sera, ices at ~own cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (~rint) Signature Address _~ Date
. ~ / . ~ - ~ ~ ~ ,
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29t~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
. PORT ANGELES:_WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
It is time to tell our'eIected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the CiW of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
Coun~ jurisdictions:and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the CounW
to establish our neighborhoods as a Coun~ Based "Limited ~rea or,ore ~ntense
~urai ~evelopment" or L~I~ for short. This option was not available when the
CounD' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~{~ option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the Ci~, and avoid costly Ci~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Iot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be se~ed by the Coun~ (roads, zoning, sherif0, the P~ (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine wouId separate our
Coun~ based L~II~ from the Ci~.
By signingthe petition betow you can exert pressure on your eIected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densR[es and land uses are retained, that you
will con~nue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
tow as possible and that you can continue to receive semqces at ~own cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name(Print) Sign~ure Address . Date .
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW !
l~t is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North l~{onroe and North Mouat Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the C~ty of Port AngeIes.
By signing the petit[on below you will be telling the Commissioners that t~aere are
other legal options for growth within our neighborheods that wouId Ieave us within
Coun~ jurisdiction and make annexation ilIegal. The petition requests the Coun~
to establish our ae[ghborhoods as a CoUn~ based "Limited ~rea of More intense
~ural Bevelopment" or L~I~ for short. This option was not availabIe when the
Coun%' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~5~ option allows our neighborhoods to retaia their large lot suburban
c~aracter, remain outside the C[~ and'.avoid costly Ci~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~{I~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot s~ze that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be se~ed by t~e Coun~ (roads, zoning, sherif0, t~e P~ (electric
and water) and t~e existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
CounD~ based LAM~ from the Ci~.
By sign[agthe petition betow you can exe~ pressure oa your eIected representatives
to ensure that your existing ~ousing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a weI1 maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
iow as possible and that you can continue to receive se~ices at ~own cost from the
institutioas that current[y provide them.
Name (Print) Signature~. -, Address ~ Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP :ANNEXATION NOW
it is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
GaIes Addition, North'~Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for'growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexaf~ion illegal. The petition requests the County
fo establish our neighborhoods as a Counfy based "Limited Area of More ~_n~ense
Rural ~evelopment' o:r LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted i'~s growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option aiIows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outs[de the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size tha, t can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e' area
would continue to be S'erved by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the ex[Sting fire district. The Ermis Creek ravine wouId separate our
County based LAMIRD from tire City.
By signing the petitioa~.be£ow you can exert pressure on )'our eIected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w~II continue to enjoy' a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you cart continue to receive ser~,ices at known cost from the
institutions that currently prov[cle them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29t~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5t~ Clailam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW. !
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'"
Gales Addition', North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want ~o be part of the City of Fort Angeles.
By signing the'petition below you will De telling the Commissioners ~hat there are
'other legal options for growth.within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexaOon illegal. The petition requests the CounD'
to establish ou~ neighborhoods as a County based "Limited A_rea of More Intense
Rural D_evelopment" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Coun~ first adopted its growt~h plan for our neighborhoods.
The LA3IIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIR~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported.by continued use of individual septic systems. Ttfe area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LA2,{IRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your ex[sting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions tI~at currently provide them.
Name (_PrinO Si~nature~/7 Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by ..April, 29th, .2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
.meeting. y ~~_. m ~ /~ ~ ~-~ ~ D-~r~ ~,~
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW !
It is ffme to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' ~-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
waat fo be part of the Ci~ of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal optioas for growth within our neighborhoods that wouId leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited ~rea of More Intense
Rural D__evelopment" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not avaitabIe when the
Count3' first adopted its growth plan for our neigI-tborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their Iarge lot suburban
cl~aracter, remaia outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option woutd allow continued clevelopment at the 1/2 acre
Iot size that eaa be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
v~ould continue to be servecl by t~e County (roads, zoning, sI~eriff), tI~e PUD (e~ectr[c
and water) and the existing fire district. The Enn[s Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition be[ow you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and !and uses are retained, that you
will continue ~o enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue t° receive sera, lees at 'known cost from the.
institutions tI~at currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!.
It is ~me to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other' legal options for growth within our neighborhoods ~hat wouId leave us within
Connty jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
fo establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More l~ntense
Rural Development" or LA3~IRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count3' first adopted i~s growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
ctaaracter, remain outside ~he Cie3' and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Iot s~ze that can be supported by con.f~nued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the Count'.,, (roads, zoning, sher~£f), the PUD (electr~c
and.water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the C[tT.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your ex[sting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you eau continue to receive ser~qces at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests yon, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County. Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!
tt is time to tel! our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods~ do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petit[on below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that~vould leave us within
County jurisdiction --.nd make annexation illegal. The petition requests the Count,
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More _~ntense
R__ural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count, first adopted its growth plan for. our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would atlow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
CounOy based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your eIected representatives
to ensure that your ex~sting housing densiffes and land uses are retained, that you
w[II continue to enjoy a well maintained road system~ that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possibIe and that you can continue to receive ser~qces at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Si ,ature. ~ . _ Addr~ss~ .... Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!
l~t is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborkoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telI[ng the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growtla within our neighborhoods that would l~-~ave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition reque~;ts the CoUnty
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "l~imited Area of ~'{ore Intense
Rural DeveIopment"-or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large iot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City server, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development z~t the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), tl~e PUD (electric
and water) and the ex[sting fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition belo~v you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
a~m.e ~Print)
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition 'and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!
IX is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
GaIes Addition~ North h{onroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighbor[~oocls, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petit[on .below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
CounD' jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. T~e petition requests the Coun~
to establish our neighborhoods as a Coun~ based "Limited ~rea of More intense
~ural Bevelopmeat" or L~I~ for short. This option was not available when the
Count' first adopted lis growth pIaa for our neighborhoods.
The L~~ option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
c~aracter, remain outside the Ci~, and avoid costly Ci~ sewer, stormwater and roa4
upgrades. The L~{I~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Iot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be se~ed by the Coun~ (roads, zoning, sherif0, the P~ (electric
and wateO and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine wouId separate our
Coun~ based L~MI~ from the Ci~.
By signing the petition.betow you can exert pressure on your eIected representatives
to ensure that your exi~sting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
wiIl continue to enjoy awetl maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue to receive se~ices at ~own cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name Print) S/enamre~ [
( . o . - ~ Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5tb Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NO ;V !
l~t is ffme to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
GaIes Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the Count},
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of 5qore Intense
R.ural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAIvlIRD option alIows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outs[de the City and avoid eostIy City sewer, stormwa~er and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would alIow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Iot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be scm'ed by tI,~e County (roads, zoning, sher[f0, the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the CRy.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your eIected representatives
to ensure that your ex[sting housing densiffes and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Add. er~s Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May St~ Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
It is ffme to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount PIeasant Neighborhoods, do not
want ~o be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petit~ou below you will be telIing the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. TIae petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County Based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Couaty first adopted its growth plan for our ne,.'ghborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
cttaracter, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and tl~e existing fire district. The Ermis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land.uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possibIe and that you can continue to receive services at 'known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
;~.~_/'~:Name (Print) Signature .Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5t~ Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!.*
It is ffme to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Additioa, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant NeighBorhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth w[tlain our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make ~nnexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural DeveIopment" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count5' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, storm~vater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by tI~e County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition belo~v you Can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as.
Iow as possible and that you can Continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
/
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW*..
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
w~-nt ~o be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition beIow you will be telling the Commissioners that tt~ere are
other legal options for growth wlth[n our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option alIows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the C;.ty and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electr[c
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue to receive semqces at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Addr~ess Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
· meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time ~o tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount PIeasant Neighborraoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leav'e us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
~ural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD Option allo~vs our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County. (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electffe
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained; that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW ..
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'"
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want ~o be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the Count),
~o establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of IV[ore Intense
R_R_ural D__evelopment" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count3' first adopted ifs growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to ~etain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Io~ s~ze that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue ~o be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), ~he PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition beloxv you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue to receive sero, ices at ~-zown cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
,.N.,ame (Print) Signature Address O~P~ Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban grosvth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW !
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount PleaSant NeighborhoOds, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petit[on below you will be telling the Commissioners that tlaere are
other legal options for growth with~a our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation ilIegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
~Rural D. evelopment" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth pIan for our neighborhooc/s.
The LAMIRD option aIIo~vs our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
ctaaracter, remain outside the CitT and avoid costly City sewer, storm~vater and road
upgrades. The LA~IIRD ~option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Iot size that can be suppor~ted by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by tI~e County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (eIeetric
and water) and the ex~sting fire district, The Eanis Creek ray,ne would separate our
County based LA_r~I1RD from the CRy.
By s~gn[ag the petition be£ow you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your ex~sting housing densiffes and land uses are retained, that you
w~[1 continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes ~vill remain as
!o~v as possible and that you eau conffnue to receive services at kno~vn cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature ,~ Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOWI
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' '-
GaIes Addition, North h~[onroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the Ci~ of PoFt Angeles.
By signing the pea:it[om below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options fo~' gro~vth within our neighborhoods that ~'ould leave us ~vith[n
Coun~ jurisdiction aad make annexation iIlegal. The petition requests the Coun~
~o establish .our neighborhoods as a Coun~ based "~imited ~rea of ~ore Intense
~ural ~evelopment" or L~I~ for short. This option was not available when the
Coun~ first adopted its gro~vth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAM~ option allo~vs our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
c~aracter, remain outside the City and avoid costly Ci~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~{I~ option would allow continued developmeat at the 1/2 acre
Iot size t~at can be supported by cont[aued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be se~ed by t~e Coua~ (roads, zoaing, s~erifO, the P~ (electric
and water) and the existiag fire district. The Enais Creek ravine ~'ould separate our
Coua~ based L~MI~ from t~e Ci~.
By signing the petition beto~v you can exert pressure oa your elected representatives
to easure that your existing ~ousing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w[II continue to enjoy a well maiatained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue to receive se~ices at ~own cost from the
~nstitut[ons t~at currently provide them.
Name (Priat) Si~ature ~ Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29t~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION N'OW ..*
It is time ~o teIl our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount PIeasant Ne[ghborIaoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the Count-y
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
R~ural D_evelopment" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count)' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and roact
Upgrades. The LA_MIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
Would continue to be served by the Courted (roads, zoning, staerif0, t~,e PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Coun~ based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) .Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business osvner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29t~, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW. .*
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North Monroe and. North Mount PIeasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of P°rt Angeles.
By signing the pelion below you ;vill be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of 5{ore Intense
R_R_ural Bevelopment" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available ~vhen the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option aIlows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the CiD' and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option ~'ould allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot s~ze that can be supported by continued use of individuaI septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, st~eriff), the PUD (electr[c
and water) and the existing fire'district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from th'e City.
By signing the petit[on below yOu can exert pressure on your eiected representatives
to ensure that your ex~sting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
wiIl continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes ;vill remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362.
STOP ANNEXATION NOW ,
It is ~[rne to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of 13ay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition belOw you will be telling the Con~tmissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County.
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was rtot available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
ctaaracter, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAtCIIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be sera'ed by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LduS~IIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w'ilI continue to enioy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Sig gat,t e Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29m~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Ciallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' '-
iGales Addition, North. Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition, below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options forgrowth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the Count5,
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of_Y,~.]ore l[ntense
Rural Development" or L.Ad'VIIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LA3,{rRD option would allow continued development ~.t the 1/2 acre
tot size that eau be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sherif0, the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine wouid separate our
County based LAMI~ from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your exisffng housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w[II continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and th'at you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date.
~ I
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gates Addition, North Monroe and North Mount PIeasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation 'illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a Coun~ based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the Cit3, and avoid costly City sewer, stormwafer and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by cont[nuec[ use ofindivid, ual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sher[fO, the PUD (electr[c
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w[II continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive sera, lees at 'known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Prin0 Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you., please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5t~ Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW ..*
It [s time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'"
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition b~Iow you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within Our neighborhoods that would leax'e us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighboi-hoods as a COunty based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural D_evelopment" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its'~rowth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option alllbws our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and' avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAblIRDi option would'allow continued development at the 1/2 aero
[or size that can be suppc~rted by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existi~g fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition b~Iow you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w[II continue to enjoy a Well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that You can continue to receive scm, ices at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Sigu, atu~,e , Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOVV . !
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal opffons for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of h~ore Intense
R__ural Development" or LANIIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County. first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large Iot suburban
character, remain outside the CiO' and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LA~rIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (e!ectric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition belo~v you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that 3'our existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to en]oy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
instieutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
. . PORT ANGELES_,_wA. 98362./__~.
STOP ANNEXATION NOW
it is time to tell our elected Coun~ Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay ~~
GaIes Addition, North Monroe and North ~{ount Pleasant Neighborhoods~ do not
want to be part of the Ci~ of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you w/It be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth w/thin our neighborhoods that would leave us within
Coun~ jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the Coun~
to establish our neighborhoods as a Coun~ based "Limited ~rea of More intense
~ural Bevelopment" or L~I~ for short. This option was not available when the
CounB' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~~ option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the Ci~, and avoid costly Ci~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~'II~ option would alIow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be se~ed by the Count' (roads, zoning, sherle, the P~ (electric
and wateO and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Coun~ based LAMIRD from the Ci~.
By signing the petition betow you can exe~ pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained,, that you
w/II continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive semites at ~own cost from the
insti~tions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
-
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!.
It is dine to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North 1VIonroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the Cit'-y of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition beIow you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count5' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option alIows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City.and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
· upgrades. The LA1VIIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Iot size.that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be serwed by the. County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition be[ow you eau exertpressure on >,our elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at 'known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Sitmature .~ Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
· PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and NOrth Mount PIeasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telIing the Commissioners that there are
other legal optiOns for growth within Ohr neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our:neighborhoods as a COUnty based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for Short. This option was not available when the
County first ad'~pted its'growth plan for our'neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD Option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the Cit-3, and :avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would :hllo~v continued development at the 1/2 acre
Iot size that eanbe suppOrted by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue 'to be Served by the CoUnty (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district.. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition 13elow you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that Your ex[sting hOusing densities and land uses are retained, that you
~vill continue to :enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possibIe and that you can continue to receive sero, ices at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by .April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5tb Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOVV .
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'"
GaIes Addition, North 1V~onroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the Ci~, of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition be[ow you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth w~th~n our neighborhoods that wouId leave us within
CounW jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the Coun~
~o establish our neighborhoods as a Caun~ based "~[miCed Area of More ~_ntense
Rural ~evelopment" or L~I~ for short. This option was not available when the
Coun~ first adopted its growth pIan for our neighborhoods.
The L~{L~ option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outs[de the Ci~, and avoid costly CiW sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~I~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be se~ed by the CounW (roads, zoning, sherif0, the PUD (electric
and water) and the ex~sting fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Coun~ based L.~MI~ from the Ci~.
By signing the petition beIow you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive semites at ~own cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES:_ WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NO'W !
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount PIeasant Neighborhoods, do not
waat to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. T~e petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of ~_~![.ore Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Couaty first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
c.haracter, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
~ -'~would continue to be served by t~e County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Couaty based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the pet:itioa below you can exert pressure on your elect:ed representaffves
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
wiII continue to en~oy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature /In
~'~v,M ~__( ~.at_mo.:.~.~.[~/"'~...~ ~_. Address D~/.~te
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW !
l~t is ffme to tell our elected County C6mmissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
avant to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below'you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal opffons for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More l~ntense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
CountT first adopted ~s grow'~h plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMtRD option allows Our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD opffon would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
~0t s~ze that can be supported.by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by ~he County' (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the e~isting fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
~o ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continae to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you Can conffnue ~o receive ser~qces at known cost from the
~nstitutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signatur~ < Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5t~ Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW !
~t is time to tell our elected COunty Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the Ci~ of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the ConntT
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count3' first adopted its growth plan £or our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly CRy sesver, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot s~ze that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by tl~e County (roads, zoning, sheriff), ~he PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire dis~r~ct. The Ennis Creek ray,ne would separate our
County based LANIIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue to receive ser~,ices at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5tb Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW[!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, Not, th Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods-that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. Tl~e petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area o~ More _Intense
l~ural D_evelopmeni~' or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Couaty first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
c~aracter, remain Outs[de the City and avoid costly City sewer, stovmwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot s.~ze that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would cantinue to be served by tIae County (roads, zoaing, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Coua~ based LA3~IIRD from the City.
By s~gning the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will coatinue to enjOy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
~o,,v as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North 5~ount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will l~e telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within oU'r neighborhoods that wou!d leave us within
CoUnty jurisdiction and make annexaflqn illegal. The petition requests the County
~o establish our neighborhoods as a CoUnty based "Limited Area of More intense
Rural D_evelopment" or LAMIRD for Short. This option was not available when the
Count3' first adopted its growth pIan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and ~tvoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAS~IRD option would fillow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that eau be supported by continfled use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the ex[sting fire district.: The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based L -A~([IRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your ex[sting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained' road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Addre?s. , Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by APril 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5tn Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW. !
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,'"
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount PIeasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By sigrtiag the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that tItere are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and"make annexation illegal. Ttxe petition requests the Count5,
to establish our neighbOr, hoods as a County based "Limited Area of More I_ntense
Rural D_exT~Iopment" or LA3{IRD for short. This option was not available when the
CounB' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIR option allows ourneigh'borhoods to retain their large lot suburban
¢laaracter, remain outside tire Ci0y and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. Tire LAl~{IRDoption Wouldiatlow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Itt size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine wouId separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petit[on below you can ~xert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your ex[sting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to en~oy a Well maintained road system~ that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that 'You can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name(Print) Signature _~ . Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29t~, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5t~ Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!
It is ffme to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the Ci~ of Po~'t Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County.jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. T~e petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of M[ore Intense
~ural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAM[RD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Iot-size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. T~a'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electr[c
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine ~vouId separate our'
County based LAMIRD frora the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
,~vi[l continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at 'knoxvn cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name(Print) Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clailam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW'
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Additioa, North Monroe and North 1V[ount Pleasant Ne[ghbor[~oods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. Tlae petition requests the Count3.'
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More ~ntense
Rural Development" or LAM1RD for short. This option was not available ~vhen the
Count3' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and roacI
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued deveIopment at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the Count- (roads, zoning, sheriff), the Pro-D (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine wouId separate our
COunty based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your eIected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive sera, ices at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business o~vner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for'it to be presented at the May 5t~ Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of ]Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North I~{[ount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petit[on below you will be tell[ag the Commissioners that there are
otker legal options for growth within our ne~hborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexatiori'illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a Courtly based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LANfIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growtk plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighbo:~hoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and aVOid eostly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LgAVIIRD option would al}ow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by Continued use of individual septic systems. Tile area
would continue to be served by tl~e CountY (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you' Can exe'tt pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can.eontinue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature , Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION .NOW . !
It is ffme to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want ~o be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition belo~v you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us w/thin
County jurisdiction and make anne×ation illegal. The petition requests the County.
~o establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More l~ntense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count3, first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows 'our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
cl~aracter, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that eau be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Tk/e area
would continue to be sea-ed by the CounW (roads, zoning, sherif0, the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAI~IIRD from the City.
~.y s;.gn~ng, the petition betow you can exert Pressure on 3'our elec~ed representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you. can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW.
~[t is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents o.f' Bay Loop,'"
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount PIeasant Neighborhoeds, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners thr:~ there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would lez:ve us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests, the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of Mi~;.re Intense
~ural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This optioa was not avaik.~ble when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lo:' suburban
c~aracter, remain outside the CRy and avoid costly City sewer, stormw'xter and road
upgrades. The LAM~ option would allow continued developmeat a~.: ~he 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic syst,'~ms. Th'e area
would continue to be served by t~e C~unty (roads, zoning, sheriff), the iPUD (eIectr~¢
and water) and the existing fire distr~ct. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition be[ow you caa exert pressure on your elected represeatatives
to ensure that your ex~sting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to ea~oy a weI1 maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possibIe and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant' Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition belmv you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests 'the County
to'establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural D__evelopment" or LAI',~IRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count)' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhocds.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
cktaracter, remain outside the City and avoid costlY City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued:use of individual septic systems. Tl~e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning,~ sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on )'our elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes ~vitl remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at knmvn cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29t~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Ciallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
lit '~s time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North l~[0nroe and North Mount Pteasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you w[I1 ,be telting the Commissioners that t~ere are
other legal options for growth within aUr neighborhoods that would teave us within
Coun~ ~urisdiction and .make annexation illegal. The petition requests the Coun~
to establish our neighborBoods as a C0.un~ based "Limited ~rea of More intense
Rural ~eveIopment" or ~I~ for short. This option was not available when the
Count' first adopted its ~rowth ptan for our neighborhoods.
The L~M~ option alI~ws our neighbprhoods to retain their large lot suburban
c~aracter, remain outside tge C[~' and.avoid, costly C[~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L_~~:0ption ~'ou[d ~allmv continued deveIopment at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by conffnued use of individual septic systems. Th~ area
would continue to be se~ed by t~e Coun~ (roads, zoning, sheri~, the P~ (electric
and water) and t~e existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Coun~ based L~MI~ from the
By signing the petition b~lo~v you can .exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing d~sit[es and land uses are retained, that you
w~II continue to en~oy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and t~at you can COntin.ue to receive sero'ices at ~own cost from the
institutions t~at currently provide t~em.
Name (Print) S gnature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North MOnroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port AngeIes.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More.Intense
Rural Development" or LAbIIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
· upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that eau be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be serwed by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature,~ _..~. Address Date
" ' "~ .... ¥_2 . 9 .~
If you are a resident or business osvner in the UGA(urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above bYApril 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Ciallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!
~[t is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' '-
GaIes Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighbor~noods~ do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By sigaiag the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growtI~ within our aeighborhoods that would Ieave us vvitIain
County jurisdiction and make annexation ilIegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of ]~{ore _Intense
Rural Development" or LAIV~IRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The 'LAM1RD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large ~ot suburban
ct~aracter, remain outside the City and avoid costly Ci~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD opt[on would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Iot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems2 Th'e area
would corttinue to be served by t~e County (roads, zon[rtg, sr~eriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire disC:riot. The Enn[s Creek ray,ne would separate our'
County based LAMIRD from t~te City.
By s[ga[ng the petitioa be[ow you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, 'that you
w[l[l continue to en~[oy a well maintained road system~ that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can conffnue to receive services at k~owrt cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print). S~gaature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5tb Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
l~t is ffme to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' --
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount P~easant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petiffon below you w/II be teliing the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation HIegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More tntense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neig)borhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outs[de the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petit[on below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing.densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!o~v as possible and that you can continue to receive services at 'known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over thc age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW
,. ~. It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
.: Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of ?oft Angeles.
· , By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
,~,. County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
, to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited ~_rea of More !]n~ense
., Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted [ts growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option aIlows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
~ character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, storrnwater and road
· upgrades. The LA~IRD opt[on would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that eau be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
· would continue to be served by tI~e County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the ex[sting fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LA2~IIRD from the City.
By s~gning the petition below you can exert pressure on your eleceed representatives
to ensure that your ex[sting t~ousing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that eurre~ fl'~ Mrs. JuanitaM. Latson
473 McCarver Rd.
Name (Print) Sign Port Angeles, WA 98362 tess. Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban grosvth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW.
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' --
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make.annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited ~rea of More Intense
~ural Development"or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
c~aracter, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size traat caa be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by t~e County (roads, zoaing, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the ex,sting fire district. The Enn[s Creek ravine would separate our
County based L3~MIRD from the City.
By signing the petitioa below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will coatinue to en~oy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions t~at currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29tb~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5tb Ciallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN. TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW. !
tt is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that flxere are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that wouId leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More intense
~.urai ~evelopment" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count5' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot st~burban
character, remain outside the Ci0, and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LA1VIIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
I0t size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine wouId separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing t~e petition below'you can exert pressure' on your elected representatives
tO ensure that your ex~sting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w~tl continue to enjoy a we!l maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
~nstitutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5t~ Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
l~t is time to telI our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Additioa, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighbor[aoods, do not
want to be part of'the City of Pot't Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal opt[oas for growth within our neighborl~oods that would leave ~rs within
County ~[urisdictioa and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our aeighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
~ural Development" or LAIV[IRD for sh:ort. This option was not available when the
Count3' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
TI~e LA.Mt_RD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
cI~aracter, remaia outside the CiD' and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L3~!IRD option-would a'tlo~v continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by ~the County (roads, zoniag, sheriff), ttae PUD (electr[c
and water) and the existing fire district, The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Couaty based L~M[IRD from ttae City.
By signing the petition betow you can exert pressure oa your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w~II coatinue to enloy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue to receive sera'ices at known cost from the
institutions tlaat currently provide tt~em.
Name (Print) S Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of lg sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5t~ Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Additioa, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
watat to be part of the Ci~ of Pot-t Angeles.
By signiag the petition betow you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth ~.~ithia our neighborhoods that x~ould leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexaffoa ilIegal. The petiffon requests the Coun~
to establish our neighborh-oods as a Coun~ based "Limited ~rea of More ~ntense
~ural Bevelopment" or L~I~ for short. This option was not available when the
CounB' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~{~ option allows our neighborhoods to retaia their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the C[.~' and avoid costly Ci~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~{I~ option ~vould alIo~v continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported bY continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
~ould continue to be se~ed by the Coua~ (roads, z~a~ag, sherifO, the P~ (eIeetrie
and water) and the existing fire district. T~e Ennis Creek raviae would separate our
Coun~ Based L3~I~ from the Ci~.
By s[gaing the petition be~o~v you caa exe~ pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing dens[0es and land uses are retained, that yon
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive sero, ices at ~own cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name ~rint) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29t'', 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP' ANNEXATION NOWv..*
tt is ~ime to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents o£Ray Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Monnt Pleasant NeighDorhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
t3y signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
bther legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "LimRed Area of'_iV~-ore _Intense
Rural D_evelopment" or LAM~RD for short. This option was not available when the
Count)' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LA1VIIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine wo'ald separate our
County based LA_MIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at kno~vn cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
': /o7 y/9
17,..¥ ""-,'"" -
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clailam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW .
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited ~rea of 5~[ore l[ntense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted [ts growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the CiO' and.avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgradeS. The LAMIRD option would,allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis (:reek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possibIe and that you can continue to receive semqces at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) -S~gr~ur.~//~ -- //A~ldress ,xf . ~. ~ Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
~t is t~rae to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North.Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of'the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Lknited Area of M~ore Intense
Rural ~evelopment" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outgide the Cif3' and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LA3~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the exigting fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
CounW based LAtVIIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densit/es and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) S~g_nature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5tb Clailam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
~t is t~me to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want ~o be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition belo~v you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation ilIegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of 5J]ore [~..tense
gural D_evelopment" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available x:;'hen the
Count3, first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their ~arge lot sub'erban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAI~{[IRD option would allow continued development at the 7/2 acre
Iot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by tke Coun~ (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PLFD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD .from the Ci~.
By signing the petition betow you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that 3,our ex[sting housing densities and land uses are retained, · that you
will continue to enjoy a ~veI1 maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive semqces at 'known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
x _ .. ~ ,~'- ~ - ~..~,
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW v.
]It ~s time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
GaIes Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Fort Angeles.
By signing the pefft[on below you will be telIing the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth w~thin our'neighborhoods that would leave us wRhin
Coun~ jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the Coun~
to establish our neighborhoods as a Coun~ based "Limited Area of ~re ~n~ense
Rural ~evelopment" or L~I~ for short. This option was not available when the
Coun~' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~~ option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly Ci~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supposed by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be se~ed by tke CounW (roads, zoning, sher[f0, the P~ (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Enn/s Creek ray,ne would separate our
Count, based L~MI~ from the C[W.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w[Il continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive se~'ices at ~own cost from the
insti~tions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Ciallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW. '.
It is ffme to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'"
GaIes Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be. telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that ~ould leave us within
County iurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a Cou. n~ based "Limited Area of More _Intense
_Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Couat~' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIR/) option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the ClOy and ~void costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LA~IRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot s~ze that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water)and the existing, fire district.~-The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from tt~e City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that yon
w:dl continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that yoa can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions tlxat currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Ciallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW I
~[t is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant NeighBorhoods, do not
want to be part of the Ci~ of Port AngeIes.
By sigaing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited ~rea of More _Intense
~_ural Development" ~r LAM~IRD for short. This option was not available when the
Cour~ty first adopted its gro~vth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD optionaHows: our neighborhoods to retain their large Iot suburban
c~aracter, remain out~ide the Ci~, and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LA/~[IRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served.by fr~e Couaty (roads, zoniag, sraer[ff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ray,ne would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petit[on below you can exert pressure on your eIected represeatatives
to ensure that your ex~isting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
[ow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW .
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
GaIes Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Po~'t Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be teIIing the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
.Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count5, first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAM-IRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Iot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County' (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (eIeetrie
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine wouId separate our
County based LA_MIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you eau exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained~ that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system~ that your taxes witl remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions tkat currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Ciallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mouat PIeasant NeighborEmods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners tEmt there are
other legal options for growth within our neighbor~,_oods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexaffon illegal. The petition requests the County
.,.to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth pIan for our neighborhoods,.
· The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and. avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would aIlow conti~.ued dew~.lopment at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
w.ould continue to be served by the Cqunty (roads, zoning, slteriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LA~MIRD from the City.
By signing the petition beIow you can-exert pressure on 3'our elecl~ed representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a wetl maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can conti.nue to receive serwices at 'knoxvn cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name(Print) Signature ,': Address ~ Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5t'q Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
-PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' --
GaIes Additioa, North MOnroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition bel'0w you will be telling the CommiSsioners tl~at there are
other legal options for growth withir~ our neighborhoods that would leave us within
Coun~ ~urisdict[on and make annexation illegal. The petition reqUests the Coun~
to establish our aeighborhoods as a coun~ based "Limited ~rea of More ~ntense
~ural Bevelopment" or L~I~ for sho~. This option was not available when the
County first adoPted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~~ option allows our.'neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, rema~n~outside'the Ci~, and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~~ obtion:would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot s~ze that can be supposed by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be se~dd by the CounW (roads, zoning, sher~f0, the P~ (electric
and water) and the existin~ fire 'd~str~ct.. The Enn~s Creek ravine would separate our
CounW based L~I~ from the C~W.
By signing the petition beI0w you can exert pressure on your elected representath, es
to ensure that your ex~st~ng housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w~II continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive seduces at ~own cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) 'Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29'~, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5tb Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
l~t ~s time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition beIow you will be telling the Commissioners that tl~ere are
other'legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "L~imited Area of More .'intense
gurai Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Coun~ first adopted its growth pIart for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside.the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwate:r and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUl) (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine wouId separate our
County based LANIlRD from the City..
By signing the petition beiow you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possibIe and that you can continue to receive sera, ices at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature ,~ Address Date
· ~ ' '~JC) '
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clailam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORt ANGELES?_.WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
[t is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Ne[ghbortaoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options'for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County ~urisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "L,;mited Area of More _Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to re~ain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LANIIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Iot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be sera:ed by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire distrieL The Ennis Creek ravine wouId separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below- you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that 3'our existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
wiIl continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5t~ Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW.V!
l~t ~s time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Monnt Pleasant ?qeighborhoods, do not
want to be part of~he Ci~ of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal opffons for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
Coun~ ~urisdiction and ~make annexaffon illegal. The petition requests the Coun~
~o establish our neighborhoods as a Coun~ based "~imi~ed ~rea of More ~n~ense
~ural ~evelopment" or'L~I~ for short. This option was not available when the
CounD' first adopted its. growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~~ option allows our. neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
ckaracter, remain outside the Ci~ and avoid costly C[~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~'I~. option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be se~ed by the CounW (roads, zoning, sherif0, the P~ (electric
and water) and the ex[sling fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Coun~ based L~I~ from the CiW.
By signing the petition beIo~v you can exe~ pressure on your elecfed representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
wiIl continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as poss[bIe and tha~ you can continue to receive se~[ces at ~own cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Date. .
Name (Print) . S gnatuqe Address
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is dine to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighbortroods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make'annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited ~krea of 5~ore Intense
Rural Development" or LA~MIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth ptan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City a~d avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LA_MIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that eau be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LANIIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
Itt size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be sera, ed by tI~e County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (eIectric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ra¥i. ne wouId separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on 3'our elected representatives
to ensure that. your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possibIe and that you can continue to receive serwices at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the LIGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW.V.
It is ffme to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
GaIes Addition, North M:onroe and North Mount PIeasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our ~eighborhoods that would leave tis ;vithin
Coun~ jurisdiction and make annexatio~ illegal. The petition requests the Coun~
to establish our neighborhoods a~a Coun~ based "Limited Area of 5{ore ~ntense
~ural ~evelopment" or L~I~ for sho~. This option was not available when the
CounB' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~I~ option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly Ci~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Iot size that can be supported by ~ontinued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be se~ed by the Coun~ (roads, zoning, sherif0, the P~ (electric
and ~vate0 and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Coun~ based L~MI~ from the
By signing the petition be[o;v you~can exekt pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
tow as possible and that you can conffnue:to receive se~qces at ~own c~st from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signa[ure Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5tb Clailam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW[
tt is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' --
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount PIeasant Neighborhoods~ do not
want to be part of the Ci~ of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition beIow you will be telling the Commissioners that tl~ere are
other legal options for growth w~thin our neighborhoods that wouId leave us with'in
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County Based "Limited ~rea of More l~ntense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count), first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition beIo~v you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that 5'our existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) z.Signatto e Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES ..WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW .!
It is ~ime to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of ~ay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the CiW of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that ,::here are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would lea,~e us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests 'he County
to establish our neighbOrhoods as a County based "Limited Area of Mo,-e Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option ;vas not availai'~le when the
Count5' first adopted its :growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot ::,.uburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormw: ~er and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at iae 1/2 acre
lot size that eau be supported by continued use of individual septic syste..:as. Th'e area
would continue eo be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the ?'::3D (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Enn[s Creek ravine would :~-;eparate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected ret:~-esentatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retaine~.~ that you
w[II continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes wiY.; remain as
Iow as possible and that you eau continue to receive services at known c~::st from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Date
Name. .Print) Address l% o tl
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW .
It is ffme to tell oar elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
GaIes Addition, North Monroe and North 1VYount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within oar neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. Tttc petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a Cop;nty based "L~mited Area of More ~tense
R__ural Development" or LAMIRD for s~0rt. This op~qon was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for oar neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to re~:ain thei~~ large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and~a~void costly _.~ty sewer, stormwater znd road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would ~llow continued development at the 1/2 acre
~ot size that can be supported by conti ~n~ed use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue ~o be served by the Coa.aty (roads, zening, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire distric~,.The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can .ed~.ert pressure ,.'.n your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing de~sities, and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintainecb road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can conti=~e t/q receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provid~e them. // .
Name(Print) Signature q) , '} aaress Date _ -
'~ zo .~' ~ '! !
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29m, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW o
It is ffme to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North h{Onroe and North Mount Pleasant Ne[ghborIaoods, do not
want to be part of the CiB~ of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that tlaere are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave ugwithin
Coun~ jurisdiction and: make annexation illegal. The petition requests the Coun~
to establish our neighborhoods as a CoUn~ based "Limited Area of ~ore intense
~urai Bevelopment" or ~~ for .short. This option ~vas not available when the
CounB, first adopted its'~growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~~ option al[dws our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outsid~ the Ci~, and avoid cestly C[~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~I~::option ~'ould allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by ~dontiaued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be se~ed by the CounW (roads, zoning, sherif0, the P~ (electric
and water) and the existlhg fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
CounW based L~MI~ from the CiW.
By signing the petition below you can eXe~ pressure on your eIected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a wetl maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive sero, ices at ~own cost from the ·
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission-
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW ..
~t is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the Ci~ of Fort Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More h~ense
~ural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD' option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. TheLA_hSIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
woUld continue to beserved by the County' (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (eIectric
and water) and the'ex[sting fire district. The Enn[s Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAaMIRD from the CID'.
By signing the petition below you can 'exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your.eXisting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
wiIl continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive semqces at lmown cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29tb~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!.
;It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want ~o be part of ~he Ci~ of Port Angeles.
:"By signing the petition below you will be telIing the Commissioners that there are
:,'other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
~-County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests ~he County
:: ~'to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
- Rural Development" or LAM1RD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
.;: The LAMH/D option alIows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
::character, remain outside the CiD' and avoid costIy City sewer, stormwater and road
~.; upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
'itt size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
· -.would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
.~ and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LA~MIRD from the City.
~: ~By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
:~-to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
~ will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes wiIl remain as
.!ow as possibIe and that you can continue to receive semqces at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
,',Name (Print) Signature ~ Address
Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at 'the May 5tb Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOWoV
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' ~-
Gales Addition, North 1Vfonroe .and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the C,.'ty of Port Angeles.
By sigaing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that t[tere are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods theft would leave us within
County ~urisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited A~rea of More l[ntense
Rural Development" or LA1VIIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count)' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIR option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large Iot suburban
character, remain outside the CiD' and a_void costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option~would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by, continued use of indiv[dua~ septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, s}ieriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the ex[sting fire district.' The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition betow you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can icontinue to receive semqces at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Si~&r,e ~ ~ddress Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29ta, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5t~ Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods,.do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that ti]ere are
- other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods ~hat would leave us within
Count)' jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County '.
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "L~imited Area of W[ore.Intense
Rural Development" or LAI~{[IRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAM[RD option allo'~Vs our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban ·
character, remain outside.the CiD,,and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
· lot size that eau be suppoi'ted by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine wouId separate our
County based LAI~IIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your eIected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possibIe and that you eau continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
/ ~ ? / r ~/y e- ~-~ ~--c2- / ,;¢,.¢, ~?~.y'C~ ~
,,.
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
.... PORT ANGELES,__ WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the Ci~'y of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would Ieave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the Count5,
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of !~[ore intense
Rural ]~evelopment" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count5' first adopted, its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the Cit3, and avoid costIy City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMiRD opt[on would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LA_MIRD from the City.
By signing the petition betow you can exert pressure oa your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are reta~ined, that you
w[II continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes ~viIl remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue fo receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County. Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
407 N. LEES C~EK RO~ - ~ / ~ '~ ~' ,'"
PORT ~GELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNE TION NOWll
It is time to tell our elected Coun~ Commissioners that the residents of Bay. Loop,'
Gales Addition, No~h Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the Ci~ of Po~ Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our-neighborhoods that svould leave us within
Coun~ jurisdiction and make annexation'illegal. The petition requests the Coun~
to establish our neighborhoods as.a Coun~ based "Limited Area of ~ore Intense
Rural Development" or L~I~ for short. This option was not available when the
Coun~ first adopted its growth plan for our.neighborhoods.
The L~I~ option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the Ci~ and avoid costly Ci~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~I~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be se~ed by th~ Coun~ (roads, zoning, sheri~, the P~ (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine svould separate our
Coun~ based L~I~ from the Ci~.
By signing the petition below you can exe~ pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
svill continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive semites at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW .
l~t is t~rne to tell our elected County Commissioners ~hat the residents of Ray Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and :North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want ~o be pa~t o£the City of Port Angeles.
,~y signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
o~her legal opffons for growth, within our neighborhoods fhat woutd leave us within
Coun~ jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the Coun~
to establish ou~ neighborhoods as a Coun~ based "~mited Area of More ~ntense
~ural ~evelopment" or L~I~ for short. This option was not available when the
Count' first adopted i~ts growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~MI~ option' allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the Ci~ and avoid costly Ci~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~I~ option would allow continued de~:'elopment at the 1/2 acre
Iot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to bese~ed by the County (roads, zonings sherif0, the P~ (electr[e.
and water) and the existing fire district. The Enn[s Creek ;"avine would separate our
Coun~ based L~MI~ from the
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your ex[sting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy, a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possibIe and that you can conffnue to receive se~,ices at ~own cost from the
institutions tkat currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature/ Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29tb~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW.
it is time to tetl our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,~ '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount PIeasant Neighborhoods, cio not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telt[ng the Commissioners that tkere are
other legal~Options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave, us with-in
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhOods as a County based "Limited Area of More.~_ntense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not availab}e ~vhen the
Count), first adopted its g~owth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMtRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot s~burban
character, remain outs[de the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAbllRD.option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Itt size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems.. The area
would cont/nue to' be sera, ed by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electHc
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAN[IRD from the City.
By s,.'gning the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, ~hat you
w[II continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue to receive semdces at known cos(: from the
institutions that currently provide them.
N,ame (Print) fignature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW .
It is ffme to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that wouId leave us wkhin
t~.~, Count,
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests t"
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of I~{ore intense
,Rural Development" or LAA{IRD for short. This option was not available when the
CounD' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option alIows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
claaracter, remain outside the C[%' and avoid costly City sewer, stormwatec and road
upgrades. The L.4A~IRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Tb.'e area
would continue to be serw'ed by the County (roads, zoning, sher[f0, the PUD (e!ectffc
and water) and the existing fire district. The Enn[s Creek ravine would separate our
County. based LAMIRD from the City..
By signing the petition be£ow you can exert pressure on your eIected representatives
to ensure that your ex[sting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
wilI continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that 5:our taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can conffnue to receive sero, ices at known cost from the
institutions tkat currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business o~vner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!*.
It is time to teIl our elected County Co~missioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North 5lonroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will b~e telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
CounD' jurisdiction and make ann,exat!~n illegal. Tire petition requests the County
to estabIish our neighborhoods as a Co.u~nty based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural ]~evelopment" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
CounD' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neigh.b, orraoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and..,...a, void costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would .~llow continued development at the 1/2 acre
Itt size that can be supported by contiu~ged use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be serw'ed by tl~e County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district., The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition be[o~v you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and Iand uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes wiIl remain as
!o~v as possible and that you eon continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW*.!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of'Bay Loop,' ~-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port AngeIes.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners th~*t there are
otraer legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us witIffn
Count3~ ~[ur[sd[ction' and make annexation illegal The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More-lntense
Rural Development" or LAi~{IRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option alloWs our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
clxaracter, remain outside tire Cit3, and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAI~IIRD option would allow continued deveIopment at t~e 1/2 acre
lot s~ze that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sI~eriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAM!RD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elect:ed representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to en.~oy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions t~at currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by .April 29t~', 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW. !
It is dine to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the CiW of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition belo;v you ~vill be telling the Commissioners that there are
other ~egal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us Within
· County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests t'he Coun .ty
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of Mc. re !]ntense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
County first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
· The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the Cit3, and avoid costly City sewer, storm;w~ter and road
upgrades. The LAJMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAM!RD from the CiW.
By signing the petition belo;v you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature , Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION N@ V.
It is time to tell our elected County CommiSsioners that the residents of Ray Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North~-Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port AngeIes.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our:neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods asa County based "Limited A~,-ea of ~.ore _intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count}' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costIy Ci~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would, allow continued develepment at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the Coun~ (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the ex[sting fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAM{RD from the City.
By signing the petition below you' can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses a;:e retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possibIe and that you can continue to receive serv[ces at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Sigg. ature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
It ~s ffme to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'"
Gales Addition, N°rth Monroe :~nd North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be.~elHng the Commissioners that there are
o~her legal options for growth Within our. neighborhoods ~hat wouId leave us within
County jurisdiction and make a~nnexation illegal. The petiffon requests the Count~'
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of 5~.ore Intense
Rural Development" or LAkSIIP,,:D for short. This option was not available when the
Count' first adopted ~ts growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMH1D option allows our'neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside-the Ci~' and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAI~[IRD oPtion:would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that eau be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. TIie area
would cant[nut to be served by~he County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (eIectric
and water) and the existing fire'district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based L>2C[IRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing hous-ing densities and land uses are reta[necl, that you
w[II continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can"continue to receive ser~qces at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name(Print) Sig,_n~at~ Address Date, .
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29~h~ 2004 ia
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' ~-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth w/thin our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexaffon illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count3' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMKRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character,- remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAI~ option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that 3,our existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature ~ Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
lit is time to tell our eIected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
o~her legal options'for growth within our neighborhoods that would Ieave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation ilIegal. The petition requests thc.. County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited zkrea of More/.ntense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available ;~hen the
CounB~ first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their targe lot subarban
clxaracter,.rema[n outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAIS~ option would allow continued deveIopment at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems° The area
would continue to be served by the CoUnty (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PU~D (electric
and water) and the ex[sting fire district. The E~mis Creek ravine wouId separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition be[ow you can exert pressure on your eIected representatives
to ensure that your exisffng housing densiffes and land uses are retained, t[mt you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possibIe and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature ~?. Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to' the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is ffme to tell ourelected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales ^ddition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the Ci~ of Port AngeIes.
By signing the petiti'on below you. will be ~elling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options.for ~rowth within our ~ighborhoods that would leave us within
CounW ]urisdiction~and make annexation i:llegal. The petition requests the Coun~
to establish our neighborhoods as.a Coun~ based "~imited ~rea of More lntense
Rural ~evelopment~~ or L~I~ for sho~t. This option was not available when the
Coun~ first adopt~ its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~~ optiqn allows our neighbor:hoods to retai~.~ their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the Ci~, and avoid costly Ci~' sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The L~ option ~ouid allqw continued development at the 1/2 acre
tot size that can be Supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be se~ed..by the Contd.(roads, zoning, sherle, the P~ (electric
a~d water) and the~existing.~re diserict. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Coun~ based L~I~ from the CiW.
By signing the petition belo~v you can exert: pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your~existing housing densi:~ies and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you. can continue to receive se~,ices at ~o~vn cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th, 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW[
It is time to tell our elected COunty Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'"
Gales Addition, North MonrOe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within o'ur neighborhoods that would leave us 'vvithirt
County jurisdicdon and mak'e annexation ilIegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County Based "Limited Area of More I_nliense
Rural Development" or LAM~I.RD for short~ This option was not available when the
Count5, first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allo~vs bur neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
cl~aracter, remain outside the'.City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD opt'i~n would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
~¥ould continue to be served by t~e County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Coun~ based LAM~[RD from the City.
By signing the petition belowyou can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that Your existing housing densities and la,ad uses are retained, theft you
wiIl continue to enjoy a well'rnaintained road system, that your taxes 'will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive sera, ices at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Na~e (Print) Signature Address Date
lfyou are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW.*!
It is time to tell 'our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North 'Mount PIeasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telIing the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growt[t within our neighborhOods tllat would leave us within
County jurisdiction and make aanexat[on'.itlegal. TI~e petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area of More Intense
'Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count3' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large l~-t suburban
c~aracter, remain outside the City and avoid costly Cit3, sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAr~D option would allow continued developmeat at the 1/2 acre
I.ot size tlxat can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (rOads, zoning, s~aeriff), the PUD (electric
and water) aad the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Couaty based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
tow as possible and that you can continue {o receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address.- Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5t~ Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
It is tirae to tell our elected County Commissioners that the res[dents of Bay Loop,' -
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North. Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want ¢o be part of the Ci~ of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below, you wilI be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within~our neighborhoods that would leave us within
Coun~ jurisdiction and make annexation, illegal. The petition requests the CounW
to establish our neighborhoods as a Coun~'based "Limited Area of ?~ore tntense
Rural ~eveIopment" or L~I~ for short. This option was not available when the
Count' first adopted tts grow.th plan for our neighborhoods.
The L~~ option allows .our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the Ci~, and avoid costly Ci~ sewer, stormwater and road
upgradeS. The L~I~ opti~on would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
[or s~ze that eau be supported: by cont[nued,.use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be se~ed ~by the CourtS-(roads, zoning, sherifO, the P~ (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
Conn~ based L~MI~ from the
By signing the petit[on below,you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your ex[sting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
w[I1 continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possibIe and that you can continue to receive se~qces at ~qown cost from the
~nstitutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) S[g ~urg}/~ Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5t~ Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
407 N. LEES CREEK ROAD
PORT .ANGELES, WA 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW!!
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'"
Gales Addition, North Mom:oe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be Part Of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within/our neighborhoods that would leave us wi'thin
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area ofl~lore Intense
Rural l~evelopment" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not. available when the
County:first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character,, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. The area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
low as possible and that you can continue to receive services at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Si/g~/~!ljf~¢:~ Address Date
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION
t~t is t~me to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,'
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Monnt Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the CiW of Fort Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that woutd leave us within
County jurisdiction and make annexation illegal. The petition requests thc County
~o establish our neighborhoods as a County based "Limited Area cf More ~(ntense
Rural Development" or LA1VIIRD for short. This option was not ayailable when the
Count5' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMIRD option alIows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot sut~urban
character, remain outside the Ci~' and avoid costly City sewer, stormwate~~ and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option would allow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sheriff):, the PU-D (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Enn[s Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your ex[sting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
Iow as possible and that you can continue to receive sero, ices at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Signature Address Date
If yon are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29ta~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
.. PORT ANGELES:_ WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW ..
It is time to tell our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North Monroe and North Mount Pleasant Neighborhoods, do not
want to be part of the City of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below yoU.will be telling the Commissioners 'that there are'
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us w/thin
County jurisdiction and make an:nexation'illegal. The Petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods asa County l~ased "Limited Area of 5q. ore Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count3' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LAMl:RD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside the City and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAMIRD option sgould allow continued development at the 1/2 acre'
[or size that eau be supported by Continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the Coun~ (roads, zoning, sheriff), the PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By sggning the petition below you. can.exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that 3'our ex[sting housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possible and that you can continue ~o receive sera, ices at 'known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) S'vznature Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Clallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
RETURN TO
2575 E. BAY STREET
PORT ANGELES, WA. 98362
STOP ANNEXATION NOW !
It is ffme to telI our elected County Commissioners that the residents of Bay Loop,' '-
Gales Addition, North h{onroe and North Mount PIeasant Ne[ghborhoods~ do not
want to be part of the Ci~ of Port Angeles.
By signing the petition below you will be telling the Commissioners that there are
other legal options for growth within our neighborhoods that would leave us within
County jurisdiction and:~make annexat[°n illegal. The petition requests the County
to establish our neighborhoods as a COunty based "Limited ~rea of Mitre Intense
Rural Development" or LAMIRD for short. This option was not available when the
Count5' first adopted its growth plan for our neighborhoods.
The LA3{IRD option allows our neighborhoods to retain their large lot suburban
character, remain outside theCity and avoid costly City sewer, stormwater and road
upgrades. The LAI~{IRD option would hllow continued development at the 1/2 acre
lot size that can be supported by continued use of individual septic systems. Th'e area
would continue to be served by the County (roads, zoning, sherif0, the'PUD (electric
and water) and the existing fire district. The Ennis Creek ravine would separate our
County based LAMIRD from the City.
By signing the petition below you can exert pressure on your elected representatives
to ensure that your existing housing densities and land uses are retained, that you
will continue to enjoy a well maintained road system, that your taxes will remain as
!ow as possibIe and that'You can continue to receive sera, ices at known cost from the
institutions that currently provide them.
Name (Print) Sign~. ~.re Address Date
If you are a resident or business owner in the UGA (urban growth area) and this
petition interests you, please have everyone over the age of 18 sign the petition and
return it to the Bay loop Neighborhood Assoc. address above by April 29th~ 2004 in
order for it to be presented at the May 5th Ciallam County Planning Commission
meeting.
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY' Submitted to City Council at its meeting of
June 8, 2004 by Ed Tuttle
We, the voters of Dry Creek community request that the County Commissioners leave the existing UGA western bounctary at ns currem
location, which is Reddick Road.
By signing this petition below you will be supporting the above statement, that will go to our elected County Commissioners, that we, the
community of Dry Creek, are opposed to any change of the Port Angeles UGA western boundary.
Since the Port Angeles UGA western boundary was changed in 1995, no development or urban services have taken place within this expanded
UGA area by the City of Port Angeles. We, the citizens of Dry Creek, wish to retain our mml charter, ensure that our homing densities and'
land use are retained, that our taxes will remain as low as possible and that we continue to receive services from our current providers (i.e: Dry
Creek Water Association and Clallam County PUD).
The Dry Creek community has a strong desire to see that our investment in our homes and our quality of life are proteCted. Some of the most
emotionally charged conflicts in communities occur when residents perceive proposed land uses as a threat to their homes and their quality of
life. Potential homeowners rely upon existing zoning and existing uses in a neighborhood when purchasing a home. At the time of purchasing
a home/land, the individual(s) makes a co_mmtment which is literally cast in concrete, a home or pioc, e of land cannot be moved or reoriented
to avoid a new incompatible use, moving a home may not be an option, either for financial reasons or because of emotional ties to the property
or community. New development must be required to be compatible with existing neighborhoods, protection of the home must be one of the
highest priorities of county government.
NAME (PKINTED) SIGNATURE ~ ADDRESS D~7~//~_/./
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY" "-
NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE ADDRESS .. DATE
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY" "-
We, the voters of Dry Creek community request that the County Commissioners leave the existing UGA western boundary at its current
location, which is Reddick Road.
By signing this petitiOn below you will be supporting the above statement, that will go to our elected County Commissioners, that we, the
community of Dry Creek, are opposed to any change of the Port Angeles UGA western boundary.
Since the Port Angeles UGA western boundary was changed in 1995, no development or urban services have taken place within this expanded
UGA area by the City of Port Angeles. We, the citizens of Dry Creek, wish to retain our rural charter, ensure that our ho.USing densities and
land use are retained, that our taxes will remain as low as possible and that we continue to receive services from our current providers (i.e. Dry
Creek Water Association and Clallam County PUD).
The Dry Creek community has a strong desire to see that our investment in our homes and our quality of life are protected. Some of the most
emotionally charged conflicts in communities occur when residents perceive proposed land uses as a threat to their homes and their quality, of
life. Potential homeowners rely upon existing zoning and existing uses in a neighborhood when purchasing a home. At the time of purchasing
a home/land, the individual(s) makes a commitment which is liter411y cast in concrete, a home or piece of land cannot be moved or reoriented
to avoid a new incompatible use, moving a home may not be an option, either for financial reasons or because of emotional ties to the property
or community. New development must be required to be compatible with existing neighborhoods, protection of the home must be one of the
highest priorities of county government.
NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE ADDRESS DATE
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY"
NAME (PRINTED)SIGNATURE ADDRESS ;' DATE
: - _., ~7~.-; . ..... . ....
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE"
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY"
We, the voters of Dry Creek community request that the County Commissioners leave the existing UGA western boundary at its current
location, which is Reddick Road.
By signing this petition below you will be supporting the above statement, that will go to our elected County Commissioners, that we, the
community of Dry Creek, are opposed to any change of the Port Angeles UGA western boundary.
Since the Port Angeles UGA western boundary was changed in 1995, no development or urban services have taken place within this expanded
UGA area by the City of Port Angeles. We, the citizens of Dry Creek, wish to retain our rural charter, ensure that our housing densities and'
land use are retained, that our taxes will remain as Iow as possible and that we continue to receive services fi-om our current providers (i.e. Dry
Creek Water Association and Clallam County PUD). - .....
The Dry Creek community has a stTong desire to see that our investment in our homes and our quality of life are protected. Some of the most
emotionally charged conflicts in communities occur when residents perceive proposed land uses as a threat to their homes and their quality of
life. Potential homeowners rely upon existing zoning and existing uses in a neighborhood when purchasing a home. At the time of purchasing
a home/land, the individual(s) makes a commitment which is literally cast in concrete, a home or piece of land cannot be moved or reoriented
to avoid a new incompatible use, moving a home may not be an option, either for financial reasons or because of emotional des to the property
or community. New development must be required to be compatible with existing neighborhoods, protection of the home must be one of the
highest priorities of county government.
NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE ADDRESS DATE / .
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY"
NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE ADDRESS , DATE
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY"
We, the voters of Dry Creek community request that the County Commissioners leave the existing UGA western boundary at its current
location, which is Reddick Road.
By signing this petition below you will be supporting the above statement, that will go to our elected County Commissioners, that we, the
community of Dry Creek, are opposed to any change of the Port Angeles UGA western boundary.
Since the Port Angeles UGA western boundary was changed in 1995, no development or urban services have taken place within this expanded
UGA area by the City of Port Angeles. We, the citizens of Dry Creek, wish to retain our rural charter, ensure that our housing densities and
land use are retained, that our taxes will remain as low as possible and that we continue to receive services from our current providers (i.e. Dry
Creek Water Association and Clallam County PUD).
The Dry Creek community has a strong desire to see that our investment in our homes and our quality of life are protected. Some of the most
emotionally charged conflicts in communities occur when residents perceive proposed land uses as a threat to their homes and their quality of
life. Potential homeowners rely upon existing zoning and existing uses in a neighborhood when purchasing a home. At the time of purchasing
a home/land, the individual(s) makes a commitment which is literally cast in concrete, a home or piece of land cannot be moved or reoriented
to avoid a new incompatible use, moving a home may not be an option, either for financial reasons or because of emotional ties to the property
or community. New development must be required to be compatible with existing neighborhoods, protection of the home must be one of the
highest priorities of county government.
NAME (PRINTED). SIGNATURE ADDRESS DATE
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY"
NAME (PRINTED) SIONA~JI~__~ ADDKESS DATE
~ J f ~ · .
- / ~. -. '
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY" ""~
NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE ADDRESS : DATE
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY"
We, the voters of Dry Creek community request that the County Commissioners leave the existing UGA western boundary at its current
location, which is Reddick Road.
By signing this petition below you will be supporting the above statement, that will go to our elected County Commissioners, that we, the
commumty of Dry Creek, are opposed to any change of the Port Angeles UGA western boundary.
Since the Port Angeles UGA western boundary was changed in 1995, no development or urban services have taken place within this expanded
UGA area by the City of Port Angeles. We, the citizens of Dry Creek, wish to retain our rural charter, ensure that our ho~ing densities and
land use are retained, that our taxes will remain as low as possible and that we continue to receive services from our current providers (i.e. Dry
Creek
Water Association and Clallam County PUD).
The Dry Creek community has a s~ong desire to see that our investment in our homes and our quality of life are protected. 'Some oftbe most
emotionally charged conflicts in communities occur when residents perceive proposed land uses as a threat to their homes and their quality of
life. Potential homeowners rely upon existing zoning and existing uses in a neighborhood when purchasing a home. At the time of purchasing
a home/land, the individual(s) makes a commitment which is literally cast in concrete, a home or piece of land cannot be moved or reoriented
to avoid a new incompatible use, moving a home may not be an option, either for financial reasons or because of emotional ties to the property
or community. New development must be required to be compatible with existing neighborhoods, protection of the home must be one of the
highest priorities of county government.
NAME (PRINTED)" SIGNATURE ADDRESS DATE
,4su~ .r ,o~.~-t+ ::r~b~~' c,c~,,,~ ._,~,~_~:~ 28o ~ w. ~_~y ~,,'~, o r,'u~ q - tco- oq
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY"
We, the voters of Dry Creek community request that the County Commissioners leave the existing UGA western boundao, at its current
location, which is Reddick Road.
By signing this petition below you will be supporting the above statement, that will go to our elected County Commissioners, that we, the
commumty of Dry Creek, are opposed to any change of the Port Angeles UGA western boundary.
Since the Port Angeles UGA western boundary was changed in 1995, no development or urban services have taken place within this expanded
UGA area by the City of Port Angeles. We, the citizens of Dry Creek, wish to retain our rural charter, ensure that our housing densities and'
land use are retained, that our taxes will remain as low as possible and that we continue to receive services from our current tnoviders (i.e. Dry
Creek Water Association and Clallam County PUD).
The Dry Creek community has a strong desire to see that our investment in our homes and our quality ofhfe are protected. Some of the most
emotionally charged conflicts in communities occur when residents perceive proposed land uses as a threat to their homes and thek quality of
life. Potential homeowners rely upon existing zoning and existing uses in a neighborhood when purchasing a home. At the time of purchasing
a home/land, the individual(s) makes a commitment which is literally cast in concrete, a home or piece ofland cannot be moved orreoricntcd
to avoid a new incompatible use, moving a home may not be an option, either for financial reasons or because of emotional ties to the property
or community. New development must be required to be compatible with existing neighborhoods, protection of the home must be one of the
highest priorities of county government.
NAME (P~) SIGNATURE ADDRESS DATE
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY"
NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE ADDRESS DATE
oq
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY"
NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE ADDRESS DATE
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY" t'-
NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE ADDRESS DATE
~ il ~ ',~~ '
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY" ....
NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE ADDRESS ' DATE
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" T9
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY" '"
We, the voters of Dry Creek cOmmunity request that the County Commissioners leave the existing UGA western boundazy at its current
location, which is Reddick Road.
By signing this petition below you will be supporting the above statement, that will go to our elected County commissioners, that we, the
community of Dry Cre. ek, are opposed to any change of the Port Angeles UGA western boundary.
Since the Port Angeles UGA western boundary was changed in 1995, no development or urban services have taken place within this expanded
UGA area by the City of Port Angeles. We, the citizens of Dry Creek, wish to retain our rural charter, ensure that our homing densities and
land use are retained, that our taxes will remain as low as possible and that we continue to receive services fi.om our current providers (i.e. Dry
Creek Water Association and Clallam County PUD).
The Dry Creek community has a strong desire to see that our investment in our homes and our quality of life are protected. Some of the most
emotionally charged conflicts in communities occur when residents perceive proposed land uses as a threat to their homes and thek quality of
life. Potential homeowners rely upon existing zoning and existing uses in a neighborhood when purchasing a home. At the time of purchasing
a home/land, the individual(s) makes a commitment which is literally cast in concrete, a home or piece of land cannot be moved or reoriented
to avoid a new incompatible use, moving a home may not be an option, either for financial reasous or because of emotional ties to the property
or community. New development must be required to be compatible with existing neighborhoods, protection of the home must be one of the
highest priorities of county government.
NAME (PRINIY~) SIGNATURE ADDRESS DATE
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY"
We, the voters of Dry Creek community request that the County Commissioners leave the existing UGA western boundary at its current
location, which is Reddick Road. "
By signing this petition below you Will be supporting the above statement, that will go to our elected County Commissioners, that we, the
commumty of Dry Creek, are opposed to any change of the Port Angeles UGA western boundary.
Since the Port Angeles UGA western boundary was changed in 1995, no development or urban services have taken place within this expanded
UGA area by the City of Port Angeles. We, the citizens of Dry Creek, wish to re, in our rural charter, ensure that our housing densities and
land use are retained, that our taxes Will remain as Iow as possible and that we continue to receive senrices from our current providers (i.e. Dry
Creek Water Association and Clallam County PUD).
The Dry Creek community has a slxong desire to see that our investment in our homes and our quality of hfe are protected. Some of the most
emotionally charged conflicts in commlmities occur when residents perceive proposed land uses as a threat to their homes and their quality of
life. Potential homeowners rely upon existing zoning and existing uses in a neighborhood when purchasing a home. At the time of purchasing
a home/land, the individual(s) makes a commitment which is literally cast in concrete, a home or piece of land cannot be moved or reoriented
to avoid a new incompatible use, moving a home may not be an option, either for financial reasons or because of emotional ties to the property
or community. New development must be required to be compatible with existing neighborhoods, tnotection of the home must be one of the
highest priorities of county government.
NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE ADDRESS DATE
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY"
We, the voters of Dry Creek community request that the County Commissioners leave the existing UGA western boundary at its current
location, which is Reddick Road.
By signing this petition below you will be supporting the above statement, that will go to our elected County Commissioners, that we, the
commumty of Dry Creek, are opposed to any change of the Port Angeles UGA western boundary.
Since the Port Angeles UGA western boundary was changed in 1995, no development or urban services have taken place within this expanded
UGA area by the City of Port Angeles. We, the citizens of Dry Creek, wish to retain our rtwal charter, ensure that our homing densities and
land use are retained, that our taxes will remain as low as possible and that we continue to receive services fi-om our current providers (i.e. Dry
Creek Water Association and Clallam County PUD).
The Dry Creek community has a strong desire to see that our investment in our homes and our quality of life are protected. Some of the most
emotionally charged conflicts in communities occur when residents perceive proposed land uses as a threat to their homes and their quality of
life. Potential homeowners rely upon existing zoning and existing uses in a neighborhood when purchasing a home. At the time of purchasing
a home/land, the individual(s) makes a commitment which is literally cast in concrete, a home or piece of land cannot be moved or reoriented
to avoid a new incompatible use, moving a home may not be an option, either for financial reasons or because of emotional ties to the property
or community. New development must be required to be compatible with existing neighborhoods, protection of the home must be one of the
highest priorities of county government.
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY" "~'-
NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATIJRE ADDRESS · DATE
-1 i
_,~ _ _ ,, ,
./
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY"
We, the voters of Dry Creek community request that the County Commissioners leave the existing UGA western boundary at its current
location, which is Reddick Road.
By signing this petition below you will be supporting the above statement, that will go to our elected County Commissioners, that we, the
community of Dry Creek, are opposed to any change of the Port Angeles UGA western boundary.
Since the Port Angeles UGA western boundary was changed in 1995, no development or urban services have taken place within this expanded
UGA area by the City of Port Angeles. We, the citizens of Dry Creek, wish to retain our rural charter, ensure that our housing densities and'
land use are retained, that our taxes will remain as low as possible and that we continue to receive services fi.om our current providers (i.e. Dry
Creek Water Association and Clallam County PUD).
The Dry Creek community has a strong desire to see that our investment in our homes and our quality of hfe are protected. Some of the most
emotionally charged Conflicts in communities occur when residents perceive proposed land uses as a threat to their homes and their quality, of
life. Potential homeowners rely upon existing zoning and existing uses in a neighborhood when purchasing a home. At the time of purchasing
a home/land, the individual(s) makes a commitment which is literally cast in concrete, a home or piece of land cannot be moved or reoriented
to avoid a new incompatible use, moving a home may not be an option, either for financial reasons or because of emotional ties to the property
or community. New development must be required to be compatible with existing neighborhoods, protection of the home must be one of the
highest priorities of county government.
NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE ADDRESS DATE
~ ':' ' , ' ' :" t '.,~.~ ' - - ' '
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY" -
NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE ADDRESS ' DATE
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY"
We, the voters of Dry Creek community request that the County Commissioners leave the existing UGA western boundary at its current
location, which is Reddick Road.
By signing this petition below you will be supporting the above statement, that will go to our elected County Commissioners, that we, the
commtmity of D~ Creek, are opposed to any change of the Port Angeles UGA western boundary.
Since the Port Angeles UGA western boundary was changed in 1995, no development or urban services have taken place within this expanded
UGA area by the City of Port Angeles. We, the citizens of Dry Creek, wish to retain our rural charter, ensure that our homing densities and
land use are retained, that our taxes will remain as low as possible and that we continue to receive services from our current providers (i.e. Dry
Creek
Water Association and Clallam County PUD).
The Dry Creek community has a strong desire to see that our investment in our homes and our quality of life are protected. Some of the most
emotionally charged conflicts in communities occur when residents perceive proposed land uses as a threat to their homes and their quality of
life. Potential homeowners rely upon existing zoning and existing uses in a neighborhood when purchas/ng a home. At the time of purchasing
a home/land, the individual(s) makes a commitment which is literally cast in concrete, a home or piece of land cannot be moved or reoriented
to avoid a new incompatible use, moving a home may not be aa option, either for financial reasons or because of emotional ties to the property
or community. New development must be required to be compatible with existing neighborhoods, protection of the home must be one of the
highest priorities of county government.
NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE ADDRESS DATE
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" T.O
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY"
NAME (PRINIZ/)) SIGNATURE ADDRESS ,' DATE
.~ ~P~e ~ I), 2.ofOr,~s/',
~ " ~ / '
DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY"
We, the voters of Dry Creek community request that the County Commissioners leave the existing UGA western boundary at its current
location, which is Reddick Road.
By signing this petition below you will be supporting the above statement, that will go to our elected County Commissioners, that we, the
community of Dry Creek, are opposed to any change of the Port Angeles UGA western boundary.
Since the Port Angeles UGA western boundary was changed in 1995, no development or urban services have taken place within th/s expanded
UGA area by the City of Port Angeles. We, the citizens of Dry Creek, wish to retain our rural charter, ensure that our hofising densities and
land use are retained, that our taxes will remain as Iow as possible and that we continue to receive services from our current providers (i.e. Dry
Creek Water Association and Clallam County PUD).
The Dry Creek community has a strong desire to see that our investment in our homes ~d our quality' of life are protected. Some of the most
emotionally charged conflicts in communities occur when residents perceive proposed land uses as a threat to their homes and their quality of
life. Potential homeowners rely upon existing zoning and existing uses in a neighborhood when purchasing a home. At the time of purchasing
a home/land, the individual(s) makes a commitment which is literally cast in COncrete, a home or piece of land cannot be moved or reoriented
to avoid a new incompatible use, moving a home may not be an option, either for financial, reasons or because of emotional ties to the property
or community. New development must be required to be compatible with existing,.:neighborhoods, protection of the home must be one of the
highest priorities of county government.
~DRY CREEK COMMUNITY REQUEST "NO CHANGE" TO
WESTERN UGA BOUNDARY"
NAME (PRINTED) SIGNATURE ADDRESS DATE
- ' /
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
Jujae 7, 2004
Port Angeles City Council
City of Port Angeles
P.O. Box 1150
Port Angeles, WA 98362
RE: GMA Comprehensive Plan Public Comment
Dear Sirs:
I first would like to thank the City C6uncil and Staff for selecting me to participate in the 2020 Vision
process. [ enjoyed the experience: it was very educational and enlightening. I am in agreement with the
majority of the comments and recommendations that have been devdope_d through the public input. I ~
would like to' take this opportunity to express my thoughts on what I believe is critical to the county's '
economic and community development of the next few years, but also is creating the greatest amount of
disagreement at this time - expansion of urban services and urban growth boundaries.
As the Executive Director of the EDC, I have had direct contact with economic and community
devdopment issues including,measuring the econmnic health through keY indicators. The county has
experienced moderate economic growth during 2002 and 2003, with increases in retail sales and new
businesses locating to the community. Since the start of 2004, there has been unprecedented growth in
the labor force of 660 people and the second lowest unemployment rate since 1980. Economic growth is
now pinking up steam in Clallam County with still more business expansion and new locations to take
place. Additionally, the City and County are seeing new housing and subdivisions not seen for decades.
The benefits of the economic development successes in 2002 and 2003 are now being seen and
~mplementation of urban service should begin immediately.
There is one element in the central and east county's economic development tool box that is lacking at
the present time. industrial and manufacturing sites of 15 acres or more that are prepared for purchase
and development; Recently there have beep a number of inquires regarding industrial sites with a limited
inventory, especially west of Port Angdes. The City should continue to pursue the intent of the GMA
and make a priority of planning for expansion of urban boundaries and services. Specifically reviewing
large pa'reds within the current UGA boundaries for primary job creation and recommend expansion to
devdop, in that fashion, during the next decade.
This issue has raised emotions and caused grave concerns within public agencies in the county. I
applaud the City and County leaders for creating a model for how our community's public agencies can
prepare for and address infrastructure expansion. Th!s model and partnership experience should be
continued. As a community ~ve cannot allow one jurisdiction to gut the financial stability of another.
I firmly believe that the City of Port Angeles, Sequim and Forks should make a priority of preparing for
urban growth in Clallam County. If government agencies get bogged down in territorialism and personal
agendas the quality of life that we cherish will be lost and development ~vill again have a bad
connotation.
Again thank you for the opportunity to participate it the process.
Respectfully.
102 E. Front · P.O. Box 1085 · Port Angeles, Washington 98362-0204
Website: w~'.clatlam.org * Phone: 360.457.7793 * Fax: 360.452.9618
p_ ORTANC;tiLIiS
WASHINGTON, U. S. IA.
CITY COUNCIL MEMO
DATE: June 1, 2004
To: CITY COUNCIL '
FROM: Glenn A. Cutler, Director of Public Works and Utilities ~}d'-t~,
SUBJECT: 2004 - 2010 Capital Faciliti4s Plan (CFP) and'Transportation Improvement Program
(TIP) Workshop and Public Hearing
Summary: The ~tate requires that the City annually update the CFP and TIP fOr planning'and
funding of capital projects. A public hearing is required to receive input regarding brojects and
additions to the CFP/TIP. The TIP projects are included in the transportation element of the CFP,
but need to be listed in the separate TIP to meet state requirements. A workshop will be held to
familiarize Council and the public with the projects included in the CFP. A public hearing is
scheduled for this evening. . '
Recommendation: Open the public hearing and continue the hearing to June 8, 2004. The
workshop will be held on June 8, 2004. After receiving comment from the public on June
8, 2004 continue the hearing to the next regularly scheduled Council meetingl
Background: Annually, the City is required by the State to update the CFP for planning and
funding of capital projects. The CFP is a project planning tool which covers all aspects of
infrastructure planning within the City. The projects included in the CFP are those that are
needed to meet the concurrency requirements of the Growth Management Act (GMA),
transportation projects to be included in the TIP, and other capital projects planned for the next
six year period. All projects in the CFP and TIP should be currently funded or have the source of
potential funding identified. In order to receive project funding in the form of grants and loans or
require development funding of infrastructure improvements, projects must be included in the
CFP. The TIP is a transportation planning tool used by the Washington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT) to allocate funding of local agency projects. The WSDOT will not
fund transportation projects that are not included in the TIP. Comments received on
transportation projects will apply to both the CFP and TIP.
The draft 2004-2010 CFP was previously distributed to Council. The staff, along with the
Finance Committee members, have identified and prioritized projects for consideration by the
full Council. While the CFP and TIP are six-year planning tools, the governmental fund
allocations cover the current year, 2004, and the next year, 2005.
H ' A d
} 71
N:\CCOUNCIL~INAL\CFP & TIP for 2004 Public earing wp .wp
June 1, 2004 City Council
RE: 2004 CFP & TIP Public Hearing
Page 2
The 2004/2005 Governmental Fund Projects is a summary of all capital projects requiring
funding from the general fund which have been prioritized on a citywide basis. The second
summary includes general fund projects (Fire, Police, Parks, and Streets) listed in departmental
priority. The third summary includes utility fund projects (Light, Solid Waste, Water,
Wastewater, and Stormwater) listed in departmental priority order. Please note that the street
projects list also serves as the TIP.
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN OVERVIEW
The total dollar amount available for Governmental Fund Project Allocation projects in 2004/
2005 is $2,400,000.' ,
The general approach for project prioritization was 1) projects that have non-City funds
associated with the project (leveraging funds of others), 2) projects with a potential of securing
non-City funds for accomplishment, 3) legal mandates, 4) economic development, 5) public
need, 6) public health and safety and 7) obsolescence.
The following is a recap of the basic strategy, key projects and funding options contained in the
proposed CFP. A detailed description of each project is listed in the 2004 CFP binder.
I. GOVERNMENT FUND PROJECTS
The proposed six-year plan for the General Fund Projects totals $39 million.
Development projects identified for the years 2004 and 2005 total $2,400,000. Projects
that are funded directly out of the general fund are identified as:
A. General (GG) fund projects identified for funding are: Laurel Street Pavers,
Homeland Security Project, Matching Funds for Community Projects, Downtown
Parking, Residential Infrastructure Development (NICE) program, Valley Creek
Restoration, and Channel 21 equipment.
B. Fire Department (FR) projects identified for funding are: Fire Station Roof
Repair, Replace Pumper, and Purchase Large Hose.
C. Police Department (PD) projects identified for funding are: Police Station
Addition/Remodel.
D. Parks Department (PK) projects identified for funding are: International
Waterfront Promenade, City Pier Dredging & Piling Replacement, Front Street
Corridor Streetscape Improvements, Shane Park Renovation, Neighborhood Park
Renovation, Recreation Facility Assessment, Erickson Park Restroom
Improvements, Skate Park, and Elks Playfield Improvements.
N:\CCOUNCIL~FINAL\CFP & TIP for 2004 Public HearingAwpd.wp]d 7 2
June 1, 20~)4 City Council
RE: 2004 ~FP & TIP Public Hearing
Page 3
E. Transportation (TR) projects identified for funding are: 8th Street Bridge
Design, Sidewalk Program, ADA Curb Ramps/Chirpers, Campbell Avenue
(Mount Angeles to Porter), Park Avenue Reconstruction (Peabody to Race), Park
Avenue Sidewalk (Race to Liberty), Street Bicycle Facilities/Racks/Striping, and
Old .Mill Rd/Scrivener Rd Improvements.
II. TRANSPORTATION
The proposed six-year plan for Transportation Projects totals $67 million. Development
projects identified for the years 2004 and 2005 total $17 million. Projects that are funded
directly out of the general funds, as also noted above, are identified as: 8t.h Street Bridge
Design, Sidewalk Program, ADA Curb Ramps/Chirpers, Campbell Avenue (Mount
Angeles to Porter), Park Avenue Reconstruction (Peabody to Race), Park Avenue ,
Sidewalk (Race to Liberty), Street Bicycle Facilities/Racks/Striping, and Ol.d Mill
Rd/Scrivener Rd Improvements.
Major Street Repair and Reconstruction
The City Council has set a goal of funding an annual Street Paving Prograin. Thi~
program of resurfacing streets allows Public Works to make steady improvements to
streets throughout the City. The "least cost" strategy is based on addressing both the
"worst of the worst" and making improvements to streets before they reach the point of
significant deterioration.
One of the main challenges in capital project funding is maintaining the annual
commitment for street repair and reconstruction. Proposed annual funding allows for
major overlay projects and funding of minor projects when needed for grant matches.
$350,000 is proposed for Peabody Street (Front to 5th ) reconstruction in 2004.
IH UTILITY PROJECTS
The proposed six-year plan for Utility Fund Projects totals $77 million. Development
projects identified for the years 2004 and 2005 total $11 million.
Each utility is operated as a separate business funded by dedicated utility rates and
development charges. As such, it does not compete with other City projects funded by
general tax revenue.
A. Light utility projects in the CFP for 2004 and 2005 include substation
upgrades, Elwha underground rebuild, and other infrastructure upgrade projects
B. Solid Waste projects in the CFP for 2004 and 2005 include starmp of the
Transfer Station Design, and Landfill Bluff Stabilization.
N:\CCOUNCIL~FINAL\CFP & TIP for 2004 Public HearingAwpd.wp]d 7 3
June 1, 2004 City Council
RE: 2004 CFP & TIP Public Hearing
Page 4
C. Water utility projects in the CFP for 2004 and 2005 include Concrete Cylinder
Pipe Replacements, Water treatment plant and other Elwha Dams removal related
support activities, Downtown Phase III waterline replacements, and Fairmont
Pump Station.
D. Wastewater utility projects in the CFP for 2004 - 2005 include Laurel and Oak
Streets outfall improvements, Pump Station 1 and 3 improvements, I/I CSO
reducti,on, Park Avenue sewer improvements, Annexation sewer extension,
Annual replacements, and Composting Facility improvements.
E. Stormwater utility projects in the CFP for 2004 - 2005 include Lincoln Street
Stormdrain, Peabody Creek/Lincoln Street Culvert Repairs, Crown Park
Overflow, and improvements to outfalls and catch basins for water quality
improvements.
IV 'CONCLUSION
The 2004-2010 CFP represents continued progress in addressing the needs of the City. It
is recommended the CFP and the allocation of funding for the projects in the years 2004 -
2005 be adopted. Other hi~gh priority projects to be considered for Governmental Fund
Project Allocation are as follows:
Project # Project Description Year Funds Discussion
TR42-99 Lauri~sen Blvd 2005 $50,000 Funds would be used for preliminary
Bridge Widening evaluation of the structure and
developing grant funding requests.
GG03-03 Residential 2004/ $150,000 Additional funds to assist in
Infrastructure 2005 constructing infrastructure to
Development support/encourage development.
TR01-03 Overlay Program 2005 $100,000 Funds have been reduced the past
few years. This would supplement
the annual budget.
WW25-99 Sewer Pump 2004 $200,000 Project costs have increased since
Stations 1 & 3 rates were established and the bond
Improvements was secured.
Attach.: Government Fund Project Allocation and CFP summaries.
d
Id74
N:\CCOUNCIL~F1NAL\CFP & TI~ for 2004 Public HearingAwp .wp
City of Port Angeles
Capital Facilities Plan/
Transportation Improvement Plan
2004
N:\Glenn\TI P-CF1~ 2(~M_A.ppt
Presentation
· Completed CFP/TIP Projects
· In Progress CFP/TIP Projects
· 2004 CFP/TIP Proiects
· Discussion
· Continue Public Heating
CFP/TIP Project Status
Completed:
GG02-99 Renovate Carnegie Library
PK03-02 Olympic Discovery Trail- Rayonier to Morse Creek
I'K04-03 Recreation Facility Assessment ~__
PK12-02 Francis Street Park Landscaping
PK09-02 City Pier Dredging & Pile Replacement (Investigation)
TR03-00 "I" Street Sidewalks
TR04-00 Lauridsen Blvd Sidewalks
TR08-00 5m Street Signal and Overlay
TRll-99 8th Street Bridges' Repairs (short term)
CFP/TIP Project Status
,
Completed (cont'd):
CL82-99 Light Operations Warehouse
CL06-99 Install Substation Circuit Switches (Washington & Laurel)
CL02-01 Valley Street Reconductor
CL01-02 Upgrade Substation Relays (Washington & Laurel)
CL85-99 Fiber Optics Backbone ~$~~~d~ft_t._.~l~ ,m~tg~fg~
WT31-99 Peabody Street Reservoir Cover
WT12-99 Annual Water Main Replacements (2004)
WT02-99 Concrete Cylinder Pipe Replacement (Design Phases I, II & III)
WT56-99 Fairmount Pump Station (Design)
CFP/TIP Project Status
Completed (cont'd):
DR54-99 Crown Park Overflow (Design)
DR02-99 City-Wide Catch Basin Modifications
WW27-99 Annual Wastewater Main Replacements (2003)
WW25-99 Sewer Pump Stations 1 & 3 Improvements (Design)
WW01-03 Compost Facility Final Phase (Design)
WW26-99 I/I CSO Reduction (Data Collection)
WW01-02 Septage Receiving Station
CFP/TIP Project Status
Ongoing:
TR48-99 Olympic Peninsula International Gateway
TR01-01 8th Street Bridges Replacement (Design)
TR33-99 Peabody Street Reconstruction (Phase I)
FR02-02 Fire Station Roof Repairs
TR01-01 8th Street Bridge Replacement (Design)
TR48-99 Olympic Peninsula International Gateway
CL06-99 Install Substation Circuit Switches ("F" Street) (Const)
CL01-02 Upgrade Substation Relays ("F" Street) (Const)
il CL01-02 Upgrade Substation Relays ("A" Street & Laurel) (Design)
II
CL03-01 Elwha Underground Rebuild (Phase I & II)
CL03-02 Acquisition of Airport PUD Electric Service
CFP/TIP Project Status
Ongoing , ·
(cont d).
WT02-99 Concrete Cylinder Pipe Replacement
WT02-01 Water Treatment Facility (PAWTP, IWTP & ESWI)
SW31-99 Landfill Transfer Station (RFP/Q)
SW01-03 Landfill Bluff Stabilization (Permitting)
SW01-04 ESC System Phase II
WW27-99 Annual Wastewater Main Replacements (2003)
WW25-99 Sewer Pump Stations 1 & 3 Improvements
WW01-03 Compost Facility Final Phase
WW26-99 I/I CSO Reduction (Data Collection)
DR54-99 Crown Park Overflow
DR02-99 City-Wide Catch Basin Modifications
General Projects - GG
lav .~c*l I ,o,^[ I ~o,^.I =oo~ I =oos I
1 GG02-01 LaureISt. Pavers [Railroad Ave.- lstSt.' 365,000 52,500 15,000 350,000
2 GG04-03 Homeland Security Project 30,000 30,000 30,000 0
3 GG05-03 Matching Funds for Conrnunity Projects 270,000 270,000 45,000 45,000
4 GG03-00 Downtown Parking4,500,000 90,000 1,400,000 3,000,000
5 GG13-99 Dow ntow n Convention Center 15,000,000 2,000,000 6,600,000 6,600,000
6 GG03-03 Residential Infrastructure Development 750,000 750,000 125,000 125,000
7 GG02-03 Valley Creek Restoration 120,000 30,000 30,000 90,000
8 GG01-03 Channel21 Equipment 120,000 60,000 120,000 0
9 GG01-01 Laurel St. Stair Repair 250,000 250,000 0, 0
10 GG05-00 Marketing Del Guzzi Dr. Property 250,000 250,000 0 0
11 GG01-02 Ediz Hook Rip Rap Repair 650,000 60,000 0 0
·
Fire & Police ProJects- FR/PD
DIV PROJECT TOTAL TOTAL 2004 2005
PRIORIT~ .................................................... ID P~T-:'i'I'T-LE P~'~T' .......... CITy ......... P'~J MT pROJECT
COST ........ C~T COST COST
1 FR02-02 Fire Station Roof Repair 568,000 50,00050,000
2 FR01-02 Replace Pumper 315,000 315,000 70,000 31,000
3 FR10-99 Replace Truck4 800,000 800,000 0 800,000
4 FR01-04 Purchase Large Hose30,00030,0000 30,000
5 FR07-99 West Side Fire Station 1,375,000 1,375,000 0 0
6 FR05-99 East Side Fire Station 1,875,000 1,875,000 0 0
DIVPROJECT TOTAL TOTAL 2004 2005
PRIORIT~ ID PROJECT TITLE PROJECT CITY PROJECT PROJECT
COST COST COST COST
1 PD01-04 POlice Station Addition/Rermdel 380,000 380,000 0 10,000
2 PI:X:)2-04 Radio Communications 230,000 230,000 0 500,000
3 PD03-04 New 9-1-1 Center 3,700,000 3,700,0000 100,000
Street Projects/TIP - TR
(Top 20 only)
DIV PROJECT TOTAL TOTAL 2004 2005
10RIT¥ ID P~~;I;"'TiTLE P~mT- ..... CiTY .... P~J~T "P~ECT
~0S~' .................... C~T ...................... COST COsT
1 TR48--99 Olympic Peninsula Intl Gateway 11,200,000 4,020,000 6,400,000 0
2 TR01-01 8th Street Bridge Replacement Design 1,800,000 360,000 1,700,000 0
3 TR01-02 8th Street Bridge Construction 15,000,000 3,000,000 330,000 7,270,000
4 TR74-99 Sidewalk Program 425,000 425,0001 25,000 50,000
5 TR26-99 ADA Curb Ramps/Chirpers 150,000 150,000 20,000 20,000
6 TR33-99 Peabody Street Reconstr. [Front - 8th] 600,000 0 350,000 0
7 TR01-04 2nd & Valley Pavement Restoration 290,000 290,000 0 0
8 TR01-03 O~eday Program 1,200,000 165,000 300,000
9 TR20-99 Street Bicycle Facilities/Racks/Striping 140,000 140,000 20,000 20,000
10 TR02-99 1st and Peabody Signal 110,000 0 0 0
11 TR10-00 16th Street Sidewalk ['F' St.-Stevens $ch] 230,000 55,000 0 0
12 TR09-00 16th Street Sidewalk [T St. -'F' St.] 250,000 75,000 0 0
13 TRll-00 10th St. Sidewalk ['N' St. -'M' St.] 375,000 200,000 0 0
14 TR12-00 10th St. Sidewalk ['M' St. -T St.] 375,000 200,000 0 0
15 TR12-99 Park A~enue Reconstruction [Peabody - Ra, 1,000,000 200,000 0 100,000
16 TR07-00 Park A~e. Sidewalk [Race - Liberty] 400,000 200,000 0 50,000
17 TR02-00 First Street Sidewalk (Ennis - Golf Course) 300,000 60,000 0 0
18 TR02-01 Ennis Street Slide Repair 210,000 210,000 0 0
19 TR21-99 Lauridsen BIll Reconstruction [Trk Rt. -'L"J 1,800,000 1,800,000 0 0
20 TR42-99 Lauridsen Bl,,d Bridge Widening 2,820,000 564,000 0 0
Prk &R oj
a s ecreat on Pr ects
DIVPROJECT TOTAL TOTAL 2004 2005
PRioRi'Ti/ ............ iD P~~'¥¥1Ti~'E .................................. P~-~T CITY- ......... PRoJ~T P~ECT
COST cosT ......... CosT COsT
1 PK02-03 Erickson Park Restroom Improvements 70,000 70,000 0 70,000
2 PK07-02 Shane Park Renovation 280,000! 280,000 140,000140.,000
3 PK06-02 Elks Playfield 70,000 70,000 0 70,000
4 PK09-02 City Pier Dredging & Piling Replacement 200,000200,000 110,00090,000
5 PK08-02 Neighborhood Park Renovation 190,000190,000 35,000 35,000
6 PK03-03 Lincoln Park Master Plan 40,000 40,000 0 40,000
7 PK13-02 Skate Park 50,000 25,000 0 50,000
8 PK01-03 International Waterfront Promenade 1,250,000 25,000, 1,225,000 0
9 PK04-02 Lincoln Park Buildings 150,000150,000 0 0
10 PK05-02 Art Education Center at PAFAC 250,0000 0 0
11 PK04-03 Recreation Facility Assessment 30,000 30,000 30,000 0
12 PK02-02 William Shore Memorial FOol Renovation 4,500,000 4,500,000 0 4,500,000
13 PK01-02 City Pier/Hollyw ood Beach Renovation 85,00085,000 0 0
14 PK01-04 Front Street Corridore StreetScape Impro 50,00050,000 25,000 25,000
15 PK02-04 Olympic Discovery Trail- Hill Street to Dq 120,000 120,000 20,000
Light Projects - CL
DIV PROJECT TOTAL TOTAL 2004 2005
PRIORIT~ ID PROJECT TITLE PROJECT CITY PROJECT PROJECT
COST COST COST COST
1 CL06-99 Install Substation Circuit Switches 325,000 325,000 253,000 0
2 CL01-02 U~rade Substation Relays 405,000 405,000 238,000 95,000
3 CL03-02 Acquisition of Airport PUD Electdc Svc 100,000 100,000 100,000 0
4 CL03-01 Elwha Underground Rebuild 820,000 820,000 242,000 270,000
5 CL02-02 Feeder ne Porter to Golf Course Rd 230,000 230,000 30,000 200,000'
6 CL01-04 Feeder Tie Hwy 101, Cherry to Pine 60,000 60,000 0 10,000
7 CL83-99 Ediz Hook OH- UG Conversion 680,000 680,000 0 250,000
8 CL07-99 Airport Industrial Park 762,000 0 0~ 0
9 CL65-99 UGA EleCtric Customers ' 2,000,000 2,000,000 0 0
10 CL18-99 Construct Transmission Line 153,000 153,000 0 0
11 CL20-99 'construct Golf Course Rd Sub 556,00C 556,000 0 0
12 CL78-99 Light Operations Center 1,000,000 1,000,000 0 0
i
Solid Waste - SW
DIVPROJECT TOTAL TOTAL 2004 2005
COST COST COST COST
1 SW02-04 Install Gas Lines at Landfill 85,000 85,000 0 85,000
2 SW01-04 ESC System Phase II 100,000 100,000 100,000 0
3 SW31-99 Landfill Transfer Station 3,700,000 3,700,000 300,000 750,000
4 SW01-03 Landfill BluffStabalization 2,550,000 2,550,000 100,000 100,000
5 SW02-03 Final Landfill Closure 4,500,000 4,500,000 0 0
·
Water ProJects - WT
DIV PROJECT TOTAL TOTAL 2004 2005
PRoJ~T TITLE PROJ'~T CITY p~ECT PROJECT
PRIORIT~ ID
CoST COsT COST COST
II
1 WT02.99 Concrete Cylinder Pipe Replacement 3,300,000 3,300,000 2,000,000 150,000
2 WT12-99 Annual Replacements 1,395,000 1,395,000 310,000 30,000
3 WT56-99 Fairmount Pump Station 335,000 335,000 335,000 0
4 WT02-01 Water Treatment Facility 10,000,000 0 0, 0
5 WT30-99 Downtown Watermains/Sidewalks III 2,000,000 2,000,000 100,000 1,900,000
6 WT32-99 iCorrosion Control Facility 380,000 380,000 0 0
7 WT64.99 UcDougal Subzone Fire pump 90,000 90,000 0 0
8 WT46-99 Southeast Reservoir 1,800,000 1,020,000 0 0
9 WT57-99 Elwha Pump Station Disinfection 175,000 175,000 0 0
10 WT65-99 UGA Water Customers 500,001~ 500,000 0 0
11 WT01-00 Airport Industrial Park Water Line 1,310,000 0 0 0
I
Wastewater Projects - WW
DIV PROJECT TOTAL TOTAL 2004 2005
PRI T ........ i'D P~~TIT[E P~'~¥ .......... CITY ............ P~T ..... P~ECT~
COST COST COST COST
1 WW01-04Baffles for CSO Sites 330,000 330,000 0 160,000
2 WW25-99Sewer Pump Stations 1 & 3 Improvements 715,000 715,000 715,000 0
3 WW05-04Park A~enue Sewer Improvements 303,000 303,000 68,000 235,000
4 WW27-99Annual Replacements Lines 685,000 685,000 0 0
5 WW06-99Oak Street Outfall Extension CSO Reductio 90,000 90,000 90,000 0
6 WW26-99I/I CSO Reduction 675,000 675,000 115,000 120,000
7 WW04-99Laurel Street Outfall Extension CSO Reducl 30,000 30,000 30,000 0
8 WW01-01,Annexation Interceptor Sewer Main 4,250,000650,000 0 400,000
9 WW03-04New Force Main, Gravity Sewer from Franci,. 3,500,000 0 400,000
10 WW02-04Replace Pump Station No. 4 7,500,000 0 0
11 WW04-04Treatment Plant for CSO Flows9,800,000 0 0
12 WW03-00Lindberg Rd. Sewer 1,000,0000 0 0
13 WW05-99Golf Course Road Sewer Interceptor 1,000,0001,000,0000 0
14 WW02-O0Aiq3o~ Industrial Sewer 1,100,0000 0 0
·
Stormwater Projects - DR
DIVPROJECT TOTAL TOTAL 2004 2005
PRIORIT~ ID PROJECT TITLE PROJECT CITY PROJECT PROJECT
COST COST COST COST
1 DR54-99 Crown Park Storm Overflow 240,000 240,000 240,000 0
2 DR04-99 Lincoln Street Storm Drain (4th to 7th St.) 400,000 400,0000 400,000
3 DR02-99 City-Wide Catch Basin Modifications 525,000 525,00070,000 75,000
4 DR01-04 stormwater Outfalls to Streams & Madne 600,000 600,0000 50,000
5 DR53-99 Stormwater Discharges Over Bluff 450,000 450,000! 0 50,000
6 DR65-99 loth And "N" Street Regional Storm Detenti~ 300,000 300,000~ 0 50,000
7 DR14-99 Peabody Creek/Lincoln St Culvert Rehab 400,000 100,0000 '0
8 DR01-01 First St. Stormwater Separation 250,000 250,0000 0
9 DR04-04 Stormwater at Canyon Edge & Ahlvers 500,000 500,0000 0
10 DR05-04 Stormwater at Rose & Thistle 500,000 500,0000 0
11 DR03-04 Stormwater at Laurel & US101 500,000 500,0000 0
12 DR06-04 Stormwater at Campbell & Porter 500,000 500,0000 0
13 DR07-04 Stormwater at "C" Street Extension 500,000 500,0000 0
14 DR02-04 Upper Golf Course Rd. Area Stormwater 500,000 500,0000 0
15 DR03-99 Milwaukee Dr. Stormwater Improvements 1,200,000 1,200,000 0 0
16 DR08-04 Lincoln Park/Big Boy Pond 300,000 300,0000 0
Governmental Fund Project Allocation 2004/2005
CITY TOTAL PROJECT ALLOCA~-U ALLOCA~,-u PROPOSED 2004 PROPOSED 2005.
PRIORITY cFp # _ PROJECT T!TLE ' :_ cOST 2003 2004 ALLOCATION ALLOCATION
2004 CITY CITY
0 GG02-99 Carnegie Library 1,840,000 840,000 0 0
0 TR08-00 5th & Race Signal 286,000 75,000 0 0
0 PK03-02 * Olympic Discovery Trail-Rayonier to Morse Creek 362,000 114,000 0 0
1 FR02-02 Fire Station Roof Repair 568,000 50,000 50,000 0
2 TR01-01 8th Street Bddge Replacement Design 1,900,000 100,000 250,000 380,000 0
3 PK01-03 * International Waterfront Promenade 1,250,000 25,000 25,000 i25,000,
4 PK09-02 City Pier Dredging & Piling Replacement 200,000 25,000 75,000 110,000 90,000~
5 PK01-04 Front Street Corridor Streetscape Improvements 50,000 25,000: 25,000
6 GG02-01 Laurel St. Pmers [Railroad Ave. - 1st St.] 365,000 52,500 15,000 37,500
7 PK07-02 Shane Park Renovation 280,000 140,000: 140,000 140,000
8 FR01-02 Replace Pumper 315,000 70,000 70,000 31,000
9 TR74-99 Sidewalk Program 425,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 50,000
10 TR26-99 ADA Curb Ramps/Chirpers 150,000 20,000 20,000 20,000
11 GG04-03 Homeland Secudty Project 30,000 30,000 30,000 0
12 GG05-03 Matching Funds for Community Projects 270,000 40,000 45,000 45,000
13 GG03-00 Downtown Parking 4,500,000 65,000 25,000 50,000 50,000
14 GG03-03 Residential Infrastructure Development (NICE Pgm) 750,000 50,000 50,000 50,000
15 FR01-04 Purchase Large Hose 30,000 0 30,000
16 TR03-04 Campbell Avenue - Mount Angeles to Porter 50,000 0 50,000
17 PK08-02 Neighborhood Park Renovation 190,000 30,000 35,000 25,000
18 GG02-03 Valley Creek Restoration 120,000 30,000 30,000
19 PK04-03 Recreation Facility Assessment 30,000 30,000 29,000 0
20 TR12-99 Park A~enue Reconstruction [Peabody - Race] 1,000,000 0 20,000
21 TR07-00 Park A~. Sidewalk [Race - Liberty] 400,000 0 25,000
22 PD01-04 Police Station Addition/Remodel 380,000 0 10,000
23 PK02-03 Edckson Park Restroom Improvements 70,000 0 70,000
24 TR20-99 Street Bicycle Facilities/Racks/Striping 140,000 20,000 20,000
25 TR02-04 Old Mill Rd/Scdvner Rd Improvements 400,000 0 25,000
26 PK13-02 Skate Park 50,000 0 25,000
27 PK06-02 Elks Playfleld Impm~ments 70,000 0 70,000
28 GG01-03 Channel 21 Equipment 120,000 60,000 0
Prioritized Summary 14,103,000 1,354,000 832,500 t,209,000 1,033,500
Governmental Fund Project-Allocation
2004/2005
Un prioritized Projects
[T0!~A~_.~~ ALLOIgATED PROPOSI~ 200~ PROPOSm 2005
cEP$ .P~._T_~.!~LE I ...... CO-"S-'-T'- ........ 2004 ~-ALLmAT~°~' I ~ ALLoCATION
I ....... C,TY / ....... c,-,-,,
GG03:0'3' Re'side'nti~il' ih~t-m~iu*re~D-e-~el'~p-rh~ni .................................. i ...................... 75i:)i'000 '~0:'o00! ............. i25 ooo .... 125,ooo
"TR01-03 Omrlay Procj'iam .... 1',200,000 0 0 100,000
TR42-99 Lauddsen BIll Bddge Widening 2,820,000 0 0 50,000
Funds Available 552,400,000~
What's Next!
Continue Public Hearing June 8
at or close to 7PM
Close Public Hearing
Adopt CFP/TIP and Allocate June 14
Governmental Funds or Continue
Close Public Hearing
Adopt CFP/TIP, Allocate Governmental July 6
Funds
2004 - 2005 GOVERNMENT FUND PROJECTS
CITY CITY TOTAL PROJECT TOTAL CITY ALLOCATED ~£OCA'FED PROPOSED 2004 PROPOSED 2005 CITY FUNDS ACCUM
PRIORITY PRIORITY CFP # PROJECT TITLE COST COST 2003 ~04 ALLOCATION ALLOCATION REQUIRED TOTALS
2003 2004 TOTAL CITY TOTAL CITY 2004-2005
I 0 GG02-99 Carnegie Library 1,840,000 840,000 840,000 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 Complete
3 0 TR08-00 5th & Race Signal 286,000 75,000 75,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 Complete
5 0 PK03-02 * Olympic Discovery Trail-Rayonier to Morse Creek 362,000 114,000 114,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 Complete
4 I FR02-02 Fire Station Roof Repair 568,000 50,000 50,000 568,000 50,000 0 0 50,000 50,000 insurance
6 2 TR01-01 8th Street Bridge Replacement Design 1,900,000 380,000 100,000 i , 250~0~.~,~. 1,900,000 380,000 0 0 380,000 430,000 Grant Match $380K, City Funds
21 3 PK01-03 * International Waterfront Promenade 1,250,000 250,000 251~ 25,000 25,000 1,225,000 125,000 150,000 580,000 Grant Match $150K, City Funds + $50K In-Kind
8 4 PK09-02 City Pier Dredging & Piling Replacement 200,000 200,000 25,000 110,000 110,000 90,000 90,000 200,000 780,000
7 5 PK01-04 Front Street Corridor Streetscape Improvements 50,000 50,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 50,000 830,000
9 6 GG02-01 Laurel St. Pavers [Railroad Ave. - 1st St.] 365,000 52,500 52~ 15,000 15,000 350,000 37,500 52,500 882,500 Debt Service on $300K = $17K/year
10 7 PK07-02 Shine Park Renovation 280,000 280,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 280,000 1,162,500
19 8 FR01-02 Replace Pumper 315,000 315,000 70~{~ 70,000 70,000 31,000 31,000 101,000 1,263,500 2007 projected purchase
12 9 TR74-99 Sidewalk Program 425,000 425,000 25,000 ~ 25,000 25,000 50,000 50,000 75,000 1,338,500 Annual Program
14 10 TR26-99 ADA Curb Ramps/Chirpers 150,000 150,000 ~0,~ ~ 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000i 40,000 1,378,500 Annual Program
15 11 GG04-03 Homeland Security Project 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 0 0 30,000 1,408,500 One time grant match
16 12 GG05-03 Matching Funds for Community Projects 270,000 270,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 90,000 1,498,500 Council Discretionary funds
17 13 GG03-00 Downtown Parking 4,500,000 100,000 65,000 1,400,000 50,000 3,000,000 50,000 100,000 1,598,500
18 14 GG03-03 Residential Infrastructure Development (NICE Pgm) 750,000 750,000i ~i~ 125,000 50,000 125,000 50,000 100,000 1,698,500 plus $75K/yr utilities ($125K total)
15 FR01-04 Purchase Large Hose 30,000 30,000i 0 0 30,000 30,000 30,000 1,728,500 Onetime purchase
16 TR03-04 Campbell Avenue - Mount Angeles to Porter 50,000 50,000 0 0 50,000 50,000 50,000 1,778,500
20 17 PK08-02 Neighborhood Park Renovation 190,000 190,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 25,000 60,000 1,838,500 Annual Program (Lions Pk '05)
22 18 GG02-03 Valley Creek Restoration 120,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 90,000 30,000 1,868,500 Grant Match $30K, City Funds
) 23 19 PK04-03 Recreation Facility Assessment 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 29,000 0 0 29,000 1,897,500 PA Tennis Club donation $1K
20 TR12-99 Park Avenue Reconstruction [Peabody - Race] 1,000,000 200,000 0 0 100,000 20,000 20,000 1,917,500 Grant Match $20K, City Funds
21 TR07-00 Park Ave. Sidewalk [Race- Liberty] 400,000 200,000 0 0 50,000 25,000 25,000 1,942,500 Grant Match $25K City Funds
22 PD01-04 Police Station Addition/Remodel 380,000i 380,000 0 0 10,000 10,000 10,000 1,952,500
23 PK02-03 Edckson Park Restroom Improvements 70,000 70,000 0 0 70,000 70,000 70,000 2,022,500
24 TR20-99 Street Bicycle Facilities/Racks/Striping 140,000 140,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 40,000 2,062,500 Annual Program
0 0 25,000 25,000 25,000 2,087,500 Condemnation Costs
25 TR02-04 Old Mill Rd/Scdvner Rd Improvements 400,000 25,000
26 PK13-02 Skate Park 50,000 25,000 0 0 50,000 25,000 25,000 2,112,500 $25K used as match
27 PK06-02 Elks Playfield Improvements 70,000 70,000 0 0 70,000 70,000 70,000 2,182,500
28 GG01-03 Channel 21 Equipment 120,000 60,000 ~ 120,000 60,000 0 0 60,000 2,242,500
Prioritized Summary 14,103,000 4,802,500 1,354,000 832,500 4,733,000 1,209,000 5,701,000 1,033,500 2,242,500 $2,400,000 Available
TR01-02 8th Street Bddge Construction 15,000,000 0 330,000 0 7,270,000 0 0 100% Grant funding to $20M
TR48-99 Olympic Peninsula Intl Gateway 11,200,000 4,020,000 0 0 6,400,000 0 0 Bonds
TR33-99 Peabody Street Reconstr. [Front - 5th] 350,000 0 350,000 0 0 0 0 STP Funds-$177K, Street -$200K
TR01-03 Overlay Program 1,200,000 1,200,000 0 300,000 0 0 Street Budget Item
PD02-04 Radio Communications 230,000 5,000 0 0 230,000 5,000 5,000 $225K Pencom, $5K Gan Fund
PK02-02 William Shore Memorial Pool Renovation 4,500,000 4,500,000 0 0 4,500,000 4,500,000 0 Funding Unknown/Bond
PD03-04 New 9-1-1 Center 3,700,000 3,700,000 0 0 100,000 0 0 Pencom Funds
PK04-02 Lincoln Park Buildings 150,000 150,000 0 0 0 0 0
GG13-99 Downtown Convention Center 15,000,000 2,000,000 7,500,000 0 7,500,000 0 0 $100K/yr 20 years Hotel/Motel Funds
FR05-99 East Side Fire Station 1,875,000 1,875,000 0 0 0 0 0 Voted Bond
FR07-99 West Side Fire Station 1,375,000: 1,375,000 0 0 0 0 0 Voted Bond
FR10-99 Replace Truck 4 (Ladder Truck) 800,000 800,000 0 0 800,000 0 Voted Bond
GG01-01 Laurel St. Stair Repair 250,000; 250,000 0 0 0 0 0
GG01-02 Ediz Hook Rip Rap Repair (2007) 650,000! 70,000 0 0 0 0 0
GG05-00 Marketing Del Guzzi Dr. Property 250,000 250,000 0 0 0 0 0
PK01-02 City Pier/Hollywood Beach Renovation 85,000i 85,000 0 0 0 0 0
PK02-04 * Olympic Discovery Trail - Hill Street to Dry Creek 120,000 120,000 0 0 20,000 20,000 20,000
04§ov4 Pa§e !
2004 - 2005 GOVERNMENT FUND PROJECTS
CITY CITY TOTAL PROJECT TOTAL CiTY ALLOCATED A[[~A~ PROPOSED 2004 PROPOSED 2005 CITY FUNDS ACCUM
PRIORITY PRIORITY CFP # PROJECT TITLE COST COST 2003 ALLOCATION ALLOCATION REQUIRED TOTALS
2003 2004 ~ TOTAL CITY TOTAL CITY 2004-2005
PK03-03 Lincoln Park Master Plan 40,000 40,000 0 0 0 0 0
PK05-02 Art Education Center at PAFAC 250,000 0 0 0 0 0 0
TR01-04 2nd & Valley Pavement Restoration 290,000 290,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR02-00 First Street Sidewalk (Ennis - Golf Course) 300,000 60,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR02-01 Ennis Street Slide Repair 210,000 210,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR02-99 1st and Peabody Signal 120,000 0 0 0 0 0 0
TR04-99 Laurel Street/Ahlvers Road Reconstruction 1,200,000 200,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR05-99 Hill Street Intersection Reconstruction 300,000 200,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR07-99 Milwaukee Ddve Phase I 2,000,000 2,000,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR08-99 Milwaukee Ddve Phase II 3,500,000 3,500,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR09-00 16th Street Sidewalk ['1' St. - 'F' St.] 250,000 75,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR10-00 16th Street Sidewalk ['F' St.-Stevens Sch] 230,000 55,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR10-99 10th Street Reconstruction ['N' - Milwaukee] 700,000 140,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR11-00 10th St. Sidewalk ['N' St. - 'M' St.] 375,000 200,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR12-00 10th St. Sidewalk I'M' St. - '1' St.] 375,000 200,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR13-00 N' Street Sidewalk [14th St. - 18th St.] 250,000 75,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR13-99 City-Wide Traffic Signal InterconnectJPre-emption 500,000 500,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR14-00 Airport Industrial Park Streets 2,000,000 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
TR42-99 Lauddsen Blvd Bddge Widening 2,820,000 564,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR18-99 Lincoln/Blvd Rechannelization and Signal 450,000 100,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR17-99 Truck Route at US101 Intersection 1,150,000 1,150,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR14-99 White's Creek Crossing 6,250,000 6,250,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR16-99 18th Street Reconstruction ['E' - Landfill] 3,300,000 3,300,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR21-99 Lauddsen Blvd Reconstruction [Trk Rt. -'L"J 1,800,000 1,800,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR32-99 9th Street Widening 50,000 50,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR69-99 Rhoads Road Area LID 900,000 0 0 0 0 0 0
TR70-99 Mt Angeles Road/Porter Street LID 2,000,000 0 0 0 0 0 0
TR71-99 10th/13th and "I"/"M" Street LID 1,200,000 0 0 0 0 0 0
TR80-99 Lauddsen Blvd/Washington Street Reconstruction 250,000 50,000 0 0 0 0 0
TR97-99 "C" Street and Fairmont LID 2,200,000 0 0 0 0 0 0
* Park Trail Project to be included in TIP. 17,646,000 2,418,000 38,522,000 6,592,000 4,510,000 42,533,500
04gov4 Page 2
2004- 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECTS
PRIORITY ORDER
PRIORITY D PROJECT TITLE PROJECTCOST COST CITY PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST 2004-2010 COST FINANCING REQU RED MANDATE I I
1 GG02.01 Laurel St. Pavers [Railroad Ave. - 1st St.1 365,000 52,500 15,00(3 350,000 0 0 0 0 01 365,000 N N
2 GG04~)3 Homeland Security Project 30,000 30,000 30,00(3 0 0 0 0 0 0 30,000 N N
3 GG05-03 blatching Funds for Community Projects 270,000 270,006 45,00(3 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 0 270,000 N N
4 GG03-00 ~owntown Parking 4,500,000 90,000 1,400,000 3,000,000 0 0 0 0 0 4,400,000 Y N
5 GG13-99 Downtown Convention Center 15,000,000 2,000,000 6,600,00(3 6,600,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 13,700,000 N N
6 GG03-03 Residential Infrastructure Development 750,000 750,00(3 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 0 750,000 N N
7 GG02~3 Valle)/Creek Restoration 120,000 30,00C 30,000 90,000 0 0 0 0 0 120,000 N N
8 GG01-03 Channel 21 Equipment 120,000 60,00¢ 120,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 120,000 N N
9 GG01-01 Laurel St. Stair Repair 250,000 250,000 0 0 25,000 225,000 0 0 0 250,000 N N
10 GG05-00 Marketing Del Guzzi Dr. Property 250,000 250,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N
11 GG01-02 Ediz Hook Rip Rap Repair 650,00(~ 60,000 0 0 0 650,000 0 0 0 650,000 Y Y
1 FR02-02 Fire Station Roof Repair 568,00¢ 50,000 50,000 I 50,00(3 N N
N
2 FR01-02 Replace Pumper 315,00¢ 315,000 70,000 31,000 30,000 184000 0 0 315,000 N
3 FR10-99 Replace Truck 4 800,00¢ 800,000 0 800,000 0 0 0 0 800,00(3 N N
4 FR01-04 Purchase Large Hose 30,00£ 30,000 0 30,000 0 0 0 0 30,000 N N
5 FR07-99 West Side Fire Station 1,375,00( 1,375,000 0 0 0 0 1,375,000 0 1,375,000 Y N
6 FR05-99 East Side Fire Station 1,875,00(: 1,875,000 0 6 0 0 1,875,000 0 1,875,000 Y N
POLICE PROJECTS
2 I PD02.04 iRadio Communications 230,0001 230,000 500,000 ~ ~ 0 0 0 380,000
500,000
~ 3 I PD03-04 INew 9-1-1 Center 3,700,0001 3,700,0o0 100,000 1,800,000 3,700,000
1 PK02-03 Edcksee Park Restroom Improvements 70,000 70,000 0 70,000 0 0 0 (3 70,000 N N
2 PK07-02 Shane Park Renovation 280,000 280,000 140,000 140,000 0 0 0 (~ 280,000 N N
3 PK06.02 Elks Playfield 70,000 70,000 0 70,000 0 0 0 (~ 0 70,000 N N
4 PK09-02 City Pier Dred(,]ing & Piling Replacement 200,000 200,000 110,000 90,000 0 0 0 0 200,000 N Y
5 PK08.02 Neighborhood Park Renovation 190,000 190,000 35,000 35,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,00(; 190,000 N N
6 PK03-03 Lincoln Park Master Plan 40,000 40,000 0 40,000 0 0 0 0 40,000 Y N
7 PK13.02 Skate Park 50,000 25,000 0 50,000 0 0 0 0 50,000 N N
8 PK01-03 International Waterfront Promenade 1,250,000 25,000 1,225,000 0 (~ 0 0 0 1,225,000 Y N
9 PK04-02 Lincoln Park Buildin~ls 150,000 150,000 0 0 150,000 0 0 0 150,000 N N
10 PK05.02 Ad Education Center at PAFAC 250,000 0 0 0 250,000 0 0 0 250,000 Y N
11 PK04-03 Recreation Facility Assessment 30,000 30,000 30,000 0 0 0 0 0 30,000 N N
12 PK02-02 William Shore Memodal Pool Renovation 4,500,000 4,500,000 0 4,500,000 0 0 0 0 4,500,000 N N
13 PK01-02 City Pier/Hollywood Beach Renovation 85,000 85,000 0 0 20,000 65,000 0 0 85,000 Y N
14 PK01~4 Front Street Corfidore Streetscape Improvement 50,000 50,000 25,00(3 25,000 0 0 0 0 0 50,000 N N
15 PK02.04 Olympic Discovery Trail - Hill Street to Dry Creek 120,000 120,000 20,000 100,000 120,000 N N
I TOTAL OF MANDATED GENERAL FUND PROJECTS 800,0001 775,0001 125,0001 175,0001 125,0001 125,0001 125'0001 125'0001 01 800'0001
TOTAL OF ALL GENERAL FUND PROJECTS 38,913,000] 18,432,500~ 10,050,000~ 16,721,000~ 3,045,000] 3,224,000~ 3,550,000~ 300,000~ 100,000! 36,990,000~
I
04-10PRIO Page i
2004 - 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECTS
PRIORITY ORDER
PRIORITY ID PROJECT TITLE PROJECTCOST COST CITY PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST 2004-2010 COST FINANCING REQU RED MANDATE
STREET PROJECTS & T.I.P.
1 TR48-99 Olympic Peninsula Intl Gateway 11,200,00£ 4,020,000 6,400,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,400,000 Y N
2 TR01-01 8th Street Bridge Replacement Design 1,900,00£ 380,000 1,900,000 0 0 0 (; 0 0 1,900,000 Y N
3 TR01-02 8th Street Bridge Construction 15,000,00(; 3,000,000 330,000 7,270,000 7,400,000 0 (~ 0 0 15,000,000 Y N
4 TR74-99 Sidewalk Program 425,00(; 425,000 25,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,00(; 50,000 0 275,000 N N
5 TR26-99 ADA Curb Ramps/Chirpers 150,00C 150,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,00(; 20,000 0 120,000 N Y
6 TR33-99 Peabody Street Reconstr. [Front - 8th] 600,00C 0 350,000 0 250,000 0 (; 0 0 600,000 Y N
7 TR01-04 2nd & Valley Pavement Restoration 290,00(; 290,000 0 0 40,000 250,000 (; 0 0 290,000 N N
8 TR01-03 Overlay Program 1,200,00(; 165,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 0 1,200,000 N N
9 TR20-99 Street Sicycle Facilities/Racks/Striping 140,00(; 140,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,00(; 20,000 0 120,000 N N
10 TR02-99 1st and Peabody Signal 110,00(; 0 0 0 10,000 110,000 (; 0 0 120,000 Y N
11 TR10-00 16th Street Sidewalk [~F' St.-Stevens Sch] 230,00(; 55,000 0 0 0 30,000 200,00(~ 0 0 230,000 Y N
12 TR09-00 16th Street Sidewalk ['1' St. - 'F' St.] 250,00(; 75,000 0 0 0 0 40,00(; 210,000 0 250,000 Y N
13 TR11-00 10th St. Sidewalk ['N' St. - 'M' St.] 375,00(; 200,000 0 0 0 40,000 335,00(; 0 0 375,000 Y N
14 TR12-00 10th St. Sidewalk ['M' St. - '1' St.] 375,00(; 200,000 0 0 0 0 40,00(; 335,000 0 375,000 Y N
15 TR12-99 Park Avenue Reconstruction [Peabody - Race] 1,000,00(; 200,000 0 100,000 900,000 0 0 0 0 1,000,000 Y N
16 TR07-00 Park Ave. Sidewalk [Race - Liberty] 400,00(; 200,000 0 50,000 350,000 0 (; 0 0 400,000 Y N
17 TR02-00 First Street Sidewalk (Ennis - Golf Course) 300,00(; 60,000 0 0 30,000 270,000 0 0 0 300,000 Y N
18 TR02-01 Ennis Street Slide Repair 210,00(; 210,000 0 0 0 210,000 0 0 0 210,000 Y N
19 TR21-99 Lauridsen Bird Reconstruction [Trk Rt. - 'L'] 1,800,00(; 1,800,000 0 0 180,000 1,620,000 0 0 0 1,800,000 Y N
20 TR42-99 Lauddsen Bird Bridge Widening 2,820,00(; 564,000 0 0 250,000 2,000,000 570,00(~ 0 0 2,820,000 Y N
21 TR18-99 Lincoln/Blvd Rechannelization and Signal 450,00(; 100,000 0 0 0 0 50,00(; 400,000 0 450,000 N N
22 TR17-99 Truck Route at US101 Intersection 1,150,00(; 1,150,000 0 0 0 0 300,00(; 850,000 0 1,150,000 Y N
23 TR04-99 Laurel Street/Ahlvers Road Reconstruction 1,200,00(; 200,000 0 0 200,000 1,000,000 (; 0 0 1,200,000 Y N
24 TR02-04 Old Mill Rd/Scrivner Rd Improvements 400,00(; 400,000 0 0 0 200,000 200,00(; 0 0 400,000 N N
25 TR14-00 Airport Industrial Park Streets 2,000,00(; 0 0 0 565,000 868,000 567,000 0 0 2,000,000 Y N
26 TR07-99 Milwaukee Ddve Phase I 2,000,00(; 2,000,000 0 0 0 200,000 1,800,000 0 0 2,000,000 N N
27 TR70-99 Mt Angeles Road/Porter Street LID 2,000,00(; 0 0 0 200,000 1,800,000 0 0 0 2,000,000 Y N
28 TR69-99 Rhoads Road Area LID 900,00~ 0 0 0 0 900,000 0 0 0 900,000 Y N
29 TR97-99 "C" Street and Fairmont LID 2,200,00(; 0 0 0 0 200,000 2,000,000 0 0 2,200,000 Y N
30 TR71-99 10th/13th and "I"/"M" Street LID 1,200,00£ 0 0 (3 100,000 1,100,000 0 0 0 1,200,000 Y N
31 TR16-99 18th Street Reconstruction ['E' - Landfill] 3,300,00£ 3,300,000 0 0 0 300,000 3,000,000 0 0 3,300,000 N N
32 TR10-99 10th Street Reconstruction ['N' - Milwaukee] 700,00£ 140,000 0 0 0 0 70,000 630,000 0 700,000 Y N
33 TR13-00 N' Street Sidewalk [14th St. - 18th St.] 250,00(; 75,000 0 0 0 0 40,000 210,000 0 250,000 Y N
34 TR32-99 9th Street Widening 50,00£ 50,000 0 0 0 50,000 0 0 0 50,000 N N
35 TR08-99 Milwaukee Drive Phase II 3,500,00£ 3,500,000 0 0 0 0 0 3,500,000 0 3,500,000 N N
36 TR13-99 City-Wide Traffic Signal InterconnectJPre-emptio 500,00(; 500,000 0 0 0 0 0 500,000 0 500,000 N N
37 TR05-99 Hill Street Intersection Reconstruction 300,00~ 200,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 300,000 300,000 Y N
38 TR80-99 Lauridsen Blvd/VVashington Street Reconstructio 250,00~ 50,000 0 0 0 0 0 40,000 210,000 250,000 N N
39 TR14-99 White's Creek Crossing 6,250,00(; 6,250,000 0 0 0 0 0 1,250,000 5,000,000 6,250,000 N N
TOTAL OF ALL STREET PROJECTS 30,049,000~ 9,045,000~ 7,810,000J 10,565,000~ 11,538,000~ 9,602,000J 8,315,000~ 5,510,000J 62,385,000~
Note: TIP Projects include all street projects and PK03-02 (Olympic Discovery Trail)
04-10PR P~
2004 - 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECTS
PRIORITY ORDER
PRIORITY ID PROJECT TITLE PROJECTCOST COST CITY PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST 2004-2010 COST FINANCING REQU RED MANDATE
LIGHT PROJECTS
1 CL06-99 Install Substation Circuit Switches 325,00C 325,000 253,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 253,000 N N
2 CL01-O2 Upgrade Substation Relays 405,00C 405,000 238,000 95,000 60,000 0 0 0 0 393,00(~ N N
3 CL03~)2 Acquisition of Airport PUD Electric Svc 100,00(~ 100,000 100,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 100,00C N N
4 CL03~01 Elwha Underground Rebuild 820,000 820,000 242,000 270.000 0 0 0 0 0 512,000 N N
5 CL02-02 Feeder Tie Porter to Golf Course Rd 230,000 230,000 30,000 200,000 0 0 0 0 0 230,000 N N
6 CL01-04 Feeder Tie Hwy 101, Cherry to Pine 60,000 60,000 0 10,000 50,000 0 0 0 0 60,000 N N
7 CL83-99 Ediz Hook OH - UG Conversion 680,000 680,000 0 250,000 0 0 250,000 0 0 500,000 N N
8 CL07-99 Airport Industrial Park 762,000 0 0 0 0 372,000 190,000 200,000 0 762,000 N N
9 CL65-99 UGA Electdc Customers 2,000,000 2,000,000 0 0 0 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 1,600,000 N N
10 CL18-99 Construct Transmission Line 153,000 153,000 0 0 0 0 20,000 120,000 0 140,000 N N
11 CL20-99 Construct Golf Course Rd Sub 556,000 556,000 0 0 0 0 74,000 415,000 0 489,000 N N
12 CL78-99 Light Operations Center 1,000,000 1,000,000 0 0 0 0 100,000 900,000 0 1,000,000 N N
TOTAL OF ALL LIGHT FUND PROJECTSI 7,091,000 6,329,000 6,039,000
SOLID WASTE
1 SW02-04 Install Gas Lines at Landfill 85,000 85,000 0 85,000 0 0 0 0 0 85,000 N N
2 SW01-04 ESC System Phase II 100,000 100,000 100,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 100,000 N N
3 SW31-99 Landfill Transfer Station 3,700,000 3,700,000 300,000 750,000 2,650,000 0 0 0 0 3,700,000 N Y
4 SW01-O3 Landfill Bluff Stabalizatioo 2,550,000 2,550,000 100,000 100,000 2,225,000 0 0 0 0 2,425,000 N Y
5 SW02-03 Final Landfill Closure 4,500,000 4,500,000 0 0 1,000,000 3,500,000 0 0 0 4,500,000 N Y
TOTAL OF ALL SOLID WASTE PROJECTSI 10,935,0001 10,935.0001 500,0001 935,0001 5,875,0001 3,500,000 10,010,000
WATER PROJECTS
1 w'r02-99 Concrete Cylinder Pipe Replacement 3,300,000 3,300,000 2,000,000 150,000 1,050,000 0 0 0 0 3,200,000 N N
2 WT12-99 Annual Replacements 1,395,000 1,395,000 310,000 30,000 320,000 40,000 360,000 0 0 1,060,000 N N
3 WT56-99 Fairmount Pump Station 335,000 335,000 335,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 335,000 N N
4 w'r02-01 Water Treatment Facility 10,000,000 0 0 0 0 400,000 600,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 10,000,000 N N
5 w-r30-99 Downtown Watermains/Sidewalks III 2,000,000 2,000,000 100,000 1,900,000 0 0 0 0 0 2,000,000 Y N
6 w-r32-99 Corrosion Control Facility 380,00(] 380,000 0 0 80,000 300,000 0 0 0 380,000 N N
7 WT64-99 McDou~al Subzone Fire pump 90,000 90,000 0 0 90,000 0 0 0 0 90.000 N N
8 WT46-99 Southeast Reservoir 1,800,000 1,020,000 0 0 290,000 1,500,000 0 0 0 1,790,00(] Y N
9 WT57-99 Elwha Pump Station Disinfection 175,000 175,000 0 0 0 175,000 0 0 0 175,00(] N N
10 W'F65-99 UGA Water Customers 500,000 500,000 0 0 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 500,000 N N
11 WT01-00 ~,irport Industrial Park Water Line 1,310,000 0 0 0 130,000 590,000 590,000 0 0 1,310,000 Y N
TOTAL OF ALL WATER PROJECTS 21,285,000 2,080,000 1,650,000 20,840,000
04-10PRIO Page 3
2004 - 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECTS
PRIORITY ORDER
PRIORITY ID ~ PROJECT TITLE PROJECT CITY PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT 2004-2010 FINANCING MANDATE
I
COST COST COST COST COST COST COST COST COST COST REQU RED
WASTEWATER PROJECTS
1 WW01-04 Baffles for CSO Sites 330,00(; 330,000 0 160,000 170,000 0 0 0 0 330,000 Y
2 WW25-99 Sewer Pump Stations 1 & 3 Improvements 715,00(; 715,000 715,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 715,000 N N
3 VVW05-04 Park Avenue Sewer Improvements 303,00(; 303,000 68,000 235,000 0 (; 0 0 0 303,000 N N
4 W~N27-99 Annual Replacements Lines 685,00(; 685,000 0 0 0 235,000 0 235,000 0 470,000 N N
5 VVW06~99 Oak Street Outfall Extension CSO Reduction 90,00(; 90,000 90,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 90,000 N N
6 WW26-99 I/I CSO Reduction 675,00¢ 675,000 115,000 120,000 125,000 (; 0 0 0 360,000 N Y
7 WW04-99 Laurel Street Outfall Extension CSO Reduction 30,00¢ 30,000 30,000 0 0 (; 0 0 0 30,000 N N
8 WW01-01 Annexation Interceptor Sewer Main 4,250,00(; 650,000 0 400,000 3,500,000 (; 0 0 0 3,900,000 Y N
9 WW03-04 New Force Main, Gravity Sewer from Francis 3,500,00(; 0 400,000 2,500,000 600,00(; 0 3,500,000 N Y
10 VVVV02-04 Replace Pump Station No. 4 7,500,00(; 0 0 0 0~ 1,000,000 6,500,000 0 7,500,000 N N
11 WVV04-04 Treatment Plant for CSO Flows 9,800,00£ 0 0 0 0 1,200,000 7,300,000 1,300,000 9,800,000 N Y
12 WVV03~0 Lindberg Rd. Sewer 1,000,00C 0 0 0 100,000 900,000 0 0 0 1,000,000 N N
13 WVV05-99 Golf Course Road Sewer Interceptor 1,000,00£ 1,000,000 0 0 140,000 860,000 0 0 0 1,000,000 N N
14 VVVV02-00 Airport Industrial Sewer 1,100,00£ 0 0 0 100,000 500,000 500,000 0 0 1,100,000 Y N
TOTAL OF MANDATED WASTEWATER PROJECTS 14,390,000~ 1,090,000 90,000 400,000 2,640,000 1,460,000 1,200,00(3 7,300,000 1,300,000 14,390,0001
I TOTAL OF ALL WASTEWATER PROJECTSI 30,978,000~ 4,478,000 1,018,000 1,315,000 6,635,000 3,095,000 2,700,00(3 14,035,000 1,300,000 30,098,000~
STORMWATER PROJECTS
1 DR54-99 Crown Park Storm Ove~ow 240,000! 240,000 240,000 0 0 0 (; (3 0 240,000 N Y
2 DR04-99 Lincoln Street Storm Drain (4th to 7th St.I 400,000 400,000 0 400,000 0 0 (; (3 0 400,000 N Y
3 DR02-99 City-Wide Catch Basin Modifications 525,000 525,000 70,000 75,000 80,000 85,000 90,00(; (3 0 400,000 N N
4 DR01~4 Stormwater Ouffalls to Streams & Marine 600,000 600,000 0 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,00(~ 50,00(3 50,000 300,000 N N
5 DR53-99 Stormwater Discharges Over Bluff 450,000 450,000 0 50,000 100,000 100,000 100,00(; 100,00(3 0 450,000 N N
6 DR65-99 10th And "N" Street Regional Storm Detention 300,000 300,000 0 50,000 250,000 0 (; (] 0 300,000 N N
7 DR14-99 Peabody Creek/Lincoln St Culvert Rehab 400,000 100,000 0 0 200,000 200,000 (; (3 0 400,000 Y N
8 DR01-01 Fimt St. Stormwater Separation 250,000 250,000 0 0 30,000 220,000 (; (3 0 250,000 N N
9 DR04~4 Stormwater at Canyon Edge & Ahlvers 500,00C 500,000 0 0 500,000 0 (; (3 0 500,000 N N
10 DR05-04 Stormwater at Rose & Thistle 500,000 500,000 0 0 0 500,000 (; (3 0 500,000 N N
11 DR03-04 Stormwater at Laurel & US101 500,000= 500,000 0 0 0 0 500,00(; (3 0 500,000 N N
12 DR06-04 Storrnwater at Campbell & Porter 500,000: 500,000 0 0 0 0 (; 500,00(3 0 500,000 N N
13 DR07-O4 Stormwater at "C" Street Extension 500,000 500,000 0 0 0 0 0 500,00(~ 0 500,000 N N
14 DR02~4 Upper Golf Course Rd. Area Stormwater 500,000 500,000 0 0 0 0 0 (~ 500,000 500,000 N N
15 DR03-99 Milwaukee Dr. Stormwater Improvements 1,200,000 1,200,000 0 (3 0 1,200,000 0: (3 0 1,200,000 N N
16 DR08-04 Lincoln Park/Big Boy Pond 300,000 300,000 0 (3 0 0 0 50,00(3 250,000 300,000 N N
TOTALOF..DATEOSTO..WATE. PROJ CTS 525,000 525,000 75,000 80,000 86,000 90,000 1,200,00.°0 800'000_0 400,0001
I TOTAL OF ALL STORMWATER PROJECTSI 7,665,000~ 7,365,000 625,000 1,210,000 2,355,000 740,000 7,240,000~
TOTAL MANDATED UTILITY PROJECTS 20,125,000 6,625,000 705,000 1,505,000 5,515,000 1,690,000 1,475,000 7,780,000 1,300,000 19,970,000
I TOTAL OF ALL UT L TY PROJECTS 77,954,000 38,302,000 5,436,000 5,780,000 15,890,000 12,827,000 6,124,000 21,370,000 75,027,000
9adsheets/04-10cfp.xls
04-10PR P~
2004- 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECTS
PROJECT ORDER
TOTAL ~ TOTAL 2004 2005 2006 2007 I 2008 2009 2010 PROJECT OUTSIDE OUTSIDE
PROJECTTITLE PROJECTI CITY PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT PROJECTI PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT 2004-20'10 FINANCING MANDATE
COST COST COST COST COST COST COST COST COST COST REQU RED
GENERAL PROJECTS
5 GG13-99 Downtown Convention Center 15,000,000 2,000,000 6,600,000 6,600,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 13,700,000 N N
4 GG03-00 Downtown Parking 4,500,000 90,000 1,400,00(; 3,000,000 0 0 0 0 0 4,400,000 Y N
10 GG05-00 Marketing Del Guzzi Dr. Property 250,000 250,000 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N
9 GG01q31 Laurel St. Stair Repair 250,000 250,000 0 0 25,000 225,000 0 0 0 250,000 N N
1 GG02-01 Laurel St. Pavers [Railroad Ave. - 1st St.] 365,000 52,500 15,000i 350,000 0 0 0 0 0 365,000 N N
11 GG01-02 Ediz Hook Rip Rap Repair 650,000 60,000 0! 0 0 650,000 0 0 0 650,000 Y Y
8 GG01~3 3hanne121 Equipment 120,000 60,000 120,0001 0 0 0 0 0 0 120,000 N N
7 GG02-03 Valley Creek Restoration 120,000 30,000 30,000 90,000 0 0 0 0 0 120,000 N N
6 GG03-03 Residential Infrastructure Development 750,000 750,000 125,0001 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 0 750,000 N N
2 GG04A~3 Homeland Secudty Proiect 30,000 30,000 30,0001 0 0 0 0 0 0 30,000 N N
3 GG05-03 Matching Funds for Community Projects 270,000 270,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 0 270,000 N N
FIRE PROJECTS
6 FR05-99 East Side Fire Station 1,875,000 1,875,000 0 0 0 0 1,875,000 0 0 1,875,000 Y N
5 FR07-99 West Side Fire Station 1,375,000 1,375,00(; 0 0 0 0 1,375,000 0 0 1,375,000 Y N
3 FR10-99 F~eplace Truck 4 800,000 800,00(; 0 800,000 0 0 0 0 0 800,000 N N
2 FR01-02 Replace Pumper 315,000 315,00(; 70,000 31,000 30,000 184,000 0 0 0 315,000 N N
1 FR02-02 Fire Station Roof Repair 568,000 50,00(; 50,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 50,000 N N
4 FR01-04 Purchase Large Hose 30,000 30,00(; 0 30,000 0 0 0 0 0 30,000 N N
POLICE PROJECTS
Police Station Addition/Remodel 380,0ooj 380,000 lO,OOOJ 370,0000 1,800,00i 01 0 i 380,000
F~adio Communications 230,000 J 230,000 500,000 0 0 500,000
New 9-1-1 Center 3,700,000J 3,700,000 100,000 1,800,000 0 0 3,700,000
PARKS PROJECTS
13 PK01-02 City Pier/Hollywood Beach Renovation 85,00(~ 85,000 0 0 20,000 65,000 0 0 0 85,000 Y N
12 PK02-02 William Shore Memorial Pool Renovation 4,500,000 4,500,000 0 4,500,000 0 0 0 0 0 4,500,000 N N
9 PK04-02 Lincoln Park Buildings 150,00(~ 150,000 0 0 150,000 0 0 0 0 150,000 N N
10 PK05-02 Ad Education Center at PAFAC 250,000 0 0 0 250,000 0 0 0 0 250,000 Y N
3 PK06-02 Elks F~a~eld 70,000 70,000 0 70,000 0 0 0 0 0 70,000 N N
2 PK07-02 Shane Park Renovation 280,00(; 280,000 280,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 280,000 N N
5 PK08-02 Neighborhood Park Renovation 190,00(; 190,000 35,000 35,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 0 190,000 N N
4 PK09-02 City Pier Dredging & Piling Replacement 200,000 200,000 110,000 90,000 0 0 0 0 0 200,000 N Y
7 PK13-02 Skate Park 50,00(; 25,000 0 50,000 0 0 0 0 0 50,000 N N
8 PK01-03 International Waterfront Promenade 1,250,000 250,000 25,000 1,225,000 0 0 0 0 0 1,250,000 Y N
1 PK02-03 Edckson Park Restroom Improvements 70,00(~ 70,000 0 70,000 0 0 0 0 0 70,000 N N
6 PK03-03 Lincoln Park Master Plan 40,00(; 40,000 0 0 40,000 0 0 0 0 40,000 Y N
11 PK04-03 Recreation Facility Assessment 30,00(; 30,000 30,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 30,000 N N
14 PK01-04 Front Street Corridore Streetscape Improvement 50,000 50,000 25,000 25,000 0 0 0 0 0 50,000 N N
15 PK02-04 Olympic Discovery Trail - Hill Street to Dry Creek 120,00(; 120,000 20,000 100,000 0 0 0 0 120,000 N N
I TOTAL OF MANDATED GENERAL FUND PROJECTS 850,0001 260,0001 110,0001 90,0001 3,085,00~1 650.0001 3,550,00001 300,00~1 100.0000137'015'0001850'000I
TOTAL OF ALL GENERAL FUND PROJECTS 3S,913,0001 18,657,5001 8,990,0001 17,766,0001 3,224,0001
04-10PROJ Page i
2004 - 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECTS
PROJECT ORDER
PRIORITY ID PROJECT TITLE PROJECTCOST COST CITY PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST 2004-2010 COST FINANCING REQU RED MANDATE
STREET PROJECTS & T.I.P.
10 TR02-99 1st and Peabody Signal 120,000 0 0 0 10,000 110,000 0 0 0 120,000 Y N
23 TR04-99 Laurel Street/Ahlvers Road Reconstruction 1,200,000 200,000 0 0 200,000 1,000,000 0 0 0 1,200,000 Y N
37 TR05-99 Hill Street Intersection Reconstruction 300,000 200,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 300,000 300,000 Y N
26 TR07-99 Milwaukee Ddve Phase I 2,000,000 2,000,000 0 0 0 200,000 1,800,000 0 0 2,000,000 N N
35 TR08-99 Milwaukee Drive Phase II 3,500,000 3,500,000 0 0 0 0 0 3,500,000 0 3,500,000 N N
32 TR10-99 il0th Street Reconstruction ['N'- Milwaukee] 700,000 140,000 0 0 0 0 70,000 630,000 0 700,000 Y N
15 TR12-99 Park Avenue Reconstruction [Peabody - Race] 1,000,000 200,000 (~ 100,000 900,000 0 0 0 0 1,000,000 Y N
36 TR13-99 3ity-W~de Traffic Signal Interconnect/Pre-emptio 500,000 500,000 0 0 0 0 0 500,000 0 500,000 N N
39 TR14-99 ~/hite's Creek Crossing 6,250,000 6,250,000 0 0 0 0 0 1,250,000 5,000,000 6,250,000 N N
31 TR16-99 18th Street Reconstruction ['E' - Landfill] 3,300,000 3,300,000 0 0 0 300,000 3,000,000 0 0 3,300,000 N N
22 TR17-99 Truck Route at US101 Intersection 1,150,000 1,150,000 0 0 0 0 300,000 850,000 0 1,150,000 Y N
21 TR18-99 Lincoln/Blvd Rechannelization and Signal 450,000 100,000 0 0 0 0 50,000 400,000 0 450,000 N N
9 TR20-99 Street Bicycle Facilities/Racks/Striping 140,000 140,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 0 120,000 N N
19 TR21-99 Lauddsen Blvd Reconstruction ~rrk Rt. - 'L'] 1,800,000 1,800,000 0 0 180,000 1,620,000 0 0 0 1,800,000 Y N
5 TR26-99 ADA Curb Ramps/Chirpers 150,000 150,000 20,00{; 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 0 120,000 N Y
34 TR32-99 9th Street Widening 50,000 50,000 0 0 0 50,000 0 0 0 50,000 N N
6 TR33-99 Peabody Street Reconstruction [Front - 8thI 350,000 0 350,000 0 0 0 0 0 350,000 Y N
20 TR42-99 Lauridsen BIvd Bridge Widening 2,820,000 564,000 0 0 250,000 2,000,000 570,000 0 0 2,820,000 Y N
1 TR48-99 Olympic Peninsula Intl Gateway/ 11,200,000 4,020,000 0 6,400,000 0 0 0 0 0 6,400,000 Y N
28 TR69-99 Rhoads Road Area LID 900,000 0 (~ 0 0 900,000 0 0 0 900,000 Y N
27 TR70-99 Mt Angeles Road/Porter Street LID 2,000,000 0 0 0 200,000 1,800,000 0 0 0 2,000,000 Y N
30 TR71-99 10th/13th and #I"/"M" Street LID 1,200,000 0 0 0 100,000 1,100,000 0 0 0 1,200,000 Y N
4 TR74-99 Sidewalk Program 425,000 425,000 25,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 325,000 N N
38 TR80-99 Lauridsen Blvd/Washington Street Reconstructio 250,000 50,000 0 0 0 0 0 40,000 210,000 250,000 N N
29 TR97-99 'C" Street and Fairmont LID 2,200,000 0 0 0 0 200,000 2,000,000 0 0 2,200,000 Y N
17 TR02~00 First Street Sidewalk (Ennis - Golf Course/ 300,000 60,000 0 0 30,000 270,000 0 0 0 300,000 Y N
16 TR07-00 Park Ave. Sidewalk [Race - Liberty/] 400,000 200,000 0 50,000 350,000 0 0 0 0 400,000 Y N
12 TR09-00 16th Street Sidewalk ['1' St. - 'F' St.] 250,000 75,000 0 0 0 40,000 210,000 0 0 250,000 Y N
11 TR10-00 16th Street Sidewalk ['F' St. - Stevens Sch] 230,000 55,000 0 0 0 30,000 200,000 0 0 230,000 Y N
13 TR11-00 10th St. Sidewalk ['N' St. - 'M' St.] 375,000 200,000 (~ 0 0 40,000 335,000 0 0 375,000 Y N
14 TR12-00 10th St. Sidewalk I'M' St. - '1' St.] 375,000 200,000 (~ 0 0 0 40,000 335,000 0 375,000 Y N
33 TR13-00 N' Street Sidewalk [14th St. - 18th St.] 250,000 75,000 0 0 0 0 40,000 210,000 0 250,000 Y N
25 TR14-00 &irpod Industrial Park Streets 2,000,000 0 8 0 565,000 868,000 567,000 0 0 2,000,000 Y N
2 TR01-01 ~th Street Bridge Replacement Design 1,900,000 380,000 1,900,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,900,000 Y N
18 TR02-01 Ennis Street Slide Repair 210,000 210,000 0 0 0 210,000 0 0 0 210,000 Y N
3 TR01-02 ~th Street Bridge Construction 15,000,000 0 330,000 7,270,000 7,400,000 0 0 0 0 15,000,000 Y N
8 TR01-03 3verla¥ Program 1,200,000 165,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 0 1,200,000 N N
7 TR01-04 2nd & Valle)/Pavement Restoration 290,000 290,000 C 0 40,000 250,000 0 0 0 290,000 N N
24 TR02-04 0Id Mill Rd/Scrivner Rd Improvements 400,000 400,000 ¢ 25,000 0 175,000 200,000 0 0 400,000 N N
I
TOTAL OF ALL STREET PROJECTS 67,135,000~ FALSE ~ 2,645,000~ 14,235,000~ 10,315,000~ 11,553,000~ 9,772,000~ 8,105,000~ 5,560,000~ 62,185,000~
2
Note: TIP Projects include all street projects and PK03-02 (Olympic Discovery Trail)
04-10PR
2004- 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECTS
PROJECT ORDER
.R,O.,. D PROJECTT,TLE PROJECTcos. II CosTC'~ PROJECTcosT ..OJECTcosT P.OJEC.cosT PROJECTcosTI P.OJECTcosT PROJECTcosT .ROJECTcosT 200.-20,0COST F,.A.O,.~REQURED .A.DATE II
LIGHT PROJECTS
1 CL06-99 Install Substation Circuit Switches 325,00(; 325.000 253,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 253.000 N N
8 CL07-99 Airport Industrial Park 762,00(; 0 0 0 0 372.000 190.000 200,000 0 762.000 N N
10 CL18-99 Construct Transmission Line 153.00(~ 153.000 0 0 0 0 20.000 120.000 0 140.000 N N
11 CL20-99 Construct Golf Course Rd Sub 556.00C 556.000 0 0 0 0 74.000 415.000 0 489.000 N N
9 CL65-99 UGA Electric Customers 2,000,00(; 2.000.000 0 0 0 400.000 400.000 400.000 400.000 1.600.00(3 N N
12 CL78-99 Light Operations Center 1.000,00(; 1.000.000 0 0 0 0 100.000 900.000 0 1,000.000 N N
7 CL83-99 Ediz Hook OH - UG Conversion 680,00(3 680,000 0 250.000 0 0 250.000 0 0 500,00(3 N N
4 CL03-01 Elwha Underground Rebuild 820,00C 820.000 242.000 270.000 0 0 0 0 0 512.000 N N
2 CL01~02 Up~]rade Substation Relays 405,00(; 405.000 238.000 95.000 60.000 0 0 0 0 393.00(3 N N
5 CL02-O2 Feeder Tie Porter to Golf Course Rd 230,00(~ 230,000 30,000 200,000 0 0 0 0 0 230,000 N N
3 CL03-02 Acquisition of Airport PUD Electric Svc 100,00C 100,000 100,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 100,000 N N
6 CL01-04 Feeder Tie Hwy 101, Cherry to Pine 60,00(; 60,000 0 10,000 50,000 0 0 0 0 60,000 N N
SOLID WASTE
3 SW31-99 Landfill Transfer Station 3.700,00(; 3.700.000 300.000 750.000 2.650.000 0 0 0 0 3.700.00(3 N Y
4 SW01~3 Landfill Bluff Stabalization 2.550,00C 2.550.000 100.000 100.000 2.225.000 0 0 0 0 2.425.00(3 N Y
5 SW02-03 Final Landfill Closure 4.500.00(; 4.500.000 0 0 1.000.000 3.500.000 0 0 0 4.500.00(3 N Y
2 SW01-04 ESC System Phase II 100,00(; 10.000 100,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 100.000 N N
1 SW02-04 Install Gas Lines at Landfill 85.00(; 85.000 0 85.000 0 0 0 0 0 85.000 N N
I
TOTAL OF ALL SOLID WASTE PROJECTS~ 10.935.000~ 10.845.000~ 500.000~ 935,000~ 5.875.000~ 3.500,000~0~ O~ 0~ 10.810,000
WATER PROJECTS
1 WT02-99 Concrete Cylinder Pipe Replacement 3.300.00£ 3.300.000 2,000.000 150.000 1.050.000 0 0 0 0 3.200.000 N N
2 w'r12-99 Annual Replacements 1.395.00£ 1.395.000 310.000 30.000 320.000 40.000 360.000 0 0 1,060,000 N N
5 WT30-99 Downtown Watermains/Sidewalks III 2.000.00£ 2.000.000 100.000 1.900.000 0 0 0 0 0 2.000.000 Y N
6 WT32-99 Corrosion Control Facility 380.00£ 380.000 0 0 80.000 300,000 0 0 0 380.000 N N
8 WT46~99 Southeast Reservoir 1.800.00C 1.020.000 0 0 290.000 1.500,000 0 0 0 1.790,000 Y N
3 WT56-99 Fairmount Pump Station 335.00¢ 335.000 335.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 335,000i N N
9 w'r57-99 Elwha Pump Station Disinfection 175.00C 175.000 0 0 0 175.000 0 0 0 175,000 N N
7 WT64-99 McDougal Subzone Fire pump 90.00(; 90.000 0 0 90.000 0 0 0 0 90.000 N N
10 WT65-99 UGA Water Customers 500.00¢ 500.000 0 0 100.000 100,000 100.000 100.000 100.000 500,000: N N
11 WT01-00 Airport Industrial Park Water Line 1.310.00(; 0 0 0 130.000 590.000 590.000 0 0 1.310.0001 Y N
4 w-r02-01 Water Treatment Facility 10.000.00(; 0 0 0 0 400.00(3 600.000 4.000.000 5.000.000 10,000.000 N N
TOTAL OF ALL WATER PROJECTS 21.285.000 2.080.000 20,840,000
04.10PROJ Page 3
2004 - 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECTS
PROJECT ORDER
t OlV PROJECT, TOTAL I TOTAL 2004 I 2005I 2006 2007I 2006I 200,I 2OlO PROJECT OUTSIOEIOUTSIOE,
PRIORITY D PROJECT TITLE PROJECTCOST COST CITY PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST PROJECT COST 2004-2010 COST FINANCING REQU RED MANDATE
WASTEWATER PROJECTS
7 W~N04-99 Laurel Street Ouffall Extension CSO Reduction 30,00(~ 30,000 30,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 30,000 N N
13 WW05-99 Golf Course Road Sewer Interceptor 1,000,00(~ 1,000,000 0 0 140,000 860,000 0 0 0 1,000,000 N N
5 WW06-99 Oak Street Outfall Extension CSO Reduction 90,00(; 90,000 90,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 90,000 N N
2 WW25-99 Sewer Pump Stations 1 & 3 Improvements 715,000 715,000 715,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 715,000 N N
6 WW26-99 I/I CSO Reduction 675,00(; 675,000 115,000 120,000 125,000 0 0 0 0 360,000 N Y
4 VVVV27-99 Annual Replacements Lines 685,00(; 685,000 0 0 0 235,000 0 235,000 0 470,000 N N
14 WVV02-00 Airport Industrial Sewer 1,100,00¢ 0 0 0 100,000 500,00(~ 500,000 0 0 1,100,000 Y N
12 WVV03-00 Lindberg Rd. Sewer 1,000,00(; 0 0 0 100,000 900,00(~ 0 0 0 1,000,000 N N
8 WW01-01 Annexation Interceptor Sewer Main 4,250,00(; 650,000 0 400,000 3,500,000 01 0 0 0 3,900,000 Y N
1 WW01-04 Baffles for CSO Sites 330,00(; 330,000 0 160,000 170,000 0 0 0 0 330,000 N Y
10 WW02-04 Replace Pump Station No. 4 7,500,00(; 0 0 0 0 1,000,00(~ 6,500,000 0 7,500,000 N N
9 VVW03-04 New Force Main, Gravity Sewer from Francis 3,500,00(; 0 400,000 2,500,000 600,000 0 3,500,000 N Y
11 WW04-04 Treatment Plant for CSO Flows 9,800,00(; 0 0 0 0 1,200,000 7,300,000 1,300,000 9,800,000 N Y
3 WW05-04 Park Avenue Sewer Improvements 303,00(; 303,000 68,000 235,000 0 0 0 0 0 303,000 N N
TOTAL OF MANDATED WASTEWATER PROJECTS 4,808,000~ 1,308,000 183,000 915,000 2,795,000 600,000 (~ 0 0 4,493,000~
I TOTAL OF ALL WASTEWATER PROJECTSI 30,978,000~ 4,478,000 1,018,000 1,315,000 6,635,000 3,095,000 2,700,00(; 14,035,000 1,300,000 30,098,000j
STORMWATER PROJECTS
3 DR02-99 City-Wide Catch Basin Modifications 525,000 525,000 70,000 75,000 80,000 85,000 90,000 0i 0 400,000 N N
15 DR03-99 Milwaukee Dr. Stormwater Improvements 1,200,000 1,200,000 0 0 0 1,200,000 0 0 0 1,200,000 N N
2 DR04-99 Lincoln Street Storm Drain (4th to 7th St.) 400,000 400,000 0 400,000 0 0 0 0 0 400,000 N Y
7 DR14-99 Peabody Creek/Lincoln St Culvert Rehab 400,000 100,000 0 0 200,000 200,000 0 0 0 400,000 Y N
5 DR53-99 Stormwater Discharges Over Bluff 450,000 450,000 0 50,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 0 450,000 N N
1 DR54-99 Crown Park Storm Overflow 240,000 240,000 240,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 240,000 N Y
6 DR65-99 10th And "N" Street Regional Storm Detention 300,000 300,000 0 50,000 250,000 0 0 0 0 300,000 N N
8 DR01-01 First St. Stormwater Separation 250,000 250,000 0 (~ 30,000 220,000 0 0 0 250,000 N N
4 DR01-04 Stormwater Outfalls to Streams & Marine 600,000 600,000 0 50,00(~ 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 300,000 N N
14 DR02-04 Upper Golf Course Rd. Area Storrnwater 500,000 500,000 0 (~ 0 0 0 0 500,000 500,000 N N
11 DR03-04 Stormwater at Laurel & US101 500,000 500,000 0 0! 0 0 500,000 0 0 500,000 N N
9 DR04-04 Stormwater at Canyon Edge & Ahlvers 500,000 500,000 0 0 500,000 0 0 0 0 500,000 N N
10 DR05-04 Stormwater at Rose & Thistle 500,000 500,000 0 0 0 500,000 0 0 0 500,000 N N
12 DR06-04 ~tormwater at Campbell & Porter 500,000 500,000 0 0 (~ 0 0 500,000 (~ 500,000 N N
13 DR07-04 Stormwater at "C" Street Extension 500,000 500,000 0 0 0 0 0 500,000 0 500,000 N N
16 DR08-04 Lincoln Park/Big Boy Pond 300,000 300,000 0 0 0 0 0 50,000 250,00(~ 300,000 N N
TOTAL OF ALL STORMWATER PROJECTSI 7,665,000~ 7,365,000 625,000 2,355,000 740,000 800,000 7,240,000~
TOTAL MANDATED UTILITY PROJECTS 16,958,000 12,868,000 2,275,000 8,690,000 4,770,000 20,000 20,000 0 16,488,000
TOTAL OF ALL UTILITY PROJECTS 77,954,000 38,212,000 5,780,000 15,890,000 12,827,000 6,124,000 21,370,000 75,027,000
9adsheets/04.10cfp.xls
04-lOPE P,
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
Lincoln Street Storm Drain (4th to 7th St.) Project #: DR04-99
Project Description Estimated Pro ~ect Costs
This project involves installing a storm drain in Lincoln Street Planning/Design: $0
from 4th Street to 7th Street that will allow the separation of Land/Right-of-Way: $0
stormwater from the sanitary sewer. Construction: $400,000
Other: $0
Total: $400,000
Estimated Project Funding
Reserves:
Donations:
3rants:
3onds:
Loans:
Utilities: $100,000
Seneral Fund Current:
Unknown: $300,000
Total: $400,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capital/Net Operating
Prior Years 2004 2005 2006 2007 I 2008 I 2009 I 2010 [Pr°jT°tal
,0 ,oi ,400,00o ,0 ,oII I,o ,o ,0 15400,000
~Yr Const Comp: ] First Year of Operating Cost: Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: No SEPA Required: Yes Other Permits: Yes
City Priority: Legal Mandate: Yes Concurrency: No Contract: Yes
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Stormwater Cost Center:
Contact: Gary Kenworthy Div. Priority: 2
Justification:
Lincoln Street does not have a separated storm drain and sanitary sewer system between 4th and 8th
Streets and the system above 8th Street is undersized for the flows. Construction of this project will
assist development and aid in the reduction of combined sewer overflows at 2nd and Lincoln. New
development will be required to extend the existing storm system from 4th to 7th Streets. Stormwater
utility may be partially reimbursed through D.R.A.
Impact if not executed:
IContinued combined sewer overflows and development restrictions. This project is also a requirement
of our NPDES permit.
Date RevisedI 6/8/04
Remarks
Design Complete
Lincoln Street Storm Drain (4th to 7th St.) Project #: DR04-99
Funding Sources I
Unknown IStormwater Rates $300,000
Utilities I Stormwater rates $100,000
Notes: $400,000
Picture / Area Map
FOURTH ST.
FIFTH ST.
SIXTH ST.
SEVENTH ST.
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm. Dev.Director: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
Peabody Creek/Lincoln St Culvert Rehab Project #: DR14-99
Project Description Estimated Project Costs
This joint project with WSDOT involves repairing and Planning/Design: $50.000
rehabilitating the existing culvert under Lincoln Street from Land/Right-of-Way: $0
Second Street to Front Street. Construction: $350,000
Other: $0
Total: $400,000
Estimated Project Funding
Reserves:
Donations:
3rants: $300,000
3grids:
Loans:
Utilities: $100,000
3eneral Fund Current:
Unknown: $0
Total: $400,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capital/Net Operating
PriorYears I 2004 2005[2006 20071200812009 2010 [Proj Total
$0 $0 $0 $200,000 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 I $400,000
Yr Const Comp: I First Year of Operating Cost: Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: No SEPA Required: Yes Other Permits: Yes
City Priority: Legal Mandate: No Concurrency: No Contract: Yes
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Stormwater Cost Center:
Contact: Gary Kenworthy Div. Priority: 7
Justification:
This project would repair the/'ailing condition of the large culvert under Lincoln Street which carries
Peabody Creek. The bottom of the pipe in many portions of its length have failed. The bricks that lined
the bottom of the pipe have been removed by the flow of the stream. Cracks are beginning to show up
on the walls of the pipe indicating that the pipe is losing its strength. WSDOT is responsible for the
section, in the right-of-way, between Front and First Streets, including the intersections.
Impact if not executed:
In the long term failure to fund this project could result in the failure of the culvert and the loss of
Lincoln Street as a traveled roadway with a high potential for property damage.
Remarks Date Revised I 6/8/04
Letter sent to WSDOT regarding need for repair.
Peabody Creek/Lincoln St Culvert Rehab Project #: DR14-99
Funding Sources '1
Grant IWSDOT *300,000
/Utilities IStormwater - Rates $100,000
Notes: $400,000
Picture / Area Map
RAILR<1AD A'TE,
FROh T ST,
J 1ST ~T, I 1ST ~;T,
~' 2ND ST,
3RD _~T, ~ ca
W
c~ 4TH _~T. tn ~ m m
~ 5TH C;T.
>
¢TH ~T. ~
J
~ o 7TH gq
J Z
m J 8TH ST,
ST,
I
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm. Dev. Director: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
Crown Park Storm Overflow Project #: DR54-99
Project Description Estimated Project Costs
This project involves installation of catch basins and piping in Planning/Design:
the Crown Park area to capture and convey storm water safely Land/Right-of-Way:
away from the bluff area. Construction:
Other:
Total:
Reserves:
Donations:
Grants:
Bonds:
Loans:
Utilities: $240,000
General Fund Current:
Unknown: $0
Total: $240,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capital/Net Operating
$0 $240,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 I $240,000
Yr Const Comp: [ ] First Year of Operating Cost: 0 Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: No SEPA Required: Yes Other Permits: Yes
City Priority: Legal Mandate: Yes Concurrency: No Contract: Yes
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Stormwater Cost Center:
Contact: Gary Kenworthy Div. Priority: 1
Justification:
Eliminate erosion of bluff face due to uncontrolled discharge during storm events. Will help to reduce
amount of storm water overflow problems to the west. Erosion debris deposits create a hazard to the
industrial waterline.
Impact if not executed:
IContinued erosion, potential hazard to the industrial watermain, and damage to property in the area.
Date Revised I 3/26/04
Remarks
ITo be constrcted with WW25-99
Crown Park Storm Overflow Project #: DR54-99
Funding Sources
Utilities [Stormwater rates ] $240,000
Notes:I [ $240,000
Picture Area Map
~, ~ F FTH ST,
~ I I I I I I I I I
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm. Dcv.Director: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
Landfill Bluff Stabalization Project #: SW01-03
Project Description Estimated Project Costs
This solid waste project involves the design and construction of Planning/Design: $200,000
a structure to stabalize the bluff area of the landfill to prevent Land/Right-of-Way: $0
further breakout of the old landfill material. Construction: $2,350,000
Other: $0
Total: $2,550,000
Estimated Project Funding
{eserves:
Donations:
Grants:
Bonds:
Loans:
Utilities: $2,550,000
General Fund Current:
Unknown: $0
]'otah $2,550,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capital~et Operating
PriorYears I 2004 I 2005 2006 I 2007 200, I 2009 I 2010 I"r°J*°ta'
$125,000 I $100,000 [$100,000 52,225,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 1$2,550,000'
Yr Const Comp: I 0 I First Year of Operating Cost: 0 Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: No SEPA Required: Yes Other Permits: Yes
City Priority: Legal Mandate: Yes Concurrency: No Contract: Yes
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Solid Waste Cost Center: 0
Contact: Glenn A. Cutler Div. Priority: 4
Justification:
Breakout of material is being experienced from old landfill. Erosion of bank above beach area. Bluff
stabalization is required as part of our landfill permit.
Impact if not executed:
IPossible landfill permit denial.
Date Revised I 6/8/04
Remarks
Landfill Bluff Stabalization Project #: SW01-03
Funding Sources I
Utilities ISolid Waste - Rates I $2,550,000
No~es: I $2,550,000
Picture Area Map
~ BLUFF ILIZATION
? '----~
#
#
LANDFILL
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm.Dev.Director: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
ESC System Phase II Project #: SW01-04
Project Description Estimated Project Costs
This Solid Waste project involves the completion of Phase II Planning/Design: $0
ESC System at the Compost Facility. Three more bays will be Land/Right-of-Way: $0
modified to include aeration in the composting process. Construction: $100,000
Other: $0
Total: $100,000
Estimated Project Funding
Reserves:
Donations:
Grants:
Bonds:
Loans:
Utilities: $100,000
3eneral Fund Current:
Unknown: $0
Total: $100,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capital/Net Operating
PriorYearsl Z004 ~00~l~00~l~0071~00'l~00~ 20]0 IPr°jT°tal,
$0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 [ $100,000
Yr Const Comp: I 0 First Year of Operating Cost: 0 Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: No SEPA Required: No Other Permits: No
City Priority: Legal Mandate: No Concurrency: No Contract: No
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Solid Waste Cost Center: 0
Contact: Tom McCabe Div. Priority: 2
Justification:
To follow the Operations Plan developed in 2003, and increase the capabilities and capacity for
handling more Class A compost. The Class A compost is needed for final cover (12,000 cyd) in 2006.
Impact if not executed:
Remarks Date Revised [ 6/8/04
ESC System Phase II Project #: SW01-04
Funding Sources I
Utilities l Solid Waste Rates I $100,000
Notes: ' [ $100,000
I
Picture / Area Map
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm. Dev. Director: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
Install Gas Lines at Landfill Project #: SW02-04
Project Description Estimated Project Costs
This Solid Waste project involves putting new gas lines on Plannin§/Desi§n: $0
:urrent cell at the Port Angeles Landfill. Land/Right-of-Way: $0
Construction: $85,000
Other: $0
Total: $85,000
Estimated Project Funding
Reserves:
Donations:
Grants:
Bonds:
Loans:
Utilities: $85,000
3eneral Fund Current:
Unknown: $0
Total: $85,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capital/Net Operating
PriorYears [ 2004 ~00~ I ~00~ I ~00, I =00~ I ~00~ I ~0'0 "ro'*o"
$0 $0 $85,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $85,000
Yr Const Comp: I 0 I First Year of Operating Cost: 0 Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: No SEPA Required: No Other Permits: No
City Priority: LegalMandate: No Concurrency: No Contract: No
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Solid Waste Cost Center: 0
Contact: Tom McCabe Div. Priority: 1
Justification:
To keep in compliance with Operations Plan & WAC-351 requirements.
Impact if not executed:
IShut Down Port Angeles Landfill.
Remarks Date Revised I 6/8/04
Install Gas Lines at Landfill Project #: SW02-04
Funding Sources
Utilities ISolid Waste Rates $85,000
I
Notes: $85,000
Picture Area Map
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm. Dev. Dir¢¢tor: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
Concrete Cylinder Pipe Replacement Project #: WT02-99
Project Description Estimated Project Costs
Project involves the replacement, or relining with smaller Planning/Desion: $300,000
diameter pipe, or approximately 26,000 feet of concrete Land/Ri0ht-of-Way: $0
cylinder pipe, Construction: $3,000,000
Other: $0
Total: $3,300,000
Estimated Proje'ct Funding
Reserves:
Donations:
3rants:
Bonds:
Loans:
Utilities: $3,300,000
3eneral Fund Current:
Unknown: $0
Total: i $3,300,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capitai~et Operating
PriorYears I 2004 2005 ] 2006 I 2007 I 2008 ] 2009 I 2010 I.r°jT°ta,
$100,000 $2,000,000 $150,000 $1,050,0001 $0 $0 $0 $0 153,3oo,ooo
Yr Const Comp:I I First Year of Operating Cost: Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: Yes SEPA Required: Yes Other Permits: Yes
City Priority: Legal Mandate: No Concurrency: No Contract: Yes
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Water Cost Center:
Contact: S. Sperr Div. Priority: 1
Justification:
Thc majority o£the main transmission lines that the city had £or water from the Morse Creek System
were constructed from concrete cylinder pipe. These pipelines are now used to tie many of our
reservoirs to the distribution system and over the last few years we have experienced a number of
£ailures to the pipelines structural integrity resulting in major costs to the utility for repairs.
Impact if not executed:
Very significant risk of costly repairs to the pipelines and loss of service to our customers. There will
continue to be a number of failures in the system.
Remarks Date Revised I 7/8/04
This project has been identified in the Water Comprehensive Plan as D-1. Combining Phase 1 &
Phase 2 for 1 st construction project.
Concrete Cylinder Pipe Replacement Project #: WT02-99
Funding Sources
Notes:Utilities IWater Fund - RatesI$3,300,00053'300'000
Picture Area Map
'-.
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm. Dev.Director: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
Southeast Reservoir Project #: WT46-99
Project Description Estimated Project Costs
This project involves constructing a new reservoir for the high Planning/Design:
system which also serves the majority of the eastern Urban Land/Right-of-Way:
Growth Area (UGA). This project will also involve the Construction:
Other:
engineering and construction of a pipeline to tie the new
Torah
reservoir into the high pressure zone. Estimated Project Funding
Reserves:
Donations: $780,000
Grants:
3onds:
Loans:
Utilities: $1,020,000
Seneral Fund Current:
Unknown: $0
Total: $1,800,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capital~et Operating
Prior Years ] 2004 I 2005 [ 2006 2007 2008 2009 [ 2010 IProiXota'
$10,000 $0 $0 $290,000 $1,500,000 $0 $0 $0 ~;1,800,000
Yr Const Comp: I I First Year of Operating Cost: Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: No SEPA Required: Yes Other Permits: Yes
City Priority: Legal Mandate: No Concurrency: Yes Contract: Yes
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Water Cost Center:
Contact: S. Sperr Div. Priority: 8
Justification:
The new reservoir is needed to provide the necessary water for daily needs as well as the fire flow
requirements for the high system and the development occuring in the eastern UGA.
Impact if not executed:
Restricting development in the upper system and eastern UGA and could delay annexation.
Date Revised I 6/8/04
Remarks
This project has been identified in the Water Comprehensive Plan as S-2.
Southeast Reservoir Project #: WT46-99
Funding Sources
Donation ]PUD contribution (may be through additional rate charge) $780,000
Utilities IWater Fund - Rates and Bonds $1,020,000
Notes: i $1,800,000
'
Picture / Area Map
PAUL/N£
UNDSER~ RD. j ~
IdELODY
IN.
'--,... HLICHES --_.D~I
A~^DDOOI,( RD.
I ,.,
g-6 - - ~
APPROXIMATE ~
LOCATION
s-2--__~ 1~
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm. Dcv. Director: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
Fairmount Pump Station Project #: WT56-99
Project Description Estimated Project Costs
The project involves installing a new pumpstation (Fairmount) Planning/Design: $20,000
of
fire
flow
demands
Land/Right-of-Way:
$0
at the end of "C" Street capable meeting
Construction: $315,000
within the Fairmont subzone, and addressing low pressure
Other:
$o
issues in the Doyle Road area south of SRI 01. Fairmount
will
Total: $335,000
replace the Spuce Street Station. Estimated Project Funding
Reserves:
Donations:
Grants:
Bonds:
Loans:
Utilities: $335,000
3eneral Fund Current:
Unknown: $0
Total: $335,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capital~et Operating
$0 I $335,000 I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $335,000
Yr Const Comp:I I First Year of Operating Cost: Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: No SEPA Required: No Other Permits: No
City Priority: Legal Mandate: No Concurrency: No Contract: No
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Water Cost Center:
Contact: S. Sperr Div. Priority: 3
Justification:
The existing pumps at the Spruce Street station cannot meet the City's goal of providing a flow of
1,000 GPM for residential areas, and peak demand results in pressures below 20 psi in the Doyle Road
area, which must be corrected per DOH requirements.
Impact if not executed:
ILack of reliable domestic and fire flows; lower water pressure during peak demand periods..
Date Revised [ 6/8/04
Remarks
lThis project has been identified in the Water Comprehensive Plan as P-3.
Fairmount Pump Station Project #: WT56-99
Funding Sources I
Utilities ]Water Fund - Rates I$335,000
No es: I $335,000
i
I
Picture / Area Map
............................... ....J. L [~.....~..~.~......d/
~'~ I ] ~ J / ] ......... ~ .......
.... T ............. ~....-... ~ ~_0~ ¢~ ,~;~
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm. Dev.Director: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
Laurel Street Outfall Extension Project #: WW04-99
Project Description Estimated Pro ;ect Costs
This project involves extending the Laurel Street combined Planning/Design: $5,000
sewer overflow outfall into deeper water farther from the Land/Right-of-Way: $0
shoreline. Tideflex tidegates will be added to eliminate salt Construction: $25,000
Other:
$0
water intrusion during high tides. Baffles will be added to
Total: $30,000
catch
floatables.
Estimated Project Funding
Reserves:
Donations:
Grants:
Bonds:
Loans:
Utilities: $30,000
General Fund Current:
Unknown: $0
Totah $30,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capital/Net Operating
$0 I $30,0001 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $30,000
Yr Const Comp: I I First Year of Operating Cost: Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: No SEPA Required: Yes Other Permits: Yes
City Priority: Legal Mandate: No Concurrency: No Contract: Yes
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Waste Water Cost Center:
Contact: Jeff Young Div. Priority: 7
Justification:
The existing outfall is located close to the shoreline. When a Combined Sewer Outfall (CSO) occurs it
is visible from the shore. In addition, the outfall is in need of repair. This repair would be completed at
the same time as the extension.
Impact if not executed:
Continued use of the existing facility.
Remarks Date Revised [ 6/8/04
Other possible permits are hydraulic and shoreline.
Laurel Street Outfall Extension Project #: V~VV04-99
Funding Sources
Jtilities IWastewater Fund - Rates I *30,000
~otes:! [ $30,000
The design will begin in year 2003 ($30,000) and construction will begin in 2004 ($150,000).
Picture / Area Map
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm. Dev. Director: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
Oak Street Outfall Extension Project #: WW06-99
Project Description Estimated Project Costs
Yhis project involves adding Tideflex tidegates to eliminate salt Planning/Design: $5,000
water intrusion during high tides. Baffles will be added to Land/Right-of-Way: $0
catch floatables. Construction: $85,000
Other: $0
Total: $90,000
Estimated Project Funding
Reserves:
Donations:
3rants:
~onds:
Loans:
Utilities: $90,000
General Fund Current:
Unknown: $0
Fetal: $90,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capital~et Operating
.riorYears I 2004 I 2005 I 2006 2007 =oo i i =o o I.ro,-,..
$0 $90,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 I $90,000
Yr Const Comp: [ 0 I First Year of Operating Cost: 0 Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: No SEPA Required: Yes Other Permits: Yes
City Priority: Legal Mandate: No Concurrency: Yes Contract: Yes
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Waste Water Cost Center:
Contact: JeffYoung Div. Priority: 5
Justification:
The existing tidegate does not work, allowing salt water to enter sewer system at high tides.
Impact if not executed:
Continued us of the existing facility.
Date Revised [ 6/8/04
Remarks
Other possible permits are hydraulic and shoreline.
Oak Street Outfall Extension Project #: WW06-99
Funding Sources
Utilities IWastewater Fund - Rates $90,000
Notes: $90,000
Picture / Area Map
FROIX T ST.
z~' I 1STST.
5TH {;T, m
0
()
Z
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm. Dev.Director: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
Sewer Pump Stations 1 & 3 Improvements Project #: WW25-99
Project Description Estimated Project Costs
This project involves eliminating sewer pump station gl with Planning/Design: $0
:he construction of a gravity main to pump station #3 and will Land/Ri§bt-of-Way: $0
~pgrade pump station #3 to add additional capacity. Construction: $715,000
Other: $0
Total: $715,000
Estimated Proje'ct Funding
Reserves:
Donations:
Grants:
Bonds:
Loans:
Utilities: $715,000
General Fund Current:
Unknown: $0
]-otal: $715,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capital~et Operating
Prior Years l 2004 I 2005 [ 2006 I 2007 2008 [ 2009 2010 [ProjTotal
$0 $715,000 I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 I $715,000
Yr Const Comp:I I First Year of Operating Cost: Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: No SEPA Required: Yes Other Permits: Yes
City Priority: Legal Mandate: No Concurrency: Yes Contract: Yes
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Waste Water Cost Center:
Contact: S. Sperr Div. Priority: 2
Justification:
Sewer pump station gl is nearing its capacity and needs to be enlarged. Pump station gl is also
located in a residential front yard, has caused odor problems, and flooding damage. When pump
~tation gl is eliminated, pump station will need to be upgraded to handle the additional capacity.
Impact if not executed:
IEventual restriction of growth in the area served by these stations. Odor and flooding problems will
continue to occur.
Date Revised
I 6/8/04
Remarks
Sewer Pump Stations 1 & 3 Improvements Project #: WW25-99
Funding Sources I
Utilities IWastewater Fund - Rates I $715,000
Notes: ' I $715,000
I
Picture Area Map
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm. Dev.Director: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
Annual Replacements Lines Project #: W"VV27-99
Project Description Estimated Project Costs
This project involves bi-annual replacement of aging sewer Planning/Design: $0
lines. Land/Right-of-Way: $0
Construction: $685,000
Other: $0
Total: $685,000
Estimated Proje'ct Funding
Reserves:
Donations:
Grants:
=~onds:
Loans:
Utilities: $685,000
General Fund Current:
Unknown: $0
Total: $685,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capital/Net Operating
t'rior Years I :zoo4 =oo~ I ~oo~ I ~007 [ =oo~ I ~oo~ I ~o~o p°'~°'"
$215,000 $0 $0 $0 $235,000 $0 $235,000 $015°85,°°°
Yr Const Comp: I First Year of Operating Cost: 0 Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: No SEPA Required: Yes Other Permits: Yes
City Priority: Legal Mandate: No Concurrency: No Contract: Yes
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Waste Water Cost Center:
Contact: S. Sperr Div. Priority: 4
Justification:
Many sewer lines are at an age where more frequent failures can be anticipated. This program will
identify and replace those lines on a non-emergency basis.
Impact if not executed:
IIf the sewer lines are not replaced, there will continue costly repairs, plugged lines, and storm water
being collected in the sanitary sewer lines.
Remarks Date Revised I 6/8/04
Note - $235K originally budgeted in 2004-2005 for the project re-allocated to fully fund projects
WW25-99 and WW05-04.
Annual Replacements Lines Project #: WV¢27-99
Funding Sources I
Utilities IWastewater Fund - Rates I $685,000
N°tes:~ I $685,000
Picture / Area Map
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm.Dev. Director: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
Replace Pump Station No. 4 Project #: WW02-04
Project Description Estimated Pro ~ect Costs
This project will replace Pump Station No. 4, which was Planning/Design: $1,000,000
originally built in 1967. Land/Right-of-Way: $0
Construction: $6,500,000
Other: $0
Total: $7,500,000
Estimated Project Fun ding
Reserves:
Donations:
Grants:
Bonds:
Loans:
Utilities: $7,500,000
General Fund Current:
Unknown: $0
Total: $7,500,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capital~et Operating
Pri°rYears I z004 i 2oo5 I 2oo6 I2oo7 2008 ] 2009 I 2010 IPr°j TOtal
$0 $0 $0 S0 S0 $1,000,000156,500,000[ *0
157,500,000
Yr Const Comp: [ 0 First Year of Operating Cost: 0 Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: No SEPA Required: No Other Permits: Yes
City Priority: Legal Mandate: No Concurrency: No Contract: Yes
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Waste Water Cost Center: 0
Contact: S. Sperr Div. Priority: 10
Justification:
Existing pump station undersized to meet wet weather flows, and is reaching the end of it's life.
Impact if not executed:
NPDES permit violation likely
Remarks Date Revised I 6/8/04
Replace Pump Station No. 4 Project #: WW02-04
Funding Sources
Utilities IWastewater Fund - Rates I 5;7,500,000
Notes:! I $7,500,000
Picture / Area Map
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm. Dev.Director: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
New Force Main, Gravity Sewer from Francis Project #: WW03-04
Project Description Estimated Pro ~ect Costs
This project will replace existing force main from Pump Planning/Design: $400,000
Station No. 4 to WWTP with 2 new force mains. It will also Land/Right-of-Way: $0
construct a new gravity sewer main from the north end of Construction: $3,100,ooo
Francis Street to the WWTP. Other: $0
Total: $3,500,000
Estimated Proje'ct Funding
Reserves:
Donations:
Grants:
Bonds:
Loans:
Utilities: $3,500,000
General Fund Current:
Unknown: $0
Total: $3,500,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capital/Net Operating
Prior Years 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 I 2009 I 2010 IProllotal
$o $o i $4oo,ooo ,2,500,000 ,600,000 $0[ [$0 $0 1$3,500,000
Yr Const Comp: 0 I First Year of Operating Cost: 0 Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: Yes SEPA Required: Yes Other Permits: Yes
City Priority: Legal Mandate: Yes Concurrency: No Contract: Yes
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Waste Water Cost Center: 0
Contact: S. Sperr Div. Priority: 9
Justification:
Existing force main is old and located in the tidal zone. Wastewater from Francis Street enters the
force main and contributes to combined sewer overflows.
Impact if not executed:
Eventual force main failure resulting in large sewer spill into the harbor. Likely NPDES permit
violation.
Remarks Date Revised I 6/8/04
New Force Main, Gravity Sewer from Francis Project #: WW03-04
Funding Sources
Utilities IWastewater Fund - Rates I $3,500,000
N°tes: i I $3,500,000
Picture / Area Map
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm.Dev. Director: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
Treatment Plant for CSO Flows Project #: WW04-04
Project Description Estimated Project Costs
This project will construct a high-rate treatment unit next to the Planning/Design: $1,200,000
Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) to treat wet weather Land/Right-of-Way: $0
Construction:
$8,600,000
flows in excess of the WWTP's capacity.
Other: $0
Total: $9,800,000
Estimated Project Funding
Reserves:
Donations:
Srants:
Bonds:
Loans:
Utilities: $9,800,000
General Fund Current:
Unknown: $0
Total: $9,800,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capital/Net Operating
PriorYears I 2004 [ 2005 I 2006 2007 [ 200S I 2009 I 20a0 "r°J TM
$0 $0 so so $0 $ h200,000l$7,300,0001 $h300,000 $9,800,000
Yr Const Comp: I 0 I First Year of Operating Cost: 0 Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: No SEPA Required: No Other Permits: Yes
City Priority: Legal Mandate: Yes Concurrency: No Contract: Yes
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Wastewater Cost Center: 0
Contact: S. Sperr Div. Priority: 11
Justification:
NPDES permit requires reducing CSO's to one event per CSO site year by year 2015. To do this, City
must convey wet weather flows to WWTP and treat them before discharge into the harbor.
Impact if not executed:
NPDES permit violation.
Remarks Date Revised I 6/8/04
Treatment Plant for CSO Flows Project #: WW04-04
Funding Sources
Notes:Utilities IWastewater Fund - Rates I $9,800,00059'800'000
Picture / Area Map
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm.Dev.Director: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT
Park Avenue Sewer Improvements Project #: WW05-04
Project Description Estimated Project Costs
This project will replace sewer main along Park Avenue Planning/Design: $68,000
between Race Street and Porter Street. Land/Right-of-Way: $0
Construction: $235,000
Other: $0
Total: $303,000
Estimated Project Funding
Reserves:
Donations:
Grants:
Bonds:
Loans:
Utilities: $303,000
General Fund Current:
Unknown: $0
Total: $303,000
Yearly Expense Summary - Capital/Net Operating
PriorYears I 2004 [ 2005 2006 2007 2008 I 2009 [ 2010 ]ProjT°tal
$0 $68,000 $235,000 ; $o I $o $o $o so I $303,000
Yr Const Comp: [ 0 I First Year of Operating Cost: 0 Operating Cost Amount: $0
Easements Reqd: No Right of Way: No SEPA Required: No Other Permits: Yes
City Priority: Legal Mandate: No Concurrency: No Contract: Yes
Department: Public Works & Utilities Division: Waste Water Cost Center: 0
Contact: S. Sperr Div. Priority: 3
Justification:
The 8-inch sewer main along Park Avenue is inadequate to handle the high flows during storm events
due to excessive inflow/infiltration.
Impact if not executed:
IContinued backups into residences during rain events. Also continue limits on development in the area
Date Revised I 6/8/04
Remarks
May be combined with street and drainage improvements in same area.
Park Avenue Sewer Improvements Project #: WW05-04
Funding Sources I
Utilities [Waste water rates $303,000
Notes: $303,000
Picture ! Area Map
REVIEW:
Department Head: Date:
Comm.Dev.Director: Date:
Finance Director: Date:
City Engineer: Date:
City Manager: Date:
pORTANGELES
WASHINGTON, U.S.A.
CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
DATE: JtrNE 8, 2004
TO: CITY COUNCIL ~ ~/~
FROM: MARC CONNELL~'DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
GLENN CUTLER, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORK~ c...
SUBJECT: PROPOSED 2004 PROJECT FOR "MATCHING FUNDS FOR COMMUNITY PROJECTS"
ELEMENT OF THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
Summalw: Created in 2003, CFP Project number GG05-03, contains annual funding to support
key community improvement projects. $40,000 was allocated in 2004 and as yet no project has
been identified. Staff recommends that the first community support venture to be funded via this
project be the installation of event (power) boxes at City Pier to support community wide special
events.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that this project be utilized to assist the funding and
installation of event boxes at City Pier to serve community special events including but not
limited to Arts in Action, Fourth of July Celebration, Strait Thunder, North Olympic Marathon,
and Concerts on the Pier. The estimated cost for this project is $11,500.
Background / Analysis:
The subject project involves the installation of new power convenient outlets to serve events at
City Pier. In the past year, three new special events organized and now utilize City Pier as their
main event venue. These events include Strait Thunder, Crab Pest, and the North Olympic
Marathon. In addition, Arts In Action, a traditional mainstay event formerly located on Laurel
Street is moving to the Pier as well. The expansion of events related to the Port Angeles Fourth
of July Celebration has also impacted the requests for convenient and accessible power.
Additional power requirements for Strait Thunder last year were met by the use of large portable
generators even though sufficient power was available nearby, but without convenient
connection.
This project would install two new event panels similar in nature to one installed on the North
side of 4th Street supporting the Juan de Fuca Festival and other outdoor events in or near the
Vern Burton Center. This project will enable this venue to continue to support these events and
other new events that might occur in and around City Pier for the foreseeable future.
This request is to utilize funds set aside as part of project GG05-03, Matching Funds for
Community Projects.
C:\COUNCIL.park board vacancies. WPT