HomeMy WebLinkAbout093Michelle Farfan
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Hollinger, Kristy < khollinger@eaest,com >
Tuesday, October 20,2015 9:35 AM
Garth Mann (Garth.Mann@statesmangroup.com)
David W. Johnson (djohnson@cojefferson.wa.us); 'peckassoc@comcast.net'; Schipanski,
Rich
Key Topics - Fiscal Considerations
CHAPTER 4_Key Topics.docx
Hi Garth,
Here is the document we were discussing this morning - Key Topics, Fiscal Considerations
Thanks,
Kristy M. Hollinger
Planner
Kristy
B}
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, lnc., PBC
2200 Sixth Ave, Suite 707 | Seattle, WA 98121
(t) 206.452.5350 ext. 1726 | (0 206.443.7646
khollinser@eaest.com
http://www.eaest.com
1
CHAPTER 4
KEY TOPIC AREAS
Consistent with SEPA requirements, a public comment period was provided for the November
2014 Draft Supplemental ElS. During the public comment period a total of 70 comment letters
were received and public testimony was provided during a Planning Commission meeting. All of
the comments received, as well as responses to the comments, are provided in Chapter 5 of this
Final SEIS.
A number of comments (written and verbal) were received that identified common subjects; these
have been referred to as "key topic areas". Rather than providing a similar response to each
comment that shares a common theme, this chapter of the Final SEIS identifies the key topic area
and provides a discussion for each topic area. Responses to specific comments provided in
Ghapter 5 of this Final SEIS which pertain to these topic areas refer back to the applicable
discussion provided in this chapter.
The following key topics are discussed on this chapter of the Final SEIS:
o 4-1- Fiscal Considerations
o 4-2- _
Introduction
Land use development proposals inherently provide both fiscal costs and benefits. Land use
development costs can include increased demands for public services, decreased housing
affordability and increased infrastructure maintenance, while fiscal benefits can include tax
revenues, development fees and job creation. Fiscal costs to local service providers and
corresponding tar/fee revenues both typically occur incrementally, with revenues realized
generally commensurate with costs. lt should be noted that these costs and benefits are not
borne or enjoyed equally by all people, but tend to vary by location, socioeconomic characteristics,
general preferences, etc.
Pleasant Harbor Proiect Conditions of Approval
ln November 2007 Jefferson County issued the Final EIS for the proposed Pleasant Harbor
Marina and Golf Course Project. Through the public review process for the proposed project and
associated Comprehensive Plan Amendment, public comment was received regarding a number
of issues including the potential to negatively impact local service providers (school, fire, police,
EMS, parks, etc.), ability of the project to foster local job creation, and ability of the project to
provide affordable housing opportunities for new employees on the site.
ln response to these public comments, ln 2008 the Jefferson County Board of County
Commissioners conditioned the approval of the Pleasant Harbor project with 30 conditions of
approval (Ordinance 07-0128-08), several of which were intended to address public services,
employment and affordable housing issues.
Pleasant Harbor Fina, SE S
2015
Key Topics
Chapter 44-1
4.1 FISCAL CONSIDERATIONS
The November 2014 Pleasant Harbor Draft Supplemental EIS reflects revisions to the proposed
master plan to reflect the Jefferson County Commissioners conditions of approval, and provides
discussion on the relationship of proposed site development with the conditions of approval.
Public Services and Utilities
Summary of Draft SE/S Environmental Analysis
As identified in Section 3.17 of the Draft SEIS (Public Services), construction and master plan
operations on the site under the EIS alternatives would result in additional demands on local
service providers including schools, police, fire, EMS and health service. Section 3.16 of the Draft
SEIS (Utilities) indicates that construction and operations under the EIS alternatives would
increase demands on utility providers for solid waste management, sewer service and water
distribution.
As is typical of residential and commercial development projects, the costs associated with
incremental increased demand on public service and utility providers in the area would be
balanced by tax revenues and development fees paid by the applicant (construction fees and
construction sales taxes) and future residents and businesses on the site (retail sales tax,
business and occupation tax, property tax, utilities tax, and otherfees, licenses and permits); thus,
a portion of the tax revenues generated from site development would accrue to Jefferson County
and area service/utility providers to help offset costs associated with increased demands.
ln addition, as indicated above the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners conditioned
the approval of the Pleasant harbor project with additional conditions intended, in part, to further
mitigate the potential for impacts to area service/utility providers. Conditions of approval that
specifically relate to public service and utility providers include:
(c) The project developer will be required to negotiate memoranda of understanding
(MOU) or memoranda of agreement (MOA) to provide needed support for the Brinnon
school, fire district, Emergency Medical Servrbes (EMS), housing, police, public health,
parks and recreation, and transit prior to approval of the development agreement. Such
agreements will be encouraged specifically between the developer and the Pleasant
Harbor Yacht Club, and with the Slip ownefs Association regarding marina use, cosfs,
dock access, loading and unloading, and parking.
(bb) Verification of the ability to provide adequate electrical power shall be obtained from
the Mason County Public Utility District.
Additional lnformation Provided for Final SEIS
Costs for infrastructure and service demands generated by the proposal would be offset by
payments and improvements by the project. The following list highlights some of the key
infrastructure improvements and services to be provided by the project:
Realignment of Black Point Road resulting in a safety improvement.
Adding width to Black Point Road at the site entrance
a
a
Key Topics
Chapter 44-2
Pleasant Harbor Fina, SE S
_2015
Providing acceleration and deceleration lanes required by WSDOT at Highway 101 and
Black Point Road.
Reconstruction of the service road to the WDFW boat launch (this road does not currently
comply with standards).
Creation of a utility district intended to eliminate impact to the surrounding community
This district would provide the following;- Pay for management and staffing of the waste water treatment plant.- Pay for PUD extension of transmission lines and new transformers.- Monitor the condition of the aquifer.
Provide security services
a Provide a medical clinic that would be available to the community
Housinq Affordabilitv
Summary of Draft SE/S EnvironmentalAnalysis
Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners conditioned the approval of the Pleasant
harbor project with additional conditions intended, in part, to ensure affordable housing for new
operational employees generated by the proposal. Conditions of approval that specifically relate
to public service and utility providers include:
(g) Ihe developer shall commission a study of the number of jobs expected to be created
as a direct or indirect result of the MPR that earn 80%o or /ess of the Brinnon area average
median income (AMI). The developer shall provide affordable housing (e.9., no more than
30% of household income) for the Brinnon MPR workers roughly proportional to the
number of jobs created that earn 80%o or less of the Brinnon area AMl. The developer may
safrsfy this condition through dedication of land, payment of in lieu fee, or onsite housing
development.
As identified in Section 3.1 1 of the Draft SEIS, development of new employment-generating land
uses could result in up to 225 new operational jobs. lt is estimated that 223 of the 225 total
operational jobs (99 percent) would earn an average wage of 80 percent or less of the Brinnon
area average median income ($34,143). The Draft SEIS also indicates that affordable housing is
defined as housing that costs no more than 30 percent of household income.
lntended to comply with conditions of approval (g), it is proposed that onsite housing be provided
for up to 208 employees at a cost of no more than 30 percent of employee income.
a
a
a
a
Pleasant Harbor Fina, SE S
2015
Key Topics
Chapter 44-3