HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.282 Original Contract9 2 0 1 3 0 0 3 7 a'Y<.,2
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN THE
CLALLAM COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT #1 AND
CLALLAM COUNTY AND THE CITIES WITHIN
WHEREAS, Section 2 of Reengrossed Substitute House Bill 1025 (hereinafter referred to as HB
1025) requires that Clallam County (hereinafter referred to as County) and the Cities of Port Angeles, Forks
and Sequim (hereinafter referred to as Cities) adopt and ratify a county -wide planning policy;
WHEREAS, the County and Cities have entered into a separate agreement setting forth a Growth
Management Steering Committee (hereinafter referred to as GMSC) to guide adoption of a county -wide
planning policy;
WHEREAS, the County -wide planning policy will address planning and policy issues surrounding the
following subjects: policies to implement designation of urban growth areas; policies for promotion of
contiguous and orderly development and provision of urban services to such development; policies for
siting public capital facilities of a county -wide or state -wide nature; policies for county -wide transportation
facilities and strategies; policies that consider the need for affordable housing; policies for joint county and
city planning within urban growth areas; policies for county -wide economic development and employment;
an analysis of the fiscal impact; policies to identify open space corridors within and between urban growth
areas;
WHEREAS, the Clallam County Public Utility District #1 (hereinafter referred to as PUD) is not
required by the Growth Management Act or HB 1025 to adopt or ratify a county wide planning policy;
WHEREAS, the County, Cities and PUD desire to work cooperatively to solve problems of growth,
orderly development and economic development; and
WHEREAS, no other provision of state or local law or policy precludes the PUD from participation in
the county -wide planning process and review and comment on the proposed planning policies.
IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE FINDINGS, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE PUD to participate in
the county -wide planning policy process, to review and comment on the planning policies and to ratify
those policies which are applicable to the PUD subject to the following terms and conditions:
SECTION 1. PARTICIPATION IN COUNTY -WIDE PLANNING POLICY PROCESS
The County and Cities agree to notify the PUD of meetings of the Growth Management
Steering Committee and Technical Advisory Group. The PUD agrees to participate in such
meetings when time is available and the subject matter applicable to the purpose of PUD.
The PUD also agrees to submit oral or written comments at the appropriate times
regarding the proposed planning policies so that the concerns and issues of PUD are
considered and integrated within the proposed planning policies.
SECTION 2. RATIFICATION PROCESS AND PROCEDURE
2.1. General Ratification Process. The GMSC shall submit proposed county -wide planning
policies, as identified in Section 3.3 below, for acceptance or rejection to the PUD. Upon
the receipt of all of the determinations of acceptance or rejection, the GMSC shall then
make any necessary revisions to the planning policies to best accommodate the concerns
raised in the determinations. After all revisions have been made, the GMSC shall submit
the planning policies to the PUD. The GMSC may submit planning policies for acceptance
or ratification all at once or in sets of one or more.
2.2 Determination of Approval. An acceptance of a proposed county -wide planning
policy as identified in paragraph 2.1 herein signifies that the PUD has determined that a
planning policy is acceptable for ratification. If the PUD accepts a planning policy, it may
submit recommendations to the GMSC to consider for revision. If the PUD rejects a
proposed planning policy, it shall Inform the GMSC of what changes are necessary for
ratification. Acceptance of a planning policy by the PUD provides a commitment to
implement the policy by the PUD. If the PUD submits recommendations to the GMSC for
revision and the GMSC rejects the suggested change, nothing in this agreement shall be
construed to bind the PUD to implement such policy.
2.3 Pgblic Hearing& Each GMSC member and the PUD shall be solely responsible for
conducting its own public hearings if required and may use any hearing process it deems
sufficient for acceptance and ratification of the proposed county-wide planning policies.
SECTION 3. DESIRED PLANNING POLICY AREAS
Section 4. Termination of Understanding
Clallam County
City of Port Angeles
City of Forks
City of Sequim
PUD
f 1
3.1. General Desired PlanninQPolicv Areag. The desired planning policy areas which
will be addressed in the county-wide planning policy will include the following areas:
policies to implement designation of urban growth areas; policies for promotion of
contiguous and orderly development and provision of urban services to such
development; policies for siting public capital facilities of a county -wide or state -wide
nature; policies for county-wide transportation facilities and strategies; policies that
consider the need for affordable housing; policies for joint county and city planning within
urban growth areas; policies for county-wide economic development and employment; an
analysis of the fiscal impact; policies to identify open space corridors within and between
urban growth areas.
3.2. Desired PlanninQPolicies. Desired planning policies within the county-wide planning
policy areas identified in Section 3.1 are attached to this agreement as Attachment A.
3.3 Plannina Policy Areas of PUD. The PUD agrees that the following planning policy areas
are applicable in whole or part to it's role and purpose: policies to Implement designation
of urban growth areas; policies for promotion of contiguous and orderly development and
provision of urban services to such development; and policies for siting public capital
facilities of a county-wide or state -wide nature.
This Understanding shall terminate upon completion of the county-wide planning policy
and ratification process as outlined in this Understanding and in Section 2 of HB 1025.
»1
AGREEMENT FOR COUNTY -WIDE PLANNING POLICY
RATIFICATION PROCESS AND DESIRED PLANNING POLICIES
gjenk
5, 028,2_,
WHEREAS, Section 2 of Reengrossed Substitute House Bill
1025 (hereinafter referred to as HB 1025) requires that the
process and framework for adoption of a county -wide planning
policy be agreed upon by the City and County governments by
October 1, 1991;
WHEREAS, the County governments adopted similar
resolutions for a process and framework; and
WHEREAS, the Cities and County wish to amend these
agreements to establish ratification procedures and define
desired planning policy areas for completion and adoption of
the County -wide planning policy.
IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE FINDINGS, IT IS HEREBY
AGREED BY THE Port Angeles City Council that the ratification
process for decisions made under the AGREEMENT FOR PROCESS AND
FRAMEWORK FOR ADOPTION OF COUNTY -WIDE PLANNING POLICY and the
desired planning policy areas of the County -wide planning
policy shall be subject to the following terms and conditions:
Section 1. RATIFICATION PROCESS AND PROCEDURE
1.1 General Ratification Process. The Growth
Management Steering Committee (GMSC) shall submit
proposed County -wide planning policies, as
identified in the Growth Management ACT, for
acceptance or rejection to the legislative bodies
represented in the GMSC. The GMSC may also submit
the planning policies for acceptance or rejection
to any other organizations the GMSC determines
should participate. Upon the receipt of all of the
determinations of acceptance or rejection, the GMSC
shall then make any necessary revisions to the
planning policies to best accommodate the concerns
raised in the determinations. After all revisions
have been made, the GMSC shall submit the planning
policies to the legislative bodies represented in
the GMSC for ratification. The GMSC may submit
planning policies for acceptance or ratification
all at once or in sets of one or more All of the
planning policies required under the Growth
Management Act must be submitted for ratification
to the legislative bodies represented in the GMSC
fourteen (14) days or more before they are required
to be adopted under the Growth Management Act.
Attachment A outlines the conceptual model for this
process.
Agreement 3/13/92
Page 2
Section 2.
1.2 Determination of Annroval. An acceptance of a
proposed County -wide planning policy as identified
in paragraph 1.1 herein signifies that a
legislative body or participating organization has
determined that a planning policy is acceptable for
ratification. If a legislative body or
participating organization accepts a planning
policy, it may submit recommendations to the GMSC
to consider for revision. If a legislative body or
participating organization rejects a proposed
planning policy, it shall inform the GMSC of what
changes are necessary for ratification.
1.3 Public Hearinas. Each GMSC member and
participating organization shall be solely
responsible for conducting its own public hearings
and may use any hearing process it deems sufficient
for acceptance and ratification of the proposed
County -wide planning policies.
DESIRED PLANNING POLICY AREAS
2.1 General Desired Plannina Policy Areas. The desired
planning policy areas which will be addressed in
the county -wide planning policy will include the
following areas: policy to implement designation
of urban growth areas; policies for promotion of
contiguous and orderly development and provision of
urban services to such development; policies for
siting public capital facilities of a County -wide
or state -wide nature; policies for County -wide
transportation facilities and strategies; policies
that consider the need for affordable housing;
policies for joint City and County planning within
urban growth areas; policies for County -wide
economic development and employment; an analysis of
the fiscal impact; policies to identify open space
corridors within and between urban growth areas.
2.2 Desired Plannina Policies. Desired planning
policies within the policy areas identified in
Section 2.1 are attached to this agreement as
Attachment B.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Port Angeles at
a regular meeting of said Council held on the 17th day of
March, 1992.
2
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN THE
PORT OF PORT ANGELES AND
CLALLAM COUNTY AND THE CITIES WITHIN
WHEREAS, Section 2 of Reengrossed Substitute House Bill 1025 (hereinafter referred to as HB
1025) requires that Clallam County (hereinafter referred to as County) and the Cities of Port Angeles, Forks
and Sequim (hereinafter referred to as Cities) adopt and ratify a county -wide planning policy;
WHEREAS, the County and Cities have entered into a separate agreement setting forth a Growth
Management Steering Committee (hereinafter referred to as GMSC) to guide adoption of a county -wide
planning policy;
WHEREAS, the County-wide planning policy will address planning and policy issues surrounding the
following subjects: policies to implement designation of urban growth areas; policies for promotion of
contiguous and orderly development and provision of urban services to such development; policies for
siting public capital facilities of a county-wide or state -wide nature; policies for county-wide transportation
facilities and strategies; policies that consider the need for affordable housing; policies for joint county and
city planning within urban growth areas; policies for county-wide economic development and employment;
an analysis of the fiscal impact; policies to identify open space corridors within and between urban growth
areas;
WHEREAS, the Port of Port Angeles (hereinafter referred to as PORT) is not required by the Growth
Management Act or HB 1025 to adopt or ratify a county-wide planning policy;
WHEREAS, the County, Cities and PORT desire to work cooperatively to solve problems of growth,
orderly development and economic development; and
WHEREAS, no other provision of state or local law or policy precludes the PORT from participation
in the county-wide planning process, review of the proposed planning policies and adoption of such
policies after review.
IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE FINDINGS, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE PORT to participate
in the county -wide planning policy process, to review and comment on the planning policies and to ratify
those policies which are applicable to the PORT subject to the following terms and conditions:
SECTION 1. PARTICIPATION IN COUNTY -WIDE PLANNING POLICY PROCESS
The County and Cities agree to notify the PORT of meetings of the Growth Management
Steering Committee and Technical Advisory Group. The PORT agrees to participate in
such meetings when time is available and the subject matter applicable to the purpose of
PORT. The PORT also agrees to submit oral or written comments at the appropriate times
regarding the proposed planning policies so that the concerns and issues of PORT are
considered and integrated within the proposed planning policies.
SECTION 2. RATIFICATION PROCESS AND PROCEDURE
2. I General Ratlficarion Process. The GMSC shall suomit proposed county -wide punning
policies, as identified in Section 3.3 below, for acceptance or rejection to the PORT. Upon
the receipt of all of the determinations of acceptance or rejection, the GMSC shall then
make any necessary revisions to the planning policies to best accommodate the concerns
raised in the determinations. After all revisions have been made, the GMSC shall submit
the planning policies to the PORT. The GMSC may submit planning policies for
acceptance or ratification all at once or in sets of one or more.
5 c2 2—
Page 2
2.2 Determination of Aaoroval. An acceptance of a proposed county -wide planning
policy as identified in paragraph 2.1 herein signifies that the PORT has determined that a
planning policy is acceptable for ratification. If the PORT accepts a planning policy, it may
submit recommendations to the GMSC to consider for revision. If the PORT rejects a
proposed planning policy, it shall inform the GMSC of what changes are necessary for
ratification.
2.3 Public Hearinas. Each GMSC member and the PORT shall be solely responsible
for conducting its own public hearings and may use any hearing process it deems
sufficient for acceptance and ratification of the proposed county -wide planning policies.
SECTION 3. DESIRED PLANNING POLICY AREAS
3.1. General Desired Plannina Policy Areas. The desired planning policy areas which
will be addressed in the county -wide planning policy will include the following areas:
policies to implement designation of urban growth areas; policies for promotion of
contiguous and orderly development and provision of urban services to such
development; policies for siting public capital facilities of a county -wide or state -wide
nature; policies for county -wide transportation facilities and strategies; policies that
consider the need for affordable housing; policies for joint county and city planning within
urban growth areas; policies for county -wide economic development and employment; an
analysis of the fiscal impact; policies to identify open space corridors within and between
urban growth areas.
3.2. Desired Plannina Policies. Desired planning policies within the county -wide planning
policy areas identified in Section 3.1 are attached to this agreement as Attachment A.
3.3 Plannina Policy Areas of PORT. The PORT agrees that the following planning
policy areas are applicable to the role and purpose of this organization: policies to
implement designation of urban growth areas; policies for promotion of contiguous and
orderly development and provision of urban services to such development; policies for
siting public capital facilities of a county -wide or state -wide nature; policies for county -wide
transportation facilities and strategies; policies for joint county and city planning within
urban growth areas; and policies for county -wide economic development and
employment.
Section 4. Termination of Understanding
This Understanding shall terminate upon completion of the county -wide planning policy
and ratification process as outlined in this Understanding and in Section 2 of HB 1025.
Citi f Port Ange
City of Forks
City
ounty
Port of Port Angeles
vl°
3- -9 z_
,.UNE30, 1992
CLALLAM COUNTY
COUNTY -WIDE PLANNING POLICY
CLALLAM COUNTY
COUNTY -WIDE PLANNING POLICY
OUTLINE
I. LEGISLATIVE MANDATE
II. AGREEMENTS
III. DEFINITIONS
IV. COUNTY -WIDE PLANNING POLICIES
A. Urban Growth Area Policies
B. Joint Planning and Contiguous and Orderly Development
C. Siting of Public Capital Facilities
D. Transportation Facilities and Strategies
E. Affordable Housing
F. Economic Development and Employment
G. Fiscal Impact Analysis of Urban Growth Areas
H. Open Space Corridors Within and Between Urban Growth Areas
V. IMPLEMENTATION OF COUNTY -WIDE PLANNING POLICY
VII. APPENDICES
A. Desired Planning Policies /Conceptual Ratification Process
B. Population Trends
VI. RATIFICATION OF COUNTY -WIDE PLANNING POLICY
LEGISLATIVE MANDATE
The Growth Management Act, as adopted in 1990 (ESHB 2929), declared that uncoordinated and
unplanned growth, together with a lack of common goals expressing the public's interest in the
conservation and the wise use of our lands, pose a threat to the environment, sustainable economic
development, and the health, safety, and high quality of fife enjoyed by residents of this state. It is in the
public interest, the legislature declared, that citizens, communities, local governments, and the private
sector cooperate and coordinate with one another in comprehensive land use planning.
For that reason, ESHB 2929 required that the comprehensive plan for each county or city be coordinated
with, and consistent with, the comprehensive plans of other counties or cities with which the county or city
has, in part, common borders or related regional issues.
Recognizing that the legislature did not provide a process and framework for adoption of these
coordinated and consistent comprehensive plans, an amendment to the Growth Management Act was
passed in 1991 (RSHB 1025) requiring the adoption of county-wide planning policies.
The county-wide planning policy is to be a written policy statement or statements used solely for
establishing a county-wide framework from which county and city comprehensive plans are developed and
adopted under the Growth Management Act. This framework ensures that the city and county
comprehensive plans are consistent. This does not mean that the land -use powers of cities are altered.
RSHB 1025 requires that Clallam County adopt this county -wide planning policy by July 1, 1992 in
cooperation with the cities. The process and framework for adoption of the county-wide planning policy is
established in a collaborative process outlined in more detail in the next section. The cities and governor
may appeal an adopted county -wide planning policy to the growth planning hearings board within sixty
days of the adoption of the policy by the County.
RSHB 1025 required that the county -wide planning policy, at a minimum, address the following subjects:
(1) Policies to implement RCW 36.70A.110 (Urban Growth Areas);
(2) Policies for promotion of contiguous and orderly development and provision of urban
services to such development;
(3) Policies for siting public capital facilities of a county -wide or state -wide nature;
(4) Policies for county -wide transportation facilities and strategies;
(5) Policies that consider the need for affordable housing, such as housing for all economic
segments of the population and parameters for its distribution;
(6) Policies for joint county and city planning within urban growth areas;
(7) Policies for county-wide economic development and employment; and
(8) An analysis of the fiscal impact.
Adopted county -wide planning policies shall be adhered to by state agencies, in addition to the county and
cities using the policies to form the framework for adoption of comprehensive plans, which must be
adhered to.
Page 1
AGREEMENTS
Section 2 of RSHB 1025 required that the process and framework for adoption of a county-wide planning
policy be agreed upon by all the cities and the county by October 1, 1991. Representatives of the cities
and county met to establish a collaborative process. The cities and county each individually adopted
identical resolutions establishing a Growth Management Steering Committee (GMSC) operating under four
terms and conditions:
1) The GMSC was composed of two representatives from each of the governments of Clallam
County, the City of Port Angeles, the City of Sequim and the City of Forks. Representatives were elected
officials, staff or anyone else for each of these governments.
2) The facilitator of the meetings alternated on a six month basis between Clallam County and the
City of Port Angeles.
3) GMSC decisions were advisory and based upon consensus. GMSC decisions were final upon
ratification by the governments represented in the GMSC.
4) The GMSC, subject to ratification, determined the procedures and provisions necessary for the
adoption of the county-wide planning policy. These procedures and provisions included desired planning
policies, deadlines, ratification of final agreements and demonstration thereof, and financing if any, of all
activities associated therewith.
The first agreement was amended by Clallam County and the cities detailing ratification procedures and
provisions for the County-wide Planning Policy. Included in the amendment were desired planning policy
areas, of which open space corridors was an added subject. The desired planning policies and conceptual
ratification process are included in Appendix A.
An agreement with the Port of Port Angeles, the cities and Clallam County was also entered into for
adoption of portions of the County -wide Planning Policy by the Port. The subject areas that the Port
agreed to be participants and signatories on were: 1) urban growth area designations; 2) contiguous and
orderly development; 3) siting of public capital facilities; 4) transportation facilities and strategies; 5) joint
county and city planning within urban growth areas; and 5) economic development and employment.
An agreement was also signed between Clallam County and the Public Utility District. The cities did not
sign this agreement. The PUD and Clallam County agreed that the PUD would be participants in the
county-wide planning policy for the following subject categories: 1) urban growth area designations; 2)
contiguous and orderly development; and 3) siting of public capital facilities.
Page 2
1. "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.
2. "County -wide Planning Policy" is a written policy statement or statements used solely for
establishing a county -wide framework from which county and city comprehensive plans are
adopted pursuant to the Growth Management Act. This framework shall ensure that city and
county comprehensive plans are consistent as required in RCW 36.70A.100. The legislative
authority of the county shall adopt this policy In cooperation with the cities within the county.
Nothing In this policy shall be construed to alter the land -use powers of cities.
3. Essential public facilities as referenced in this document are public capital facilities of a county-
wide or state -wide nature which are typically difficult to site. Essential public facilities include the
following:
4. "Public capital facilities" of a county-wide or state -wide nature as referenced in this document
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 state -wide population. Public capital
facilities of a county-wide or state wide nature may include but are not limited to the following:
DEFINITIONS
Airports
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
Airports
State Education 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 Recreation Facilities
Marine Terminals
Libraries
Fairgrounds
Hospitals
County Courthouse
Page 3
Definitions June 30, 1992
5. "Public Services" include fire protection and suppression, law enforcement, public health,
education, recreation, environmental protection, and other governmental services.
6. "Resource Lands" means forest, agriculture and mineral resource lands of long term commercial
significance that were designated by Clallam County pursuant to Section 6 and 17 of the 1990
Growth Management Act.
7. "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 such 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.
8. "Urban Growth Areas" means those areas proposed by the cities or the county and designated by
Clallam County pursuant to the policies in the County -Wide Planning Policy adopted pursuant to
Section 2 of RSHB 1025.
9. "Urban services" include those services historically and typically delivered by cities or other
identified service provider, such as a utility district, and which at a minimum include the provision
for sanitary waste, solid waste disposal systems, water systems, urban roads and pedestrian
facilities, public transportation systems, stormwater systems, police and fire and emergency
service systems, electrical and communication systems, school and health care facilities, and
neighborhood and /or community parks.
Page 4
URBAN GROWTH AREA POLICIES
POLICIES RELATED TO THE DESIGNATION OF URBAN GROWTH AREAS
1. Minimum Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) shall be established based upon land use demand as
determined by the Clallam County 20 -year forecast of population for the county and specified sub-
areas, so long as the county-wide forecast is not less than the most recent forecasts available from
the Office of Financial Management (OFM). The county shall provide forecasts for the designation
of urban growth areas.
A. The County growth population projection should be based on the OFM analysis prepared
for Clallam County. The following projections were completed by OFM in a report dated
January 31, 1992:
TABLE 1: OFM POPULATION PROJECTIONS
1990 I 1995 1 2000 1 2005
Population 1 56,464 1 57,754 1 58,246 1 58,753
Note: OFM estimated that the 1991 Clallam County population was as follows:
County: 58,500
Unincorporated 33,550
Forks 3,280
Port Angeles 17,890
Sequim 3,780
OFM estimated the preliminary 1992 Clallam County population as follows:
County: 60,000
Unincorporated 34,780
Forks 3,310
Port Angeles 18,040
Sequim 3,870
Page 5
2010
59,189
2012
59,312
B. The County sub -area population projections should be based either on a straight line
(linear) projection model or on the sub -area growth rate for the preceding 10 years. For
the purposes of designating urban growth areas, a linear projection is preferred. For other
planning purposes, the last ten year sub -area growth rate should be compared to a
straight line projection and a determination made regarding which projection is most
appropriate.
Urban Growth Area Policies June 30, 1992
TABLE 2: AREA AVERAGE GROWTH RATE
1980 -90 1990 2000 2010
Growth Population Population Population
Rate
Agnew- Carlsborg 2.72 6,310 1 8,252 10,792
Clallam Bay -Neah .93 2,966 3,253 3,569
Bay
Crescent 2.2 2,507 3,116 3,874
Forks -1.56 6,846 5,849 4,998
Sequim 2.7 11,076 14,457 18,870
Port Angeles .44 26,759 27,959 29,214
TOTALS I
1990 2000 2010
Population Popu/r On Population
Agnew Carlsborg 6,310 7,126 8,428
Clallam Bay -Neah 2,966 3,334 3,636
Bay
Crescent 1 2,507 3,116 3,874
Forks 6,846 8,775 10,041
Sequim 1 11,076 12,522 14,751
Port Angeles 1 26,759 27,959 29,214
TABLE 3: LINEAR PROJECTION MODEL
City of Port Angeles
City of Sequim
City of Forks
56,464 62,886 71,317
TOTALS I 56,464 62,832 69,944
C. The City population projections should encourage a shift from growth in unincorporated
areas to urban areas, consistent with the intent of the Growth Management Act. The City
population projections should also reflect sub -area growth trends, in that growth usually
occurs based on geographic preference (schools, climate, jobs, etc.).
TABLE 4: CITY POPULATION PROJECTIONS
LINEAR PROJECTION MODEL BASED ON SUB AREA (Table 3)
1990
17,710
3,616
2,862
Page 6
2000 1 2010
18,382 I 19,053
4,650 I 5,683
3,453 1 4,044
Urban Growth Area Policies June 30, 1992
D. The county population forecasts should be reviewed every five years. Such review shall
include an analysis of the previous ten year period.
2. The county should designate as urban growth areas those unincorporated areas not in proximity to
existing cities, provided that such areas meet the principles established for UGAs and that
appropriate service providers are identified to provide the specified urban govemmental services.
3. UGAs shall include areas characterized by urban growth adjacent to existing city boundaries and
physical features shall be considered in establishing UGA boundaries.
4. The current County Comprehensive Plan identifies a density exceeding one unit per acre as
urban /suburban. Density is one factor that will form the demarcation between urban and rural for
purposes of establishing an urban growth area. This does not preclude land currently zoned R
(Rural) from a UGA. It shall preclude urban growth outside UGAs, and shall permit urban densities
inside urban growth areas.
It is expected that net densities will increase over current city densities as urban growth and
development occurs within the UGA, and the UGA boundary should be established toward this
objective. Included in this principle0Wft#0414cities should develop specific strategies
and programs to encourage infiVdevelopment and redevelopment of identified underdeveloped
lands.
6. Land designated for commercial or industrial uses which encourage adjacent urban development
shall not be located outside a UGA.
7. The amount of acreage designated for commercial, industrial or other non residential uses within a
UGA adjacent to a city boundary shall be based upon the land use element and economic
development element of the city's comprehensive plan.
8. The amount of acreage designated for commercial uses, industrial uses, regional facilities or other
non residential uses within a UGA not adjacent to a city boundary shall be based upon a
reasonable level of service for the size of the UGA's service area.
9. Urban growth areas should be established to avoid critical areas, except where addressed as part
of the city's comprehensive plan or critical areas ordinance. Urban growth areas should not
include designated resource lands unless the city or county has enacted a program authorizing
transfer or purchase of development rights.
10. Urban growth area designations shall consider the linkage with open space corridors within and
between urban growth areas as required in this policy and the Growth Management Act.
Urban Growth Area Policies June 30, 1992
POLICIES RELATED TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AN URBAN GROWTH AREA
The following policies contain specific statements and directed actions that when accepted as policy
and /or implemented will protect the integrity of the designated UGA.
11. Lands within urban growth areas which are adjacent to existing cities should be able to be
annexed to those cities. The cities and county, in coordination with existing and ultimate service
providers, should develop an annexation plan which includes annexation of land characterized by
urban development and a phased program of annexation consistent with the extension of services
and the development of land in accordance with the city's comprehensive plan and capital facilities
plan.
12. Public facilities and services necessary to support urban development will be specifically identified
for provision within the designated urban growth areas of Clallam County in accordance with the
policies for Joint Planning and Contiguous and Orderly Development.
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.
14. Urban services /facilities required to meet the needs of new development shall be provided, or shall
be planned to be available within six years, to meet the levels of services established for such
services within each UGA.
15. Urban services shall be provided and constructed in accordance with the design and construction
standards as specified in the UGA Urban Services and Development Agreement required by the
policies for Joint Planning and Contiguous and Orderly Development.
16. Services and facilities which are not available at the time of the development project giving rise to
the need for such services shall be included in a financially feasible capital facilities element of the
comprehensive plan for the city responsible for such service provision, and /or in the appropriate
plans of the service provided.
17. Before extension or construction of urban services, the city or service provider shall demonstrate
the financial capability for continued operation of the facility.
18. The county and the cities will ensure appropriate techniques for managing future growth consistent
with the designation of urban growth areas, such as a minimum density within the UGA and a
maximum density outside the UGA. A range of densities should be provided for by the city and
county for lands within the UGA, 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. The rural element of the County's comprehensive plan shall permit only those land
uses that are compatible with the rural character of such lands and provide for a variety of rural
densities and development patterns, including the use of cluster housing concepts to encourage
conservation of open space and resource lands.
Page 8
Urban Growth Area Policies June 30, 1992
19. Where critical areas occur within the designated UGA, policies and regulations will be developed to
ensure protection of such areas.
20. The County, h coordination with the adjacent city, shall consider the need for future expansion of
urban growth areas beyond the projected 20 -year period required by the Growth Management Act.
Special density considerations shall be given at the edge of urban growth areas, if determined
necessary based on a land use analysis, so that future extension of urban growth areas and urban
services allows conversion to more efficient urban patterns. Special density considerations could
include reduced densities or cluster development options. Such considerations shall occur during
preparation and adoption of joint city /county comprehensive plans for the unincorporated urban
growth area.
Page 9
JOINT PLANNING AND CONTIGUOUS AND ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT
Once the Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) have been established by the County, it will be imperative for both
the County and the Cities to agree on a procedure to ensure the contiguous and orderly development of
the UGAs and to ensure the appropriate provision of urban services to such development. Some service
providers such as schools and libraries provide services outside of urban growth areas. Service provision
in the area outside the urban growth areas will be determined by the county which will work with the
service providers for these areas. The following county-wide planning policies provide general guidance
for the future development and provision of services both within and outside of the individual UGAs.
1. Each agency and /or service provider which provides an urban service within an Urban Growth
Area or its associated joint city /county planning area should participate in the development and
implementation of a UGA Urban Services and Development Agreement. Each UGA Urban
Services and Development Agreement should contain the following:
a. the establishment of an Urban Growth Area Development Committee made up of
representatives from each of the participating agencies and /or service providers for the
purpose of reviewing, coordinating, ensuring equitable financing and recommending long
range service plans and capital facility plans for urban services proposed in the UGA and
associated joint planning area;
b. a definition of "urban services" which at a minimum includes the provision for sanitary
waste, solid waste disposal systems, water systems, urban roads and pedestrian facilities,
public transportation systems, stormwater systems, police and fire and emergency service
systems, electrical and communication systems, school and health care facilities, and
neighborhood and /or community parks;
c. level of service standards for urban services within the unincorporated UGA and
associated joint planning area;
d. policies identifying the interim and ultimate responsible service provider for the various
urban services and their roles;
e. a requirement that any capital improvement and /or public facility providing an urban
service constructed and /or planned within a UGA meet ail design and urban service
requirements of ultimate service provider;
f. a policy and procedure identifying which development projects (subdivisions, rezones,
etc.) require intergovernmental communication and coordination between the County and
the adjacent city and a procedure for the submittal, review and approval of such project
applications located in the UGA; (nothing in this policy or procedure shall be construed to
alter the land use powers of the city or the county)
g.
a requirement that any project located in the UGA meet the subdivision, zoning, building,
design and urban service standards agreed upon by the County and adjacent city;
Page 10
Joint Planning and Contiguous and Orderly Development June 30, 1992
h. an annexation plan which encourages annexation of land characterized by urban
development and is a reasonable extension of urban services consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan and Capital Facilities Plan;
i. a policy prohibiting annexation of areas outside the UGA or areas not reasonably
contiguous with the existing city limits and areas of urban services;
1.
policies which protect existing and future transportation /utility corridors, facilities, and
services within the UGA and the associated joint planning area;
k. the establishment of a procedure for review by the participating agencies of amendments
to land use regulations and plans;
1. a procedure for joint capital facility planning between the participating agencies and
service providers within the UGA and to ensure equitable financing of such facilities;
m. policies to ensure a functional transition of public infrastructure between incorporated and
non incorporated areas within the UGA.
2. Each agency and /or service provider participating in a UGA Urban Services and Development
Agreement should make available as early as possible an inventory and analysis of its existing
and /or planned urban services for the purpose of coordinating with other such agencies and /or
service providers in the UGA Urban Services and Development Agreement.
3. The County will establish which services will be provided in the area outside the Urban Growth
Areas or the associated city planning area. The County and special purpose districts will work
together to define the role of the special purpose districts in areas outside the Urban Growth Area
or the associated city planning area.
4. The County and its cities will develop a process for early review and input in the development of
comprehensive plans covering the land contained within the unincorporated portions of the city's
urban growth areas in order to provide for coordinated and consistent planning between
jurisdictions. Amendment of these plans will also be subject to early review and input by all
jurisdictions operating within urban growth areas.
Page 11
SITING OF PUBLIC CAPITAL FACILITIES
The Growth Management Act requires local governments to inventory existing capital facilities owned by
public entities, evaluate existing and planned capacities of current facilities, determine capital facility needs
for the next twenty years and develop policies for siting needed capital facilities. Counties and cities are
required to coordinate their efforts in siting of county wide and state -wide capital facilities in a manner that
will reduce any potential adverse impacts resulting from the location and development of these facilities.
Govemment entities must develop a process for siting essential public facilities.
1. Public capital facilities of a county-wide or state -wide nature as referenced in this document 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 state -wide population. Public capital facilities
of a county -wide or state -wide nature may include but are not limited to the following:
Airports
State Education 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 Recreation Facilities
Marine Terminals
Libraries
Fairgrounds
Hospitals
County Courthouse
2. The County and the cities should develop an inventory of existing public capital facilities of a
county-wide or state -wide nature which includes the current capacity and planned capacity of such
facilities.
3. The County and the cities should determine the need for new public capital facilities over the next
twenty year period.
4. Public capital facilities that generate substantial travel demand should be Located along or near
major transportation routes.
5. Some types of public capital facilities such as those for waste handling, may be more appropriately
located outside of urban growth areas due to objectionable characteristics, size or potential for
danger. Public capital facilities located outside of urban growth areas should be largely self
contained or be served by urban governmental services in such a manner that sprawl will not be
promoted. Utility and service considerations must be incorporated into site planning and
development.
Page 12
Siting of Public Capital Facilities June 30, 1992
6. The multiple use of corridors for major utilities, trails and transportation rights -of -way is
encouraged.
7. Public capital facilities which are unrelated to recreational uses shall not be located in designated
resource lands unless alternate locations In non resource zones are unavailable or impractical and
then only If siting of such facilities would not interfere with resource management on adjacent
resource lands. Water and sewer systems designed to provide service to more than one
development or to serve a large area shall not provide service to or be located within resource
lands with the exception of water extraction or water storage facilities.
8. Essential public facilities as referenced in this document are public capital facilities of a county-
wide or state -wide nature which are typically difficult to site. Essential public facilities include the
following:
Airports
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
9. The County should develop and maintain a current list of essential public facilities which meet a
county -wide or state -wide need.
10. When an essential public facility is proposed, the county in association with other affected
governmental or public agencies shall appoint a committee composed of representatives from the
county, each city and urban growth area in the county, affected service providers and citizen
members selected to represent a broad range of interest groups and charged with producing a
facility site selection, analysis and evaluation report which shall at a minimum consider the
following:
a. need for the new or expanded facility;
b. an inventory of existing facilities used for this purpose and the impacts created by those
facilities;
c. an analysis of the fair share allocation of such facilities;
d. development of specific siting criteria with an emphasis placed on environmental
constraints;
e. the identification, analysis and ranking of potential project sites;
f. potential impacts to the economy, environment and community character;
g. measures to minimize or mitigate potential physical impacts from facility development
h. measures needed to minimize or mitigate the fiscal impacts of development of the facility.
The committee shall involve the public at an early stage in the development of their report and
keep them involved through the process. When established state -wide procedures exist for siting
facilities, the local process will serve the purpose of providing local citizen participation in the state
process and will be consistent with the state's procedures and shall not duplicate studies
undertaken by the state.
Page 13
Siting of Public Capital Facilities June 30, 1992
11. County and city comprehensive plans shall not preclude the siting of essential public facilities.
12. The schedule for building new, essential public facilities should be coordinated with the provision
of infrastructure and other development. Essential public facilities shall be sited in areas that can
easily be supported by infrastructure and services.
13. Essential public facilities should be sited in places that enhance the regions economic
development strategy.
14. All jurisdictions should strive to identify locations of essential public facilities so as to distribute
them equitably county-wide. No single community should be required to absorb an undue share
of the impacts of essential public facilities.
Page 14
GENERAL POLICIES:
TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES AND STRATEGIES
The Growth Management Act fundamentally changed the way that comprehensive planning will be done
within the State of Washington. This change is notable by the increased importance of the transportation
element of the comprehensive plan. The Act makes it unlawful to approve development for which the
approving Jurisdiction cannot demonstrate the availability of infrastructure and service which are needed to
accommodate the increase In traffic at the adopted level of service within six years. Future development
activity will be constrained by a jurisdiction's ability to finance and provide transportation improvements or
implement high occupancy vehicle strategies. This fact has some very significant implications for all
jurisdictions which are dependent upon the region's transportation system because projected traffic
growth on portions of the road system may exceed the ability to finance and construct the improvements
needed to maintain existing level -of- service. Development within any one jurisdiction may also experience
major impacts by decisions beyond that jurisdiction's control.
Financial constraints and potential coordination problems make it necessary to undertake a new approach,
for both transportation planning and land use planning. This is necessary if the region is to avoid
haphazard denials of development permits following the deadline for implementing ordinances. In order to
limit sprawl, retain the desired rural character and urban form, and provide some measure of predictability
for landowners and developers, the county's transportation improvements must be focused on areas
where densities support a multi -modal transportation system. System capacity investments should be
targeted first to those areas where the existing land use and transportation system may achieve the desired
multi -modal level -of- service within six years of the improvement.
1. Clallam County, its cities, tribes, adjacent counties, Clallam Transit System (CTS), the Port of Port
Angeles, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and federal agencies
should support the continuous, comprehensive and cooperative transportation planning process
conducted by Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization (PRTPO) for the
development of regional transportation systems plans and strategies.
2. The existing and future land use pattem shall be supported by a balanced transportation system
which promotes the mobility of people and goods with a variety of options. This system shall be
cooperatively planned, and constructed between the county, state and cities.
The transportation system shall include the following:
A. Highways, and major and minor roads;
B. A transit component;
C. Non motorized facilities; and
D. Air and water transportation modes and facilities.
3. The balanced, multi -modal transportation system shall include highway and road improvements
which help alleviate existing traffic congestion problems, enhance transit and ridesharing
operations, and provide access to desired growth areas as identified in adopted land use plans.
General capacity improvements promoting only single occupant vehicle traffic shall be a lower
Page 15
Transportation Facilities and Strategies June 30, 1992
priority. The movement of goods shall be considered as a factor in determining transportation
improvements.
4. A new county-wide forum or task force committee consisting of PRTPO policy board and technical
advisory members shall be appointed whose ongoing responsibility will include:
assessing and maintaining coordinated level -of- service standards for urban major and
urban minor streets and transit routes, of Clailam County significance
developing consistent county-wide policies and negotiating concurrance
advising transportation financing strategies, including recommendations for prioritizing
capacity improvements eligible to receive federal funds available to the region under the
Inter -modal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA)
LEVEL -OF- SERVICE (LOS) POLICIES:
5. Level -of- service standards shall be used as the basis to evaluate concurrency for long -range
transportation planning, development review and programming of transportation investments.
They shall be ultimately adopted by each jurisdiction. As long -range transportation planning goals
change, the level -of- service will change accordingly.
6. Highway level -of- service standards shall incorporate other factors of transportation to calculate the
level -of service such as freight vehicles and bicycles.
7. Level -of- service standards shall vary by different levels of development patterns and growth
management objectives and account for alternative travel modes. It shall concentrate growth into
existing urban centers, and not encourage growth in resource lands. Lower standards, tolerating
more congestion, shall be established for urban centers. Transit and major urban road LOS
standards shall focus on higher service levels in and between centers and decrease as population
and employment densities decrease.
8. Clallam Transit System (CTS) should coordinate transit level -of- service standards to the highway
level -of- service standards with the County and cities. CTS should provide adequate public
transportation within the service area based on level -of- service given funding ability.
The transit level of service should address the following service objectives:
a. degree of route coverage by type of service;
b. frequency of service during peak and off -peak hours; and
c. travel speed relative to single occupant vehicles (SOVs).
9. The County, or other appropriate regional agency, should develop a traffic simulation and
forecasting model in coordination with the cities based on land -use assumptions and calibrated to
existing traffic patterns.
Page 16
Transportation Facilities and Strategies June 30, 1992
CONCURRENCY POLICIES:
10. Clallam County, its cities, adjacent counties and other Jurisdictions shall comply with GMA
concurrency requirements and establish a consistent regional process for implementing
concurrency, Including responsibility for impacts on adjacent jurisdictions.
11. Each jurisdiction shall identify the facilities needed to ensure that services are provided consistent
with the Jurisdiction's adopted level -of- service levels. Timelines for the construction of the needed
facilities should be identified.
REASSESSMENT POLICIES:
12. Local governments shall work together to reassess regional land use and transportation elements,
if transportation adequacy and concurrency cannot be met.
13. Should funding fall short for transportation improvements or strategies needed to accommodate
growth, the following action should be taken in order of:
a. consider appropriate changes in land use and level -of- service standards to better achieve
adequacy and concurrency requirements;
b. work with WSDOT, CTS and the private sector to seek additional state transportation
revenues and local options, to make system improvements necessary to accommodate
projected employment and population growth.
STATE TRANSPORTATION ROLE AND STATE HIGHWAYS:
14. Local governments should coordinate with the State and commit to common land use strategies
as they affect state transportation systems.
15. The County and its cities will plan for alternative state highway routes or improvements and have
coordinated land -use controls to preserve the integrity of the alternative routes or improvements.
SITING REGIONAL AND COUNTY -WIDE TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES:
16. Clallam County, its cities, CTS, the PRTPO, and the State shall identify significant regional /county-
wide right -of -way needs for transportation and plan work programs for long -range transportation
use.
17. The County and the PRTPO should establish a process of prioritizing and siting the location of
facilities.
18. County and State transportation facilities shall be sited to support the county-wide land use
pattern, support economic activities, and minimize public costs.
Page 17
Transportation Facilities and Strategies June 30, 1992
19. Minimize and control levels of harmful pollutants generated by transportation construction and
activities from entering surface and groundwater resources and degrading air quality. Implement
water quality management practices in designs.
FINANCING POUCIES:
20. In projecting the probable funding available to meet Its future growth related transportation
improvements needs, each jurisdiction shall first program necessary funds to maintain the safe
operation of its existing transportation infrastructure. To the extent revenues from existing sources
are insufficient to meet a jurisdiction's maintenance and safety needs, the jurisdiction shall
describe how additional funds will be raised to meet those basic needs.
21. The comprehensive plans of the County and the cities should include policies which ensure that
new development projects contribute their fair share of financing transportation improvements
needed to accommodate the impacts to the transportation system resulting from new
developments.
22. Regional revenues should be used to address regional mobility projects, including such strategies
as creating or enhancing transit /ridesharing transfer centers.
NON MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION POLICIES:
23. The transportation element of comprehensive plans shall include trail corridors, pedestrian and
bicycle travel as part of the transportation system and be developed on a coordinated, regional
basis. The non motorized element shall be a part of the funding component of the capital
improvement program.
24. The safety and quality of the travel experience for the non motorized traveller shall be improved
with a larger role in the transportation system.
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND STRATEGIES:
25. The comprehensive plans of the County and the cities should include policies which encourage
reduced reliance on the single occupant vehicle and the vehicle trips generated while encouraging
the use of other transportation facilities and links to alternative modes (transit, commuter vanpools,
bicycles and ferries) as cost effective and /or time saving travel alternatives.
provide incentives to transit such as offering free transit passes in lieu of private vehicle
mileage reimbursement
promote disincentive strategies such as imposing parking fees
encourage and support the major employment and commercial centers in reducing single
occupant vehicle trips by enacting ridesharing, transit and staggered work hour (TDM)
strategies
support capital improvement projects that facilitate and contribute to the success of
transportation demand management measures
Page 18
Transportation Facilities and Strategies June 30, 1992
TRANSIT POLICIES:
26. The comprehensive plans of the County and the cities should include strategies which support
coordinated land -use policies for affordable housing, higher density housing and employment
centers with transit or multi -modal options.
27. Planning and construction standards shall be developed by the cities and county to emphasize
transit compatibility.
HIGHWAY POLICIES:
28. The comprehensive plans of the County and the cities should include policies which would support
the increased efficiency of the regional highway system by maximizing use of the existing facility
and optimizing the schedule coordination between other modes.
29. The comprehensive plans of the County and the cities should include policies which protect and
enhance scenic vistas visible from the highway and provide limited and safe access to vista points
when possible.
30. The comprehensive plans of the County and the cities should include policies which would seek to
control commercial roadside sign usage and placement along the regional transportation system.
AIRPORT POLICIES:
31. The comprehensive plans of the County and the cities should include policies which establish
priorities for regional transportation system routes serving airports of which the highest priority
shall be given to transit accessing airports.
32. The comprehensive plans of the County and the cities should include policies which coordinate
land -use development in and adjacent to airports, that will reflect good safety measures and not
contribute a negative impact to the regional transportation system.
FREIGHT POLICIES:
33. The comprehensive plans of the County and the cities should include policies which promote
plans, procedures and systems aimed at providing safe movement and routing of freight, which will
assist in decreasing accidents, vehicle breakdowns, spilled loads, or other events which reduce the
capacity of the road system.
34. The comprehensive plans of the County and the cities should include policies which identify
options to reduce the impacts of congestion on roadway freight movement, as well as identifying
options to mitigate the impacts of roadway freight movement on urban congestion.
Page 19
Transportation Facilities and Strategies June 30, 1992
WATER TRANSPORT POLICIES:
35. The comprehensive plans of the County and the cities should include policies which establish
priorities for regional transportation system routes serving ferries in which high priority shall be
given to transit accessing ferry terminals and parking facilities at the terminals to relieve congestion
on urban streets.
Page 20
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Soaring land costs and the preponderance of construction of high end housing projects have taken their
toll on the ability of median income families to find the kind of housing they want and need. A
comprehensive response will bring a range of solutions that address major causes of the decline in
housing affordability. The focus of countywide housing efforts should be directed at increasing the supply
of low to moderate income housing. For use in the county -wide policy plan and comprehensive plans, low
and moderate income are defined below:
a. Low Income shall mean those households that have incomes that are below 80 percent of the
county-wide median.
b. Moderate income shall mean those households that have incomes within the range of 80 95
percent of the county-wide median.
1. Each comprehensive plan should include a policy encouraging participation in a Housing Task
Force comprised of representatives from government, financial institutions, business, construction, real
estate and other citizens interested in housing issues. A major goal of the Task Force would be
coordination of efforts to provide affordable housing and providing mechanisms for rapid review and
financing of low and moderate income housing projects.
Policy Explanation. The Housing Task Force could develop a program to monitor and report progress toward
meeting housing production and rehabilitation goals. The Task Force could develop a Rental Housing Action
plan with an objective to build 500 -1,000 new rental units in Clallam County over the next ten years. Additionally
the Task Force could develop a Special Needs Housing, Homeless and Services Plan with an objective to
provide 100-500 new special needs units in Clallam County over the next ten years. Agencies willing to develop
special needs housing projects and secure technical assistance for them to apply for special needs housing
funding programs could be identified and encouraged by the Task Force.
The Housing Task Force could develop a Housing Rehabilitation Program with an objective to upgrade 3,400
residential units from poor and fair condition to average condition in Clallam County over the next ten years.
The use of FHA 504 Home Repair Program and Housing Preservation Grant Program Funds could be examined
by the Task Force as a means of upgrading existing housing units. The Housing Task Force could use the
Washington State Housing Finance Commission Single Family Program, the Farmer's Administration Loans
Guarantee Program and other programs in conjunction with State Trust Funds or Block Grant Funds to facilitate
the objectives of the Task Force. The Task Force could identify agencies willing to become sponsors of FHA
self -help housing projects and start a self -help housing projects and start a self -help project by 1992. The
Housing Task Force could explore methods to purchase existing single family housing on scattered sites to be
offered as permanent rental housing.
2. Innovative zoning techniques should be utilized to create affordable housing opportunities.
Policy Explanation The county's new Planned Unit Development Ordinance provides density bonuses for
provision of affordable housing and the county's proposed cluster ordinance allow developers to build housing
on smaller lots which should provide cost savings in land costs. The new Planned Residential Community
Ordinance in Port Angeles allows multi family projects to be proposed in many zoning districts. Additional
examples of innovative techniques would include allowing accessory housing as a permitted use within large
Page 21
Affordable Housing June 30, 1992
single family structures in some zones and allowing affordable housing construction in some commercial
districts. Affordable housing provision could become a requirement for large development projects which are
granted density bonuses for providing more units than those that are required. As new ordinances are
developed In response to growth management initiatives, affordable housing alternatives could be built into the
provisions where appropriate.
3. Cities and the county should develop programs to assemble packages of publicly owned land to
be used for low and moderate income housing.
Policy Explanation. The county, cities, port district, school districts, public utilities and transportation agencies
own substantial amounts of undeveloped urban land. This land could be designated for the siting of low and
moderate income housing or other types of subsidized housing and could be sold or leased at prices reflecting
the value for this use. Land trusts and the housing authorities could be explored as a suitable vehicle for
assembling and holding land.
4. Cities and the county should inventory and designate land which is suited for high density
development and should examine the establishment of zoning districts where high density housing is the
only permitted residential use of property.
Policy Explanation. Vacant lands within the city or in close proximity to the cities which would be ideally suited
to high density development could be identified, designated and zoned to encourage the construction of high
density development. Limiting residential development options within these zones can ensure that an adequate
supply of high density, low cost housing is available to meet projected housing needs.
5. A fair share of low and moderate income housing should be provided within each jurisdiction in the
county.
Policy Explanation. Each jurisdiction within the county should provide its fair share of low and moderate income
housing.
6. Educational programs should be developed to promote acceptance of low and moderate income
housing.
Policy Explanation. Dialogue should be encouraged to help people realize that people seeking affordable
housing are not just the underemployed but could include school teachers, firefighters, secretaries and service
sector workers. The challenge is how to make multi- family projects not just housing, but also neighborhoods
with playgrounds, community services, green spaces and other amenities so that these workers can also enjoy
a quality living environment.
7. Jurisdictions should consider how proposed development impact fee ordinances will affect
affordable housing opportunities.
Policy Explanation. impact fees should apply only to new demand, not catch -up for past under funding.
Page 22
Affordable Housing June 30, 1992
8. Jurisdictions should consider enacting ordinances which require property owners who demolish,
substantially rehabilitate, change the use of residential property or remove use restrictions in assisted
housing developments to provide relocation assistance to low income tenants as provided for in sections
49 and 50 of the Growth Management Act.
Policy Explanation. Relocation assistance can be required of property owners who displace low Income
households through demolition or conversion of low income housing. Relocation assistance can Include
relocation expenses such as moving costs, advance payments required at the new residence, utility connection
fees and anticipated additional rent and utility costs for one year after relocation.
9. The cities and the county should coordinate their efforts to develop a transfer of development
rights program with high density receiving zones located within Urban Growth Areas.
Policy Explanation. Clallam County could develop a transfer of development rights program in conjunction with
the cities in the county. Receiving areas could be designated close to existing cities where high density projects
could be provided with urban services. This program would not only conserve productive farms and forest land
but it would create the potential for using increased density to meet affordable housing needs of the urban
areas.
10. Density incentives should be developed to effectively enhance supply of low and moderate income
housing.
Policy Explanation. incentives could be applied to projects that will yield a minimum set-aside of units which
will remain part of the low and moderate income housing stock. These incentives should apply to an entire
project, not to Individual units, to allow the project to be financially viable even with a set-aside of below market
rate units.
11. Retention and development of quality mobile home parks should be encouraged.
Policy Explanation. Mobile home parks are an important part of the affordable housing stock in Clallam County
and this use of land could be encouraged. Mobile home parks should have design standards which ensure that
they can become viable single- family neighborhoods. In rural areas, a large portion of new housing is individual
mobile homes on owner occupied lots. Almost one fourth of all housing units being added in the state of
Washington are manufactured. Because mobile homes are a growing portion of the county's affordable housing
inventory, standards for manufactured housing and the status of existing and potential mobile home parks need
to be put on a more stable basis.
12. Each comprehensive plan should include a policy to encourage local non profit groups or housing
authorities to initiate a Scattered Site Housing Construction Program.
Policy Explanation. Rental housing could be built on scattered sites by non -profits groups or housing
authorities to provide for affordable rental housing. Scattering of these projects would tend to increase
community acceptance of subsidized housing.
Page 23
Affordable Housing June 30, 1992
13. Each comprehensive plan should include policies encouraging the development of a range of
housing types which result in affordable housing for those in need of assistance such as the "working poor"
and households on fixed incomes. Housing concepts which should be examined Include accessory
housing units, additional multi -plex rental housing, additional condominium development, high density
detached housing (small single family lots) and low density attached (planned unit developments with
clustered housing and open space).
Policy Explanation. Housing options which increase density tend to increase affordability. As the population of
Ciallam County ages, zoning ordinances could be examined to ensure a range of housing types are allowed as
permitted uses.
14. Each comprehensive plan should include land use policies which promote housing development
for the existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community.
Policy Explanation. The current housing market meets the needs of high and middle income workers. The
housing needs of lower income workers must also be met. High density housing will be needed workers who
are a growing segment of our economy. Land use regulations must provide for increased opportunities to
develop high density housing.
15. Each comprehensive plan should include policies which encourages the improvement of
substandard housing.
Policy Explanation. The Clallam County Department of Community Development conducted a housing needs
assessment In 1991. This study revealed that up to twenty percent of existing housing was in substandard
condition. The county and cities could identify federal, state or private funding for housing rehabilitation and
coordinate the distribution of these funds.
16. Each comprehensive plan should include a policy within its Capital Facilities section which
establishes a high priority for provision of infrastructure to serve high density housing development.
Policy Explanation. Undeveloped land within the cities or on the edge of current city limits may provide the least
controversial location for new multi- family zoning. When areas are zoned for multi family development, those
lands could be provided with infrastructure as soon as it can be provided in order to facilitate the development
of new multi- family housing.
17. Each UGA comprehensive plan should include policies which encourage the provision of sufficient
areas for high density development to provide for affordable housing opportunities.
Policy Explanation. Establishing sufficient areas where multi-family housing may be conducted that this land
can be purchased at a reasonable cost. Low land costs are an important factor in the provision of affordable
housing
18. Each comprehensive plan should include policies which promote utility cost saving strategies in
order to increase the affordability of housing.
Policy Explanation. Utility costs are a factor in housing affordability. Energy efficient low and moderate income
housing will be more cost effective to the owner than units which are not built in an energy efficient manner.
Page 24
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND EMPLOYMENT
1. Each comprehensive plan adopted by the County and cities should contain policies which support
and encourage economic development and employment to provide opportunities for prosperity
and adequate funding for local govemment services.
2. Each comprehensive plan adopted by the County and cities should include an economic
development element
3. Each economic development element should identify the types of commerce and industry that
Claliam County and its cities wants to attract so the necessary infrastructure and support services
can be planned and built.
4. The cities and county planning under these policies should seek assistance by the Economic
Development Council with drafting the economic development element of local comprehensive
plans. Their work could include assistance in:
identifying economic development goals and criteria
identifying future capital facility needs and investments
evaluating available mechanisms for funding capital improvements
5. As part of local comprehensive plans, each local government should prepare an:
analysis of its local economy, including an inventory and map of the existing economic
base and tax base and an analysis of land availability
analysis of the growth potential of area industries
assessment of the comparative advantages which the community now offers or could
create to support its future economic diversification and vitality
6. To help ensure the economic health of the community, each local comprehensive plan's land use
element should explicitly identify areas where future economic activity and growth is intended or
desired to occur. This identification of areas of future economic growth should be part of the
process for designating the proposed general location of commerce and industry in the land use
element and in designating urban growth areas.
7. The economic development element of local comprehensive plans should support and be
supported by basic development of capital and utility facilities. Special attention should be given
to coordinating economic activity with transportation needs and developing land use policies that
support successful implementation of the economic development element.
8. The economic development element of each local comprehensive plan should be coordinated with
other elements of the plan. It also should be consistent with other public policy goals, and provide
certainty about future growth and economic development.
Page 25
Economic Development and Employment June 30, 1992
9. Because of the multi jurisdictional nature of a dynamic economy, each economic development
element should encourage inter Jurisdictional cooperation on economic development issues,
particularly those that affect the size and diversity of the economic base.
10. Each economic development element should promote resource management to seek a balance
between the environment and the economy, as well as encourage multi -use approaches.
Page 26
FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS OF URBAN GROWTH AREAS
Note: Section 2 of RSHB required an analysis of the fiscal impact. This subsection is particularly vague.
In a Briefing Paper issued by the Association of Cities, which were participants in drafting this section, they
noted the following:
'In developing a policy or policies which address 'fiscal impacts,' you must first
determine what you want this to mean. Does this language call for an analysis of fiscal
impacts associated with developing the planning policies? It might Instead mean an
analysis of fiscal impacts associated with implementing the policies. An example of this
might be establishing policies, relating to the complex issues of service and revenue
transfer between a city, the county and special districts as an area is annexed. Overall,
you should consider how far you want to go in addressing fiscal impacts. Given the short
timeframes and potential complexity of the issues, it might be wise to narrow the focus for
the purposes of this initial planning policy effort.'
For these reasons, Clallam County and the cities chose to focus on the fiscal impact of urban growth areas
in adoption of policies for this section.
1. Clallam County and the cities will complete an analysis of the fiscal impact of annexation of lands
within urban growth areas. Clallam County, the cities and other public service providers shall
develop agreed upon strategies for mitigation of the fiscal impact on the county, the cities or other
service providers.
Page 27
OPEN SPACE CORRIDORS WITHIN AND BETWEEN URBAN GROWTH AREAS
The Growth Management Act requires each county and city preparing a comprehensive plan under the Act
to identify open space corridors within and between urban growth areas. They will include lands useful for
recreation, wildlife habitat, trails, and connection of critical areas. The county and cities are also required
to identify lands useful for public purposes such as recreational corridors. Local govemments should
develop policies for designation of open space corridors which can be used to separate urban growth
areas, provide travel corridors for wildlife and recreational users both within and between urban growth
areas and connect critical areas in such a manner that wildlife and recreational values are enhanced.
1. The County and the cities in Clallam County recognize that open space is vital to the quality of life
and sense of place in the county. The County and the cities should include a open space element
within their comprehensive plans which provides for a coordinated response to the issues of
protection and connection of critical areas within a system of linked greenbelts, parks and open
space to protect wildlife corridors and to enhance recreational opportunities, public access and
trail development.
2. Each County and city comprehensive plan shall identify open space corridors within and between
urban growth areas and lands useful for public purposes such as utility corridors, landfills, sewage
treatment facilities, recreation, schools, and other public uses.
3. The County and the cities shall examine the effect of critical area, shoreline and resource
protection ordinances and policies in providing travel corridors for wildlife. Where additional
connections are needed to tie critical areas together or where lands would be occupied by a public
use, the county and cities should target identified lands for acquisition of development rights.
4. Each County and city comprehensive plan should contain policies supporting the acquisition of
development rights in targeted areas within open space corridors through the use of funds
authorized by RCW 84.34.230 or from other sources such as public /private partnerships, bond
issues, dedications, conservation easements, fee and less than fee simple purchases.
5. Each County and city comprehensive plan should contain policies which promote a range of non
motorized opportunities within Clailam County in the form of multipurpose recreation and
transportation trails for users of all abilities.
6. Each County and city comprehensive plan should contain policies which promote establishment of
transportation linkages between urban growth areas, neighborhoods, activity centers, schools,
recreational resources, and other existing and proposed trails.
7. Each County and city comprehensive plan should contain policies which promote
intergovernmental cooperation in trail planning, funding, construction, and management.
8. Each County and city comprehensive plan should contain policies which promotes dedication of
public rights -of -way for construction of trails and bike lanes separate from vehicle lanes of travel in
all new roadway construction.
Page 28
IMPLEMENTATION OF COUNTY -WIDE PLANNING POLICY
The County -wide Planning Policy is written as a policy statement(s) used solely for establishing a county-
wide framework from which the Clallam County Comprehensive Plan and each city comprehensive plans
are adopted pursuant to the Growth Management Act. Because the Port of Port Angeles and Public Utility
District #1 have also agreed to adopt certain sections of this policy, the policy also serves as a framework
for the development of comprehensive plans for those agencies. This framework ensures that city and
county comprehensive plans, and Port and PUD plans, are consistent as required in RCW 36.70A.100. In
order to implement the County -wide Planning Policy, the county and each city must allow ample
opportunity for the neighboring jurisdiction, or special purpose district, to participate, review and comment
on the plan, in addition to making a finding that the plan is consistent with this planning policy.
It Is also expected, like comprehensive plans, that this document will need revision, perhaps even before
the adoption of the comprehensive plans. Therefore, a continued process of intergovernmental
coordination is anticipated in order to resolve planning policy matters.
In order to implement the County -wide Planning Policy and to ensure that the Policy is a living document,
the following policies are also to be adopted by the county, each city, the Port of Port Angeles and the
Public Utility District:
1. The county and each city shall provide appropriate opportunities for the neighboring jurisdiction
and service providers to participate in the preparation of comprehensive plans and development
regulations adopted pursuant to the Growth Management Act. Participation should at times be provided
early in the planning process, and at other times during the public review and comment period.
2. The county and each city shall implement this County -wide Planning Policy through adoption of
comprehensive plans and implementing regulations or agreements. Each comprehensive plan or
implementing regulation should include a determination that the plan or regulation is consistent with this
planning policy.
3. Any jurisdiction or the Port of Port Angeles or the Public Utility District, may initiate amendments to
the County -wide Planning Policy through ample notification to the county and each city, and the Port and
PUD. The jurisdiction initiating the amendment shall be responsible for making the necessary arrangement
of the parties and preparation of the materials. The ratification process used to adopt the County -wide
Planning Policy shall be followed.
4. The Port of Port Angeles and the Public Utility District shall implement those provisions applicable
to their jurisdiction (as specified in the ratification section which follows) through comprehensive and
capital facility plans adopted by the respective jurisdiction.
Page 29
URBAN GROWTH AREA DESIGNATIONS
1. Agreed upon population forecast and distribution by geographic subareas.
2. Agreed upon process to designate urban growth areas.
3. Agreed upon policies /principles to designate urban growth areas.
4. Agreed upon process to amend urban growth area designations.
CONTIGUOUS AND ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT
1. Agreed upon service provisions within designated urban growth areas.
2. Agreed upon service provisions outside designated urban growth areas.
3. Definition of special purpose district role in the provision of services inside and outside of urban
growth areas.
4. An agreed upon process to establish consistent and coordinated service level standards for public
facilities within geographic planning area and urban growth area. Process should also establish
how "concurrency" would be addressed from one jurisdiction to another.
5. Policies to prohibit or discourage "leap -frog" development inside urban growth areas.
6. Policies regarding annexation and phasing of development.
7. Agreed upon policies or process for consistent development standards within urban growth areas.
8. Agreed upon policies or process regarding land division and land use review within urban growth
areas and geographic planning areas.
SITING OF PUBLIC CAPITAL FACILITIES
APPENDIX A
DESIRED PLANNING POLICIES
1. Agreed upon process for identifying which public capital facilities are of a county -wide or state-
wide nature.
2. Agreed upon process for scheduling and distribution of facilities,including within urban growth
areas.
3. Agreed upon policies for location and size, environmental and design standards of public capital
facilities.
COUNTY -WIDE TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES AND STRATEGIES
1. Agreed upon process for adoption of transportation policies and strategies, including the role and
linkage with the Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization.
2. Agreed upon policies for the improvement of state highway system.
3. Agreed upon policies for the linkage and improvement of transit and non vehicular transportation
in the regional transportation network.
4. Agreed upon process for insuring consistency and coordination of level -of- service designations.
Appendix A: Desired Planning Policies June 30, 1992
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
1. Policies to encourage affordable housing opportunities through land use regulations.
2. Agreed upon strategies for encouragement and development of affordable housing.
3. Policies to ensure a fair share distribution of affordable housing in Clailam County.
4. Policies to address compensation for displacement of affordable housing with new development
JOINT COUNTY AND CITY PLANNING IN URBAN GROWTH AREAS
1. Policies to encourage consistent development standards within the urban growth area.
2. Agreed upon process for joint public facility planning.
3. Agreed upon process for financing public facilities within urban growth area.
4. Agreed upon policies for public infrastructure transition in urban growth areas.
5. Agreed upon process for intergovernmental coordination and communication of development
projects within urban growth areas.
6. Agreed upon process for adoption and amendment of coordinated and consistent plans within
urban growth areas.
COUNTY -WIDE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND EMPLOYMENT
1. Policies that consider the need for economic diversification and employment.
2. Policies that consider the county -wide linkages in economic development and employment, such
as tourism, conventions, promotion and marketing, transportation, diversified manufacturing,
retirement, forest products and infrastructure needs, etc.
3. Policies that address need for sites for economic development, particularly suitable land for
commercial and industrial development.
4. Agreed upon process for siting, coordination and consistency of economic development plan
implementation.
FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
1. Policies that consider service transfer as areas become annexed.
2. Policies that consider revenue transfer as areas become annexed.
3. Policies that consider phased annexation within urban growth areas.
OPEN SPACE CORRIDORS
1. Agreed upon policies or process to identify open space corridors within and between urban
growth areas useful for recreation.
2. Agreed upon policies or process to identify open space corridors within and between urban
growth areas useful for wildlife habitat.
3. Agreed upon policies or process to identify open space corridors within and between urban
growth areas useful for trails.
4. Agreed upon policies or process to identify open space corridors within and between urban
growth areas useful for connection of critical areas.
ii
STATE DCD
(SEEK ADVICE)
NO CONSENSUS
Figure 1
RATIFICATION PROCEDURE FOR THE COUNTY -WIDE POLICY PLAN
STATE DCD STATE DCD
(SEEK ADVICE) (SEEK ADVICE)
NO CONSENSUS COUNTY REJECTS
GROWTH COUNTY GROWTH COUNTY CITY
ROPOSAL CONSENSUS MANAGEMENT CONSENSUS CITY OR CONSENSUS MANAGEMENT CONSENSUS OR OTHER CONSENSU1 ADOPT
STEERING OTHER STEERING AGENCY POLICY
COMMITTEE AGENCY COMMITTEE (PUBLIC HEARINGS)
(PUBLIC
IEARINGS)
COUNTY RATIFIES AND
CITY(S) REJECT
GROWTH
MANAGEMENT
REGIONAL
HEARINGS
BOARD
APPENDIX B
POPULATION TRENDS
The population of Clallam County has grown from 26,396 in 1950 to 56,465 in 1990, an increase of 30,069.
A brief analysis of this growth trend, broken down into ten -year increments is given below:
TABLE 1: CLALLAM COUNTY GROWTH TRENDS
1 1950 1 1960 1 1970 1 1980 1 1990
Population 1 26,396 1 30,022 1 34,770 1 51,648 1 56,464
Growth/Year I 1 1.30 1.48 1 4.04 1 .90
Absolute 363 475 1,688 407
Growth/Year
As shown above, the period of greatest population growth in Clallam County was between 1970 and 1980.
Since 1980, the County's population has continued to grow, but at a much slower rate.
Clallam County may be broken down into six sub -areas which correspond to the County's U.S. census
divisions: Agnew Carlsborg, Clallam Bay -Neah Bay, Crescent, Forks, Port Angeles, and Sequim. (See
Figure 2.) Historical population trends for these sub -areas are difficult to isolate due to fluctuations in
census division boundaries over the years. The greatest census division boundary discrepancies exist in
the Crescent and Port Angeles subareas. To compensate for these discrepancies, trends from 1950 to
1980 were first analyzed adjusting division boundaries to make the areas compatible throughout the study
period. Unfortunately, slight discrepancies still existed, causing the Crescent population to be somewhat
overestimated and Port Angeles, correspondingly, underestimated. However, the discrepancies appear to
be minor and the trends remain significant. Historical population trends for the six sub -areas are shown in
Table 2 on the following page.
The 1990 Census was not analyzed to adjust division boundaries to make 1950 to 1970 data comparable to
1990 data. Therefore, the 1950 to 1980 trends established in Table 2 were supplemented by trends
indicated in 1980 to 1990 population data shown in Table 3 on the following page. (The 1980 data shown
below differs slightly from that given earlier since the 1980 division boundaries were previously adjusted to
make data comparable to earlier years. The 1980 data shown below is comparable to 1990 data.)
iii
v
Appendix B: Population Trends June 30, 1992
TABLE 2: CLALLAM COUNTY SUB -AREA GROWTH TRENDS
Sub -Area 1950 I 1960 1 1970 1980
Agnew Carlsborg
Population 1493 1 14381 2031 1 4825
Growth/Year I -.271 3.51 1 9.04
of County Population 5.66 1 4.791 5.84 1 9.35
Clallam Bay -Neah Bay
Population 1638 1 2343 1 2496 1 2703
Growth/Year 1 3.64 1 .63 1 .80
of County 6.21 1 7.8 1 7.181 5.23
Crescent
Population 2082 1 2155 1 1912 1 3656
Growth/Year I .34 -1.19 6.70
of County Population 7.89 1 7.18 5.50 7.08
Forks
Population 29181 32161 3899 1 8015
Growth/Year I .98 1 1.94 1 7.47
of County Population 11.05 1 10.71 1 11.21 1 15.52
Sequim
Population 27091 2919 1 3974 1 8483
Growth/Year 1 .75 1 3.13 1 7.88
of County Population 10.26 1 9.72 1 11.43 1 16.42
Port Angeles
Population 15,5561 17,9511 20,458 1 23,966
Growth/Year 1 1.44 1 1.32 1 1.60
of County Population 58.93 1 59.79 1 58.84 1 46.40
Agnew Carlsborg
Clallam Bay -Neah Bay
Crescent
Forks
Sequim
Port Angeles
TABLE 3: 1980 -1990 SUB -AREA GROWTH TRENDS
1980 1990 1990 of Growth/Year
County
4,825 6,310 11.17 1 2.72
2,703 2,966 5.25 1 .93
2,017 2,507 4.44 1 2.20
8,015 6,846 12.12 -1.56
8,483 11,076 19.62 2.70
25,605 26,759 47.39 1 .44
iv
Appendix B: Population Trends June 30, 1992
Table 4 shows population trends for the three cities of Sequim, Port Angeles and Forks. One factor which
has changed the population figures of cities is the rate of annexation. In the case of these three cities,
however, most annexations were of vacant land. Thus, the population increases still represents real
population growth of the city, versus a shift in population counts from rural areas to the city.
TABLE 4: CITY POPULATION TRENDS (1970 -1990)
1970 1980 1990
City of Port Angeles
Population 16,367 17,311 17,710
of County 47.07 33.52 31.37
Growth/Year .56 .23
City of Sequim
Population 1,549 3,013 3,616
of County 4.45 5.83 6.40
Growth/Year 6.88 1.84
City of Forks
Population 1,680 3,060 2,862
of County 4.83 I 5.92 1 5.07
Growth/Year 1 6.17 1 -.67
v
Appendix B: Population Trends June 30, 1992
The Growth Management Act requires the county to designate urban growth areas which include areas
and densities sufficient to permit the urban growth which is projected to occur in the county for the
succeeding twenty -year period. As can be seen in Table 5, the growth pattems of Clailam County over the
past twenty -year period has been towards rural growth, rather than urban growth. Table 6 shows the
change in each city's relative percentage of the census division. As can be seen in that table, the trend
within each one of those sub -areas is away from urban growth and towards rural growth.
TABLE 5: UNINCORPORATED AND URBAN GROWTH (1970 -1990)
1970 1 1980 I
Cities
Population 1 19,596 1 23,384 1
Growth/Year 1 1 1.78 1
of County Population 1 56.36 1 45.28 1
Unincorporated
Population 1 15,174 1 28,264 1
Growth/Year I I 6.42
of County Population 1 43.64 1 54.72
TABLE 6: CITY PERCENTAGE OF SUB -AREA POPULATION
1 1970
City of Port Angeles 80%
City of Sequim 38.98%
City of Forks 43.09%
vi
1
1980
72.23%
35.52%
38.18%
1
1990
24,188
.34
42.83
32,276
1.34
57.16
1990
66.18%
32.64%
41.81%
1
GP
CLALLAM/ EAH BAY
r"
1
i_ L
o
1
FORKS
t V 1 v�
1
FIGURE 2
CLALLAM COUNTY
SUB -AREAS
1'
1
CRESCENT
PORT
ANGELES
I
I
AGNEW/
CARLSBORG
SEQUIIN\
The following entities hereby certify that the policies contained within this document have been adopted
through resolution and pursuant to the agreements for adoption of this planning policy document:
JP 7e
C'iairrnan, Clailam County I36ard of Commissioners
Mayor, City of Port Angeles
Mayor, City of Sequim
Mayor, City of Forks
RATIFICATION OF COUNTY -WIDE PLANNING POLICY
292
Date
Date
Date
Date
Chairman, Port of Port Angeles Date
(policies ratified by Port: 1) urban growth area policies; 2) joint planning and contiguous and orderly development;
3) siting of public capital facilities; 4) transportation facilities and strategies; 5) economic development and employment; and 6)
implementation of county -wide planning policies.)
President, Public Utility District #1 of Gallam County Date
(policies ratified by PUD: 1) urban growth area policies; 2) joint planning and contiguous and orderly development;
3) siting of public capital facilities; and 4) implementation of county -wide planning policies.)