HomeMy WebLinkAbout108-05 - Ord. Amending Mason County Comprehensive Plan, Shoreline Master Program, and Development Regulations ORDINANCE NUMBER 108 ® 05
AMENDMENTS TOT E MASON COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,
SOURCE ORDINANCE , SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM,
AND MASON COUNTY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
AN ORDINANCE amending the Mason County Comprehensive Plan and development standards, as
set forth in the work program adopted in August 2005 , which include : Comprehensive Plan Chapter III
Planning Policies , Chapter IV Land Use (population allocations , urban area boundaries , open space,
and master development planning) , Chapter V Housing, and Chapter VIII Transportation; new Chapter
IX Shoreline Master Program, Chapter X Economic Development, Chapter XII Health and Human
Services ; Mason County Resource Ordinance Agricultural Resource Lands standards on accessory
land uses ; Mason County Development Regulations definition of essential public facilities and the
standards on structure height limits on industrial land uses ; new Mason County Code chapters 17 . 40
Airport Overlay Zone and 17 . 50 Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations ; review whether Harstine
Island Subarea Plan policies have been included in development standards ; review whether county
development standards limit the location of manufactured housing within Mason County, under the
authority of Chapters 36 . 70 and 36 . 70A RCW .
WHEREAS , the Washington State Growth Management Act (RCW 36 . 70A. 130) requires each county,
including Mason County, to take legislative action to review and revise its comprehensive plan and
development regulations to ensure that the plan and regulations continue to comply with the requirements of
the Act; and
WHEREAS , Mason County accomplished this compliance review and revision by preparing a public
participation plan (adopted on February 15 , 2005 ) and work program of tasks (adopted on June 30 , 2005 ) to
be completed by Mason County by December 1 , 2005 . As the adopted work program tasks were carried
out, no further actions for review were proposed by agencies or the public ; and
WHEREAS , as part of the public review process in workshops and public hearings before the Mason
County Planning Advisory Commission and the Mason County Board of Commissioners , the Department
of Community Development has prepared changes to the Comprehensive Plan Chapters and existing
I
mplementing ordinances , as well as, new Chapters of the Comprehensive Plan and implementing
ordinances , as noted in the work program; and
WHEREAS , in September, October, and November 2005 , the Mason County Planning Advisory
Commission discussed proposed changes and additions to the Comprehensive Plan and implementing
ordinances , and the Planning Advisory Commission members evaluated and passed motions to recommend
approval of these proposed changes and additions ; and
WHEREAS , the Mason County Board of Commissioners held public hearings about the proposed changes
and additions on November 1 , 15 , and 22 , 2005 , to consider the recommendations of the Planning Advisory
Ordinance No . 108 - 05 (continued)
Commission, and the testimony and letters of the Mason County Department of Community Development
and Mason County citizens on the proposed revisions to the Mason County Comprehensive Plan and
implementing ordinances ; and
WHEREAS , the work program tasks of reviewing urban growth area boundaries and completing the
subarea plans for Shelton and Allyn were attained in part, the Department of Community Development,
Planning Advisory Commission, and Board of County Commissioners assert to complete these tasks with
public involvement in the 2006 planning period; and
WHEREAS , based upon the staff report, text of the proposed revisions to the Mason County
Comprehensive Plan and implementing ordinances , and public testimony, the Mason County Board of
Commissioners has approved the findings of fact to support its decision as ATTACHMENT A.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED , the Mason County Board of Commissioners
hereby approves and ADOPTS the revisions amending the Mason County Comprehensive Plan and
development standards , as follows : Comprehensive Plan Chapter III Planning Policies, Chapter IV
Land Use (population allocations, urban area boundaries, open space, and master development
planning), Chapter V Housing, and Chapter VIII Transportation; new Chapter IX Shoreline Master
Program, Chapter X Economic Development, Chapter XII Health and Human Services ; Mason County
Resource Ordinance Agricultural Resource Lands standards on accessory land uses ; Mason County
Development Regulations definition of essential public facilities and the standards on structure height
limits on industrial land uses ; new Mason County Code chapters 17 . 40 Airport Overlay Zone and
17 . 50 Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations , as described by ATTACHMENT B .
DATED this 29h day of November 2005 .
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MASON COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ATTEST :
Ja i L.' Kam, , Ch irp rson
Clerk of the Board
APPROVED AS TO FORM : M6
L d' Ring Erickson, Co issioner
Prosecuting Attorney
Tim Sheldon, Commissioner
ATi ACHMENT A - ORDINANCES 10& 05 8t 109 - 05
AN ORDINANCEAMENDING THE MASON COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AND MAP FOR 205 AND MAKING CORRESPONDING
AMENDMENTS TO THE MASON COUNTY ZONING CODE AND MAP
MASON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
December 9 , 200
Findings " Growth Management
Update " - Legislative Actionired
Under RCW .
1 )
Under consideration is a 2005 update to the Mason County Comprehensive Plan and
development regulations . The changes are proposed in response to Chapter 36 . 70A .
RCW, the State Growth Management Act ( GMA ) . Mason County ' s Comprehensive Plan
includes provisions for continuing evaluation and review of the Comprehensive Plan
and implementing regulations , and that it shall only be amended through established
procedures (Mason County Comprehensive Plan : Chapter I Introduction ; 1 - 2 - The
Growth Management Act Planning Process , Comprehensive Plan Amendments , p . I -
2 . 3 ) .
2 )
The GMA, RCW 36 . 70Am 130 (4 ) , establishes a schedule whereby each city and county in
Washington must take action to review and , if needed , revise its Comprehensive Plan
and development regulations to ensure consistency with the Act , in accordance with
RCW 36 . 70A . 1 30 ( l ) . Mason County ' s deadline for this "compliance review " is
December 1 , 2005 .
3 )
The county performed a substantial public participation process and the record
provides background information on the proposal . Public participation includes public
workshops and public hearings before the Planning Commission and the Board of
Commissioners . In addition , public participation was provided through the SEPA review
process and other written public comment .
4 )
The county responded to Chapter 36 . 70A . RCW of the State Growth Management Act
as summarized below .
a ) Public Participation Program ®
Local governments must establish a public participation program for their GMA
update process under RCW 36 . 70A . 130(2) . The final legislative action for a
jurisdiction 's GMA update should include findings that a public participation program
was established and followed .
ATTACHMENT A - ORDINANCLS 108 - 05 & 109 - 05
On February 15 , 2005 , Mason County approved a public participation program in
accordance with RCW 36 . 70A . 130 ( 2 ) that identified procedures and schedules for
reviewing and , if needed , revising the comprehensive plan and development
regulations . Mason County has followed its adopted public participation program ,
including :
i ) Adoption of a 2005 - 2006 Work Program developed to outline what
changes to the Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations were
determined to be necessary to ensure the County ' s continued compliance
with GMA .
ii ) Production of a schedule for the 2005 GMA Evaluation and Update
Project consisting of four basic phases :
( 1 ) Establish the Public Participation Plan - In this Phase the County is
developed the Public Participation Plan , which was adopted as policy by
the Board of Mason County Commissioners ( Board ) on February 15 , 2005 .
( 2 ) Preliminary GMA Compliance Review - In this phase , the County
collected and analyzed data on growth trends , forecasts , and other
information in support of the update . The County also conducted a
preliminary evaluation of the comprehensive plan and development
regulations for update requirements based on changes to state law and
the extension of the comprehensive plan to 2025 . The County also held
two regional community open houses in April of 2005 to present Phase II
results and gather general public comments on the County ' s
comprehensive plan and development regulations . The County
presented its preliminary findings and comments received at the open
houses in a joint workshop meeting of the Planning Advisory Commission
( PAC ) and the Board .
( 3 ) Final GMA Compliance Review - The PAC worked together with the
County staff to review the comprehensive plan and development
regulations for GMA compliance . The PAC forwarded their
recommendations and findings to the Board and they held a public
hearing on the results of the GMA review and analysis on August 2 , 2005 .
The results were presented in the form of a Resolution and Work
Program . The public comment was invited on any proposed revisions to
the comprehensive plan or development regulations .
(4 ) Amendments and updates (if needed ) - Proposed revisions to the
comprehensive plan and / or development regulations were prepared as
needed based on the work program established under Phase III .
Additional public meetings and hearings were held before the PAC , as
needed , to make recommendations to the Board regarding specific
updates .
iii ) Opportunities for public involvement were provided throughout the
2005 GMA review and update process to encourage early and continuous
public participation .
( 1 ) As part of Phase III , there were at least twelve ( 12 ) meetings of the
Mason County PAC , including a joint meeting with the Board , from June
2
ATTACHMENT A - ORDINANCtS 108 - 05 Et 109 - 05
through November 2005 to evaluate the comprehensive .plan and
development regulations for compliance with the GMA . These meetings
were open to the public , and a general public comment period was
provided during and after those meetings .
(2) The County held two community open houses April 2005 in Shelton and
North Mason County as part of Phase II . Comment cards were distributed
at these open houses to allow written public comment to be received
via U . S . Mail or electronic mail . Comments were accepts until May 2 ,
2005 .
(3 ) The Board of Mason County Commissioners held a public hearing to
consider public input on the PAC recommendation and the GMA
Compliance Resolution and Work Program to complete Phase III . This
hearing was held on August 2 , 2005 .
(4 ) The County also worked with the local communities . Staff met and
continues to meet at least monthly with the Allyn Community
Association planning committee . In addition , staff met with
stakeholders to get their assistance in the preparation of the new
county Economic Development Element for inclusion in the county plan .
( 5 ) Written comments were welcome throughout the GMA Evaluation and
Update process . A table summarizing written comments received and
the County ' s response to those comments was prepared .
iv ) Mason County used a variety of methods to inform the public about
upcoming public meetings , availability of relevant planning documents and
reports and important milestones related to the GMA Evaluation and Update
Project .
( 1 ) Mason County kept current information for the project on the county
web site (www . co . mason . wa . us ) . The web site will also include links to
the Mason County comprehensive plan and development regulations ,
and providing an " EMAIL US " link for sending comments to the
Department of Community Development .
(2) The County maintained a list of interested persons and organizations to
receive notices of scheduled public meetings .
(3 ) The County will issue news releases announcing public meetings ,
hearings , and comment periods to the following : KMAS , KRXY, Shelton -
Mason County Journal , The Olympian , Shelton Chamber Of Commerce ,
North Mason Chamber Of Commerce , City Of Shelton , Economic
Development Council , The Sun .
(4) Public notice of all public hearings and any decisions regarding the
review and update of the comprehensive plan development regulations
were be published under " Legals " in the Shelton - Mason County Journal
classified section . Public notification of all hearings was provided at
Least 10 days before the date of the hearing . Public notification on
County adoption of this Public Participation Plan , the GMA Compliance
Resolution , and any specific revisions to the comprehensive plan or
development regulations was published in the Shelton - Mason County
Journal following adoption .
( 5 ) In addition to the public participation procedures described above , the
County utilized the following means to increase public involvement and
3
ATTACHMENT A - ORDINANCES 10 & 05 Et 109 - 05
to disseminate information : additional meetings , mailings , and
presentations at local community groups , stakeholder groups , and
professional organizations .
v ) An official project file was available for public inspection during regular
business Mason County Department of Community Development . All public
meetings , except for the Open Houses , were audio recorded . Minutes
and / or meeting summaries of all public meetings related to the GMA
Evaluation and Update were prepared and available upon request .
) Review of the Best Available Science ®
If the city or county GMA update includes revisions to its critical areas program to
include the best available science as required by RCW 36 . 70A . 172 , the final
legislative action should document in its findings the sources of scientific information
that were used , and how it was incorporated into the critical areas program .
Mason County be reviewing and updating , if needed , regulations with respect to
wetland critical areas and critical aquifer recharge areas in 2006 .
c ) State Agency Notice .
RCW 36 . 70A . 106 requires local governments to provide notice to state agencies of
their intent to adopt any amendments to GMA comprehensive plans or development
regulations . This notice must be provided to CTED at least 60 days before the planned
adoption of each amendment . For GMA updates , this notice should be provided before
each amendment that is part of the update, and before the planned adoption of the
final legislative action .
Notice of all amendments to the comprehensive plan and development regulations
adopted to fulfill the requirements of RCW 36 . 70A . 130 was sent to the Washington
State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development at least sixty
days before the amendments were adopted , in accordance with RCW 36 . 70A . 106 .
d ) Review and Revision of Comprehensive Plans and Development
Regulations Required (Jurisdictions Planning Under RCW 36 . 70A . 040 ) .
Counties and cities required to plan under RCW 36 . 70A . 040 must review, and revise if
necessary, their entire comprehensive plan and development regulations . These cities
and counties should affirm this status in their findings .
Mason County is required to plan under RCW 36 . 70A . 040 . Every seven years , RCW
36 . 70A . 130 ( 1 ) requires Mason County to take legislative action to review and , if
needed , revise its comprehensive plan and development regulations , including its
policies and regulations designating and conserving natural resource lands and
designating and protecting critical areas to comply with the requirements in
Chapter 36 . 70A RCW . Under the schedule established in RCW 36 . 70A . 130 (4 ) . the
deadline for Mason County to comply with the update required by RCW
36 . 70A . 130 ( 1 ) is December 1 , 2005 .
4
ATTACHMENT A - ORDINANCtS 108 - 05 Et 109 = 05
On July 18 , 2005 Mason County Planning Staff ( Staff ) prepared an analysis and
proposed Work Program of the comprehensive plan and development regulations
currently in effect in Mason County for consistency with the requirements of
Chapter 36 . 70A RCW . The Mason County Board of County Commissioners on August
2 , 2005 adopted this Work Program . Based on this analysis , Staff prepared
proposed revisions it concluded are needed to comply with Chapter 36 . 70A RCW .
Staff forwarded its analysis and proposed revisions to the Mason County Planning
Advisory Commission .
The Mason County Planning Advisory Commission reviewed the analysis and
proposed revisions prepared by Staff and public hearings on October 10 , November
1 , November 7 , and November 14 , 2005 to receive public comments on the analysis
and proposed revisions . Based on its review of the requirements of Chapter 36 . 70A
RCW , the analysis and proposed revisions prepared by Staff , and the public
comments received , the Planning Advisory Commission accepted the analysis and
proposed revisions and forwarded recommended findings on review and proposed
revisions to the Mason County Board of County Commissioners on November 14 ,
2005 .
The Mason County Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing on
November 29 , 2005 to receive public comments on the recommended findings on
review and proposed revisions . Based on its review of the requirements of Chapter
36 . 70A RCW , the analysis and proposed revisions prepared by Staff, the
recommended findings on review and proposed revisions forwarded by the Planning
Commission , and the public comments received , the Board of County
Commissioners finds and declares that the review and needed revisions have been
prepared in conformance with applicable law , including Chapter 36 . 70A RCW and
Chapter 43 . 21 C RCW .
Based on its review of the requirements of Chapter 36 . 70A RCW , the analysis and
proposed revisions prepared by Staff, the recommended findings on review and
proposed revisions forwarded by the Planning Commission , and the public
comments received , the Board of County Commissioners accepted the analysis and
proposed revisions and hereby finds and declares that Mason County ' s
comprehensive plan and development regulations as revised by this ordinance
comply with the requirements of Chapter 36 . 70A RCW .
From the preceding findings , it is concluded amendments to the Mason County
Comprehensive Plan , November 29 , 2005 , should be adopted as proposed and moved
by the Board .
Chair, Mason Cou y Board of ounty, Commissioners
Date
5
ATTACHMENT B - Ordi ice No . 108 - 05
ComprehensiveMason County 2005
Summary of 2005 Mason County Comprehensive Plan amendments and Mason County
Development Regulations changes recommended by the
Planning Advisory Commission
In Comprehensive PlanAmendments .
1 . Economic Development Element : A new Element providing goals and policies that
encourage and support economic development in Mason County .
2 . Manufactured Housingm A review of County policies that could restrict the location
of manufactured housing upon lands in Mason County was included in the 2005
Work Plan . Upon review, no chancies are proposed .
. Countywide Planning Policies regarding raGrowth Area sizing : An update
to Countywide Planning Policies addressing population growth and capacity , and
Urban Growth Area sizing .
Comprehensive Plan Policies regarding arstine Island: A review of
Comprehensive Plan policies for Harstine Island to ensure they are consistent with
other policies in the Comprehensive Plan was included in the 2005 Work Plan .
Site Specific Rezoneso Consideration of Rezone applications processed in 2005 .
6 . Update Comprehensive Plan Policies regarding Open Spacem Update includes
revisions to the open space corridors , and the incorporation of policies adopted in
the Mason County Master Trails Plan ,
7 . Updates to the Transportation Element : Update includes identifying State
Highways of Statewide Significance , Level of Service updates , and other related
amendments to the Transportation Element policies .
8 . Integration of the Shoreline Management Program : Incorporation of the policy
portions of the Shoreline Master Program into the Comprehensive Plan , and
integration of the regulatory portions of the Shoreline Master Program with other
regulatory codes .
9 . Population Projections : Update the allocation of population to the county' s Urban
Growth Areas and Rural Lands and revise the Comprehensive Plan growth
projection to a 2025 planning horizon .
1 . Health and Human Services Elemento A new Element providing goals and policies
that support efforts to improve the delivery of health and human services
countywide . (This is not a mandatedate )
1 . Updatest usi Element: Update data and projections to reflect a 2005 to
2025 timeline , and incorporation of the 2003 Housing deeds Assessment .
1 . Updates to the Land Use Elements Update data and projections to reflect a 2005
to 2025 timeline .
1 . Urban Growth Boundarieso Consider changes to the Urban Growth Areas in
concert with updating population projections to the 2025 timeline .
14 . Master Development Plans and Fully Contained Communitieso A new Element
providing Comprehensive Plan goals and policies establishing objectives and
providing framework for master development plans in Mason County . (This is not a
mandated update)
15 . Update to Essential Public Facilitlesm Review of County Essential Public Facilities
as defined in the Comprehensive Plan , in coordination with the City of Shelton .
110 Development Regulation Amendments .a
Airport verl one Ordinance : New chapter 17 , 40 . 010 establishes land use
zoning regulations around Sanderson Field that are specifically designed to
address issues of compatibility between the airport and surrounding land uses .
Agricultural Resource Lands : Amendment to Mason County Resource
Ordinance Section 17 . 01 . 061 that provides specific standards of review in the
evaluation of proposed land uses which addresses new state law on accessory
uses within designated Agricultural Resource Lands .
Height Limitations within the Rural Industrial Zones Amendment to Mason
County Development Regulations Section 1 . 03 . 032 . C , or, 1 . 04 . 404 . C . , providing
relevant standards of review for height limits of proposed structures used in an
industrial activity without the use of a special use permit . (This is not a
mandated update)
Mason Cguntp Comprehensive Plan — 2005 Update Economic Development Element
DRAFT - AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING ADVISORY
COMMISSION WITH BOARD OF COISSONERS COMMENTS
Chapter X
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ELEMENT
X4 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, the Economic Development
Element, is to identify and explain what the county will do to encourage and support
economic development . The County Comprehensive Plan supports this with policies : 1 )
encouraging economic development throughout Mason County that is consistent with the
adopted Comprehensive Plan, 2) promoting economic opportunity for all citizen of the
County, especially for unemployed and disadvantages persons , and; 3 ) encouraging
growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic growth, all within the capacities of
the County' s natural resources, public services, and public facilities (refer to Mason
County Comprehensive Plan, County-wide Planning Policy 8 . 1 ) .
This economic development element includes : the community setting ; a profile,
assessment, and analysis of the local economy; a summary of the relationship of the
economic development element to other portions of the Comprehensive Plan, and; an
economic development approach including goals for economic development with
policies, strategies , and objectives to implement these goals .
Preparation of the economic development element integrated a discussion of the present
economic conditions in the county, region, and state, and consideration of various
internal and external influences that may affect conditions in the future . Public
involvement included the 2004 "Future Search" economic summit sponsored by the
Economic Development Council of Mason County. Economic development goals,
policies, and strategies were further developed through a series of workshops sponsored
by the Mason County Department of Community Development held in spring 2005 . A
draft Economic Development Element was further refined through public review and the
public hearing process prior to adoption .
Definitions and abbreviations:
The following definitions and abbreviations apply within this chapter :
Action Statement : Short statements that describe embraced attributes, targets, and
actions that the community should continually strive to achieve .
Most of the action statements included in the Economic
Development Element were created during the Economic
Page X . 1
Mason ConnU Comprehensive Plan — 2005 Update Economic development Element
Development Council of Mason County' s 2004 "Future Search„
economic summit .
Fully Contained Community: As defined in the County Comprehensive Plan, a
reserve capacity for new urban development that will be
characterized by urban densities and intensities , urban
governmental services, and meets the criteria established in the
comprehensive plan and in the Revised Code of Washington
(RCW) 36 . 70A . 350 .
Goals : Statements that describe a desired future condition. Goals describe
mileposts that link your core values and vision with strategies .
Goals are used to articulate the overall expectations and intentions
of the community.
Objectives : Are SMART. That is they are :
Specific - Everyone can agree on what they mean.
Measurable - The outcome and success can be measured.
Action oriented - In order to happen, specific actions must
be taken.
Realistic - The steps to be taken are clear and doable .
Time oriented - They have a specific time frame for
completion .
Policies : Guiding principles , actions, steps , or procedures intended to
influence decisions or strategies affecting economic development.
Strategies : A series of actions , often in a specific sequence, which have been
developed to achieve specified goals .
Sustainable : In the context of business ; operating business in a profitable
manner that promotes a balance between social, economic, and
environmental interests to meet the needs of the present and future
generations .
Vision Statement : A statement or set of statements that describes the community ' s
vision for economic vitality. What is possible or attainable, based
in reality, mindful of the past but focused on the future .
FY : Fiscal Year
UGA : The adopted urban growth areas of Allyn, Belfair, and Shelton,
unless specified otherwise
Page X . 2
Mason County Comprehensive flan — 2005 Zlpdate Economic Development Element
Vision and Purposem
The vision for economic development in Mason County is to promote and support a high
quality of life for the citizens of Mason County by: 1 ) supporting existing businesses , 2)
encouraging and facilitating diverse and sustainable business expansion and
development, 3 ) expanding education and training opportunities, and; 4) broadening the
county' s tax base, all in a manner that is compatible and complementary to the county ' s
rural character and natural beauty.
X-2 COMMUNITY SETTING
Mason County is uniquely located between the metropolitan areas of Seattle, Tacoma,
and Olympia, and the rural Olympic Peninsula. The northwestern portion of the county
lies with the Olympic National Forest and Olympic National Park, with much of the
southeastern border located on Puget Sound. Over 40 percent of the county' s workforce
commutes to work elsewhere daily. Much of that traffic flows southerly to the State
capital (in Thurston County) and to Bremerton and the largest Naval shipyard on the
westcoast (in Kitsap County) . Shelton is the only incorporated city in the county and is
the seat of county government. The county includes two other urban growth areas , Allyn
and Belfair, three rural activity centers and nine hamlets . The County Comprehensive
Plan also includes a Fully Contained Community Reserve, yet to be designated . More
information on these areas can be found in Chapter IV. 2 . The Squaxin Island Tribe and
Skokomish Tribe also reside in Mason County. The county is part of the Columbia-
Pacific Resource Conservation and Economic Development District, which also includes
Grays Harbor, Pacific, and Wahkiakum Counties .
The forests products industry (forestry, lumber and wood products , plywood and pulp)
provided the economic foundation on which Mason County was built. From the time
railroads became established in the region until the 1970s the forest products sector,
including Christmas trees, logs, and other wood-based products, was the key economic
driver for the county. Beginning in the early 1980s , the forests products industry
experienced a significant, long-term decline statewide, which was coupled with a
regional decline in the 1990s . Due to the general downsizing of this industry and growth
in other business sectors over the past 25 years , a more diversified economic base
emerged within Mason County.
In 2004, the government sector (including state, county, city employees , and education)
was the single largest employer in Mason County, encompassing 30 % of the total
workforce within the county. The aquaculture industry has historically played a major
role in the economy of Mason County, and has experienced sustained growth over the
past 10 - 15 years with sales rising nearly tenfold since the late 1980 ' s . Anchored by
Mason General Hospital , which in 2004 was the fifth-largest employer in the county, the
health care sector continues to generate a significant number of jobs locally. The county
further recognizes the important, mutually beneficial economic development interests of
the Skokomish Tribe and the Squaxin Island Tribe . The high-tech fabrication industry
has also maintained a presence in the local economy.
Page X . 3
Mason County Comprehensive Plan — 2005 Update Ec®n ®neic Development Element
MASON COUNTY MAJOR EMPLOYERS 2004
Source : Economic Development Council of Mason County
Employer Description FullwTime Employees
1a Washington Correctional Center Correctional Facility 66
. Little Creek Casino/Hotel Gambling Estab. & Hotel 611
3 . Shelton School District Educational Facility 569
4 . al - art Retail 500
5 . Mason General Hospital Medical Facility 453
6 . Simpson Timber Company Lumber 400
7 . Mason County Government 360
. Taylor Shellfish , Inc . Shellfish 360
9 . Olympic Panel Products Plywood , veneer 350
10 . North Mason School District Educational Facility 284
11 . Squaxin Tribe Tribal Facility 175
12 , Safeway Groceries 16
13 . Fir Lane Health & Rehabilitation Care provider 160
1 . Skookum Lumber Company Lumber 130
15. Mason County Forest Products Lumber 120
16 . City of Shelton Government 115
17 . Mason County PUD #3 Utilities 114
18 . Skokomish Tribe Tribal Facility 11
19 . Alderbrook Inn Resort 110
20 . Pioneer School District Educational Facility 105
The county includes a number of rural-based businesses . Most of these are small
businesses with four employees or less, but collectively they account for roughly 3540%
of the total private payroll county-wide while 62 % of all businesses are located in the
rural areas as well (source : Business Demographics and the Impact of Land Use
Restrictions on the Mason County Economy; Phase II Report, April 2000) . Historically,
Mason County has been generally limited to seasonal tourism traffic ; however, aided by
the establishment of the Little Creek Casino and Hotel and the reopening of the
Alderbrook Inn, the tourism sector is an increasing important factor in the local economy.
Mason County remains a primary vacation destination for residents of the three adjacent
metropolitan centers . According to the US Census Bureau, some 5 ,200 of the nearly
26 , 000 residential units in the county are used as recreational or seasonal homes .
Vacationers come to enjoy the miles of shoreline, dozens of lakes, numerous recreational
areas , the Olympic National Forest and Olympic National Park .
Housing prices in Mason County have increased in recent years , but still lag behind
housing prices in Thurston, Pierce, and Kitsap County. Expansion of local employment
has not grown at the same rate as housing and population, which is one reason the
percentage of workforce commuters is growing and the median housing price in Mason
County increases at a lower rate than other neighboring counties . As a result, housing in
Mason County is still considered affordable, which exacerbates the current condition of
43 percent of the Mason County workforce commuting outside the county.
Page X .4
Mason County Comprehensive Plan - 2005 Update Economic Development Element
There are a number of organizations that as part of their purpose support economic
activity in Mason County. These include :
Economic Development Council of Skokomish Tribe
Mason County (EDC) Squaxin Island Tribe
® North Mason County Chamber of Port of Allyn
Commerce Port of Dewatto
® Shelton-Mason County Chamber of Port of Grapeview
Commerce Port of Hoodsport
® Port of Shelton
X 3 ECONOMIC PROFILE
Population
Mason County is a rural county that experienced sustained growth over the past three
decades . The population increased from 20, 918 in 1970 to 49 ,405 in 2000, and is
estimated to be 53 , 789 in 2005 by the Office of Financial Management (OFM) (see
Figure X4 ) .
Demographic data of Mason County indicates a steady reduction in the proportion of
seasonal homes to permanent residences, and an increase in the proportion of the
population over 55 years of age . The long-term trend in seasonal housing reflects the
change in the county from a relatively remote area to one which people increasingly live
and work or from which they commute to nearby jobs. County population projections
echo the national trend in which the large population of "baby-boomers" (individuals
born from 1946 to 1964) are entering retirement age . Mason County residents 65 years
of age or older represented 17 percent of the county population in 2000 , and is estimated
to increase to 28 percent by 2025 . This change in demographics is expected to occur due
to migration of retirees into the county and the aging of the present population.
Figure X4 Population Trend in Mason County - 1970 to 2025
120000
100000
; Population
80000
- Low Projection
60000 -
� ` - — - Int. Projection
C - 40000
CL 20000 < High Projection
0
YEAR
Page X . 5
Mason Coun!E Comprehensive flan — 2005 URdate Economic Develogment Element
Figure X®2 Age Distribution by Percent — 2000 to 2025
35 � ` � ... '.. . . � .. w. �_. _.v _ .: � wm .. ..:-W. I
® 30 ® ® ® � 6 ® ® � —
p - X ® wAge 0-4 yrs .
25
five- 19 yrs .
A - -
$24 20 _ — _ — A - 20- 24 yrs .
� ' 15 ' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -� - - 25-44yrs .
° - 4 - 45-64 yrs.
a10 = r► — 65 + yrs .
5 - -
0
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025
YEAR
Employment
The unemployment rate in Mason County has fallen steadily in the last decade, from 8 . 4
percent in 1993 to 7 . 4 percent as recently as January 2005 . This is above the State of
Washington unemployment rate of 6 .2 percent .
Table X= 1 Comparative Labor Force and Unemployment Data
(Annual Averages)
Labor Force by Year % Change in Labor
Force
Geographic 1970 1980 1994 2004 ( 1970 - ( 1994-
Area 1994) 2004)
Mason 8 , 260 11 , 020 17 , 030 23 ,420 + 33 . 4% + 37 . 5 %
County
State of 1 ,4147000 1 , 984 , 000 2 , 7161100 3 , 2337700 + 40 . 3 % + 19 . 1 %
Washington
Unemployment Rate
Mason 6 . 9 % 7 . 6% 8 . 4% T5%
County
State of 9 . 2 % 7 . 9% 6 . 4%0 6 . 2%
Washington
Source : State of Washington Employment Security Department ,
Page X . 6
Mason County Comprehensive Plan — 2005 Update Economic Development Element
On average, income per capita in Mason County is lower than state and federal per capita
incomes . Percent change in the per capita income in Mason County during the 1990s
was lower than the rest of the state, but kept pace with the US average .
The median household income in Mason County grew at a faster rate from 1990-2003
than in the Slate of Washinton and the rest of the nation. The proportion of individuals
living at the federal poverty level is slightly greater in Mason County than in the State .
Table Xm2 Comparative Per Capita erso Income Data
1970 1980 1990 2003 % 'Change 1990
County 2003
Mason County $3 , 604 $ 8 , 963 $ 14 , 615 $ 24 , 689 68 . 9%
State of Washington $4 , 191 $ 101832 $ 19 , 865 $33 , 254 67 . 4%
United States $4 , 085 $ 10 , 114 $ 1 % 477 $29 , 845 53 . 2%
Source : U . S . Bureau of Economic Analysis
Table X-3 Comparative Median HouseholdIncomes
Median % Individuals Below
Household % Change Poverty Level
Jurisdiction Income ( 1999) 1990-2000
Mason County $ 39 , 586 50 . 5 % 12 . 2 %
Washington State 1 $451776 1 46 . 8% 10 . 6%
United States 1 $41 , 944 39 . 6% 12 . 4%
Source : U. S . Census Bureau , 2000 Census .
X4 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The economic vitality of the community is critical to the implementation of the Mason
County vision statement for the communty, and to achieving the goals and objectives
within its comprehensive plan.
A fundamental goal of this Economic Development Element is to diversify and grow
Mason County' s economic base . This diversification of the economy would promote the
creation of new businesses thus expanding employment and would mitigate the impact of
cyclical recressions while increasing tax revenues .
The county ' s comprehensive plan includes policies, programs and initiatives regarding
land use, transportation and other capitial facilities . The success of the county' s
economic development planning is interrelated to the achievement of other portions of
the county' s 20-year plan . The intent of this Element is to develop policies and strategies
that are mutually supportive with other portions of the comprehensive plan, recognizing
the reciprical benefits of coordinated policies .
Page X . 7
Mason County Comprehensive Plan — 2005 Update Economic Development Element
X4 ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSIS
There are several market factors influencing economic growth locally. In some markets ,
conditions have remained relatively static (e . g . agriculture) while other markets
experienced profound changes over the last 15 -20 years (e . g . information technologies) .
To most effectively promote economic growth locally, Mason County should take into
account present and future market conditions and the various external influences
affecting economic conditions locally and regionally when considering economic policies
and strategies . For example, the second Tacoma Narrows Bridge, scheduled for
completion in 2007 , and a 80, 000- seat race track being considered in south Kitsap
County are projects that will alter future economic conditions in Mason County. Land
availability constraints regionally may also affect growth patterns locally.
The established resource-based industries , state, city and county government, education
and training, and Mason General Hospital represent large employers providing a sound
foundation from which the local economy can expand . Olympic College in Shelton
provides local access to post secondary education, and several partnerships and programs
provide technical training, retraining, and support services for, aged, displaced and
dislocated workers, and disadvantaged youth. Local access to quality education is
considered critical to encourage economic expansion and promoting a higher quality of
life .
The county' s rustic beauty and abundance of open space can promote economic
development . The county can capitalize on the the rural character, abundant natural
beauty in the surroundings , and proximity to shorelines and the Olympics to expand
tourism and recreational opportunities . Existing cottage industries make a significant
contribution to the local economy, and the county must continue to support these business
activities and facilitate expansion and new development when consistent with the
predominant rural character. A proper definition of Mason County' s rural character must
include that the County' s rural areas have in the past and continue today to provide vital
business sites for small businesses to spawn and grow. The county must maintain
policies which foster and sustain these small business opportunities .
Prospects for business expansion and development exist through the air transport
capabilities from the Port of Shelton, existing rail and highway access , and local
investment in telecommunications infrastructure . Recent infrastructure improvements
initiated by the County, such as the Belfair Water District system upgrades and the
installation of wastewater treatment facilties in Allyn, and improvements to the rail
loading facilities at the Port of Shelton have improved conditions for development and
investment locally. Several planned improvements should further promote economic
expansion within the county. The following infrastructure improvement projects and
estimated costs are included in the county' s six-year Capital Facilities Plan :
North Bay Sewer System Facility and System Improvements ($ 60, 000)
North Bay Sewer System Overflow Reroute ($ 545 , 000)
® North Bay Sewer System Treatment Plant Capacity Upgrades ($ 550 , 000)
Page X. 8
Masora Countv Comprehensive flan — 2005 Update Economic Development Element
• Belfair Area Sewer Improvements ($ 32 ,250 , 000)
• Hoodsport Area Sewer Improvements ($21 , 200 ,000)
• Harstene Pointe Sewer Plant Outfall Extension and Operational Upgrades
($ 540 , 000)
These projects will promote business expansion and faciliate residential and commercial
development at urban densities within the Allyn and Belfair Urban Growth Areas , and
support the shellfish and tourism industries by mitigating current water quality issues and
addressing wastewater impacts from future development on local waters . Funding
sources for the more costly projects include grants and loans , but there is the potential for
other state and federal funding sources to assist in their implementation . In 2005 , the
State legislature committed funding for several local capital and transportation projects ,
which include :
Sewer facilities in Belfair ($ 16 mil . )
• Shelton Regional Water, Wastewater and Sewer Project ($ 14 . 7 mil .)
• Wastewater treatment facilities design, Hoodsport/Skokomish Reservation
area ($ 1 mil . )
• Improvements to septic systems , Hoodsport ($ 320 , 000)
• Stormwater management plans at Hoodsport and Belfair ($ 300, 000)
• Mason Conservation District for constructing a manure waste control facility
($ 560, 000)
• Mission Creek Womens Corrections Center 120-bed expansion ($ 3 . 4 mil .)
• Construction of the Belfair Bypass ($ 15 mil . )
• State Route 3 improvements in Belfair ($ 15 . 7 mil . )
• Hwy. 101 / Lynch Road improvements ($ 1 mil . )
• Hwy. 101 /Purdy Creek Bridge replacement ($ 11 mil.)
• SR 106/ SR 3 signalization improvements ($ 1 mil . )
• New northbound ramp @ SR 3 / Hwy. 101 ($ 3 mil . )
• SR 3 improvements from Goldsborough Creek Bridge to Mill Creek Bridge
(FY 2009 - $ 11 mil .)
• Paving projects @ SR 119 and Hwy. 101 ($ 8 mil . )
• Realignment of SR 302 ($ 5 mil .)
These projects will promote economic development by improving local transportation
systems , supporting expansion of existing facilities, providing necessary infrastructure to
support future development, and by supplying construction-related employment during
development . These efforts could be collaborated by the establishment of Special
Assessment Districts and Local Improvement Districts , particularly in designated
industrial and commercial areas, for funding the construction of utilities , transportation,
and other facilities . Preparing a Coordinated Water System Plan (CWSP) to serve
specific areas would also promote economic investment by addressing issues related to
inadequate water supply and reliability of water service .
Page X. 9
Mason County Comprehensive Plan = 2005 Update Economic Development Element
The agriculture, aquaculture , fishing, and forestry sectors , and related value- added
processing collectively represent an export- oriented segment of the manufacuring sector
providing long-term, primarily living wage employment locally. Mason County must
remain proactive to ensure the sustainability of these sectors , by reviewing and updating
water quality control regulations , adopting performance measures that lower the levels of
urban-based pollutants entering waterways , and considering measures that would protect
current resource-based operations and facilitate potential future expansion . Protection of
the long-term forest land use designation, and maintaining provisions that ensure
compatibility between resource lands and adjacent land uses will also help support the
long-term viability of these sectors . The commercial timber industry, local conservation
districts , watershed planning groups and other organizations are very proactive in
watershed conservation and the implementation of watershed restoration projects that
enhance water quality county-wide . These efforts indirectly benefit the entire communty,
and more directly benefit the aquaculture and other resource-based industries that rely on
a clean environment. However, the full benefit of watershed management is only
realized when measures are collaborated with all stakeholders, property owners and
tenants . The county should continue to proactively encourage and support coordination
and collaboration in ongoing watershed conservation efforts .
Lumber and wood products manufacturing represents the bulk of the manufacturing
sector in Mason County. Simpson Timber recently completed a multi-million dollar
upgrade at their Shelton facilities to enhance the milling capability at this site . Increases
in value added production and other industry changes have further diversified the wood
products industry. Aerospace manufacturing has been a cyclical industry both locally
and within the State, but has remained an important component of the local ecomomy
with growth potential . The food processing industry has grown in recent years, mostly in
seafood processing and generally due to the areas ' competitive advantage resulting from
the abundance of productive shellfish beds . However, the shift from the mainly resource-
based manufacturing economy that began in the 1980s to a more diversified employment
base, including boosts in generally lower wage service sector employment, is likely to
continue as the population increases .
Accommodating business start-ups and expanding existing industries located in the rural
areas could be very important to the long-term economic health of Mason County. It is
estimated that 55 -60% of Mason County businesses with employees are located outside
the UGA ' s . A key to luring new industries to the county' s many underutilized and
vacant commercial and industrial sites would be improving and expanding existing water,
sewer, stormwater, and transporation systems . Other methods to attract industry to
Mason County could include : ( 1 ) establishing and maintaining an inventory of
commercial and industrial designated lands to help determine if adequate industrial and
commercial lands exist to meet current and future needs ; (2) coordinating resources to
construct the necessary infrastructure making industrial and commercial sites "building
ready" ; (3 ) developing tools that assist industry in evaluating the potential for
development and expansion of specific sites ; (4) seeking ways to allow industrial
businesses too large for available urban sites to locate in rural areas ; (5 ) reviewing the
zoning regulations and building permit processes to make permitting commercial and
Page X . 10
Mason County Comprehensive Plan — 2045 glpdate Economic Development Element
industrial developments more predictable , efficient, effective and timely; (6) re-
evaluating county policies on business development and expansion in the county' s rural
areas , and; (7) creating incentives for attracting start-ups and assisting existing firms with
expansion and/or the relocation efforts .
The health care and human services sector of the economy offers significant growth
potential . Mason County benefits from Mason General Hospital, which provides an
anchor to the local health care sector. However, as in other rural communities, patients
regularly travel out of the area to receive medical services and treatment . Reasons for
this may include : ( 1 ) the limited number of health care providers located in Mason
County; (2) recent migrants to the county choose to retain the services of providers they
are already familiar with, (3 ) local providers are not affiliated with the group insurance
plans provided by local employers, and : (4) Northeast Mason County residents (Allyn
and Belfair) are closer to emergency and urgent care providers located in Kitsap County
than Mason General Hospital . In addition, there is not an urgent care facility or Federal
Qualified Health Clinic (FQHC) in Mason County, and the number of charity cases and
write-offs at Mason General Hospital has risen significantly in recent years . These and
other factors are having an adverse affect on the growth and viability of the health care
sector. In April 2005 , the county was awarded a National Association of Counties
(NACO) grant to assist the county in understanding residents ' utilization patterns , the role
of the health care sector in the local economy, and the potential for growth in this sector.
The results of this effort should be utilized in the preparation of refined goals, policies,
and strategies that address demographic changes on the horizon and support the
expansion of health care services locally.
Primarily due to the area' s scenic beauty, plentiful outdoor recreation, and proximity to
major population centers, Mason County has served as a vacation destination for the
Greater Puget Sound. Presently, 20 . 1 percent of the housing units in Mason County are
vacation homes, with seasonal visitors supporting tourist-oriented businesses . In
addition, 17 percent of the population is 65 years of age or older; as members of the
"baby-boom" generation continue to retire the proportion of the population in this age
group is expected to increase to 28 percent by 2025 . These local demographic changes
will also occur on a regional and national level, and could provide opportunities to
expand leisure-oriented business activities in the county. Local tourism opportunities
were further bolstered by two recent developments : the new hotel at the Squaxin Island
Tribe ' s Little Creek Casino , and the reopening of the renovated Alderbrook Inn. These
destinations, along with the Mason County Fairgrounds and Convention Center and the
abundant outdoor recreation, presently make up the key components of the tourism
sector. The Mason County Tourism Task Force has historically represented Mason
County in coordinating tourism promotion and development with the North Mason
Chamber of Commerce and the Shelton/Mason Chamber of Commerce . Mason County
has retained a consultant to assist in coordinating the efforts of key shakeholders in
evaluating resources , understanding hinderances , and in developing strategies to improve
tourism promotion . The county should support a coordinated approach in developing and
implementing a tourism marketing strategy, and consider a more broad, regional
approach to promote tourism, if recommended by the county ' s consultant .
Page X . 11
Mason County Comprehensive Plan — 2005 Update Economic (Development Element
In the State of Washington, counties and cities are prohibited from using public funds for
financing private investment . This places Mason County and the region at a competitive
disadvantage in recruiting and developing business , as several states do not have similar
restrictions . Creating innovative methods to provide start-up and expanding firms with
incentives and access to resources would help offset this condition. Participating in local
and regional partnerships to encourage economic growth is a growing trend that could
facilitate business development, particularly expansion in the tourism and health care
services sectors . The Economic Development Council of Mason County (EDC) is the
most recognized organization promoting economic development in Mason County, and is
a participant in the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy for the Columbia-
Pacific region .
X4 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT APPROACH
The following principles summarize the community' s philosophy regarding economic
development objectives (see Chapter X-6 . 1 ) . The action statements , goals, and policies,
are intended to provide direction for the implemetation of economic development in
Mason County (see Chapter X- 6 . 2) . These goals and policies are further supported by
implementation strategies and objectives (see Chapter X- 6 . 3 ) .
X-6 . 1 Economic Development Principles
The following statements summarize the community ' s philosophy on economic
development :
1 . Maintaining Mason County' s rural character is vital to preserving the
quality of life enjoyed by the community. Future economic development
must consider the compatibility of adjacent uses and ensure that the
community' s rural character is maintained.
2 . Mason County supports the concept of sustainability in economic
development, that business must strike a balance between social,
economic, and environmental interests to meet the needs of the present
and future generations .
3 . The county must strive toward economic diversity, and promote business
opportunities that result in a broadened economic base . Business
expansion should strive to capitalize on :
a) anticipated increases in the proportion of individuals 65 years of age
and older residing in Mason County over the next 20 years , and ;
b) anticipated continued growth in the natural resources industries , with
an eye toward manufacunng and export opportunities .
4 . A tep priority for Mason County must continue to be supporting local
resource-based industries, recognizing the community possesses a
significant competitive advantage and investment in these sectors .
5 . To remain competitive , the county should enable a favorable business
environment, ensuring that the permit process is more predictable,
efficient, and timely.
Page X . 12
Mason County Comprehensive flan — 2005 Update Economic Development Element
6 . The county shall strive to increase the number of citizens that both live
and work in Mason County. Expansion in employment should include
economic opportunities for local high school graduates that wish to live
and work locally, and adults seeking training and/or retraining in pursuit
of new career opportunities .
7 . Private, local and state investment to construct infrastructure is necessary
for achieving desired economic development . Capital infrastructure
improvements are needed to promote industrial and commercial
development within the UGA ' s, and for protecting rural areas .
X-6 . 2 General County-wide Planning Goals and Policies :
Goal 1 :
Mason County shall promote economic vitality while protecting and maintaining a rural
lifestyle, balancing business and industrial development with environmental protection.
Policies :
1 . 1 Recognize that environmental quality and economic development are
complementary objectives that should be achieved simultaneously.
1 . 2 Support business activities in the rural areas and facilitate expansion and new
development when consistent with the predominant rural character and state law.
[Refer to X- 6 . 3 (C) , (D) and (J) for implementation strategies and objectives . ]
Goal 2 :
Ensure that the permit process is predictable, efficient and timely. [Refer to X-6 . 3 (B) for
implementation strategies and objectives . ]
Business Expansion
Action Statement : Develop and maintain a business friendly environment that
encourages business development compatible with the environment of Mason County.
Goal 3 :
Support sustainable business and industrial development which : 1 ) Strengthens and
diversifies the economic base ; 2) promotes predominantly living-wage jobs and economic
opportunity that preserves a high quality of life for all citizens , and ; 3 ) develops and
operates in a manner compatible with the natural environment .
Policies :
Page X . 13
Mason County Comprehensive Plan — 2005 Update WWRI mmpww Economic Development Element
3 . 1 Promote, support, and strengthen existing business and industry, and assist
in attracting new business to the county, adding to the diversity of
economic opportunity and employment.
3 . 2 Support and coordinate economic expansion and diversification to support
capital facilities , public transit and transportation, urban governmental
services and balance business and industrial development with
environmental protection .
3 . 3 Provide areas designated for industrial use large enough to accommodate a
number of industrial uses in clusters, so that the area may be developed in
a coordinated fashion and provided with a variety of parcel sizes .
3 . 4 Allow limited changes or expansion to non-conforming businesses in rural
areas provided : 1 ) detrimental impacts to adjacent properties will not be
increased or intensified; 2) proposed changes in use or expansion complies
with adopted performance standards ; 3 ) proposed change would not result
in a formerly small operation dominating the vicinity; and, 4) expansion or
change of use will be keeping with the rural character.
3 . 5 Protect long-term forest land use designations and maintain provisions that
ensure compatibility between resource lands and adjacent land uses .
[Refer to X-6 . 3 (A) , (B) , (E) and (G) for implementation strategies and objectives . ]
Goal 4 .
Promote and foster a community where business is encouraged to advance solutions to
issues impeding economic development ; and government and education are encouraged
to recognize, appreciate, and adopt an entrepreneurial spirit .
Policies :
4 . 1 Support and facilitate communication between key stakeholders by
providing a forum for discussing impediments to economic development
and the encouragement of economic opportunities .
4 . 2 Promote a positive regulatory culture with a bias toward making decisions .
[Refer to X-6 . 3 (B) for implementation strategies and objectives . ]
Goal 5 :
Encourage cooperative support between public agencies and the private sector for sharing
costs related to industrial and commercial business recruitment .
Page X . 14
Mason County Comprehensive Plan — 2005 U2date Economic Development Element
Policies :
5 . 1 Support coordination of economic development activities with the Skokomish
Tribe and Squaxin Island Tribe .
5 . 2 Consider providing funding and other means of
support for the EDC .
[Refer to X- 6 . 3 (E) and (H) for implementation strategies and objectives . ]
Education and Job Training
Action Statement : Provide proactive and committed support to our county's learning
communities as their efforts pertain to workforce development, enabling the delivery of a
variety of quality educational opportunities for youth and adults , effectively preparing our
citizens for the future and in support of our employment needs .
Goal 6 .
Expand opportunities for secondary education and job training locally, and encourage and
support high quality educational facilities and programs in Mason County.
Policies :
6 . 1 Mason County shall assist educators in matching vocational training with
industry needs through :
6 . 1 (a) Promoting and assisting communication between employers and
educators to match training and education needs .
6 . 1 (b) Supporting organizations that facilitate and provide professional
training and retraining.
6 . 1 (c) Supporting organizations that improve exposure to job
opportunities in Mason County.
Goal 7 :
Mason County shall encourage and support local school districts in maintaining existing
and developing facilities .
Policies :
7 . 1 Mason County shall assist local school districts in facilities expansion and
upgrades by coordinating with the school districts , landowners and developers in
locating potential sites for future school facilities .
Page X . 15
Mason Couniy Comprehensive Flan - 2005 iJpdate Economic Development Element
7 . 2 Investigate the feasibility to provide funding assistance to local school
districts developing facilities and/or programs with Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) funds .
In {r°astr°ucture
Action Statement : Build and maintain capital facilities that enable and support
community functions and economic development while complementing the environment .
Goal 8 :
When prioritizing funding of Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Capital
Facilities Plan (CFP) projects, the county shall give higher consideration to projects
serving areas within the UGAs than those in rural areas .
Goal 9 :
Mason County shall support the long-term viability of Sanderson Field and proposed
expansion of industrial development at the Port of Shelton.
Policies :
9 . 1 Ensure future county land use decisions protect and preserve the continued
viability and operation of rail service, and the airfield, facilities , and runway
protection zone at Sanderson Field.
9 . 2 The county shall consider alternatives for improving access and utilization of the
existing Navy-owned rail corridor to expand rail freight service capabilities .
9 . 3 Support and assist the State, the City of Shelton and the Port of Shelton with the
Shelton Regional Water, Wastewater, and Sewer Facility Plan, serving the remaining
undeveloped and underutilized areas of the Port of Shelton and future development of
the surrounding areas within the City of Shelton Urban Growth Area, and work to
ensure that surrounding land uses served are compatible with the Airport Master Plan .
9 . 4 Cooper-atewith. the City of Skelton and. Poft of Sheltea in developing ifivestinm
fes-
Goal 10 :
Page X . 16
Mason County Comprehensive flan — 2005 Update F Economic Development Element
Support the coordination and development of capital facilities and public improvements
as a priority for the commercial and industrial-zoned portions of the Urban Growth
Areas, and other appropriate areas .
Policies :
10 . 1 Strengthen efforts to lobby State and Federal agencies for revenue sharing,
securing grants, and bonds or other funding mechanisms for financing important
infrastructure projects .
10 . 2 Supp oft the PO A Of Shelton and the City o 7 _
114astef C lan
10 . 3 Support and coordinate infrastructure development serving recreation in rural
areas that improves the quality of life .for Mason County citizensprescnt F- n
their- enviroBraeiAal ,,, paetJ.
10 . 4 Promote and support establishing a county-wide Coordinated Water System
Plan (CWSP) , to address issues related to inadequate water supply and reliability of
water service, by 2008 .
[Refer to X-6 . 3 (A) for implementation strategies and objectives . ]
Buildable Land Supply
Action Statement : Ensure that Mason County includes buildable lands sufficient to
accommodate forecasted population, housing growth, and business development, to foster
community vitality and economic development .
Goal 11 :
Work with other general-purpose governments to eEnsure that the county maintains an
adequate supply of industrial and commercial designated lands that will accommodate
orderly and compatible industrial and commercial business expansion and development.
[Refer to X- 6 . 3 (F) for implementation strategies and objectives . ]
Goal 12 :
Support and encourage the extension of utilities , transportation, and other facilities to
areas designated industrial and commercial in advance of need, making future
development of these areas more attractive and viable .
Policies :
Page X . 17
Mason County Comprehensive flan — 2005 Ugdate Economic Development Element
12 . 1 . The county shall consider long-term industrial and commercial development
growth projections and the time necessary to design and construct needed capital
facilities when prioritizing capital facilities projects countywide .
12 . 2 . The county shall support regional coordination and funding to develop
capital facilities .
12 . 3 . The county shall ensure that infrastructure is adequately sized or expandable
to accommodate projected growth .
[Refer to X-6 . 3 (A) , (F) and (G) for implementation strategies and objectives . ]
Goal 13 :
Discourage under utilization of land by promoting, encouraging, and supporting
residential development consistent with adopted urban growth area plans and the State
Growth Management Act.
Policies :
13 . 1 . Promote and facilitate the development of infrastructure necessary to
support the intensity of development envisioned within the UGA ' s .
[Refer to X-6 . 3 (A) and (C) for implementation strategies and objectives . ]
Goal 14 :
Encourage the provision of technology that fosters business development, including
home-based businesses , (i . e . , telecommuting, fiber optics , etc . ) .
Policies :
14 . 1 . Continue to support capital investment of infrastructure (i . e . , fiber optic
lines, cell towers) that improve communication and internet access capabilities for
businesses in Mason County, consistent with GMA goals and sustainability
objectives .
Goal 15 :
Coordinate economic development and land use activities with the Skokomish Tribe and
Squaxin Island Tribe, including the appropriate zoning of lands adjacent to reservation
lands .
[Refer to X- 6 . 3 (F) for implementation strategies and objectives . ]
Page X . 1 8
Mason County Comprehensive Plan — 2005 Update Economic Development Element
Health and Human .Services
Action Statement : Local access to affordable quality health, human and social
services in Mason County before 2020 .
Goal 16 :
Promote economic development and improve the quality of life for Mason County
citizens through working with social services providers and the expansion of local health
care systems .
Policies :
16 . 1 . The county shall actively engage (through assistance, coordination, and/or
funding) with community agencies and organizations to maintain and improve the
availability of needed health and human services for ALL Mason County residents .
16 . 2 . The county shall assist in identifying emerging health and human needs and
working with health care service providers to develop local community responses that
capitalize on these emerging trends .
16 . 3 . The county shall work with the local health care service providers to establish a
community-based clinic in North Mason County.
[Refer to X-6 . 3 (H) for implementation strategies and objectives . ]
Tourism
Action Statement : Support and prepare for tourism as a elean industry bringing new
jobs and investment to Mason County.
Goal 17 :
Promote the development of tourist and tourist-related activities as part of an economic
diversity strategy providing employment and business opportunities in Mason County.
Policies :
17 . 1 . Actively support tourism (include agritourism and ecotourism), recreation,
cultural heritage , and social activities as a significant element in expanding
employment opportunities .
17 . 2 . Support established and promote community aa ,ana4 events that expand year-
round tourism (i . e . Mason County Fair and NPRA Rodeo , ®ysterfest, festivals ,
exhibitions, rallies)
Page X . 19
Mason County Comprehensive Plan — 2005 Update Economic Development Element
17 . 3 . Investigate the feasibility of establishing and maintaining informational kiosks ,
maps, and directional signs identifying the location of prominent historic , cultural,
recreational, and environmental amenities .
17 . 4 . Ensure tourism and tourism-related activities do not adversely impact Mason
County ' s environmental quality.
[Refer to X-6 . 3 (I) for implementation strategies and objectives . ]
X4. 3 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
Strategies and objectives to promote economic development :
A . The Mason County Public Works Department shall delineate the process for
establishing Special Assessment Districts and Local Improvement Districts ,
particularly in designated industrial and commercial areas, specifically created to
fund the construction of utilities, transportation, and other facilities . Key
objectives in this process would include :
1 . To publish the description of Special Assessment Districts and Local
Improvement Districts and the process for their creation.
2 . To promote Special Assessment Districts or Local Improvement Districts
where the extension or provision of public infrastructure is not cost effective .
3 . To facilitate coordination between utility providers to more effectively and
efficiently develop and maintain capital facilities .
B . The Mason County Department of Community Development (DCD) shall
establish and provide administrative and managerial support for a Permit
Streamlining and Regulatory Reform Committee . Main objectives of this
committee would include :
1 . To ensure the committee includes key stakeholders and obtains input from
representatives from both the public and private sector.
2 . To recommend revisions making the permit process for commercial and
industrial development more predictable , efficient, effective and timely.
3 . To work within the framework of existing State and Federal laws , focusing on
local governmental regulations in recommending changes .
C . The Mason County Department of Community Development (DCD) shall
coordinate with the Department of Ecology to determine the feasibility of
establishing a county-managed land-banking program . Key objectives of this land
bank would include :
Page X . 20
Mason County Comprehensive flan - 2005 Update Economic development Element
1 . To both enhance environmental value and facilitate industrial and commercial
development .
2 . To provide a mechanism to allow the transfer or selling of "credits" for
mitigating environmental impacts of new industrial and commercial projects .
D . Mason County shall proactively support the local aquaculture business sector and
facilitate potential expansion through the following measures :
1 . Mason County Public Works and Environmental Health shall update water
quality controls county-wide, including storm water treatment and on- site
sewage regulations , to lower the levels of pollutants and silt entering
waterways . Considerations should include :
a. Adopting provisions within the most recent State Department Ecology
Stormwater Manual .
b . Adopting low-impact development regulations for areas in proximity to
shellfish growing areas .
c . Amending provisions regulating the operation and maintenance of on-site
sewage systems .
2 . Support the creation of incentives designed to maintain or improve water
quality.
3 . The Mason County Department of Community Development (DCD) shall
investigate the feasibility of creating an expedited process to secure
development and environmental permits for new and/or expanded aquaculture
operations .
4 . Ensure adequate boater pumpout, toilet and pet waste facilities are provided
for shoreline and marine water recreation to minimize water quality impacts .
E . Enhance Mason County' s competitive advantage for attracting business by
developing creative incentives for attracting start-ups and for encouraging
expansion of existing firms . Key objectives include :
1 . To strengthen communication and coordination with key stakeholders and
better understand the needs of start-up businesses .
2 . Consider entering into new alliances and partnerships that will broaden
business opportunities and expose local competitive advantages to new
business ventures considering location options .
Page X . 21
Mason County Comprehensive Flan — 2005 Update Economic Development Element
F . The Mason County Department of Community Development (DCD) shall
coordinate the completion of a buildable lands assessment . Key objectives of this
buildable lands assessment would include :
1 . To establish and maintain an inventory of commercial and industrial
designated lands that can be used to determine if adequate areas are
designated industrial and commercial to meet current and future needs .
Rezone lands as necessary to address future needs .
2 . To use county Geographic Information Systems (GIS ) to locate various
infrastructure (rail , water, sewer, three-phase power, etc . ) in proximity to
commercial and industrial zoned lands , to assist industry in evaluating sites
for potential business development and expansion.
3 . To establish and maintain an inventory of all residential parcels outside the
Urban Growth Areas (UGAs), to more precisely determine the capacity of
these lands as the county projects future residential development.
4 . To assist the county in locating and sizing industrial reserve overlay zones that
prohibit the accommodation of other incompatible uses adjacent or in
proximity of areas where the future expansion of industrial uses is anticipated.
The industrial reserve overlay zones are to be established by 2008 .
5 . Consider establishing residential reserve overlay zoning for certain areas
adjacent to Urban Growth Areas , where some adverse environmental impacts
resulting from other incompatible uses , such as heavy industrial, could occur.
G. The Mason County Department of Community Development (DCD) shall report
on the possible use of GMA provisions to allow industrial businesses too large for
available urban sites to locate in rural areas .
H . Implement health and human service policies addressing local needs and that
support improved retention of health-related revenues . Approaches should
include :
1 . Identify and prioritize critical health and human services essential to the
economic well-being and health status of Mason County and its residents .
2 . Identify gaps in services through an inventory of existing services and
comparing to critical services .
3 . Prioritize services gaps and provide leadership to enable the community to
develop strategic plan(s) to address priority gaps . Review and update
essential services analysis , gaps analysis and strategic plan(s) on a biannual
basis .
Page X . 22
Mason County Comprehensive flare — 2005 Update Economic Development Element
4 . Seek ways to support increasing the number of local providers , and assist
local providers to offset Federal cuts in the reimbursement rates under
Medicare and Medicaid .
5 . Encourage and create opportunities for local businesses and citizens to utilize
and maximize the local health and human services systems .
I. Support and facilitate a coordinated approach in developing and implementing a
county-wide tourism marketing strategy. Key objectives should include :
1 . Coordinate with key stakeholders and a hired consultant evaluating Mason
County' s tourism industry and considering strategies to expand the tourism
industry.
2 . Provide adequate infrastructure for tourist services and promote agritourism,
eco -tourism, and native and cultural tourism with revenue generated from the
lodging tax .
3 . Consider adopting and supporting a regional approach to promote tourism
locally.
J . The Mason County Department of Community Development (DCD) shall update
county policies on business development and expansion in the county ' s rural
areas , and the development regulations for the rural commercial, rural industrial,
rural natural resource, and rural tourist districts , Key objectives in the adoption of
new and modified policies and regulations would include :
1 . Establishing a framework for discussion and input that includes a broad range
of citizens and stakeholders .
2 . Recommending policies and regulations that address balancing economic
expansion with preserving the quality of life enjoyed by the community.
3 . Crafting a definition for "Rural Character" that is specific to Mason County.
4 . Recommending commercial and industrial activities that would be appropriate
within the rural areas, and compatible with the "Rural Character" as defined
by Mason County.
5 . To consider tailoring the policies and regulations to address the differing
conditions of business expansion and new business development .
6 . To work within the framework of existing State and Federal laws , focusing on
local governmental regulations in recommending changes .
Page X. 23
Comprehensive2005 Mason County
Review
CountymWide PlanningPolicies Sizing
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Policies BCC hearing Nov. 2005 p,
MASON COUNTY COMPREHENSIVEPOLICIES
Chapter IV. 2 : POPULATION of the Mason County Comprehensive Plan be amended as
follows :
2 . Minimizing restrictions on the supply of urban land and offsetting rising
housing costs by designating an Urban Growth Area of sufficient size to accommodate
growth 25 50% greater than projected .
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Policies BCC hearing Nov. 2005 g
Comprehensive2005 Mason County
ReviewliHarstine Island
MASON COUNTY H IVE PLAN POLICIES
Chapter 111 . : RESOURCE LANDS of the Mason County Comprehensive Plan be
amended as follows :
Ilarstine Island Sub-Area Plan
B 2 Fer-®st Use.
B 2 a :: Eneour-age fe estFy as a-preferred im d. use, ffl.the suvmrca•
island;B 2 bi Promote fefest praofiees with pr-Arate land owner-s and eenuner-eial timber eempanies tha
pr-eseFve as ffmch as possible of the natiffal beau-ty of the
espeeially along reads
and . other-
�orested areas should be idePAAed and agreements
should be pr to with :amber oompapues t e altematives t eleaf outting
those
B 2 b m 2 : Agreements with timber- eempanies should be promoted whieh millimize the
likelihood that laige blocks of land 411 be vie.... out simultaneously.
... � . r�c'vn-oay '
Comprehensive2005 Mason County
2005 Rezone Requests
November 8 , 2005
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REVIEW
TABLET
REZONE REQUEST APPLICANT LOCATION PARCEL FACTS / CONCLUSIONS PAC
AREA BY STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Rezone parcels 12329- 12 - * Request to be outside of the UGA boundary
1 00020 , 12329- 12-000301 12329 - Ken & Peggy Belfair UGA five totaling requires the corresponding Comp Plan change to Approval as requested
12 -000401 12329- 12-00050 , and Van Buskirk 10 . 00 ac . complete the request . by 5 to 0 vote .
12329- 12 -00060 from Belfair * Within the Belfair UGA and subject to subarea
UGA Long Term Agriculture development standards , these properties have
zone to Rural Residential 5 been designated Long Term Agriculture ; LHA
zone . designation permits 1 DU per 10 ac . development
density with the option to transfer three density
credits / acre to other lands outside of LHA district
within Belfair UGA.
* Requested Rural Residential 5 designation
permits 1 DU per 5 ac. development density
WITHOUT the option to transfer density credits .
Rezone parcels 42212-51 •- 10013 * Within the Hoodsport RAC , changes in zoning
2 from Rural Residential 2 . 5 zone Everett Jay Hoodsport 0 . 17 ac. designations anticipated to be requested . Approval as requested
to Rural Commercial 3 zone ; and RAC 0 . 75 ac . * new potential land uses is likely retail and by 5 to 0 vote .
4221144-00250 from Rural personal services ; property fronts two roads for
Industrial zone to Rural good traffic flow.
Commercial 3 zone . * No changes in services to be provided expected
as this mixed land use results .
Rezone parcels 4221441 -00110 Peggy & Edwin * Within the Hoodsport RAC , changes in zoning
3 and 4221441 -00020 from Rural Patterson and Hoodsport 0 . 78 ac. designations anticipated to be requested . Approval as requested
Residential 2 . 5 zone to Rural Ben Fabig RAC 0 . 50 ac . * New potential land uses is likely to complement by 4 to 1 vote .
Commercial 3 zone . Hoodsport Winery property to the south ; subject
properties front on State Highway so good access
and traffic flows will be important .
* No changes in services to be provided expected
as mixed commercial land use results .
* Protection of multi-party water source on one
property important to evaluate in reviewing the
area and intensity of proposed development .
November 8 , 2005
REQUESTSBOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REVIEW
TABLE OF 2005 REZONE
REZONE REQUES"�" APPLICANT LOCATION PARCEL FACTS / CONCLUSIONS PAC
AREA RECOMMENDATION
Rezone parcels 22129-34-90020 * Within the Spencer Lake Hamlet, changes in
4 (south half) and 22129-34-90040 Alfred Jones Spencer Lake 3 . 50 ac . zoning designations anticipated to be requested . Approval as requested
from Residential 5 zone to Rural Hamlet : 1 . 70 ac . * Potential land uses on southern portion along by 4 to 1 vote .
Commercial 2 zone Spencer Lake Rd . not known ; property fronts two
roads for good traffic flow.
* Little change in services expected as self
stora a or commercial land use results .
Rezone parcel 32335-33-00000 * Subdivision at any density will need to meet
5 from Rural Residential 20 zone Donald Huson Tee Lake area 40 . 00 ac . adequate water, sewage , access , utility, and Approval as requested
to Rural Residential 10 zone , stormwater standards . by 6 to 0 vote .
* Due to size and zoning of adjoining properties
that surround the subject parcel , consistent zone
designation is the requested Rural Residential 10
zone . * If approved , this rezone will not result in
sprawling rural development or cause further land
divisions in the area .
Rezone parcel 3190&50-00017 * Within the Taylor Town RAC , changes in zoning
6 from Rural Residential 2 . 5 zone William Knannlein Taylor Town 4 . 59 ac designations anticipated to be requested ; several Approval as requested
to Rural Industrial zone . RAC parcels to the east and north are already Rural by 6 to 0 vote .
Industrial .
* New potential industrial land uses not known ;
property fronts two roads for good traffic flow.
* No changes in services expected as new
industrial land use results .
Map Error Rezone parcels * Map Error: Commercial land use as restaurant
7 42212 -33-00010 from Rural Gary Gribble Hoodsport 0 . 71 ac. has occurred on this property for many years prior Approval as requested
Residential 2 . 5 zone to Rural RAC to July 1990 (date of GMA planning start-up ) . by 6 to 0 vote .
Commercial 3 zone . * Proper zoning of the subject parcel within the
Hoods ort RAC is Rural Commercial 3 zone . -
November 8 , 2005
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REVIEW
TABLE OF 2005 REZONE REQUESTS
REZONE REQUEST APPLICANT LOCATION PARCEL FACTS / CONCLUSIONS PAC
AREA RECOMMENDATION
Map Error Rezone parcels I * Map Error : Auto salvage land use has occurred
8 42036- 1 1 -00020 from Rural Larry & Vickie King Rural Area 1 . 82 ac . on this property for many years prior to July 1990 Approval as requested
Residential 5 zone to Rural (date of GMA planning start-up ) ; current owner is by 6 to 0 vote .
Industrial zone . new.
* Proper zoning of the subject parcel is Rural
Industrial zone .
Map Error Rezone parcels * Map Error: Non -forestry or no land use on this
9 12308-22-00010 from Long Aaron & Barbara Long Term 13 .48 ac. property for many years prior to July 1990 (date of Approval as requested
Term Commercial Forest to Shumaker Commercial GMA planning start-up ) . by 6 to 0 vote .
Rural Residential 5 or 20 zone . Forest * Map showing Long Term Commercial Forest
lands as of 1993 shows that this portion of Section
8 WAS NOT within the resource land designation ,
and was incorrectly illustrated on the
Development Areas Map 1 in March 2002 ; lands
to the east and south are designated as Rural
Residential 20 zone .
* Proper zoning of the subject parcel is Rural
Residential 20 zone .
November 8 , 2005
Mason County Comprehensive t lan - April 1996 (as o 2004) [Sept 2005 rev.J Planning Policies
III= OPEN SPAC
Planning
05 - 050 The designation of Open Space shall in no way violate or void any
private property ownership rights and does not imply or create access
to Oven Space property_.
OS400 The County Open Space Plan should be updated every five years
(Mason County Parks, Recreation and Open Space Comprehensive
Plan) .
OS401 Mason County should develop and maintain an open space inventory
to evaluate the effectiveness of the County Open Space Plan see
Open Space Map ) .
0S402 Trails should be into rated with. the desi TIation aE'... oven a.ce
—'g '- ------ -g— -- - - ven �—
corridors during Comprehensive Plan 4pdates . 01,1ason County
tl1-aster Trails Plan 4 Frame-vilfork _ br Ccriart . �ivide Trail
Development)
meat ) --- --- — _. _
OS - .103_ _-_Mason County should consider and develop lone .rats e trailTpIarnng
with a view to 2055 . (Mason County Master Trails Plan A
Frameiifork for Countvwide Trail DevelopLncnt
OS4042 Mason County should coordinate open space planning with Grays
Harbor, Jefferson, Kitsap, Pierce and Thurston Counties to more
effectively preserve watersheds, wildlife, scenic views and
recreational opportunities .
OS405 7 Master plans for mixed-use developments, Fully Contained
Communities (FCC ' s), and Master Planned Resorts (MPR ' s) should
contain an open space element that includes the following :
A . The mapped location of open space areas within the plan site;
Be Identification of the proposed use(s) of designated open space
areas, and where feasible, provisions for multiple uses ;
Co Provisions for linkage of open space areas within the site, as
well as with open space areas on adjacent properties where
feasible; and
Do Provisions for public access to open space areas where such
III- 6. I
Mason County Comprehensive Plan - April, 1996 (as of2004) ept. 2005 rev., Planning Policies
access does not threaten fragile or sensitive natural features .
Acquisition
OS -200 Open space has a high aesthetic value, therefore it should be acquired
to provide natural recreation areas and provide for wildlife habitat
(Mason County Parks, Recreation and Open Space Comprehensive
Plan) .
OS -201 Lands of regional open space significance should be identified for
preservation through a process involving County residents , property
owners , the urban centers of Shelton Alf rr� , and Belfair, other
government agencies , and conservation and outdoor recreation
groups .
OS -202 Open space lands preserved at public expense should be selected
based upon objective criteria, and the criteria and properties to be
acquired should be reviewed periodically.
OS -203 Mason County should establish a program to encourage the donation
of open space and conservation easements .
OS -204 Special areas should be acquired to provide trails for Off-Road-
Vehicles (Mason County Parks, Recreation and Open Space
Comprehensive Plan) .
OS -205 The County should make an effort to acquire shoreline property in
areas where public access is limited (Mason County Parks,
Recreation and Open Space Comprehensive Plan) .
Open Space Networking
OS -300 Where feasible, parks, open space parcels, wildlife corridors, trails,
and educational facilities should be connected throughout Mason
County.
OS - 301. Trails should be integrated with the county transportation systena to
provide__. or ._ faci:l. it:atL altel'natii _v_c lT3odes of transportatio ll -Cn
� ntlti =
niodalhlason County A1lcrster 71•ails flan , 1 Framework fnr
Countvwide Trail Development
OS _3_()2_ _ . . __ . Mason County shall e, r_ cotiratye, the develc nnient and ni1 <iintenanc e of
trails that provide; access to historic natural recIeMiona.( cultural
and tot.jrist_ oric_nfed points of irate esi acid attractions is well as other
III- 6. 2
Mason County Comprehensive Plan - April 1996 (as o 2004) `Sept 2005 rev.J Planning Policies
local and rc aio al trail systems (AFfason Couniv ildf dsled Trails Plan ,
. f°r rtteti� ot°k or C(. unt ' wide Trrr, il l)c c7loprnctltl
OSFd Mason County shall consider providing <zltertiatwe routes of`
cirCUI. at €o ri withIn local c. onini rnrtles . Mason C"ocinty shall tc ilher
...... _ . a _ . ......
consider devetolain �4 trails that allow users non71120tor zed access to
IF
ti <zrioc � rtrb t clest.inzrtic rrs _(e . gr. schools, h<fil. fie_lds,_downtc�r�_xi �Jrca5,
acid com nercial and residde itial. districts ) , circtilatior.� within the local.
area, and access and initeif.. on wiLIF,tt1. OUblic transpor# atlon aysturns-.
( Ahison County .M aster IF .Plan A Erarnesvorkfi)r ( '« zarrtywitle
Trail _De velopmetat)
OS - 302 The County should encourage the Department of Natural Resources
and the Department of Fish and Wildlife to provide public shoreline
access (Mason County Parks, Recreation and Open Space
Comprehensive Plan) .
OS -303 Access should not be required of all open space sites and should be
limited in ecologically sensitive open space areas .
Development and Multi.21e Use
OS400 Fully Contained Communities (FCC ' s) should be developed under a
master plan that provides for at least 30% of the site to be designated
as permanent open space .
OS403 Master Planned Resorts (MPR' s) should be developed under a master
plan that provides for at least 50% of the site to be designated as
permanent open space .
OS405 Plats, mobile home parks, and recreational vehicle parks should
provide greenbelts and common open space (Mason County Parks,
Recreation and Open Space Comprehensive Plan) .
OS406 In satisfying performance district open space requirements, those areas
with critical and sensitive features such as wetlands , shorelines,
critical fish and wildlife habitat, etc . should receive prime
consideration for inclusion within designated open space areas .
OS407 Lands preserved for open space should provide multiple open space
benefits whenever possible . Multiple benefits include, but are not
limited to, active or passive recreation, scenic vistas, fish and wildlife
habitat, natural surface water drainage systems and wetlands .
OSF,d Multiple use open space should be designed and managed to minimize
conflicts among users with competing interests .
111- 6. 3
Mason County Comprehensive Plan - April, 1996 (as of 2004) `Sept. 2005 rev, I Planning Policies
<) S -fit:9 Masan (:.'ount ' shalI cons.id o ( errtial and exi. stiri&) oUL?.(2rtr.r:rrities for
trail syst € rrr d sr �n and developin nt . Thy. C" $; unty shall consider
potential and existing coLrratv�rnd other ri. �y;lats-ofCw i.yasirotcrati <al trail.
sites when. lcasible , take ad anta (= c of oLiblic lands _ald acifties
.._ .consider requiring trails and open space in. commercial and residential.
cevel_oonaent . prgiects and seek to f7nn pai n.ershisthat foster Mjol; p
development and expansion . ( lesson Traits lIh-al . Wit.
FraTnetii�ot_'k C rin.tvwir c Trrrrl . Z)e t�efdoj?.in..c�wz1 }
Education and Recreation
OS - 500 Outdoor education and recreation in the form of viewing wildlife,
waterfowl and other native organisms, plus learning about and
experiencing aspects of local history should be provided for County
residents .
OS - 501 Special consideration should be given to Mason County' s extensive
wetlands resources in regard to educating the public on the
importance of preserving these areas (Mason County Parks,
Recreation and Open Space Comprehensive Plan) .
OS - 502 Mason County should prornote environmental protection and
education in its trail desi. and development. Afetson Coun . _Alaster
Trails Plan, _4. Framework for Countvwide Trail Development
OS - 503 Mason County shall consider- water resources as vital for the county
and sb.ould L;rtilize and r_omote these resources in its systersa of trails_
Access to lakes and rivers and fresh and saltwater activities shall be
encouraged . Mason Count?.,,Alaster Trails Pkin, A .f'ranuewoi :kf0r
Count-14ride T rail Develownent) --- -
Parks and Trails
OS,_-_600 - --- Mason _CoLInty SIIOLI] d _consi consider trails as a.�a essential elc_rllerit.__for-
quality of life . (A4 ison ( 'ountt' 11aster liflu s 1an, A Frarnewor•k j )r
C'ount_vwide Trail„ L)evelopment )
OS_ 601 Mason_ C�oru� ty shall c,olisider oublic_ saf ty tr) trail c esgrl and
deyelop:n eat ( 011rrson ( ottnti � Ihister Trails Plan f Frarnenrorlc for
Countv_wi_de Trail De veloprlte nt
( � 5b()2 . ..... _Trails should be used asa niecins to pr_onlotit�). cconornic de elopri e rt
and. tour:israa . ( ILlcrsorz. C`oraraty <llG7ster .Tr-ails !'lrtn � t friarraetiork r7r
C "ountvwide Train �cwelolnne>nt
111- 6. 4
Mason County Comprehensive Plan - April, 1996 (as of2004) `Sept. 2005 rev.J Planning Policies
OS -60 1 rails slzOL.II Id be_ d sigmated and c onsIruc t.{ cl_.as nItilli qpose where. an(l
_.. ...
where apgr
QS 604 Mason County should consider any potential impacts oti adlaegpt
prcpe;rtaes �� lac,L�..-cicternlining..-trail location and use .
OS_605 Mason COLITAY ... . Sh.4ill...._. CV fl zrate ilte meet fcx .._... c evelnptl� ent ,_ and
ni.aintenance of, sl) ecific trails fbr use by Of:f-Road Vehicles , (Alh-i •on
Th,'fls Plan A Frarneork I )r Couwvwrde Trail Icstcrr _ _ . ....
Development)
OS - 6060 Parks and recreational facilities should prohibit the use of off-road-
vehicles (ORV) unless the facility is specifically designed for those
activities (Mason County Parks, Recreation and Open Space
Comprehensive Plan) .
OS - 6074- Conserving natural open space and significant cultural resources for
recreational opportunities should be considered in parks projects .
OS -60822 Trails should be constructed to provide for the growing population of
the County (Mason County Parks, Recreation and Open Space
Comprehensive Plan) .
OS -6093� Trails should traverse areas of natural beauty, historic significance or
other special interest but in no way destroy or degrade the naturalness
or character of the surrounding area.
OS - 61004 Rail- , Railroad right-of-ways through Mason County are suitable
corridors for open space between and within urban growth areas .
Should the opportunity arise, such as through abandonment of the rail
road line, then Mason County should pursue acquisition of the right-
of-ways for use for trails, open space, bike trails or other suitable
recreational applications . Right-of-ways should also be preserved for
potential transportation purposes, rather then divided and lose utility.
(adopted April 1996)
Consistent with the counties transportation and open space policies, the Belfair By-Pass will
provide a bicycle-pedestrian trail parallel to the county road, connected to State Route 3 north
of the Belfair UGA, continuing through the UGA, to re-connect with State Route3 south of
the UGA .
Connecting with this route is a proposed corridor that would run from the north end of North
Bay, up the Coulter Creek for less than %2 mile until it turns west to the north end of
Devereaux Lake, where it turns north until it reaches Hood Canal at Lynch Cove . The route
would provide a connection between the Puget Sound and Hood Canal . With a trail along
North Bay or the North Bay Road, it could provide a trail/open space connection between the
111- 6. 5
Mason County Comprehensive Plan - April 1996 (as of2004) L,!jept 2005 rev.J Planning- Policies
Allyn and Belfair UGA ' s by way of the Belfair Bypass trail .
Called the Lake Devereaux Regional Corridor by the Allyn Sub -Area Plan Committee, a
community planning group , this route and some associated open space areas around the trail
would be the highest priority for open space corridors and buffers , creating a permanent
separation between the two UGA ' s . The route also enhances public access to shorelines and
promotes other important purposes .
Wetlands,� �Z �W � � Region Cafrzidor-. This r-eute would follow Getiltef Gr-ee
Hood ,
and Spr-i , ,twater Greek .k (PROPOSED DELETION Sept . 2005)
A third option identified by the Allyn Sub Area Plan Ceffwnit4ee is the Fen%Kzeeneman Lake
Wildlife Area Region Gei:Fider- would not separate the Allyn UGA from Belfair- UGA, but
might be eensidered if I itsap GeupAy proposes designating new UGA areas east of Mlyn and
l el-faif. (PROPOSED DELETION Sept. 2005 )
OS -6I 105 Open space corridors shall be designated northward between the urban
growth areas of Allyn and Belfair, and southward between the urban
growth areas of Allyn and Shelton, by including a 200400t width on
each side of the easement along the railway, natural gas, and electric
transmission right-of--ways between the Shelton and Belfair Urban
Growth Areas . (originally adopted March 2002)
OS -61. 206 Two undeveloped lots under Mason County ownership should be
developed as community parks under Mason County Parks
Department management. These properties (one within the Union
RAC and the other at Latimer' s Landing near Harstine Island) should
be mapped on the counties future open space map to identify them for
III- 6. 6
Mason County Comprehensive Plan - April, 1996 (as of2004) [Sept. 2005 rev. 1 Planning Policies
further planning and possible development as open space community
parks by the county, working in partnership with other agencies and
adjacent land owners . (adopted March 2002)
arstlne Island SubArea Plan
B -6 Natural Systems
B - 6 -c : Encourage the preservation of current open space
areas, including wetlands , woodlands, and natural
drainage corridors . Encourage protection of scenic
views .
B -6 -c ® 1 : All development in the subarea should protect stream
buffers during construction and during the operation
of land use activities .
B - 6-c ® 2 : Open space in the subarea should be designated to
protect scenic views and significant natural resources .
B -6-c ® 3 : Greenbelts and common areas should be included in
residential and commercial development. Open space
and greenbelts should be used as visual buffers from
logging and mining activities .
B - 6 -c ® 4 : Financial incentives should be provided to landowners
who protect identified open space areas .
Southeast Mason County Sub Area Plan
G. NATURAL SYSTEMS
Cl : All land modifications in the subarea should protect stream corridors during
and after construction and during the operation of land use activities .
C2 : The use of greenbelts and common areas should be encouraged in proposals
for residential and commercial development .
C3 : Financial incentives should be provided to landowners who protect identified
open space areas .
111- 6. 7
_ .
_
did
0 In
LAd dtpI
14
t
Ad
It
IV
Idl—
-
,
3
+ 7 �
z
LL
r :a, Y cc
AM
�y 4 v ra 4
:� ' l.*' '3T�e'� . '�. SY ^t5Y .. -Lu` YY • 4 '+ q d -
eA..
i •
•
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Management Program
chapter 1A
I I THE SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
The shorelines of Mason County are among the most valuable and fragile of its natural resources
and there is great concern relating to their utilization, protection, restoration and preservation . In
addition , ever- increasing pressures of additional uses are being placed on the shorelines ,
necessitating increased coordination in the management and development of the shorelines of the
state . Unrestricted construction on privately owned or publicly owned shorelines is not in the
best public interest; therefore regulation is necessary in order to protect the public interest
associated with the shorelines, while , at the same time , recognizing and protecting private
property rights , public rights of navigation and corollary rights incidental thereto consistent with
the public interest.
The public 's opportunity to enjoy the physical and aesthetic qualities of natural shorelines of the
state shall be preserved to the greatest extent feasible consistent with the overall best interest of
the state and the people generally . To this end uses shall be preferred which are consistent with
control of pollution and prevention of damage to the natural environment, or are unique to or
dependent upon use of the state' s shorelines . Alterations of the natural condition of the
shorelines of the state, in those limited instances when authorized, shall be given priority for
single family residences , ports , shoreline recreational uses , including but not limited to, parks ,
marinas, piers , and other improvements facilitating public access to shorelines of the state,
industrial and commercial development which are particularly dependent _ on their location on or
use of the shorelines of the state and other development that will provide an opportunity for
substantial numbers of people to enjoy the shorelines of the state.
The Shoreline Master Program (Mason County Code , Title 7) provides for the management of
the shorelines by fostering all reasonable and appropriate uses . Its regulations implement the
policies as outlined in this Chapter and are intended to protect against adverse effects on the
public health, on the land and its vegetation and wildlife, and the waters and their aquatic life .
1
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Management Program
IX�2 SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM POLICIES
In order to maintain consistency, the definition of terms that are described in the following policies
are set forth in Mason County Code 17 . 50 . 040 Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations ,
Agriculture
Definition
The cultivation of soil, production of crops or raising of livestock. Agricultural Practices include any
activity whether for commercial or recreational use directly pertaining to production of food, fiber or
livestock including but not limited to cultivation, harvest, grazing, animal waste storage and disposal ,
fertilization, suppression or prevention of diseases and insects . Excluded from this definition are
transportation of products, related commercial or industrial uses such as wholesale and retail sales or final
processing.
Policies
1 . Soils that are well suited for agriculture, resource protection and open space should be
protected from non-agricultural uses .
2 . Erosion control measures should conform to guidelines and standards established by the
USDA Soil Conservation Service ,
3 . Animal keeping areas should, when possible , be located outside the shoreline management
area . When located in the shoreline management areas , they should be separated from
water bodies by vegetated buffer strips .
4 . Proper pasture maintenance and runoff practices should be employed to preclude
contamination of surface water with livestock waste, to prevent the transmission of
waterborne diseases to both human and livestock populations , and to preserve pasture
vegetative cover and soil absorptive capacity .
5 . Pasture siting practices that prevent contamination of watercourses and the destruction and
erosion of vegetation and soil should be encouraged .
6 . Buffer zones of permanent vegetation should be encouraged between pastures and tilled
areas and associated water bodies to retard surface runoff, reduce siltation, and promote
quality habitats for fish and wildlife .
7 . Livestock waste should be disposed of in a manner that will prevent surface or ground water
contamination .
8 . Commercial feedlots should be restricted from locating on shorelines unless they can
satisfactorily demonstrate that they will cause no adverse environmental impacts .
9 . Pesticides should be used, handled , and disposed of in accordance with provisions of the
Washington State Pesticides Application Act (RCW 17 . 21 ) and the Washington State
Pesticide Act (RCW 15 . 57) to prevent contamination and sanitation problems .
10 . Maintaining vegetative cover in areas subject to flooding should be encouraged .
11 . Perennial wetlands should be encouraged for use in treatment of tillage runoff PROVIDED
no adverse impacts to the receiving wetland would occur.
2
Mason Countv Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Management Pro ram
Aquaculture
Definition
Aquaculture involves the culture and farming of food fish, shellfish, and other aquatic animals and plants
in lakes, streams, inlets, bays and estuaries . Methods of aquaculture include, but are not limited to, fish
pens, shellfish rafts, racks and longlines , seaweed floats and the culture of clams and oysters on tidelands
and subtidal areas . Excluded from this definition are related commercial or industrial uses such as
wholesale and retail sales, or final process and freezing.
Policies
1 . Potential locations for aquaculture practices are relatively restricted due to specific
biophysical requirements such as water quality , temperature , substrate , dissolved oxygen,
and salinity . Priority should be given to aquaculture uses in areas having a high potential
for such uses .
2 . The County should strengthen and diversify the local economy by encouraging aquaculture
uses .
3 . Shoreline and upland development in productive aquaculture areas or those areas with a high
potential for aquaculture uses should be reviewed for detrimental impacts on aquaculture .
4 . Recognition should be given to the possible detrimental impacts that aquacultural activities
might have on the aesthetic quality of the shoreline area.
5 . Structures or activities associated with aquaculture should be located inland from shoreline
areas unless clearly shoreline dependent.
6 . Aquacultural activities should be operated in a manner that allows navigational access to
shoreline owners and commercial traffic .
7 . Flexibility to experiment with new aquaculture techniques should be allowed .
8 . Proposed surface installations should be reviewed for conflicts with other uses in areas that
are utilized for moorage , recreational boating, sport fishing, commercial fishing or
commercial navigation . Such surface installation shall incorporate features to reduce use
conflicts .
9 . Maximum effort to protect water quality should be made in areas with high potential for
aquaculture and current aquaculture areas that have been identified as sensitive areas .
Forest Manamement Practices
Definition
Any activity conducted on or directly pertaining to forest land and relating to growing, harvesting, or
processing of timber including but not limited to : ( 1 ) road and trail construction; (2) harvesting ; (3 ) pre-
commercial thinning; (4) forestation; (5 ) fertilization; (6) prevention and suppression of disease and
insects ; (7) salvage of timber; ( 8) brush control ; and (9) slash and debris disposal . Excluded from this
definition is preparatory work such as tree marking, surveying and removal of incidental vegetation such
as berries, greenery, or other natural products whose removal cannot normally be expected to result in
damage to shoreline natural features . Log storage away from forestlands is considered under Industry.
Policies
1 . Revegetation of all denuded areas in an Urban Residential Environment should be
accomplished as quickly as feasible . Stabilization measures should be provided for all
critical areas , such as road cut and filled slopes . Seeding, mulching, matting, planting , and
fertilizing may be necessary in some areas .
3
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Management Program
2 . In general , harvesting of timber is discouraged in a Natural Environment.
3 . In cases of natural catastrophe, infestation, or disease, special permits may be issued in a
Natural Environment .
4 . After completion of harvesting, deep gouges and ruts should be graded to a normal contour
and necessary water bars installed .
5 . When practical , forest management road systems will be designed outside the shoreline area .
6 . Prime consideration must be given to shorelines . Selective removal of timber adjacent to
waterways must be practiced whenever possible ; PROVIDED that other timber harvesting
methods may be allowed in those limited instances where topography, soil conditions, and
silvicultural practices necessary for regeneration render selective logging ecologically
detrimental ; and PROVIDED further, that clear cutting of timber which is solely incidental
to the preparation of the land for other uses may be allowed .
Commercial Development
Definition
Uses and facilities that are involved in wholesale or retail trade or business activities. Water dependent
commercial uses are those commercial activities that cannot exist in other than a waterfront location and
are dependent on the water by reason of the intrinsic nature of its operation.
1 . Home Occupation. A business conducted within a dwelling which is the residence of the principal
practitioner. A Home Occupation may be reviewed as a residential use provided it complies with all
applicable County Ordinances and no alteration is made to the exterior of the residence or site which
would alter the character of the site as a residential property including parking and signs . Home
Occupations which require more than $2, 500 in exterior development costs require a Substantial
Development Permit.
2 . Cottage Industry . Small scale commercial or industrial activities on residential properties performed
in the residence or building accessory thereto . The principal practitioner must reside on the property .
Cottage Industries are considered as residential use and minor commercial development and are
Substantial Development under this Master Program, provided they do not alter the character of the site as
a residential property and wholesale and retail trade are minimal . Cottage Industries must comply with all
applicable County Ordinances and require a Conditional Use Permit.
Policies
1 . Commercial development on shorelines should be encouraged to provide physical and/or
visual access to the shoreline , and other opportunities for the public to enjoy the shoreline .
2 . Multiple use concepts, which include open space and recreation, should be encouraged in
commercial developments .
3 . Commercial development should be aesthetically compatible with the surrounding area.
Structures should not significantly impact views from upland properties, public roadways
or from the water.
4. The location of commercial developments along shorelines should ensure the protection of
natural areas or systems identified as having geological, ecological , biological , or cultural
significance .
5 . Commercial developments should be encouraged to be located inland from the shoreline
area unless they are dependent on a shoreline location . Commercial developments should
be discourage over-water or in marshes , bogs , swamps and floodplains .
6 . New commercial development in shorelines should be encouraged to locate in those areas
with existing commercial development that will minimize sprawl and the inefficient use of
4
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Management Program
shoreline areas .
7 . Parking facilities should be placed inland, away from the immediate water' s edge and
recreational beaches .
8 . Commercial development should be designed and located to minimize impacts of noise
and/or light generated by the development upon adjacent properties . Commercial
developments, which generate significant noise impacts, should be discouraged .
Marinas
Definition
A commercial moorage with or without dry storage facility for over ten pleasure or commercial craft
excluding canoes, kayaks and rowboats . Goods or services related to boating may be sold commercially .
Uses associated with marinas shall conform to the regulations for these uses .
Policies
1 . Marinas and boat launching facilities should be located in areas where parking and access to
the facility can be accommodated without causing adverse impacts upon adjacent
properties or endanger public safety .
2 . Proposals should be planned and developed where regional and local evidence of
substantial need exists .
3 . Shallow water embankments should not be considered for overnight or long-term moorage
facilities .
4 . New construction should be aesthetically compatible with the existing surroundings and not
degrade existing views .
5 . Marinas and public launch ramps are preferred rather than the development of individual
docks and piers for private , non-commercial pleasure craft.
6 . In locating marinas, special plans should be made to protect the fish, shellfish, and other
biological resources that may be harmed by construction and operation of the facility.
7 . Special attention should be given to the design and development of operational procedures
for fuel handling and storage in order to minimize accidental spillage and provide
satisfactory means for handling those spills that do occur.
Mining
Definition
Mining means the extraction or removal of sand, gravel , minerals or other naturally occurring
materials from the earth .
Policies
1 . Recognizing that minerals , especially sand, gravel , and quarry rock are valuable resources
yet are relatively limited in quality and quantity, and that shorelines are also a valuable and
limited resource where mining has severe impacts if occurring within the shoreline area,
mining and accessory activities shall be conducted to the extent feasible in a manner
consistent with the shoreline resource . Therefore, mining activities shall not result in
permanent, significant damage to the shoreline environment. Provisions should also be
made to maintain areas of historic , cultural , or educational significance on or adjacent to
mining sites , and mining in unique , natural, or fragile shoreline areas shall not be allowed .
5
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Management Program
2 . To the extent feasible , accessory equipment, and materials essential to mining operations in
shoreline are shall be stored, sited, and operated as far landward from the ordinary high
water mark as possible .
3 . Screening and buffering measures shall , as far as is reasonably feasible , utilize natural
vegetation and topography of the site .
4 . Screening and buffering shall use topography and natural vegetation to the extent feasible
and shall be maintained in effective condition .
5 . Mining shall not be allowed on marine beaches .
6 . All practical measures should be taken to protect water bodies from all sources of pollution ,
including sedimentation and siltation, chemical and petrochemical use and spillage , and
storage or disposal of mining wastes and spoils . Maximum protection should be provided
for anadromous fisheries' resources .
7 . Mining activities should allow the natural shoreline systems to function with a minimum of
disruption during their operations and should return the site to as near natural a state as
possible upon completion.
8 . Mining operations should minimize adverse visual and noise impacts on surrounding
shoreline areas .
9 . Provisions should be made to maintain areas of historic cultural , or educational significance
on or adjacent to mining sites .
10 . The on-site handling of materials (including screening, washing, crushing, sorting, loading,
stockpiling and storage operations) should be conducted landward of the shoreline .
Outdoor Advertising, Signs And Billboards
Policies
1 . Wherever feasible , outdoor advertising, signs and billboards should not be placed in such a
manner as to degrade or impair visual access to the shoreline and water. Location or
placement should be on the upland side of transportation routes unless it can be shown that
views will not be obstructed .
2 . All outdoor advertising, signs and billboards shall comply with State and County regulations .
3 . Wherever feasible, outdoor advertising signs and advertising shall be placed on or against
existing buildings to allow maximum visibility of shoreline and water areas .
4 . In Conservancy Environment : where feasible, permitted signs shall be located on the upland
side of transportation routes parallel or adjacent to shoreline and water areas .
6
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Management Program
Residential Development
Definition
The development of land or construction or placement of dwelling units for the purpose of
residential occupancy . This shall apply to all single family and multifamily dwellings, and any
other accessory structure , including decks , garages and fences .
Policies
1 . Over-water residential development should not be permitted .
2 . Sewage disposal facilities , as well as water supply facilities , should be provided in
accordance with appropriate state and local health regulations . Storm drainage facilities
should be separated, not combined with sewage disposal systems .
3 . Residential development in geologically hazardous areas or in areas subject to flooding
should not be permitted.
4 . Residential development in shoreline areas should be designed to preserve natural drainage
courses .
5 . Subdivisions should maintain usable waterfront areas for the common use of all property
owners within the development.
6 . Residential development on shorelines and wetlands should be planned with minimum
adverse environmental and visual impact. Structures should be designed and located to not
significantly block views of adjacent residences .
7 . Residential developments created after the effective date of this program should provide
adequate common access to the shoreline and open space along the shoreline for all
residents of the development. The access and open space should be of adequate size to
provide for recreation land to ensure against interference with adjacent properties .
8 . A variety of housing types on land should be encouraged, provided that they are consistent
with the environment designation criteria.
9 . Residential structures should be located to minimize obstruction of views of the water from
upland areas. The intent of this policy is to encourage the retention of views in and through
new residential developments . This policy is not intended to prohibit residential
development of a shoreline lot simply because it may impact or eliminate views from upland
property .
10 . Residential development along shorelines should be designed and sited to make shoreline
protection measures unnecessary .
11 . New residential development should be encouraged to cluster dwelling units in order to
preserve natural features , minimize physical and visual impacts and reduce utility and road
costs .
12 . The overall density of development, lot coverage and height of structures should be
appropriate to the physical capabilities of the site . Particular attention should be given to
the preservation of water quality and shoreline aesthetic characteristics . Density should be
consistent with density provisions of local plans , codes , and ordinances .
AccessorE Living Quarters
Definition
Separate living quarters , attached or detached from the primary residence which contain less
habitable area than the primary residence .
7
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Management Program
PoPolicy
Accessory living quarters for the use of guests , employees or immediate family members should
be allowed as a Substantial Development, when minimal impact would occur to the surrounding
area. The cumulative impact of like structures on neighboring properties must be considered .
Utilities
Policies
1 . If possible, power distribution and telephone lines should be placed under ground in any new
residential , commercial, public , or view area near the shores of a water body .
2 . High voltage transmission lines should be placed in the water only when there is no
reasonable alternative .
3 . The possibility of making use of public utility rights-of-way to provide additional public
access to lakes , streams , or saltwater should not be overlooked when granting such rights-
of-way . Planning for location of towers , substations , valve clusters , etc . , so as not to
obstruct such access should be pursued.
Ports And Water-Related Industry
Definition
Ports are centers for water-borne traffic and as such have become gravitational points for
industrial/manufacturing firms . Heavy industry may not specifically require a waterfront
location, but is attracted to port areas because of the variety of transportation available .
Policies
1 . Port facilities should be designed to permit viewing of harbor areas from viewpoints which
would not interfere with port operations or endanger public health and safety .
2 . Sewage treatment, water reclamation, desalinization and power plants should be located
where they do not interfere with and are compatible with recreational , residential or other
public uses of the water and shore lands . Waste treatment points for water-related industry
should occupy as little shoreline as possible .
3 . Land transportation and utility corridors serving ports and water-related industry should
follow guidelines provided under the sections dealing with utilities and road and railroad
design and construction . Where feasible , transportation and utility corridors should be
located upland to reduce the pressures for the use of waterfront sites .
4 . Master Program planning should be based on a recognition of the regional nature of port
services .. Prior to allocating shore lands for port uses , local governments should consider
statewide needs and coordinate planning with other jurisdictions to avoid wasteful
duplication of port services within port services regions .
5 . Water-related sites should be planned so as to avoid wasteful use of the limited supply of
shore ; therefore, shorelines should ultimately be used only by industries specifically
requiring waterfront sites . Industries linked to them but not requiring use of actual
waterfront should not be located on the shoreline . Mason County and Shelton should take
steps to reserve industrial sites in upland locations near present water-related industries so
as to have adequate backup space .
6 . Port districts should reserve ample sites inland for public terminals and supporting ancillary
8
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Management Program
facilities .
7 . Industries should be encouraged to use cooperative waste disposal and reclamation systems ,
thereby releasing valuable acreage for other uses .
8 . Docking and storage facilities on the waterfront should be shared where possible .
Shoreline odi cation Activities: Bulkheads
Definition
Bulkheads are retaining wall - like structures whose primary purpose is to hold or prevent sliding
of soil caused by erosion and wave action and to protect uplands and fills from erosion and wave
action .
Policies
1 . Bulkheads should be located, designed and maintained to protect natural shore features and
the integrity of the natural geohydraulic system, including feeder bluffs , littoral drift
corridors and accretion beaches .
2 . Bulkheads should be located, designed and maintained in a manner that will conserve and
enhance water quality , fish, shellfish, and other wildlife resources and habitats .
3 . Owners of property containing feeder bluffs should generally be discouraged from
constructing bulkheads , particularly in areas not already developed or not already subject to
shoreline modification .
4 . Bulkhead construction should be permitted only where protection to upland areas or facilities
is provided, not for the indirect purpose of creating land by filling behind the bulkhead .
5 . Property owners. should be encouraged to coordinate bulkhead development for an entire
drift sector to avoid causing erosion on adjacent properties .
6 . Bulkheads should be allowed only where evidence is present that one of the following
conditions exists .
a) Serious wave erosion threatens an established use or existing buildings on upland
property .
b) The proposed bulkhead is necessary to the operation and location of water dependent
and/or water related activities consistent with the Master Program . In addition, it must
be demonstrated that other alternatives are not feasible and that such bulkheads meet
other policies and regulations of this chapter.
c) The proposed bulkhead is necessary to re-establish a shoreline boundary that has been
eroded away within the past two years, the proposed bulkhead will replace a bulkhead
which has failed within the past five years . The burden of proof is on the applicant. Re-
establishment of all other historical shoreline boundaries is prohibited when it does not
meet the criteria of this chapter.
Shoreline Modification Activities. Breakwaters, Jetties And Groins
Definitions
Breakwaters . Protective structures usually built off shore to protect harbor areas , moorage ,
navigation, beaches and bluffs from wave action . Breakwaters may be fixed, open pile , or
floating .
Jetties . Structures generally built singly or in pairs perpendicular to the shore at harbor entrances
9
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Management Program
or river mouths to prevent the shoaling or accretion of littoral drift . Jetties also protect channels
and inlets from storm waves and cross currents .
Groins . A barrier type of structure extending from the beach or bank into a water body for the
purpose of the protection of shoreline and adjacent uplands by influencing the movement of
water or deposition of materials . Generally narrow and of varying lengths , groins may be built
in a series along the shore .
Policies
1 . Because the purpose of these structures is to modify complex water movement and littoral
drift systems and may thus impact the shoreline outside the project boundaries ,
professional design by a registered engineer is encouraged and may be required .
2 . Floating breakwaters are preferred to solid landfill types to maintain sand movement and
fish habitats .
3 . When planning for breakwaters and jetties or groins , the County should consider entire
systems or sizable stretches of rivers or marine shorelines . This planning should consider
off- site erosion or accretion that might occur as a result of these shoreline structures or
activities . These structures should be developed in a coordinated manner among affected
property owners and public agencies .
4 . Jetties should generally be discouraged because they partially or totally block shore
processes , are irreversible in nature and require an on-going and costly dredging or beach
feeding program to alleviate erosion or accretion problems .
5 . Marine groins should generally be discouraged because they purposefully trap and accrete
beach forming material , yet erode down drift beaches which may have adverse effects on
other shore resources and habitats .
6 . Breakwaters , jetties and groins should be located and designed so as to minimize adverse
impacts on fish and wildlife resources and habitats .
7 . Artificial beach feeding and enhancement proposals that do not use jetties or groins should
be encouraged over developments requiring the use of such structures .
Land all
Definition
The creation of or addition to a dry upland area by depositing materials . Depositing topsoil for
normal landscaping purposes is not considered a landfill .
Policies
1 . Any permitted fills or shoreline cuts should be designed so that no significant damage to
existing ecological values or natural resources , or alteration of local currents will occur,
creating a hazard to adjacent life , property, ecological values , or natural resources .
2 . Priority should be given to landfills for water dependent uses .
3 . In evaluating fill projects and in designating areas appropriate for fill, such factors as total
water surface reduction , navigation restriction , impediment of water now and circulation,
reduction of water quality and destruction of habitat should be considered .
redgin�
1
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Management Program
Definition
The removal , displacement, and disposal of unconsolidated earth material such as silt, sand,
gravel, or other submerged material from the bottom of water bodies , ditches or natural
wetlands : maintenance dredging and other supportive activities are included in this definition .
Policies
1 . Upstream migration and downstream escapement of migratory fish should be considered . If
dredging operations wholly involve a creek, stream, or river channel , or other recognized
fish migration route , these operations should be restricted to 12 hours per day to allow for
successful passage of these fish .
2 . In Rural , Conservancy and Natural Environments : Dredging operations in certain
environmental conditions could be extremely detrimental and should be carried out only as
a means to preserve, protect, or improve existing conditions .
Flood Protection And Shoreline Stabilization
Policies
l . Shoreline stabilization and flood protection planning should be undertaken in a coordinated
manner among affected property owners and public agencies and should consider entire
systems or sizable stretches of rivers , lakes or marine shorelines . Thus planning should
consider the off- site erosion, accretion or flood damage that might occur as a result of
stabilization or protection structures or activities .
2 . Shoreline stabilization and flood protection works should be located, designed, constructed
and maintained to provide :
• Protection of the physical integrity of the shore process corridor and other properties which
may be damaged by interruptions of the geohydraulic system ;
• Protection of water quality and natural ground water movement;
• Protection of valuable fish and other life forms and their habitat vital to the aquatic food
chain ;
• Preservation of valuable recreation resources and aesthetic values such as point and
channel bars, islands and other shore features and scenery .
3 . Non-structural flood control solutions should be used wherever possible, including
prohibiting or limiting development in historically flood prone areas , regulating structural
design and limiting increases in peak flow runoff from new upland development.
Structural solutions to reduce shoreline damage should be allowed after it is demonstrated
that non-structural solutions would not be able to reduce the damage .
4 . Substantial stream channel modification, realignment and straightening should be
discouraged as a means of shoreline stabilization and flood protection .
5 . In design of publicly financed or subsidized works , consideration should be given to
providing public pedestrian access to the shoreline for low- intensity outdoor recreation .
Transportation Facilities
Policies
1 . Roads should be located on stable soils , back from a water channel using routes that avoid
slumps , wetlands , and natural drainage areas . When this is not possible , corrective
stabilization measures should be used .
11
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Management Program
2 . Major highways , freeways and railways should be located away from shorelands .
3 . Road locations should be planned to fit the topography so that minimum alterations of
natural conditions will be necessary .
4 . Scenic highways should have provisions for safe pedestrian and other non-motorized travel .
Also , provisions should be made for sufficient viewpoints, rest areas and picnic areas on
public shorelines .
5 . Extensive loops or spurs of old highways with high aesthetic quality should be kept in
service as pleasure bypass routes , especially when main highways , paralleling the old
highway, must carry large traffic volumes at high speeds .
6 . Roads located in wetland areas should be designed and maintained to prevent erosion and to
permit the natural movement of ground water .
7 . Location of roads and railroads should not require the rerouting of stream and river
channels .
8 . Roads and railroads should be designed, constructed and maintained to minimize erosion
and to permit natural movement of ground water and flood waters to the extent practical .
9 . All debris, overburden and other waste materials from construction should be disposed of in
such a way as to prevent their entry by erosion from drainage , high water, or other means
into any surface water body .
10 . Waterway crossings should be designed and constructed to maintain normal geohydraulic
processes, as well as to minimize interruption of flood water flow.
11 . The number of waterway crossings should be minimized.
12 . New transportation facilities should be located and .designed to minimize the need for
shoreline protection measures .
13 . Trail and bicycle systems should be encouraged along shorelines to the maximum extent
feasible .
14 . All transportation facilities in shoreline areas should be located, designed, constructed and
maintained to cause the least possible adverse impacts on the land and water
environments , should respect the natural character of the shoreline and should make
every effort to preserve wildlife , aquatic life and their habitats .
15 . Abandoned or unused road or railroad right-of--way which offer opportunities for public
access to the water should be acquired or retained for such use .
Piers and Docks
Definition
A structure built over or floating upon the water, used as a landing place for marine transport or
for commercial or recreational purposes . Structures regulated include piers and docks , floats,
stairways, marine railways, mooring buoys and boat ramps .
Policies
1 . Piers and docks should be designed and located to minimize obstruction of views and
conflicts with recreational boaters and fishermen .
2 . Cooperative uses of piers and docks are favored, especially in tidal waters .
3 . The type , design and location of docks and piers should be compatible with the shoreline
area where they are located . Consideration should be given to shoreline characteristics,
tidal action , aesthetics , adjacent land and water uses.
4 . Priority should be given to the use of community piers and docks in all new waterfront
12
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Management Program
subdivisions . In general , encouragement should be given to the cooperative use of piers
and docks .
5 . Mooring buoys and floats are preferred over piers and docks .
6 . Joint use stairways are preferred over individual stairways .
7 . Boathouses and covered moorages shall be discouraged .
Archaeological Areas and Historic Sites
According to anthropological data, human habitation of the shoreline areas of Mason County
spans hundreds, most likely thousands , of years . Due to climate , vegetation and the effects of
population changes , visible evidence of such habitation is primarily that of the last 50 years .
Frequently, sites are discovered during construction of buildings, transportation routes (including
trails), bridges, ditching, drilling and the like .
Because of their rarity and the education link they provide to our past, these locations should be
preserved. Because of their delicate nature, the utmost care and caution must be used in any
development of these areas . Thus , these guidelines should be closely adhered to in all areas ,
whether Urban, Rural, Conservancy or Natural .
Policies
1 . The Shorelines Advisory Board should know of these areas and consult with professional
archaeologists to identify areas containing potentially valuable archaeological data, and to
establish procedure to salvage this data .
2 . Where possible, sites should be permanently pressured for scientific study and public
observation . In areas known to contain archaeological data, local governments or the
Shorelines Advisory Board should attach a special condition to the shoreline permit
providing for a site inspection and evaluation by an archaeologist to ensure that possible
archaeological data is properly salvaged . Such a condition might also require approval by
local government before work can resume on the project following such and examination.
3 . Shoreline permits , in general, should contain special provisions which require developers to
notify local governments if archaeological data is uncovered during excavation .
4 . On sites not designated by archaeological and historical authorities but where the above
artifacts are found, the archaeological or anthropological, and historical authorities should
be notified .
5 . The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and RCW 43 . 51 provide for the protection,
rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction of districts , sites , building, structures and
objects significant to American and Washington history, architecture, archaeology or
culture . The State Legislature names the Director of the Washington State Parks Planning
and Resources Department as the person responsible for this program .
Recreational Development
Definition
Recreational development includes facilities such as campgrounds , recreational vehicle parks ,
day use -parks, etc . This applies to both publicly and privately owned shoreline facilities intended
for use by the public or private club, individual group or association .
13
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Management Program
Policies
l . Shoreline developments that serve a variety of recreational needs should be encouraged .
2 . All proposed recreational developments should be designed, located and operated to protect
the quality of scenic views and to minimize adverse impacts on the environment.
Favorable consideration should be given to those projects which compliment their
environment .
3 . Publicly owned property which provides public access to a body of salt or fresh water
should be retained for public use .
4 . Public agencies , private individuals , groups and developers should be encouraged to
coordinate development projects to mutually satisfy recreational .
5 . Recreational facilities should make adequate provisions for :
a . traffic, both inside and outside the facility
- b . proper water, solid waste and sewage disposal methods ;
c . security and fire protection ;
do the prevention of overflow and trespass onto adjacent properties , including but not
limited to landscaping, fencing and posting of property ;
e . buffering of development from adjacent private property .
6 . Facilities for intensive recreational activities should be permitted only where sewage
disposal and garbage disposal can be accomplished without altering the environment
adversely .
7 . Where appropriate, non-intensive recreational use should be allowed on floodplains that are
subject to recurring flooding .
8 . Off-shore recreational devices should be allowed and should be designed to not unduly
interfere with navigation of waterways .
9 . Trails and pathways on steep shoreline bluffs should be designed to protect bank stability .
10 . Public recreational developments should be consistent with adopted park, recreation and
open space plans for the County .
11 . The development of small , dispersed recreation areas should be encouraged .
12 . The linkage of shoreline parks, recreation areas and public access points by linear systems,
such as hiking paths, bicycle paths, easements and scenic drives should be encouraged .
13 . The use of off4oad vehicles is discouraged in all shoreline areas except where special areas
have been set aside for this purpose .
14
Chapter 17. 50
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sections .
17 . 60 . 010 Title .
17 . 50 . 020 Purpose .
17 . 50 . 030 Application of Regulations
17 . 50 . 040 definitions
17 . 50 . 050 Project Classifications
17 . 50 . 060 Use Regulations
17 . 50 . 010 Title .
This Title shall be officially cited as Title 17 . 50 Zoning — Shoreline Master Program Use
Regulations .
17 . 50 . 020 Purpose .
This Title is intended to carry out the responsibilities given Mason County by the Shoreline
Management Act of 1971 (RCW 90 . 58) . The actual purpose of the Use Regulations is the same
as the purpose of the Act itself and more fully outlined in the Shoreline Master Program , Title 7 of
the Mason County Code . The Master Program provides for the management of the shorelines by
fostering all reasonable and appropriate uses . These regulations are intended to protect against
adverse effects on the public health , on the land and its vegetation and wildlife , and the waters
and their aquatic life .
17 . 50 . 030 Application of Regulations .
These regulations shall apply to all the lands and waters that are designated in WAC 173- 181
WAC 173-20 , and WAC 173-22 to be under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act of
1971 .
17 . 50 . 031 These regulations shall apply to every person , firm , corporation , local and state
governmental agencies and other non-federal entities that would develop , use , or own lands ,
wetlands , or waters under the control of the Master Program .
17 . 50 . 032 Adjacent Lands . The purpose of this subsection is to discuss the coordination of
development of lands adjacent to shorelines with the policies of the Master Program and the
Shoreline Management Act. A development undertaken without obtaining the applicable
shoreline permits or which is inconsistent with the regulations of the Master Program , is unlawful .
On the other hand , a use or development which is to some extent inconsistent with a policy plan
may not be unlawful , but may be denied or conditioned on the basis of its inconsistency with the
plan . These principles apply to the regulation of shoreline and adjacent lands :
a . Part of the property is inside the shoreline , part is outside , and all of the development is
outside the shoreline . No shoreline permit is required because all of the "development" lies
outside the shoreline . However, uses and actions within the shoreline , though they do not
constitute "development" must be consistent with the regulations of the Act and Shoreline
Program . Change of use within shoreline jurisdiction may require a Conditional Use Permit.
b . Part of the property is in the shoreline , part is outside , and all or part of the development
is proposed within the shoreline . A permit is required for "development" within the shorelines .
In addition , uses and other actions within the shorelines must comply with Master Program
regulations . Furthermore , when the development proposal consists of a single , integrated
project and a shoreline permit is required due to development within the shorelines , review
and approval of development outside the shorelines may be postponed until shoreline permit
review is accomplished if the public interest would be served by such a review sequence .
Finally , although development conditions may be attached to developments within shorelines ,
1
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
conditions may not be attached , pursuant to the Shoreline Management Act , to aspects of a
development lying outside the shorelines .
17 . 50 . 033 Developments and Uses Subject to Several Regulatory Sections . Some proposed
developments or uses will be subject to more than one regulatory section of this program . For
example , a proposed marina may be subject to regulations concerning " Dredging , Landfilling ,
Marinas" , etc . A proposed development must be reviewed for consistency with the regulations of
each applicable section .
17 . 50 . 034 Unspecified Uses . These regulations and the Master Program in its entirety do not
attempt to identify or foresee all conceivable shoreline uses or types of development. When a
use or development is proposed which is not readily classified within an existing use or
development category , the unspecified use must be reviewed as a Conditional Use and
Performance Standards relating to the most relevant category shall be used .
17 . 50 . 040 Definitions
For the purpose of this title , certain terms and words are defined in this chapter. All defined uses
are subject to existing local , state and health regulations .
Accessory Facilities . A use that is demonstrably subordinate and incidental to the principal use
and which functionally supports its activities , including parking . The standards of performance for
a development shall apply to an accessory facility unless otherwise indicated .
Accessory Living Quarters . Separate living quarters attached or detached from the primary
residence which contain less habitable area than the primary residence and which are used by
guests , employees , or immediate family members of occupant of primary residence ; PROVIDED
no accessory living quarters shall be rented or leased , and are subject to all Health Department
requirements .
Act (Shoreline Management) . Act adopted by state legislature in 1971 which defines shoreline
jurisdiction and authorizes the development of Shoreline Master Programs .
Administrator, The Director, Mason County Department of General Services .
Advisory Board (Shorelines) . A board , appointed by the Board of County Commissioners .
Agricultural Practices . Any activity whether for commercial or recreational use directly pertaining
to production of food , fiber or livestock including but not limited to cultivation , harvest, grazing ,
animal waste storage and disposal , fertilization , suppression or prevention of diseases and
insects .
Agriculture . The farming or raising of livestock, crops , berries , fruit, nursery stock on land , and
may require development such as buildings , feed lots , fences , ditches , bridges , ponds , wells ,
grading , as well as use of native pasture and woodlots .
Application . A Substantial Development Permit application , Variance Permit application ,
Conditional Use Permit application , or Exemption application .
Appurtenant Structure . A structure which is necessarily connected to the use and enjoyment of a
single-family residence and is located landward of the ordinary high water mark and the
perimeter of a wetland . Normal appurtenant structures include a garage ; deck; driveway ; utilities ;
storage shed (one story - less than 600 square feet) , woodshed , pump house , upland retaining
wall and, grading which does not exceed 250 cubic yards and which does not involve placement
of fill in any wetland or waterward of the ordinary high water mark.
Aquaculture . Aquaculture involves the culture and farming of food fish , shellfish and other
aquatic animals and plants in lakes , streams , inlets , bays and estuaries . Methods of aquaculture
include but are not limited to fish pens , shellfish rafts , racks and longlines , seaweed floats and
the culture of clams and oysters on tidelands and subtidal areas . Excluded from this definition
are related commercial or industrial uses such as wholesale and retail sales , or final processing
and freezing .
2
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
Aquaculture Practices . Any activity directly pertaining to growing , handling , or harvesting of
aquaculture produce including but not limited to propagation , stocking , feeding , disease and pest
treatment , waste disposal , water use , development of habitat, maintenance and construction of
necessary equipment building and growing areas .
Average Grade Level . The average of the natural or existing topography of the portion of the lot,
parcel , or tract of real property which will be directly under the proposed structure and shall be
determined by averaging the ground elevations at the midpoint of all exterior walls of the
proposed structure : PROVIDED , that in the case of structures to be built over the water, average
grade level shall be the elevation of the ordinary high water mark.
Board . The Board of County Commissioners of Mason County .
Boat house . Any walled and or roofed structure built on shore or offshore for storage of
watercraft or float planes .
Boat Ramp . An inclined slab , set of pads , planks , or graded slope used for transferring marine
vessels or equipment to or from land or water.
Bog. A depression or other undrained or poorly drained area containing or covered with usually
more than one layer of peat . Characteristic vegetation of bogs are sedges , reeds , rushes , or
mosses . In early stages of development , vegetation is herbaceous and the peat is very wet. In
middle stages , dominant vegetation is shrubs . In mature stages , trees are dominant and peat
near the surface may be comparatively dry . ( Bogs represent the final stage of the natural
process (eutrophication) by which lakes are very slowly transformed into land ; bogs are
sometimes mined for peat on a commercial basis ; bogs are often an intake for ground water
(aquifer recharge area) .
Breakwaters . Offshore structures which may or may not be connected to land . Their primary
purpose is to protect harbors , moorages and navigation activity from wave and wind action by
creating still water areas . A secondary purpose would be to protect shorelines from wave.
caused erosion .
Bulkhead . Retaining wall- like structures whose primary purpose is to hold or prevent sliding of
soil caused by erosion and wave action , and to protect uplands and fills from erosion by wave
action .
Channelization . The straightening , deepening or lining of natural stream channels , including
construction of continuous revetments or levees for the purpose of preventing gradual , natural
meander progression .
Commercial Development. The primary use is for retail or wholesale trade or other business
activities .
Community Dock. A dock development providing moorage for pleasure craft and recreational
activities for use in common by residents of a certain subdivision or community . Marinas are not
considered community docks .
Commercial Feedlot . An enclosure or facility used or capable of being used for feeding livestock
hay , grain , silage , or other livestock feed , but shall not include land for growing crops or
vegetation for livestock feeding and/or grazing , nor shall it include normal livestock wintering
operations . Said enclosure/facility for commercial livestock .
Conditional Use . Conditional use means a use , development , or substantial development which
is classified as a conditional use or not classified within this master program .
Conservancy Environment . Conservancy environment means that environment in which the
objective is to protect , conserve and manage existing natural resources and valuable historic and
cultural areas in order to ensure a continuous flow of recreational benefits to the public and to
achieve sustained resource utilization .
The Conservancy Environment is for those areas which are intended to maintain their existing
character. The preferred uses are those which are by nature non-consumptive of the physical
and biological resources of the area .
Non - consumptive used are those uses which can utilize resources on a sustained yield basis
while minimally reducing opportunities for other future uses of the resources in the area .
Activities and uses of a nonpermanent nature which do not substantially degrade the existing
3
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
character of an area are appropriate uses for a Conservancy. Environment. Examples of uses
that might be predominant in a Conservancy Environment include diffuse outdoor recreation
activities , timber harvesting on a sustained yield basis , passive agricultural uses such as pasture
and range lands and other related uses and activities . Compatible commercial uses are low
intensity and low impact activities such as small camping or picnic facilities (less than ten
spaces) , aquacultural retail booths ( less than 600 square feet) and cottage industries when the
operation is entirely contained within the primary residence excluding outbuildings , PROVIDED ,
such commercial activities must not alter the character of the Conservancy Environment.
The designation of Conservancy Environments should seek to satisfy the needs of the
community as to the present and future location of recreational areas proximate to concentrations
of population , either existing or projected.
The Conservancy Environment would also be the most suitable designation for those areas
which present too severe biophysical limitations to be designated as Rural or Urban
Environments . Such limitations would include areas of steep slopes presenting erosion and slide
hazards , areas prone to flooding , and areas which cannot provide adequate water supply or
sewage disposal .
Cottage Industry . Small scale commercial or industrial activities on residential properties
performed in the residence or building accessory thereto . The principle practitioner must reside
on the property . Cottage Industries are considered as residential uses and minor commercial
development and substantial developments under this Master Program provided they do not alter
the character of the site as a residential property and wholesale and retail trade is minimal .
Cottage Industries must comply with all applicable County Ordinances and require a Conditional
Use Permit .
Counly . Mason County .
Covered Moorage . A roofed , floating or fixed offshore structure for moorage of watercraft or float
planes .
Dam . A barrier across a streamway to confine or regulate stream flow or raise water level for
purposes such as flood or irrigation water storage , erosion control , power generation , or
collection of sediment or debris .
Department. The Washington State Department of Ecology (WDOE) .
Development. A use consisting of the construction or exterior alteration of structures ; dredging ;
drilling ; dumping ; filling ; removal of any sand , gravel or minerals ; bulkheading ; driving of piling ;
placing of obstructions ; or any project of a permanent or temporary nature which interferes with
the normal public use of the surface of the waters overlying lands subject to the Act at any state
of water level .
Dike . An artificial embankment or revetment normally set back from the bank or channel in the
floodplain for the purpose of keeping floodwaters from inundating adjacent land .
Dock . A structure built over or floating upon the water , used as a landing place for marine
transport, or for commercial or recreational purposes .
Dredging . The removal , displacement, and disposal of unconsolidated earth material such as
silt , sand , gravel , or other submerged material from the bottom of water bodies , ditches or
biological wetlands ; maintenance dredging and other support activities are included in this
definition .
Dredge Spoil . The material removed by dredging .
Drift Sector. A segment of the shoreline along which littoral along shore movements of
sediments occur at noticeable rates . Each drift sector includes a feed source that supplies the
sediment, a driftway along which the sediment moves , and an accretion terminal where the drift
material is deposited .
Duplex . A two-family house whether divided vertically or horizontally . A duplex is not exempt
from a Substantial Development Permit as is a single-family residence .
EmergencyR epair . Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the
elements as per WAC 173-27- 040 , as amended
4
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
Environment Designations Map . The official map associated with this Master Program and
adopted by ordinance that shows the jurisdiction of the Act and this Program and the boundaries
of the environments .
Exemption . Exempt developments are those set forth in WAC 173-27-040 and RCW 90 . 58 . 030
(3) (e) , 90 . 58 . 140 (9) , 90 . 58 . 1471 90 . 58 . 355 , 90 . 58 , 390 and 90 . 58 . 515 which are not required to
obtain a substantial development permit but which must otherwise comply with applicable
provisions of the act and this master program .
Extreme Low Tide . The lowest line on the land reached by a receding tide .
Fair Market Value . The fair market value of a development is the open market bid price for
conducting the work, using the equipment and facilities , and purchase of the goods , services and
materials necessary to accomplish the development . This would normally equate to the cost of
hiring a contractor to undertake the development from start to finish , including the cost of labor,
materials , equipment and facility usage , transportation and contractor overhead and profit. The
fair market value of the development shall include the fair market value of any donated ,
contributed or found labor, equipment or materials .
Feedlot. An enclosure or facility used or capable of being used for feeding of livestock hay , grain
silage , or other livestock feed , but shall not include land for growing crops or vegetation for
livestock feeding and/or grazing , nor shall it include normal livestock wintering operations .
Fetch . The perpendicular distance across the channel or inlet .
Floodway . Those portions of the area of a river valley lying streamward from the outer limits of a
watercourse upon which flood waters are carried during periods of flooding that occur with
reasonable regularity , although not necessarily annually , said floodway being identified , under
normal condition by changes in surface soil conditions or changes in types or quality of
vegetative ground cover condition . The floodway shall not include those lands that can
reasonable be expected to be protected from flood waters by flood control devices maintained by
or maintained under license from the Federal Government, the state , or a political subdivision of
the state . The limit of the floodway is that which has been established in flood regulation
ordinance maps or by a reasonable method that meets the objectives of the Act (WAC 173-22-
030 (3)) .
Floodplain . One hundred year floodplain and means that area susceptible to being inundated by
stream derived waters with a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given
year.
Forest Practices . Any activity conducted on or directly pertaining to forest land and related
growing , harvesting , or processing of timber including but not limited to : ( 1 ) road and trail
construction , (2) harvesting , (3) pre-commercial thinning , (4) reforestation , (5) fertilization , (6)
prevention and suppression of diseases and insects , (7) salvage of timber, (8) brush control , and
(9) slash and debris disposal .
Excluded from this definition is preparatory work such as tree marking , surveying and removal of
incidental vegetation such as berries , greenery , or other natural product whose removal cannot
normally be expected to result in damage to shoreline natural features . Log storage away from
forestlands is considered under Industry .
Groins . A barrier type of structure extending from the beach or bank into a water body for the
purpose of the protection of a shoreline and adjacent uplands by influencing the movement of
water or deposition of materials . Generally narrow and of varying lengths , groins may be built in
a series along the shore .
Hearings Board , The State Shorelines Hearings Board established by the Act in RCW
90 . 58 . 1706
Height. Height is measured from average grade level to the highest point of a structure :
Provided , that television antennas , chimneys , and similar appurtenances shall not be used in
calculating height , except where such appurtenances obstruct the view of the shoreline of a
substantial number of residences on areas adjoining such shorelines , or this master program
specifically requires that such appurtenances be included : Provided further, That temporary
construction equipment is excluded in this calculation .
5
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
Home Occupation . A business conducted within a dwelling which is the residence of the
principal practitioner. A Home Occupation may be reviewed as a residential use provided it
complies with all applicable County Ordinances and no alteration is made to the exterior of the
residence or site which would alter the character of the site as residential property including
parking and signs . Home Occupations , which require more than $2 , 500 in exterior development
costs , require a Substantial Development Permit .
Industrial Development. Facilities for processing , manufacturing , and storage of finished or semi-
finished products , together with necessary accessory uses such as parking , loading , and waste
storage and treatment.
Jetties . Structures generally perpendicular to shore extending through or past the intertidal zone .
They are built singly or in pairs at harbor entrances or river mouths mainly to prevent shoaling or
accretion from littoral drift. Jetties also serve to protect channels and inlets from storm waves or
cross currents .
Joint- Use Private Dock. A dock or float for pleasure craft moorage or water sports for exclusive
use by two or more waterfront lot owners , excluding marinas .
Landfill . The creation of or addition to a dry upland area by depositing materials . Depositing
topsoil in a dry upland area for normal landscaping purposes is not considered a landfill .
Littoral Drift (or transport) . The natural movement of sediment, particularly sand and gravel ,
along shorelines by wave action in response to prevailing winds or by stream currents . (See Drift
Sector. )
Marina . A commercial moorage with or without dry storage facility for over ten pleasure or
commercial craft excluding canoes , kayaks and rowboats . Goods or services related to boating
may be sold commercially . Uses associated with marinas shall conform to the regulations for
these uses .
Marine Waters . All bodies of water having a connection with the open sea and which are tidally
influenced , together with adjoining transitional and estuarine areas where average ocean derived
salts exceed five parts per thousand .
Master Program . Mason County program for regulation and management of the shorelines of the
state including goals and policies , use regulations , maps , diagrams , charts and any other text
included in the Program . The enforceable provisions of the Master Program are embodied in this
ordinance .
Mean Higher High Tide . The elevation determined by averaging each day's highest tide in a
particular saltwater shoreline area over a period of 18 . 6 years .
Mining . The removal of sand , gravel , minerals or other naturally occurring materials from the
earth .
Multkfamily Dwelling . A building designed or used for a residence by three or more household
units , including but not limited to apartments , condominium complexes , and townhouses .
Natural Environment. The natural environment is intended to preserve and restore those natural
resource systems existing relatively free of human influence . Local policies to achieve this
objective should aim to regulate all potential developments degrading or changing the natural
characteristics that make these areas unique and valuable .
The main emphasis of regulation in these areas should be on natural systems and resources ,
which require severe restrictions of intensities and types of uses to maintain them in a natural
state . Therefore , activities , which may degrade the actual or potential value of this environment ,
should be strictly regulated . Any activity that would bring about a change in the existing situation
would be desirable only if such a change would contribute to the preservation of the existing
character.
The primary determinant for designating an area as a natural environment is the actual presence
of some unique natural or cultural features considered valuable in their natural or original
condition which are relatively intolerant of intensive human use .
Non -conforming Development . A shoreline use , structure or lot which was lawfully constructed or
established prior to the effective date of the Act, or the Master Program , or amendments thereto ,
6
Chapter 17. 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
but which does not conform to present regulations or standards of the Program or policies of the
Act.
Normal Maintenance . Those usual acts to prevent a decline , lapse or cessation from a lawfully
established condition .
Normal Repair. To restore a development to a state comparable to its original condition ,
including but not limited to its size , shape , configuration , location and external appearance , within
a reasonable period after decay or partial destruction except where repair involves total
replacement which is not common practice or causes substantial adverse effects to the shoreline
resource or environment (WAC 173-27-040 , as amended ) . A reasonable period of time for repair
shall be up to one year after decay or partial destruction , except for bulkhead replacement which
shall be allowed up to five years . Total replacement that is common practice includes but is not
limited to floats , bulkheads and structures damaged by accident, fire and the elements .
Normal Protective Bulkhead ( also referred to as "erosion control bulkhead ") . A retaining wall- like
structure constructed at or near ordinary high water mark to protect a single family residence or
lot upon which a single family residence is being constructed and is for protecting land from
erosion , not for the purpose of creating land .
Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM ) . On all lakes , streams , and tidal water is that mark that will
be found by examining the bed and banks and ascertaining where the presence and action of
waters are so common and usual , and so long continued in all ordinary years , as to mark upon
the soil a character distinct from that of the abutting upland , in respect to vegetation as that
condition exists on June 1 , 1971 , or as it may naturally change thereafter or as it may change
thereafter in accordance with permits issued by local government or the Department PROVIDED
THAT in any area where the ordinary high water mark cannot be found , the ordinary high water
mark adjoining salt water shall be the line of mean higher high tide and the ordinary high water
mark adjoining fresh water shall be the line of mean high water . (WAC 173-22-030 as amended)
Permit. A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit, or Variance
Permit, any combination thereof, or their revisions , issued by Mason County Pursuant to RCW
90 . 58 .
Person . An individual , partnership , corporation , association , organization , cooperative , public or
municipal corporation , or agency of the state or local governmental unit however designated
Pier. An open pile structure generally_ built from the shore extending out over the water to
provide moorage for private recreation , commercial or industrial watercraft and/or float planes .
Plot Plan . An area drawing to scale of proposed project showing existing structures and
improvements including wells , septic tanks and drainfields , proposed structures and other
improvements and the line of ordinary high water.
Port Development. Public or private facilities for transfer of cargo or passengers from water-born
craft to land and vice versa ; including but not limited to piers , wharves , sea islands , commercial
float plane moorages , off- shore loading or unloading buoys , ferry terminals , and required
dredged water. ways , moorage basins and equipment for transferring cargo or passengers
between land and water modes . Excluded from this definition and dealt with elsewhere are
marinas , boat ramps or docks used primarily for recreation , cargo storage and parking areas not
essential for port operations , boat building or• repair . The latter group are considered as industrial
or accessory to other uses .
Recreational Development . Recreational development includes facilities such as campgrounds ,
recreational vehicle parks , day use parks , etc . .
Residential Development . The development of land or construction or placement of dwelling
units for residential occupancy .
Revetment . A sloped wall constructed of rip rap or other suitable material placed on stream
banks or other shorelines to retard bank erosion from high velocity currents or waves
respectively .
Rip Rap . Dense , hard , angular rock used to armor revetments or other flood control works .
7
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
Road and Railway Development. Includes also related bridges and culverts , fills , embankments ,
causeways , parking areas , truck terminals and rail switchyards , sidings and spurs . These are
addressed under " Recreation and Forest Practices" .
Rural Environment. The Rural Environment is intended to protect agricultural land from urban
expansion , restrict intensive development along undeveloped shorelines , function as a buffer
between urban areas , and maintain open spaces and opportunities for recreational uses
compatible with agricultural activities .
The rural environment is intended for those areas characterized by intensive agricultural and
recreational development. Hence , those areas that are already used for agricultural purposes , or
which have agricultural potential should be maintained for present and future agricultural needs .
Designation of rural environments should also seek to alleviate pressures or urban expansion on
prime farming areas .
New developments in a rural environment are to reflect the character of the surrounding area by
limiting residential density , providing permanent open space and maintaining adequate building
setbacks from the water to prevent shoreline resources from being destroyed for other rural types
of uses .
Public recreation facilities for public use , which can be located and designed to minimize conflicts
with agricultural activities , are recommended for the rural environment. Linear water access
which will prevent overcrowding in any one area , trail systems for safe nonmotorized traffic along
scenic corridors and provisions for recreational viewing of water areas illustrate some of the ways
to ensure maximum enjoyment of recreational opportunities along shorelines without conflicting
with agricultural uses . In a similar fashion , agricultural activities should be conducted in a
manner that will enhance the opportunities for shoreline recreation . Farm management practices
that prevent erosion and subsequent siltation of water bodies and minimize the flow of waste
material into water courses are to be encouraged by the master program for rural environments .
Shorelands . Those lands extending landward for 200 feet in all directions , as measured on a
horizontal plane from the ordinary high water mark, floodways and contiguous floodplain areas
landward 200 feet from such floodways , and all wetlands and river deltas associated with the
streams , lakes and tidal waters which are subject to the provisions of the Act and this master
program .
Shorelines . All of the water areas of the state , including reservoirs , and their associated
shorelands , together with the lands underlying them ; except
( 1 ) shorelines of statewide significance ;
(2) shorelines on segments of streams upstream of a point where the mean annual flow is
twenty cubic feet per second or less and the wetlands associated with such upstream segments ;
and
(3) shorelines on lakes less than twenty acres in size and wetlands associated with such
small lakes .
Shorelines of Statewide Significance . Those shoreline areas as defined in RCW 90 . 5&030 (2) (e) ,
and , specifically the following bodies and associated shorelands in Mason County : Hood Canal ,
Lake Cushman , the Skokomish River from the confluence of the North Fork of the Skokomish
River and the South Fork of the Skokomish River, downstream to the Great Bend of Hood Canal
(excluding that portion within the Skokomish Indian Reservation ) , and all saltwater bodies below
the line of extreme low tide .
Shorelines of the State . The total of all "shorelines it and shorelines of "state-wide significance" .
Shoreline Permit . One or more of the following permits : Substantial Development Permit ,
Conditional Use Permit , or Variance .
Single Family Residence . A detached dwelling designed for and occupied by one family ,
including those structures and developments within a contiguous ownership that are normal
appurtenance .
Structure . A building or edifice of any kind , or any piece of work artificially built up or composed
of parts joined together in some definite manner .
8
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
Subdivision . The division or redivision of land for purposes of sale , lease or transfer of ownership
into five or more lots , any one of which is smaller than five acres or one one- hundrec! Awenty-
eighth of a section of land .
Substantial Development. Any development of which the total cost or fair market value exceeds
Five Thousand ( $5 , 000) Dollars , or any development which materially interferes with normal
public use of the water or shorelines of the state ; except that those developments defined above
as an "exemption " do not require a substantial development permit but may require a variance or
conditional use permit .
Tideland . The land on the shore of marine water bodies between OHWM or MHHW and the line
of extreme low tide which is submerged daily by tides .
Upland . Those shoreline areas landward of OHWM except berms , backshores , natural wetlands ,
and floodplains .
Urban Environment. Those shorelines designated for urban uses provided that industrial
development is prohibited in all categories except the urban industrial designation . The urban
area is an area of high intensity land use including residential , commercial , and industrial
development . The environment does not necessarily include all shorelines within an
incorporated city , but is particularly suitable to those areas presently subjected to extremely
intensive use pressure , as well as areas planned to accommodate urban expansion . Shorelines
planned for urban expansion should present few biophysical limitations for urban activities and
not have a high priority for designation as an alternative environment.
Because shorelines suitable for urban industrial uses are a limited resource , emphasis should be
given to development within already developed areas and do not have a high priority for
designation as an alternative environment .
Urban Industrial . The objective of the Urban Industrial Environment is to ensure optimum
utilization of shorelines within urbanized areas by managing industrial development .
The Urban Industrial Environment is an area of high intensity industrial land use . The
environment does not necessarily include all shorelines within an unincorporated city , but is
particularly suitable to those areas presently subjected to extremely intensive use pressure , as
well as areas planned to accommodate industrial expansion . Shorelines planned for future
industrial expansion should not have a high priority for designation as an alternative environment .
Because shorelines suitable for urban industrial uses are a limited resource , emphasis should be
given to development within already developed areas and particularly to water-dependent
industrial uses requiring frontage on navigable waters . Industrial development is prohibited in all
categories but Urban Industrial Environment.
Urban Commercial . The objective of the Urban Commercial Environment is to ensure optimum
utilization of shoreline within urbanized areas by managing commercial development.
The Urban Commercial Environment is an area of high intensity commercial land use . The
environment does not necessarily include all shorelines within an unincorporated city , but is
particularly suitable to those areas presently subjected to extremely intensive use pressure , as
well as areas planned to accommodate commercial expansion . Shorelines planned for future
commercial expansion should not have a high priority for designation as an alternative
environment .
Because shorelines suitable for urban commercial uses are a limited resource , emphasis should
be given to development within already developed areas and particularly to water-dependent
commercial uses requiring frontage on navigable waters .
Urban Residential . The objective of the Urban Residential Environment is to ensure optimum
utilization of shorelines for residential development .
The Urban Residential Environment is an area of high intensity residential land use . Shorelines
planned for future residential expansion should have few geographic limitations and not have a
high priority for designation as an alternative environment
Variance . An adjustment in the application of this program' s regulations to a particular site
pursuant to Chapter 7 . 28 , to grant relief from a specific bulk , dimensional or performance
9
Chapter 17 .50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
standards set forth in the applicable Master Program and not a means to vary the use of a
shoreline .
Vector. An organism that carries and transports disease ( i . e . , rat , fly) .
Water Dependent Use . A use that cannot exist in other than a waterfront location and is dependent
on the water by reason of the intrinsic nature of its operation . Examples include but are not limited to
cargo terminal loading areas , barge loading , ship building , repair, servicing and dry docking ,
aquaculture and log booming .
Water Oriented Use . A use that provides the opportunity for a substantial number of the general
public to enjoy the shoreline without causing significant adverse impacts upon other uses and shore
features . Examples include but are not limited to restaurants , parks , recreation areas , marine or
freshwater educational facilities , fresh seafood only retail sales . The use must be consistent with at
least one of the following : ( 1 ) offer a view of waterfront activities ; (2 ) make use of a unique
characteristic of the site ; and (3) support other proximate water dependent, water related or water
oriented activities .
Water Related Use . A use that is not intrinsically dependent on a waterfront location but whose
operation cannot occur economically and functionally without a shoreline location . Examples include
but are not limited to warehousing of goods transported by water, seafood processing , oil refineries ,
paper and wood mills ( if materials or products are water transported ) and ships' parts and equipment
fabrication .
Wetlands : Areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or ground water at a frequency
and duration sufficient to support , and that under normal circumstances do support a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions . Wetlands generally include swamps ,
marshes , bogs , and similar areas . Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally
created from non-wetland sites including , but not limited to , irrigation and drainage ditches , grass-
lined swales , canals , detention facilities , waste water treatment facilities , farm ponds , and landscape
amenities . However, wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non.
wetland areas created to mitigate conversion of wetlands , if permitted by the County .
17 . 50 . 050 Project Classifications .
Development proposals that propose to locate along the shoreline are categorized within each
shoreline designation as " permitted " , "conditional uses" , or " prohibited " . This priority system
determines the proposal's administrative requirements and encourages activities that are
compatible with each shoreline designation .
During application review, the basic element or intent of a proposed development will guide in the
determination of the proposal's particular use activity . When a proposal contains two or more
use activities , including accessory uses , the most restrictive category will be applied to the entire
proposal .
DEFINITIONS :
Permitted . Those uses that are preferable and meet the policies of the particular shoreline
designation , but because of their dollar value require a Substantial Development Permit or any
development that materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the
state .
Conditional Use . A Conditional Use Permit is intended to allow for flexibility and the exercise of
judgment in the application of regulations in a manner consistent with the policies of the
Shoreline Management Act and the Master Program . While not prohibited , these uses are an
exception to the general rule . Criteria used for judging conditional uses are outlined in Chapter
7 . 28 of the Shoreline Management Program .
Prohibited . Some developments and uses are viewed as inconsistent with the definition , policies
or intent of the shoreline environmental designation . For the purposes of this program , these
uses are not considered appropriate and are not allowed , including by Conditional Use or
Variance .
10
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
PROJECT CLASSIFICATION TABLE
ENVIRONMENT DESIGNATION URBAN RURAL CONSERVANCY NATURAL
Agriculture P P P C
Commercial Feedlots X C X X
Aquaculture
non-floating P P P C
floating C C C C
gravel enhancement C C C C
projects > 1 , 000 c .y .
Forest Practices P/X P P C
Commercial
Water dependent P C C2 XI
non-water dependent/ C C C2 X
with waterfront
non-water dependent P C C2 X
without waterfront
Marinas C C CI XI
Mining C C C X
Outdoor Advertising P P P X
Residential - single family E E E X
duplex P P C X
multi-family C C X X
nonconforming development EN E/V EN X
accessory living quarters P P P X
Ports water dependent P C C XI
non-water dependent C C C X
Bulkheads P P P X
Breakwaters , Jetties, Groins C C C XI
Shore Defense Works P P C C
(flood protection and
stabilization)
Diking C C C C
11
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
ENVIRONMENT DESIGNATION URBAN RURAL CONSERVANCY NATURAL
Landfill
water dependent-upland P P C X
water dependent-beyond OHWM C C X X
non-water dependent-upland C C C X
non-water dependent-beyond OHWM X X X X
sanitary landfill/ X X X X
solid waste disposal site
Dredging
water dependent P P C XI
non- water dependent C C C XI
Transportation P P C C
Piers & Docks P P C X
Marine rails/ P P C X
boat ramps
mooring buoys E E E E
Boat house on land P P P X
Boat house over water/
* Covered moorage C C X X
Archaeological/ P P P C
Historic Sites
Recreation
campgrounds C C C C
parks P P C C
P=Permitted
C=Conditional Use
X=Prohibited
E=Substantial Development Permit Exempt
* Permitted only in marinas .
NOTE : This matrix is a guide only . The classifications can be found in the appropriate section.
IProhibited when upland is designed Conservancy, Natural or in biological wetlands
2See Conservancy definition
12
Chapter 17 .50 Mason County Shoreline Faster Program Use Regulations
17 . 50 . 060 Use Regulations .
Agriculture
Definition
The cultivation of soil , production of crops or raising of livestock . Agricultural Practices include
any activity whether for commercial or recreational use directly pertaining to production of
food , fiber or livestock including but not limited to cultivation , harvest, grazing , animal waste
storage and disposal , fertilization , suppression or prevention of diseases and insects .
Excluded from this definition are transportation of products , related commercial or industrial
uses such as wholesale and retail sales or final processing .
1 . The use of tanks and troughs for animal watering is encouraged ; allowing animals direct ,
unrestricted access to surface water is not permitted .
2 . Surface water drainage and runoff shall be diverted away from animal confinement and
waste storage sites .
3 . Animal confinement areas shall be graded to slope away from surface water.
4 . Gutters and downspouts shall be installed on roofs to prevent excess water from entering
animal confinement areas . The roof water will be transported by County approved methods to
appropriate streams .
5 . Perennial wetlands shall not be used as animal containment sites .
6 . Confinement areas shall be located away from perennial and intermittently flowing
streams . A fenced buffer of permanent vegetation at least 100 feet in width shall be
maintained between such areas and water bodies .
7 . Waste storage sites with the exception of manure lagoons shall be covered and contained
with impermeable material . Manure lagoons shall be set back 200 feet from all surface water
and diked to withstand the 100-year base flood with three feet of overboard .
8 . Tillage patterns which allow runoff directly into adjacent waters shall not be allowed . A
buffer of permanent vegetation at least 25 feet in width shall be maintained between tilled
areas and water bodies to retard surface runoff.
9 . Commercial Feedlots where permitted within the shoreline jurisdiction shall require a
Conditional Use Permit and shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from ordinary high water
mark.
Aquaculture
Definition
Aquaculture involves the culture and farming of food fish , shellfish , and other aquatic animals
and plants in lakes , streams , inlets , bays and estuaries . Methods of aquaculture include , but
are not limited to , fish pens , shellfish rafts , racks and longlines , seaweed floats and the culture
of clams and oysters on tidelands and subtidal areas . Excluded from this definition are related
commercial or industrial uses such as wholesale and retail sales , or final process and freezing .
1 . Shoreline developments adjacent to areas especially suitable for aquaculture shall
practice strict pollution control procedures .
2 . Proposed residential subdivisions and other developments which may impact aquaculture
operations shall install storm drainage and water disposal facilities to prevent any adverse
water quality impacts to such operations .
3 . Site preparation in the vicinity of aquaculture operations shall not result in off-site erosion ,
siltation , or other reductions in water quality .
4 . Aquacultural practices shall be located and conducted so as to provide reasonable
navigational access to waterfront property owners and along the shoreline .
5 . Aquaculture development shall not cause extensive erosion or accretion along adjacent
shorelines .
13
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
6 . Aquaculture structures and activities that are not shoreline dependent shall be located to
minimize the detrimental impact to the shoreline .
7 . Proposed aquaculture processing plants shall provide adequate buffers to screen
operations from adjacent residential uses .
8 . Aquaculture structures and fisheries enhancement activities shall , to the greatest extent
feasible with regard to the economic viability of the operation and protection of the
environment be located , designed and operated so that native plant and animal populations ,
their respective habitats and the local ecological balance are maintained . Disease and pest
control may be authorized .
9 . Floating aquaculture structures shall not unduly detract from the aesthetic qualities of the
surrounding area .
10 . Aquacultural structures shall be placed in such a manner, and be suitably marked , so as
to minimize interference with navigation .
11 . Aquaculture development shall be designed and constructed to harmonize as far as
possible with the local shoreline environment and shall be maintained in a neat and orderly
manner.
12 . Proposed aquacultural developments shall make adequate provisions to control nuisance
factors such as excessive noise and odor and excessive lighting .
13 . Aquacultural discards shall be disposed of in a manner that will not degrade associated
uplands , wetlands , shorelines , or water environments . Discards shall not be disposed of in a
manner which results in offensive odors or increases the vector population .
14 . Equipment , structures and materials shall not be abandoned in the shoreline or wetland
area .
15 . Special precautionary measures shall be taken to minimize the risk of oil or other toxic
materials from entering the water or shoreline area . Precautionary measures are subject to
approval by the County Environmental Health Specialist.
16 . Landfills are prohibited waterward of the ordinary high water mark or on biological
wetlands , except that they may be permitted for aquacultural practices and water dependent
uses where no upland or structural alternative is possible .
Forest Management Practices
Definition
Any activity conducted on or directly pertaining to forest land and relating to growing ,
harvesting , or processing of timber including but not limited to : ( 1 ) road and trail construction ;
(2 ) harvesting ; (3) pre- commercial thinning ; (4) forestation ; (5) fertilization ; (6) prevention and
suppression of disease and insects ; (7) salvage of timber; (8) brush control ; and (9) slash and
debris disposal .
Excluded from this definition is preparatory work such as tree marking , surveying and removal
of incidental vegetation such as berries , greenery , or other natural products whose removal
cannot normally be expected to result in damage to shoreline natural features . Log storage
away from forest lands is considered under Industry .
1 . Cutting practices on shorelines of statewide significance shall be governed by the Act .
2 . Herbicides , insecticides , or other forest chemical applications are to be used in
accordance with the Washington Pesticide Application Act ( RCW 17 . 21 ) and the Washington
Pesticide Act ( RCW 15 . 47) .
3 . Forest Management practices are not permitted in an Urban Industrial or Urban
Commercial Environment .
4 . Urban Residential , Rural , and Conservancy Environments
a . Notification of logging operations which do not require a Substantial Development permit
shall be made by letter, telephone , DNR cutting permit , or other means acceptable to the
Administrator.
14
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
b . No logs shall be yarded through streams or rivers .
c . No slash or debris shall be intentionally allowed to enter the stream . Accidentally injected
slash shall be removed .
d . All trees located within 50 feet of the stream or river shall be felled away from the water' s
edge .
e . No equipment shall be abandoned in the area of jurisdiction .
f. All slash shall be cleaned up or burned in areas where the buffer strip is not sufficient to
trap the debris from reaching the stream in a heavy storm or wind .
g . The accumulation of slash and other debris in waterways covered by this Act is not
permitted .
5 . In addition to the above , the following shall apply in Rural and Conservancy
Environments :
a . Vegetation along the water's edge shall be left with minimum disturbance except for
construction of bridges and large culverts .
b . Reforestation shall occur within 18 months after completion of harvesting unless land is
intended for other use . Density of planting shall be 350 trees per acre of a commercial
species .
6 . In a Conservancy Environment , for streams of less than 15 feet in width , no more than 25
percent of the lineal stream frontage of any single ownership may be clear cut in any calendar
year. No clear cut shall be longer than 1 , 500 stream feet.
Commercial Development
Definition
Uses and facilities that are involved in wholesale or retail trade or business activities . Water
dependent commercial uses are those commercial activities that cannot exist in other than a
waterfront location and are dependent on the water by reason of the intrinsic nature of its
operation .
1 . Home Occupation . A business conducted within a dwelling that is the residence of the
principal practitioner. A Home Occupation may be reviewed as a residential use provided it
complies with all applicable County Ordinances and no alteration is made to the exterior of the
residence or site which would alter the character of the site as a residential property including
parking and signs . Home Occupations which require more than $2 , 500 in exterior
development costs require a Substantial Development Permit.
2 . Cottage Industry . Small scale commercial or industrial activities on residential properties
performed in the residence or building accessory thereto . The principal practitioner must
reside on the property . Cottage Industries are considered as residential use and minor
commercial development and are Substantial Development under this Master Program ,
provided they do not alter the character of the site as a residential property and wholesale and
retail trade are minimal . Cottage Industries must comply with all applicable County Ordinances
and require a Conditional Use Permit .
1 . The County shall utilize the following information in its review of commercial development
proposals :
• nature of the activity ;
• need for shore frontage ;
• special considerations for enhancing the relationship of the activity to the shoreline ;
• provisions for public visual or physical access to the shoreline ;
• provisions to ensure that the development will not cause severe adverse environmental
impacts ;
provisions to mitigate any significant noise impacts ;
provisions to mitigate light or glare impacts .
2 . Commercial development may be permitted on the shoreline in the following descending
order of priority : water dependent , water related and water oriented . Non -water related , non-
15
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
water dependent and non-water oriented developments in an urban and rural environment
may be permitted by Substantial Development Permit when :
• The parcel of land to be developed is a minimum of 100 feet from OHWM and is located on
the upland side of a public roadway , railroad right of way or government controlled property .
3 . Parking and loading areas shall be located well away from the immediate waters' edge and
beaches , unless there is no other practical location for parking . Perimeters of parking areas
shall be landscaped to minimize visual impacts to the shorelines , roadways and adjacent
properties subject to approval by Public Works and/or Department of Transportation . Permit
application shall identify the size , general type and location of landscaping . Design of parking
and loading areas shall ensure that surface runoff does not pollute adjacent waters or cause
soil or beach erosion . Design shall provide for storm water retention . Parking plans shall be
reviewed by Mason County Department of Public Works for compliance with all applicable
County Ordinances . Creation of parking areas by landfilling beyond OHW mark or in biological
wetlands is prohibited .
4 . Those portions of a commercial development which are not water dependent are
prohibited over the water.
5 . Water supply and waste facilities shall comply with the strictest established guidelines ,
standards and regulations .
6 . New commercial developments shall be located adjacent to existing commercial
developments whenever possible .
7 . New or expanded structures shall not extend more than 35 feet in height above average
grade level .
8 . Commercial developments adjacent to aquaculture operations shall practice strict pollution
control procedures .
9 . Commercial developments shall be located and designed to minimize noise impacts on
adjacent properties .
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
URBAN RURAL CONSERVANCY NATURAL
Shore setbacks from the OHWM
Primary Structures :
Water Dependent 15' 50' 50' X
Non -water Dependent 50' 75' 100, X
* Water dependent commercial structures may be constructed over the water if this is a
functional requirement . No variance from setback is required .
Accessory Uses ( including parking) 50' 100, 150' X
* Water dependent commercial structures may be constructed over the water if this is a
functional requirement. No variance from setback is required .
Side Yard Setbacks ' 5-25' 15-25' 20-30' X
Site coverage by structures , 70 % 50 % 20 % X
roads , parking and primary uses
Height Limit 35 ' 35' 35' X
X = Prohibited Use
' Side yard setbacks will be increased depending upon the height of the building . Buildings shall have a
setback of five feet plus five feet for every ten feet or fraction thereof in height over 15 feet.
16
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
Marinas
Definition
A commercial moorage with or without dry storage facility for over ten pleasure or commercial
craft excluding canoes , kayaks and rowboats . Goods or services related to boating may be
sold commercially . Uses associated with marinas shall conform to the regulations for these
uses .
1 . Marinas that provide overnight or long -term moorage shall not be located in areas with
commercial aquacultural harvest.
2 . Marinas shall be compatible with the general aesthetic quality of the shoreline area where
they are located .
3 . Marinas and their accessory facilities shall be located , designed , constructed and
operated to minimize adverse effects on fish , shellfish , wildlife and other biological resources ,
water quality , and existing geo- hydraulic shoreline processes .
4 . Marinas shall be located , designed , constructed and operated so as to not substantially
or unnecessarily interfere with the rights of adjacent property owners , nor interfere with
adjacent water uses .
5 . Parking and loading areas shall be located well away from the immediate waters' edge
and beaches , unless there is no other practical location for parking . Perimeters of parking
areas shall be landscaped to minimize visual impacts to the shorelines , roadways and
adjacent properties subject to approval by Public Works and/or Department of Transportation .
Permit application shall identify the size , general type and location of landscaping . Design of
parking and loading areas shall ensure that surface runoff does not pollute adjacent waters or
cause soil or beach erosion . Design shall provide for storm water retention , shall comply with
the Mason County Parking Ordinance , and shall be reviewed by Mason County Department of
Public Works for compliance with all applicable County Ordinances . Creation of parking areas
by landfilling beyond OHW mark or in biological wetlands is prohibited .
6 . Provisions shall be made to facilitate the orderly circulation of vehicles and pedestrians in
the vicinity of the marina .
7 . Provisions shall be made to facilitate the orderly launching , retrieval and storage of boats .
8 . New marinas , or expansion of existing saltwater marinas which provide moorage for more
than ten boats , shall be required to be equipped with easily accessible vessel pump-out and
shall provide on-shore sewage and waste disposal facilities . Each marina shall predominately
display signs stating that sanitary discharge of wastes is prohibited . Deviation from pump-out
requirements on saltwater shall require a Variance .
9 . In sensitive areas , such as near certified shellfish spawning areas , the applicant shall be
required to demonstrate that the maximum protection of shore features , water quality and
existing uses will be provided .
10 . Adequate illumination shall be required . Illumination shall be designed and constructed
to minimize off-site light and glare .
11 . Physical and/or visual public access opportunities shall be provided unless the proponent
can demonstrate that such access is physically unfeasible .
12 . Rest room facilities shall be provided for public use .
13 . Associated uses shall be limited to those found necessary to marina operation or which
provide visual or physical access to the shoreline to substantial numbers of the public .
Associated uses shall conform to the regulations for those uses .
14 . Marina facilities shall project waterward the minimum distance necessary to provide
service to vessels , without creating a hazard to navigation .
15 . Marina and launching facilities shall be located to minimize the need for initial and
maintenance dredging , filling , beach feeding and other channel maintenance activities .
16 . Expansion of existing marinas shall be required to meet the standards set forth for new
development.
17
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
17 . Covered moorage is only permitted in a marina . Covered moorage shall be designed and
located in order to minimize adverse impacts caused by lighting and view blockage .
Mining
Definition
Mining means the extraction or removal of sand , gravel , minerals or other naturally occurring
materials from the earth .
1 . . Accessory Facilities . Accessory facilities essential to mining operations may be permitted
provided that they adhere to all applicable Master Program policies and use activity
regulations . Piers , floats , docks and dolphins may be permitted accessories to mining uses
according to the following conditions .
a . Length . Pier, float , or dock accessories to mining uses should not exceed 200 feet in
total length as measured from the ordinary high water mark to the furthest waterward
extension of the pier. Loading or accessory facilities or structures , including but not
limited to walkways , gangways , slips , troughs , and conveyors may extend beyond this
length .
b . Width . The width of the pier , float , or dock should not exceed a maximum of 30 feet.
c. Height ( 1 ) The surface of the pier, float or dock should not exceed a maximum of 30
feet .
(2) Loading or accessory facilities or structures located on the dock should be
no higher than 50 feet above mean higher high tide .
2 . Mining activities shall not be allowed that will permanently impede , or retard the flow or the
direction of flow of any stream or river. Surface runoff from the site carrying excessive
sedimentation and siltation shall not be allowed to enter any shoreline waters .
3 . Mining activities shall utilize visual and aural screening , buffers and berms around the
operation to minimize aesthetic and noise impact .
4 . Restoration of the site after completion of the mining activity shall be provided . Plans shall
detail reclamation of all disturbed areas to a biologically productive and useful condition , and
shall ensure compatibility between the project site and adjacent existing land , shoreline and
water uses .
5 . Setbacks and Buffers . Mining operations (including accessory facilities) in shoreline areas
shall utilize screening and buffering to minimize visual and auditory impacts to the shoreline
environment. The screening and buffering shall be at sufficient height and width to be effective
and shall be in place before the mining activity begins .
6 . Erosion Control . Mining operations shall employ measures to minimize surface runoff,
erosion , and sediment generation from entering shoreline waters . All preventive techniques
shall be maintained in good effective condition .
7 . Rivers and Streams . Mining river bars is permitted provided that no operations shall be
allowed which permanently impede or retard the flow of any river or stream .
8 . Marine Beaches and Lake Shores . The mining of sand , gravel , cobbles , or rock from any
marine beaches or lake shores below the ordinary high water mark shall not be permitted .
Routine aquacultural uses and maintenance are not considered mining activities .
9 . Related Activities . The reduction , treatment , batching , or processing of the mined
materials for on-site manufacturing purposes shall adhere to the policies and regulations
applicable to ports and water- related industry ( Refer to Shoreline Master Plan , Chapter
7 . 16 . 100 . ) ,
10 . Water Quality . Mining operations shall comply with all local , state , and federal water
quality standards and pollution control laws .
11 . Standing Water. Mining operations shall be conducted so as not to result in open pits or
excavations being left which collect and hold stagnant , toxic , or noxious standing waters .
18
Chapter 17. 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
12 . Interim Reclamation Measures . The amount of excavated area at any time shall be set by
permit condition : PROVIDED that no more than ten acres shall lie disturbed , unused , or
unreclaimed at any one time .
13 . Reclamation . Mining in Washington is controlled by the Surface Mining Act of 1970 ( RCW
78 . 44) and is administered by the State Department of Natural Resources . The provisions of
this legislation shall be followed in all cases . To ensure the future use and visibility of
shoreline areas after the completion of mining activities , the following provisions for land
reclarnations and utilization shall be adhered to :
a . All reclamation shall be completed within two years after discontinuance of
mining operation . A reclamation plan shall be submitted as part of any shoreline permit
application .
b . All equipment, machinery , building , and structures shall be removed from the
site upon discontinuance or abandonment of mining operations .
c . Backfill material used in site reclamation shall be natural materials .
Combustible , flammable , noxious , toxic , or solid waste materials are not permitted as
backfill or for on -site disposal , and shall be removed and disposed of away from the
shoreline area .
d . The site shall be rehabilitated so as to prevent future erosion and
sedimentation . Suitable drainage systems shall be installed and maintained if natural
gradual drainage is not possible . Topography of the site shall be restored to contour
compatible with the surrounding land and shoreline area .
e . All slopes and exposed areas shall be seeded or surfaced with soil to at least
the depth necessary to support revegetation . Revegetation shall utilize compatible
native , self-sustaining trees , shrubs , legumes , or grass and shall be planted so as to
blend with the surrounding land and shoreline area .
f. No stagnant or standing water shall be allowed to collect and remain on the site
except as a transient part of a sedimentation collection and removal system specified
in the reclamation plan .
14 . Permit Application . Applications for mining projects shall provide the following information
for permit review :
a . Description of the materials to be mined , quantity and quality by type , the total
deposit, lateral extent and depth , depth of overburden and amount of materials to be
mined .
b . Description of mining technique and list of equipment to be utilized .
c . Cross section plans which indicate present and proposed elevation and/or
extraction levels and show the maximum mining depth .
d . Site plans which show existing drainage patterns and all proposed alterations of
topography , proposed means of handling surface runoff, and preventive controls for
erosion and sedimentation .
e . A mining plan showing scheduling (seasonal , phasing and daily operations) ;
storage , usage and deposition of overburden , excavation material and tailings ; location
and dimensions of stockpiling areas ; screening , buffers and fencing ; locations of
building , equipment, machinery , and structures .
f. A reclamation plan .
15 . Mining Operations . All phases and activities of mining operations shall be carried out in a
manner so that the operator shall not significantly affect adjacent shoreline areas .
16 . Public Access . Some form of public access to the shoreline for private non-commercial
recreational purposes shall be afforded in a manner compatible with mining and accessory
facilities and uses . Such public access may be restricted and shall be consistent with the
protection of the health , safety , and welfare of the public.
17 . Subject to the performance standards , mining is a Conditional Use in Urban , Rural and
Conservancy environments .
18 . Mining is a prohibited use in a Natural environment .
19
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
Outdoor Advertising , Signs And Billboards
1 . In an Urban ( Industrial , Commercial and Residential ) or Rural Environment
a . Outdoor advertising , signs and billboards shall be on premise .
b . Sign supports shall be durable . Sign design and support shall be compatible with the
environment . Flashing lights shall be prohibited . Lighted signs shall be permitted for
public services remaining open after sundown . Such lighting shall be hooded or shaded
so that direct light of lamps will not result in glare when viewed from the surrounding
property or rights-of-way .
c . Temporary or obsolete outdoor advertising , signs and billboards shall be removed
within ten days of elections , closures of business or termination of any other intended
function .
2 . Conservancy Environment
a . Outdoor advertising and signs shall be on premise . Billboards are prohibited .
Highway signs giving directions to scenic routes , trails , picnic areas , boat launching sites ,
scenic sites and unique points of interest shall also be permitted .
b . Signs and outdoor advertising shall not exceed 15 square feet in size and shall not
project more than six feet above road level . Sign design and support shall be compatible
with the environment. Illuminated signs shall not be permitted unless warranted by safety
factors . Flashing signs are prohibited .
c . Temporary or obsolete outdoor advertising , signs and billboards shall be removed
within ten days of elections , closures of business or termination of any other intended
function .
3 . Natural Environment .
a . Only temporary , on premise , advertising signs are permitted . Billboards are
prohibited .
b . Directional signs to viewpoints or for trails and signs describing unique points of
interest shall be permitted .
c . Permitted signs shall not exceed four square feet in size and shall not project more
than six feet above road level . Sign design and support shall be compatible with the
environment . Lighted signs are prohibited unless warranted by safety factors .
d . Where feasible , permitted signs shall be located on the upland side of transportation
routes parallel or adjacent to shoreline and water areas . Placement of signs shall not
degrade or obstruct view areas .
e . Temporary or obsolete outdoor advertising , signs and billboards shall be removed
within ten days of elections , closures of business or termination of any other intended
function .
Residential Development
Definition
The development of land or construction or placement of dwelling units for the purpose of
residential occupancy . This section shall apply to all single family and multi-family dwellings ,
and any other accessory structure , including decks , garages and fences .
Although a Substantial Development Permit is not required for construction on wetlands by an
owner, lessee or contract purchaser of a single family residence for his own use or the use of
his family , such construction and all normal appurtenant structures must otherwise conform to
this Master Program . Construction greater than 35 feet high requires a Substantial
Development Permit .
1 . Residential development over the water is prohibited .
2 . "Submerged lands" ( biological wetlands and those lands waterward of the ordinary high
water) within the boundaries of any waterfront parcel shall not be used to compute required lot
20
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
area , lot dimensions and required yards . Portions of land lying within marshes , bogs and
swamps may be included as open space .
3 . Subdivision proposals shall identify areas of natural vegetation , storm water retention and
erosion control measures .
4 . Landfill for residential development which results in the creation of new dry land waterward
of OHWM or in biological wetlands is prohibited . Fill necessary for a normal erosion control
bulkhead is exempt. Land fill in biological wetlands (excluding bogs , marshes , swamps ,
marine and estuarine shore) may be permitted . Such filling may be considered as a
Conditional Use PROVIDED the applicant can demonstrate the following : ( 1 ) Extraordinary or
unique circumstances relating to the property exist which require the proposed shoreline
location ; and (2) No viable alternative using a different method or structural solution exists .
5 . Landfilling in flood hazard areas other than a floodway is allowed only for flood protection
of a structure(s) .
6 . Storm drainage facilities shall be separate from sewage disposal transport facilities and
include provisions to prevent uncontrolled and untreated direct entry of surface water runoff
into receiving waters . Storm drainage facilities shall include , but not be restricted to vegetated
swales , retention ponds and artificial and natural wetlands PROVIDED no adverse impacts to
the receiving wetlands would occur and shall be subject to Mason County approval .
7 . Subdivision developments and planned unit developments shall provide areas sufficient to
ensure usable access to and along the shoreline area for all residents of the development
except where the shoreline topography does not permit the same .
8 . In order to preserve aesthetic characteristics , no fence or wall shall be erected , placed or
altered nearer to the water than the building setback line , unless it is under 30 inches in height.
9 . Each shoreline environment has a setback requirement for structures from the ordinary
high water mark. (See chart at end of this section . ) Uncovered porches , decks or steps may
project into the required setback area , provided such structures are no higher than 30 inches
above average grade excluding railings required for reasons of public safety . The setback in
each environment may be increased or decreased by the Administrator in the following ways :
a) Increased Setback Requirements . The setbacks may be increased if the building area
or setback area has a slope greater than 40 percent, severe instability , or the average setback
of the two adjacent residences is greater than the setback requirement for that environment.
In such cases , the setback shall be determined by drawing an imaginary line between the roof
lines of adjacent residences ; PROVIDED the minimum distance required by reason of slope or
instability shall be required . If there is no residence on an adjacent lot , the next lot with a
residence will be considered , up to 150 feet away . If there is no adjacent residence within 150
feet; the minimum default setback shall be assumed on that side of the proposed residence .
In the Urban Environment , a residence setback over 120 feet from the line of ordinary high
water will not be considered in determining the setback and the default setback will be used at
15 feet.
In cases of a pronounced curved shoreline or point , the setback shall be established by
determining proportionate setback distances from the OHWM of adjacent residences .
Setback for any structure greater than 30 inches above average grade shall be behind this
common line ( see figure) .
b . Decreased Setback Requirements . The setback may be relaxed PROVIDED that at
least one existing residence adjacent (within 50 feet) to the proposed structure infringes on the
setback. In such cases , the setback shall be determined in the same manner described under
" Increased Setback Requirement" where applicable . This shall not be construed to allow
residential development over water or to allow a reduction of the default setback in cases of
pronounced cove or indented shoreline . Setback relaxation is subject to approval by the
Shoreline Administrator (see illustration) .
Further deviation from setback requirements shall require a Variance .
10 . Clustering of residential dwellings in all environments except Natural is allowed . The number
of clustered lots or residential units in the shoreline area shall not exceed the number of units
21
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
which results from multiplying the total acres ( minus submerged lands) in the shoreline area by
the density allowed in the specific environment.
11 . Proposed residential developments adjacent to a water body supporting aquaculture
operations shall install drainage and storm water treatment measures facilities to prevent any
adverse impact to aquaculture operations . Such measures shall include but not be restricted to
vegetated swales , retention ponds and use of artificial or natural wetlands PROVIDED no adverse
impacts to the receiving wetlands would occur. Measures utilized shall be subject to Mason
County approval .
12 . Multi -family residences are permitted in the Urban environment, subject to a maximum
projected output of 1 , 570 gallons of sewage per acre per day .
13 . If marshes , bogs , swamps or other fragile features are located on a development site ,
clustering of residential units shall be required in order to avoid any development in such areas .
14 . Storm drainage facilities shall be required by the County for residential development projects
excluding a single family residence . Facilities shall include but not be restricted to vegetated
swales , retention ponds and use of artificial or natural wetlands PROVIDED no adverse impacts
to the receiving wetlands would occur and are subject to Mason County approval .
15 . Lots created prior to the adoption of this ordinance which do not meet the minimum lot size
may be used for a single family residence when all of the following criteria can be met:
(a) A permit for an on -site disposal system which meets all current codes for setbacks and
sizing , has been granted by the Environmental Health Section .
(b) All side yard and shore yard setbacks can be met .
Exceptions from these criteria would require a Variance Permit.
16 . Only one dock or pier is permitted in a new subdivision , planned unit development , or short
plat, when lot frontages on the shoreline do not exceed an average of 150 feet . Prior to plat
approval , a usable area with access shall be set aside for the pier or dock, unless no suitable area
exists .
17 . Construction of new dwellings shall be required to comply with current sewage system
setback and design standards as per WAC 24 &96 .
18 . Expansion of existing dwellings shall require strict compliance with current sewage system
setback and design standards as per WAC 248-96 .
19 . Normal maintenance and repair of non-conforming structures shall be allowed , provided no
material expansion is involved .
20 . Residential development is prohibited within a floodway .
21 . Residential developers and individuals shall be required to control erosion during
construction . Removal of vegetation should be minimized and any areas disturbed should be
restored to prevent erosion and other environmental impacts .
22 . Waste materials from construction shall not be left on or adjacent to shorelines .
23 . Kokanee area only — No building on slopes greater than 20 % will be allowed . (See page 57)
Accessory Living Quarters
Definition
Separate living quarters , attached or detached from the primary residence which contain less
habitable area than the primary residence .
Accessory living quarters may be allowed subject to meeting the following criteria :
1 . Only one accessory living quarter per lot. In an Urban environment , a lot must be 1 - 1 /2 the
size required for a single family residence which totals 18 , 750 square feet.
2 . Strict compliance with current sewage setback and design standards as per WAC 24 &76-090 .
3 . Minimal impact on surrounding properties from view blockage , traffic , parking and drainage .
4 . Compliance with setback criteria set forth in the Table on Page 35 .
5 . Accessory living quarters shall require a Substantial Development and shall not exceed 1 , 000
square feet .
22
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
REGULATION URBAN RURAL CONSERVANCY NATURAL
1 . Shore setbacks , in feet
( From OHWM or front of bulkhead . Side yard setbacks shall apply to sides . )
a . Single family , duplex 15 25 50 X
b . Multi-family structures
less than 35 ' high 30 50 NA X
c . Multi-family structures
over 35 ' high 50 100 NA X
2 . Side yard setbacks (in feet)
a . Single family , duplex 5 10 25 X
b . Multi-family structures
less than 35 ' high 20 20 X X
c. Multi-family structures
more than 35' high 30 30 X X
3 . Height limits in feet
a . 049 feet from OHWM 35 30 25 X
b . 50- 100 feet from OHWM 45 40 30 X
4 . Site coverage - for: *
a . Single family , duplex 60 % 50 % 15 % X
b . Multi-family structures 40 % 40 % 15 % X
*Site coverage shall include all impermeable surfaces.
5 . Minimum lot size 12 , 500 SF 20 , 000 SF 5 acres** X
( per residential unit)
Primary residence and accessory structure 18 , 750 SF 20 , 000 SF 5 acres** X
(one per lot maximum)
Duplex 1 , 570*** 785*** 5 acres X
Multi-family 11570*** 785*** N/A N/A
** One residential unit is allowed per 200 lineal feet in the shoreline jurisdiction area .
** * Maximum gallons of sewage per acre
6 . Minimum lot width 50 ' 100, 200'
measures at OHWM and at building setback
X = Prohibited
23
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
utilities
1 . Discharges from sewage treatment plants shall not be allowed into Totten Inlet regardless
of the environmental designation .
2 . Any excavation for a utility line must be restored to pre- project configuration , replanted with
native species and provided with maintenance care until the newly planted area is established .
Ports And WatermlRelated Industry
Definition
Ports are centers for water- borne traffic and as such have become gravitational points for
industrial/manufacturing firms . Heavy industry may not specifically require a waterfront
location , but is attracted to port areas because of the variety of transportation available .
1 . Industry shall be responsible for any water pollution it creates .
2 . Ports and water-related industries are prohibited in all environments except the Urban
Industrial Environment.
Shoreline Modification Activities : Bulkheads
Definition
Bulkheads are retaining wall-like structures whose primary purpose is to hold or prevent sliding
of soil caused by erosion and wave action and to protect uplands and fills from erosion and
wave action .
Exemptions
The Shoreline Management Act exempts the construction of a normal protective bulkhead
common to single-family residences from the Substantial Development Permit requirement.
" Normal protective bulkhead " is constructed at or near the ordinary high water mark to protect
a single-family residence or lot upon which a single-family residence is being constructed and
is for protecting land from erosion , not for the purpose of creating land . " However, these
structures are required to comply with all the provisions of the Master Program and
development standards of this section . " A Conditional Use Permit or Variance may be
required .
1 . Bulkheads shall be permitted only where they provide protection to upland areas or
facilities , not for the indirect purpose of creating land by filling behind the bulkhead . Nothing in
this section shall be construed to prohibit construction of a normal protective bulkhead or
maintenance of an existing bulkhead , where there is a demonstrated need , to protect a fill
which occurred prior to the Shoreline Management Act, and is the site of a single-family
residence or other improvements which are currently in use .
2 . Bulkheads may be allowed to re-establish a shoreline boundary that has eroded away
within the past two years . The burden of proof shall be on the applicant . Re-establishment of
all other historical shoreline boundaries is prohibited when it does not meet the criteria of this
chapter.
3 . Bulkheads on lake shores subject to erosion shall be located within one foot of the toe of
the bank , or the line of ordinary high water mark whichever is furthest landward and shall
generally parallel the natural shoreline .
4 . Bulkheads on saltwater shores subject to erosion shall be located only as far seaward as
is necessary to excavate for footings and shall in no case be located more than six feet
beyond OHWM . Any distance further than this shall be considered landfill and shall be
evaluated as such . Except if such fill can be demonstrated to meet regulation Number 2
above and meet the other provisions of this section .
24
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
5 . Bulkheads shall be sited and designed consistent with appropriate engineering principles .
Professional geologic site studies or design may be required for any proposed bulkhead for
which a building permit is required if the Administrator determines sufficient uncertainties exist .
Grounds for such determination shall be inadequate information on local physical features or
potential damage to other shoreline properties and features .
6 . The use of solid waste , junk, abandoned automobiles or asphalt or building demolition
debris is prohibited in the construction or maintenance of bulkheads .
7 . Beach materials shall not be used for fill material behind bulkheads .
8 . When an existing bulkhead is being repaired , construction shall occur no further
waterward of the existing bulkhead than is necessary for construction of the new footing .
Replacement of a failed bulkhead shall be permitted in the same location as the original
bulkhead , if such replacement is commenced within five years of failure . The burden of proof
of location of the original bulkhead shall be on the applicant .
9 . Stairways shall be located landward of bulkheads except where proven infeasible (see
Section 7 . 16 . 200 of the Shoreline Management Program ) .
Shoreline Modification Activities : Breakwaters Jetties And Groins
Definitions
Breakwaters . Protective structures usually built off shore to protect harbor areas , moorage ,
navigation , beaches and bluffs from wave action . Breakwaters may be fixed , open pile , or
floating .
Jetties . Structures generally built singly or in pairs perpendicular to the shore at harbor
entrances or river mouths to prevent the shoaling or accretion of littoral drift. Jetties also
protect channels and inlets from storm waves and cross currents .
Groins . A barrier type of structure extending from the beach or bank into a water body for the
purpose of the protection of shoreline and adjacent uplands by influencing the movement of
water or deposition of materials . Generally narrow and of varying lengths , groins may be built
in a series along the .shore .
1 . The County shall require and utilize the following information during its review of
proposals for breakwaters , jetties and groins (all drawings shall be drawn to scale) :
a . Purpose of the structure ;
b . Construction of project relative to toe and crest of uplands ;
c : Adjacent land contours and high water elevations including but not limited to the
following : Extreme High Tide , OHWM , MLLW and tidal elevation at the end point.
d . Seasonal direction and speed of prevailing winds ; with wind rose and duration graphs .
e . Net direction of littoral drift , tidal currents .
The following additional information is required for groins :
f. Profile of uplands ;
g . Beach type , slope and materials ;
h . Uplands type , slope and materials ;
i . Soil type ;
j . Physical or geological stability of uplands and ;
k . . Predicted impact on area shore processes , adjacent properties and upland stability .
2 . Breakwaters shall only be permitted for navigational purposes , aquacultural activities ,
industrial activities and marinas as an integral component of a harbor, marina or port , where
water dependent uses are located waterward of the existing shoreline and where protection
from strong wave action is essential .
3 . Jetties and marine groins shall only be permitted for navigational purposes , industrial
activity , marinas and public beach management as integral components of an overall
development plan .
25
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
4 . Breakwaters , jetties and groins shall be located and designed so as to minimize impacts
on fish and wildlife resources and habitat .
5 . Groins on rivers , streams and lakes may be considered as a Conditional Use provided
the applicant can demonstrate the appropriateness of the designed structure for the site and
that alternative shore protection measures would prove more detrimental to the geohydraulics
and natural resources within the water body .
Landfill
Definition
The creation of or addition to a dry . upland area by depositing materials . Depositing topsoil for
normal landscaping purposes is not considered a landfill .
1 . Landfills are prohibited waterward of the ordinary high watermark or on biological
wetlands , except that they may be permitted as a Conditional Use for aquacultural practices
and water dependent uses where no upland or structural alternative is possible . Fill necessary
for erosion control bulkheads shall not be considered under landfill . Landfill in biological
wetlands (excluding bogs , marshes , swamps , marine and estuarine shore) for non-water
dependent uses may be permitted . Such fill may be considered as a Conditional Use
PROVIDED the applicant can demonstrate the following : ( 1 ) Extraordinary or unique
circumstances relating to the property exist which require the proposed shoreline location ; (2 )
No viable alternative using a different method or structural solution exists .
2 . Landfills are not permitted on estuaries , tidelands , marshes , ponds or swamps , except
that they may be allowed for water dependent uses as a Conditional Use .
3 . Landfills are not permitted in floodplains unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the
geohydraulic and floodplain storage capacity will not be altered to increase flood hazard or
other damage to life or property .
4 . Landfills shall not disrupt normal surface water drainage .
5 . Permitted fills shall be appropriately sloped and planted with vegetation to prevent
erosion .
6 . Applications for landfill projects shall include the following information (at a minimum) :
a . Character and source of fill material ;
b . Method of placement and compaction ;
c . Type of surfacing proposed , if any ;
d . Method of perimeter erosion control ;
e . Proposed use of fill area ;
f. Location of fill relative to natural or existing drainage patterns .
g . Proposed revegetation and/or landscaping .
7 . Perimeters of fills shall be provided with vegetation , retaining walls , or other mechanisms
for erosion prevention . Any fill on or adjacent to a tideland or shoreline shall be designed to
prevent erosion .
8 . Fill materials shall be of such quality that they will not cause degradation of water quality .
g . Sanitary landfills and solid waste disposal sites are prohibited uses within the shoreline
jurisdiction .
Dredging
Definition
The removal , displacement, and disposal of unconsolidated earth material such as silt , sand ,
gravel , or other submerged material from the bottom of water bodies , ditches or natural
wetlands : maintenance dredging and other supportive activities are included in this definition .
1 . Urban Industrial and Urban Water Environments . Dredging shall be permitted :
a . If it is necessary to deepen or widen navigation channels .
26
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
b . If it is necessary to deepen or widen commercial moorage .
c . If it is necessary to create settling lagoons .
d . If it is necessary in conjunction with flood control measures .
e . If it is necessary in creating solid foundations for placement of concrete , riprap , and
other building materials .
f. If it is necessary in containing peat and peat moss .
g . If it is necessary to facilitate channel clearance and improvement .
h . If it is necessary to remove roots , logs , brush , grasses , and other material to create
access from the shore to navigable water.
i . If it is necessary to remove siltation and other debris from lagoons , ponds and other
areas used by industry .
j . If it is necessary when industrial expansion requires landfill over present lagoons or
ponds and they must be relocated .
k. If it is necessary to facilitate movement of floating materials .
2 . Urban Residential and Urban Commercial Environments . Dredging shall be permitted :
a . If it is necessary to deepen or widen navigation channels .
b . If it is necessary to deepen or widen commercial moorage .
c . If it is necessary to create settling lagoons .
d . If it is necessary in conjunction with flood control measures .
e . If it is necessary in creating solid foundations for placement of concrete , riprap , and
other building materials .
f. If it is necessary in containing peat and peat moss .
g . If it is necessary to facilitate channel clearance and improvement.
h . If it is necessary to remove roots , logs , brush , grasses , and other material to create
access from the shore to navigable water.
i . If it is necessary in certain shellfish farming , harvesting , and protection operations .
3 . Rural and Conservancy Environments . Dredging shall be permitted :
a . If it is necessary to deepen or widen navigation channels .
b . If it is necessary to deepen or widen commercial moorage .
c. If it is necessary to create settling lagoons .
d . If it is necessary in conjunction with flood control measures .
e . If it is necessary in creating solid foundations for placement of concrete , riprap , and
other building materials .
f. If it is necessary in containing peat and peat moss .
g . If it is necessary to facilitate channel clearance and improvement.
h . If it is necessary to remove roots , logs , brush , grasses , and other material to create
access from the shore to navigable water.
i . If it is necessary to facilitate movement of floating materials .
j . If it is necessary in certain shellfish farming , harvesting , and protection operations .
k . If it is necessary to create or maintain drainage channels in lowland areas for
agricultural purposes .
4 . Natural Environment. Dredging shall be permitted : If it is necessary in conjunction with
flood control measures .
5 . For all Environments . Dredging restrictions are as follows :
a . Dredging operations shall not cause damage to adjacent shorelines or marine
developments .
b . Dredging operations shall be self- monitored to control to a feasible minimum any leaks
or spillage of dredged materials from pipes , machinery , dikes , or bulkheads .
c . Dredging machinery or vessels shall use reasonable precautionary measures to prevent
petroleum from entering the water.
d . Dredged material , if deposited within shoreline boundaries , shall be contained by
bulkheading , diking , or other acceptable methods , to prevent undesirable erosion or shifting
after operations and related monitoring are needed .
Chapter 17. 50 Mason County Shoreline Faster Program Use Regulations 27
e . Dredged material , when not deposited on land , shall be placed in spoils deposit sites in
water areas to be identified by the County . Depositing of dredge material in water areas shall
be allowed only for habitat improvement, to correct problems of material distribution affecting
adversely fish and shellfish resources or where the alternatives of depositing material on land
are more detrimental to shoreline resources than depositing in water areas .
Flood Protection And Shoreline Stabilization
1 . The County shall require and utilize the following information during its review of shoreline
stabilization and flood protection procedures :
• River channel hydraulics and floodway characteristics up and downstream from the project
area ;
Existing shoreline stabilization and flood protection works within the area ;
Physical , geological and soil characteristics of the area ; and
Predicted impact upon area shore and hydraulic processes , adjacent properties and
shoreline and water uses .
2 . Conditions of Hydraulic Project Approval , issued by Washington State Department of
Fisheries , may be incorporated into permits issued for flood protection and shoreline
stabilization .
3 . The County shall require professional design of shoreline stabilization and flood
protection works where such projects may cause interference with normal river geohydraulic
processes , leading to erosion of other upstream and downstream shoreline properties , or
adverse effects to shoreline resources and uses .
4 . Groins on rivers , streams and lakes may be considered as a Conditional Use PROVIDED
the applicant can demonstrate the appropriateness of the designed structure and that
alternative shore protection measures would prove more detrimental to the geohydraulics and
natural resource within the water body .
5 . Diking may be permitted as a Conditional Use PROVIDED :
a . Diking is set back to the edge of the floodway ;
b . Timing and construction shall be coordinated with WDF and WDW;
c. Diking shall be designed and constructed to meet Soil Conservation Service technical
manual standards and shall , at a minimum include ( 1 ) layered compaction , (2) removal of
debris ( i . e . , tree stumps , tires , etc . ) , and (3) revegetation and maintenance until ground cover
is established .
6 . Flood protection measures shall be planned and constructed based on a state approved
flood control management plan , when available , and in accordance with the National Flood
Insurance Program .
Transportation Facilities
1 . Application for roads and railroads must adequately address the following :
• Need must be shown for a shoreline location and that no reasonable upland alternative
exists .
• The construction is designed to protect the adjacent shoreline against erosion ,
uncontrolled or polluting drainage and other factors detrimental to the environment both during
and after construction .
• That the project will be planned to fit the existing topography as much as possible , thus
minimizing alterations to the natural environment .
• That all debris , overburden and other waste materials from construction will be disposed of
in such a way as to prevent their entry by erosion from drainage into any water body .
2 . Bridge construction shall conform to the following :
28
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
Excavation for and placement of the sills or abutments and outside placement of stringers
or girders shall be accomplished from above the ordinary high water mark, as a Conditional
Use .
Bridge approach fills shall not encroach in the floodway of any stream or river .
All bridges shall be high enough ( minimum of three feet above 100-year flood elevation ) to
pass all expected debris and anticipated high water flows from a 100-year flood .
3 . Foot or vehicular bridges crossing rivers or streams for the private use of individual land
owners shall be evaluated for need and design . They shall meet the same standards for water
quality protection and erosion control as all other bridges .
4 . Private road construction and maintenance shall conform to the following standards :
• Road subgrade widths shall be the minimum commensurate with the intended use ,
generally not more than 20 feet for single lane roads .
• Roads shall follow natural contours where possible . Natural benches , ridge tops and flat
slopes are preferred locations .
• Erodible cuts and filled slopes shall be protected by planting or seeding with appropriate
ground cover or by matting immediately following construction .
5 . Requirements for culvert installation in streams used by anadromous fish are defined by
the Washington State Department of Fisheries and culvert installation may require a hydraulic
permit.
6 . Excess construction materials shall be removed from the shoreline area .
7 . Filling of bottom lands , tidelands , and biological wetlands for road or railroad rights-of-
way shall be prohibited . Such filling may be considered a Conditional Use PROVIDED the
applicant can demonstrate all of the following :
a . Extraordinary or unique circumstances relating to the property exist which require the
proposed shoreline location .
b . No viable alternative using a different method or structural solution exists .
8 . All excavation materials and soils exposed to erosion by all phases of road , bridge and
culvert work shall be stabilized and protected by seeding , mulching or other effective means ,
both during and after construction .
9 . Where permitted to parallel shorelines , roads or railroads shall be set back a sufficient
distance from the ordinary high water mark to leave a usable shoreline area for shoreline
recreation or access .
10 . Storm water runoff shall be controlled to reduce suspended solids and other pollutants
before entering any surface water body .
Piers and Docks
Definition
A structure built over or floating upon the water, used as a landing place for marine transport
or for commercial or recreational purposes . Structures regulated by this section include piers
and docks , floats , stairways , marine railways , mooring buoys and boat ramps .
1 . The location and design of docks and piers , as well as the subsequent use , shall
minimize adverse effects on fish , shellfish , wildlife and water quality .
2 . Docks and piers shall be located , designed and operated to not significantly impact or
unnecessarily interfere with the rights of adjacent property owners , or adjacent water uses .
Structures shall be located a minimum of five feet from side property lines . Community use or
joint use facilities may be located on the property line .
3 . If the location of side property lines on a cove cannot be officially established without a
survey , the Administrator may require a survey by a registered land surveyor before a permit is
issued .
4 . No pier, dock , or float or similar device shall have a residential structure constructed upon
it.
29
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
5 . Prior to final project approval of a residential subdivision or short plat , a usable area shall
be set aside for a community pier or dock , unless no suitable area exists . Only one pier or
dock is permitted in a new residential subdivision or short plat where each lot frontage does
not exceed 150 feet on the shoreline .
6 . There is no maximum length , width or height for commercial or industrial piers and docks .
The proponent must show the size of the proposal is the minimum necessary to allow the
intended use . Mining associated piers and docks are regulated under Section 7 . 16 . 060 of this
Master Program .
7 . Maximum overall length of a recreational pier or dock facility including float shall be only
so long as to obtain a depth of three feet of water as measured at mean lower low water on
salt water or a depth of five feet as measured from ordinary low water on lakes . The length of
any pier or dock facility shall not exceed the lesser of 15 percent of the fetch or 100 feet from
OHWM on salt water and 50 feet on fresh water shorelines . Joint or community use facilities
may be an additional 15 feet in length , and shall not exceed a depth of minus five (-5) feet .
When sufficient depth to serve a vessel is not found at these lengths , a recreational float, with
one boat slip , may be located at a depth sufficient to serve the vessel , but not exceeding
minus eight (-8) feet as measured from mean lower low water, on marine shores , and ordinary
low water on lake shores .
8 . Only one dock is allowed per lot .
9 . The width of recreational piers and docks shall not exceed eight feet .
10 . At the end of a dock or pier, a float may be attached . These floats may either be parallel
to the dock or pier, or form a "T" or " L" . In tidal water, the float shall not exceed 400 gross
square feet without a boat slip (700 square feet for two joint use owners) , or 600 gross square
feet with a boat slip ( 1 , 000 square feet for two joint use owners) . In fresh water, the float area
shall not exceed 250 square feet without a boat slip (400 square feet for two joint use owners) ,
or 400 square feet with a boat slip (700 square feet for two joint use owners) .
Joint or community use facilities shall be allowed the above float areas for the first two lot
owners plus an additional 20 percent size increase on the base float area per each lot owner
up to a maximum of nine lot owners (see chart) .
11 . On lakes throughout the County a float may be attached in either an "L" or "T" formation .
When the " L" or "T" shaped design is used , on lakes , the portion parallel to the shoreline shall
not exceed 16 feet in width .
12 . Unattached recreation floats shall not exceed 400 gross square feet in tidal water, or 250
square feet in fresh water. There shall be no more than one per residence . Unattached
recreational floats shall be chain anchored .
13 . Recreational piers shall be no higher than 11 feet above mean higher high water. Piers
and docks shall have at least an eight-foot span between pilings .
14 . The surface of floating structures shall be a minimum of eight inches above the surface of
the water.
15 . All floating structures shall include intermittent supports to keep structures off the
tidelands at low tide .
16 . All facilities shall be constructed and maintained in a safe and sound condition .
Abandoned or unsafe docks and piers shall be removed or repaired promptly by the owner .
Where any such structure constitutes a hazard to the public , the County may , following notice
to the owner, abate the structure if the owner fails to do so within a reasonable time , and may
impose a lien on the related shoreline property in an amount equal to the cost of the
abatement .
17 . Recreational Mooring Buoys are exempt from the Substantial Development Permit
process .
18 . There is no maximum length or width for commercial industrial or community use marine
railways or boat ramps , however, the proponent must show the size proposed is the minimum
necessary to allow the use proposed .
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations 30
19 . Marine railways and concrete boat ramps may be permitted . Ramps shall be placed at
beach grade , and not elevated on fill . .
20 . Design standards for boat ramps and marine railways are as follows :
Ramps and railways shall not exceed 12 feet in width .
Ramps and railways shall not exceed 50 feet in length , as measured from the line of
ordinary high water. Marine railways shall not extend beyond MLLW (0 . 0) .
Ramps and railways shall not exceed 18 inches in height at the line of ordinary high water,
or the toe of the bulkhead .
21 . Stairways less than $2 , 500 in value located landward of mean higher high water and less
than ten feet waterward of the toe of the bank do not require a Substantial Development
Permit. Stairways exceeding $2 , 500 in value located landward of mean higher high water and
less than ten feet waterward of the toe of the bank require a Substantial Development Permit .
Stairways located waterward of mean higher high water, exceeding $2 , 500 in value shall
require a Conditional Use Permit. Stairways shall not be located more than ten feet waterward
of the toe of the bank. Stairways located waterward of mean higher high water but less than
$2 , 500 in value shall require a Conditional use Permit.
22 . Stairways shall be located landward of bulkheads except where proven infeasible .
23 . Covered moorage and over the water boat houses are prohibited except in marinas .
Boat houses on land shall be subject to a maximum size of 600 square feet and shall meet all
setback requirements and require a Substantial Development Permit.
TIDAL WATER TIDAL WATER FRESHWATER FRESHWATER
WITH WITHOUT WITH WITHOUT
BOAT SLIP BOAT SLIP BOAT SLIP BOAT SLIP
Single Owner 600 400 400 250
Joint Use (2 owners) 11000 700 700 400
Community Use or Joint Use*
3 owners 11120 780 780 450
4 " 11240 860 860 500
5 " 11360 940 940 550
6 17480 11020 11020 600
7 1 , 600 11100 11100 650
8 it 11720 1 , 180 11180 700
9 of
11840 17260 11260 750
*Maximum bonus allowed
Mean High Tide ( MHT) for the following locations :
Union - Hood Canal 10 . 80 feet
Allyn - Case Inlet 13 . 21 feet
Arcadia - Pickering Passage 13 . 40 feet
Shelton - Oakland Bay 13 . 20 feet
Vaughn - Case Inlet 13 . 20 feet
Walker's Landing - Pickering Passage 13 . 30 feet
Mean Higher High Tide ( MHHT) for the following locations :
Union - Hood Canal 11 . 80 feet
Allyn - Case Inlet 14 . 13 feet
Arcadia - Pickering Passage 14 . 40 feet
Shelton - Oakland Bay 14 . 20 feet
Vaughn - Case Inlet 14 . 10 feet
Walker' s Landing - Pickering Passage 14 . 30 feet
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations 31
Archaeological Areas and Historic Sites
According to anthropological data , human habitation of the shoreline areas of Mason County
spans hundreds , most likely thousands , of years . Due to climate , vegetation and the effects of
population changes , visible evidence of such habitation is primarily that of the last 50 years .
Frequently , sites are discovered during construction of buildings , transportation routes
(including trails) , bridges , ditching , drilling and the like .
Because of their rarity and the education link they provide to our past , these locations should
be preserved . Because of their delicate nature , the utmost care and caution must be used in
any development of these areas . Thus , these guidelines should be closely adhered to in all
areas , whether Urban , Rural , Conservancy or Natural .
1 . Excavation of archaeological sites shall be directed by archaeologists approved by the
Society for American Archaeology and/or a University Department of Anthropology .
2 . Cooperation and permission of groups or individuals concerned with the site , such as
tribal governments and private property owners , shall be obtained before excavation begins .
3 . Excavated sites shall be restored upon completion of research . Information signs may be
placed on the sites . If possible , educational display units shall be constructed on the sites .
4 . Copies of archaeological and anthropological reports on excavations shall be made
available to county libraries and concerned groups or individuals
5 . These rules apply in each division , i . e . , Urban , Rural , Conservancy , and Natural .
Recreational Development
Definition
Recreational development includes facilities such as campgrounds , recreational vehicle parks ,
day use- parks , etc .
This section applies to both publicly and privately owned shoreline facilities intended for use by
the public or private club , individual group or association .
Uses and activities associated with recreational development which are identified as separate
use activities in this program , such as boating facilities , piers and docks , residential and
commercial development are subject to the regulations established for those uses in addition
to the standards established in this section .
1 . All proposed recreational developments shall be analyzed for their potential effect on
environmental quality and natural resources .
2 . Recreational developments shall comply at all times with the updated local and State
Health regulations and such compliance made a condition of the permit .
3 . Priority shall be given to developments which provide recreational uses and which
facilitate public access to shorelines .
4 . Parking areas shall be located inland , away from the immediate edge of the water and
recreational beaches , unless there is no area available . Provisions shall be made for
adequate vehicular parking and safe pedestrian crossings . Design of parking areas shall
ensure that surface runoff does not pollute adjacent waters . Design shall provide for storm
water retention and shall be reviewed by Mason County Department of Public Works .
5 . Vehicular traffic is prohibited on beaches , bars , spits and streambeds , except for boat
launching and maintenance activities . Perimeters of parking areas shall be landscaped to
minimize visual impacts to the shorelines , roadways and adjacent properties .
6 . Trail access shall be provided from upland facilities to the beach area .
7 . Public access points on lakes and marine waters must provide parking space appropriate
for the intended use .
3 . Events and temporary uses in the public interest may be approved by the Administrator in
any environment , provided that such uses will not damage the shoreline environment .
32
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
9 . Recreational developments must provide facilities for non- motorized access , such as
pedestrian or bicycle paths to link the recreation area to the shoreline .
10 . The following regulations shall apply to artificial aquatic life habitats :
Habitats shall not interfere with surface navigation ;
Habitats shall be constructed and moored so as to remain in their original location , even
under adverse current or wave action ;
• Conditions of the State Departments of Fisheries and Wildlife Hydraulic Project Approval
may be incorporated into any permit issued .
11 . Trailer spaces , camping sites and similar facilities shall not be located on beaches and
tidelands .
12 . Recreational facilities shall make adequate provisions for water supply , sewage disposal
and garbage collection .
13 . Recreational facilities shall make adequate provisions , such as screening , buffer strips ,
fences and signs , to prevent overflow and to protect the value and enjoyment of adjacent or
nearby private properties .
14 . Signs associated with recreational facilities shall be kept to a minimum in number and
size and shall be erected as informational or directional aids only .
15 . To protect natural features and adjacent properties , park and recreational facilities shall
prohibit the use of all-terrain vehicles in the shoreline area .
16 . All permanent recreational structures and facilities shall be located outside officially
mapped floodways EXCEPT the County may grant exceptions for non-intensive accessory
uses (e . g . , picnic tables , etc . ) .
17 . Accessory facilities , such as restrooms , recreation halls , commercial services , access
roads and parking areas shall be located inland from shoreline areas unless it can be shown
that such facilities are shoreline dependent. These areas shall be linked to the shoreline by
walkways .
18 . For recreation developments that will require the use of fertilizers , pesticides or other
toxic chemicals , such as golf courses and playfields , the applicant shall submit plans
demonstrating the methods to be used to prevent leachate from entering adjacent water
bodies . Buffer strips shall be included in the plan . The County shall determine the maximum
width necessary for buffer strips , but in no case shall the buffer strip be less than 25 feet.
19 . In approving shoreline recreational developments , the County shall ensure that the
development will maintain , enhance or restore desirable shoreline features including unique
and fragile areas , scenic views and aesthetic values . To this end , the County may condition
project dimensions , location of project components on the site , intensity of use , screening ,
parking requirements and setbacks , as deemed appropriate to achieve this end .
20 . No recreation building or structure , except piers or docks , or bridges shall be built over
the water.
21 . Proposals for recreational development shall include plans for sewage disposal . Where
treatment facilities are not available , the County shall limit the intensity of development to meet
strict County and State on-site sewage disposal requirements .
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Faster Program Use Regulations 33
RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
SHORELINE AREA
REGULATION URBAN RURAL CONSERVANCY NATURAL
1 . Shore setbacks ( in feet) from OHWM for:
a . Campsites , picnic facilities 25 50 100 C
and related facilities
b . Access roads , restrooms 50 100 100 X
c . Accessory uses , structures , 75 100 150 X
parking , commercial services
2 . Sideyard setbacks ( in feet) for :
a . Roads , campsites , restrooms 10 50 75 C
b . Accessory uses structures , 20 75 100 X
parking , commercial services
3 . Height limit ( in feet)
a . 0- 100 feet from OHWM 25 20 15 X
b . 101 -200 feet from OHWM 35 25 25 X
4 . Site coverage 60 % 40 % 20 % 5 %
C = Conditional
X = Prohibited
34
Chapter 17 . 50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations
MEMORANDUM
Date : November 1 , 2005
To : Mason County Planning Advisory Commissioners
From : Bob Fink
Subject : Population Projections and Allocations — Choosing an Alternative
Introduction
To update the Mason County Comprehensive Plan to a 2025 planning horizon, an
important determination is the allocation of population to the county ' s urban areas . Please
refer to previous memos dated August 15 and August 22 for background information on
this process and alternatives that have been presented .
The following report updates that information and provides a proposal for two new
alternatives . These alternatives are intended to temporarily maintain the status quo for the
Allyn and Shelton urban areas . Significant issues for those areas are not expected to be
resolved until next year. The first and recommended alternative allocates population
appropriate to the existing size of the urban areas . The second alternative allocates a
population for the Shelton urban area that would require the reduction in the size of the
area .
Population Projections and Allocation to Urban Areas
The county must consider a population projection within the range developed by the state
Office of Financial Management. For us, that means a total population in 2025 of
between 61 , 760 and 95 ,437 people . That is a range of population increase from 40% to
77% . This uncertainty is based on the fact that most of this increase is due to net
migration into the county . Net migration is always less certain than the population change
that is due to natural increase, that is — the net effect of births and deaths .
Added to this uncertainty is the difficulty of determining where within the county people
will choose to settle . While we know current growth trends , the intent of the plan is to
change those trends by attracting people to the urban areas and reducing development
potential in the rural area . We can have some confidence in the direction of the change,
but the magnitude of the change is much more difficult to assess . Six different
alternatives were developed previously to examine what that range might be . These are
found in the "Mason County Population Allocation Alternatives" with an updated draft
10/28/05 . Allocations within the ranges developed should be viable for adoption on the
GMA in the sense that all are within the range of population projections provided by the
state OFM and all are reasonable given different expectations for the future .
Page 1 of 3
The decision on how to allocate population is an exercise in setting goals and controlling
risk. The goal is to encourage growth in the urban area. The risks of underestimating the
growth are that there may be shortages of available land and increased cost for the land,
lack of services , and building or development moratoriums because of failure to maintain
levels of service . The risks of overestimating the growth include that the financing of
services may be difficult because revenues lag projections . In practice , this uncertainty is
dealt with by monitoring growth and making adjustments as necessary . For instance,
waste water treatment system design will address uncertainty by setting capacity trigger
points to start the expansion process and by making adjustments to the utility rate
structures .
The GMA requires a specific allocation that serves as a basis for sizing of the urban
growth areas . In updating the plan now, the situation facing the county is that the detailed
planning for Allyn and for Shelton is unfinished and not expected to be done for several
months . Also , the county will be re-examining land demand and supply for both
residential and non-residential purposes . There is, for example an on- going program
partly funded by the state Department of Community, Trade , and Economic Development
by the Port of Shelton, the Economic Development Council , and the county to revisit
industrial land demand . This study and other work may have an effect of the sizing of
urban areas . The dilemma is that the 2005 update of the plan is due now .
The proposed alternatives
Our proposal is to adopt one of two alternatives . They both take the form of a population
allocation for 2025 that is expected to change next year . They are intended to allow an
update of the plan while preserving the status quo for those issues not yet resolved .
Specifically, one alternative is as follows :
Adopt a population allocation for the Belfair UGA appropriate to the sub-area plan
adopted last year. This is estimated to be an allocation of 5 , 600 people .
Adopt a population allocation for the Allyn UGA appropriate to the currently designated
UGA . This is estimated to be an allocation of 2 ,250 people .
Adopt a population allocation for the Shelton UGA appropriate to the currently
designated UGA . This is estimated to be an allocation of 10, 500 people .
Adopt an allocation of 1 , 000 people for a fully contained community . (This provision is
discussed below .)
The other alternative would be to :
Adopt a population allocation for the Belfair UGA appropriate to the sub-area plan
adopted last year. This is estimated to be an allocation of 5 , 600 people .
Adopt a population allocation for the Allyn UGA appropriate to the currently designated
UGA . This is estimated to be an allocation of 2 , 250 people .
Adopt a population allocation for the Shelton UGA appropriate to the currently planning
for the Shelton regional water and waste water systems . This is estimated to be an
allocation of 6 , 100 people .
Adopt an allocation of 1 , 000 people for a fully contained community .
Page 2 of 3
Since these allocations can be changed when the new sub- area plans are finished for the
Allyn and Shelton urban growth areas , the first alternative should be seen as a
placeholder. It does not require the designation of properties from urban to rural or rural
to urban before the sub- area plans are complete . Yet, if such designation changes are
appropriate, it does not preclude those changes either . The allocations can also be
changed at next year ' s comprehensive plan amendment .
The second alternative is also a placeholder, but it is proposed because the City of
Shelton is currently considering it . As noted elsewhere, the city and the county are
engaged in joint planning for the Shelton urban area. It seems appropriate to keep this
option open in case Shelton should recommend this interim action because of the
sensitivity of the issues surrounding the regional facility planning .
An inconsistency between a population projection used for a special purpose and the
population allocation used to size the UGA is not clearly erroneous or unworkable . The
August 22 , 2005 decision of the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings
Board (Case No . 04-2-0038c) determined that the test for the inconsistency is its effect on
the goals and operation of the plan . Given the inherent uncertainties , is a different number
more conservative or otherwise appropriate to that special purpose ? Does the
inconsistency interfere with other features of the plan? In any case, if the higher rate of
growth occurs in the Shelton urban area; the water and waste water systems would be
expected to have capacity through about the year 2020 . Growth would be monitored and
work necessary for the next expansion started in time to provide the capacity when
needed .
Allocation for the Fully Contained Community (FCC)
The current comprehensive plan has a provision for the creation of a new fully contained
community . This provision is the only way provided in the GMA to allow the creation of
a new community . This is the only way for a major new urban development to be allowed
that was not within or immediately adjacent to the existing urban areas .
We propose to retain this provision to keep this capability, and we are also developing
master planned community policies and regulations to better guide this type of
development . We have scheduled a public hearing on the master planning policies before
the PAC on November 141h . Next year the implementing regulations will be ready for
consideration .
Recommendation
Staff recommendation is to approve the first alternative allocation . This will allocate
sufficient population to each urban area to maintain its current size . This recommendation
is , of course , subject to change based of new information such as might come from the
City of Shelton .
Page 3 of 3
Comprehensive
ReviewiElement
Adoption " FINAL
ELEMENT dated November 8 , 2005
As amended by I i i i i
MASON COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN
FINAL DRAFT
TRANSPORTATION
ELEMENT
November 8 , 2005
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005 Transportation
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
CHAPTER VIII .* TRANSPORTATION
VIII. I BACKGROUND AND ANALSIS
Introductionand Purpose . 00400 . . 0 . 04 . . . . . 9 . . 000 . . . . . 4 . . . . 0 . . . 00 . 0400 . 900 . 0 . 00 . . 060 . . 0 . 0 . 009999 . . 000 . 60 . 000010 . 0 . 0 . . . .VIII . 1 - 1
Inventorv . 0 . . 0 . . 00049 . . 4 . 69 . 0 . 00 . . 96 . 0 . 0 . 00 . 9 . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . 0 . . 490 . . 09 . . . 0 . . . 0 . 0 . 00400 . 09 . 990000960 . . . 0 . . 0000000 . 0 . 000 . 6 . . 0 . 004 . VIII . 1 - 1
TrafficData . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII . 1 - 1
6gin-Destination Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . too sea . . . . . . . . . . added added add . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIIL1 -5
Truck Traffic Patterns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . adds . .VIIL1 -6
CollisionData . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . al. . . . . . . add . . . . . . . . . . adds . . . . . . . . . . . . gad . . . . . . add . . .VIIIa1 -6
SystemAnalysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . I -7
Levelof Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . l - 8
Capacity Estimates for Mason County Roads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 1 - 12
OperationalReview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . see . . . . .VIII . 142
TrafficModel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIILl - 13
FutureTravel Demand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 1 - 17
FutureTrips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII . 1 - 18
Future Traffic Assignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . 900 . . 0 . 0 . .VIII . 149
Future Volume-to-Capacity Ratios and Level of Service Defici
- encies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIIL l - 19
Minimum Standards Criteria and Deficiencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . add . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIILI -21
VIII. 2 GOALS AND POLICIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .2- 1
Transportation Svstem Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .2- 1
CoordinationPolicies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 . . . . . . 0 . 0 . . 0 . . . 06 . . . . 00 . . 0 . 0 . . . . 00 . . . . . . . . 96 . . . 6 . 0000 . . . 0 .VIII .2- 1
1. Public Participation Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Deaf .VIII .2- I
2. Intergovernmental Coordination Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .2-2
3. Multi Modal Coordination Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .2-2
4. Utility Coordination Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . ways seen obsolete * * # VoqWVso * * wpm * 0 0 0 W a 6 6 0 4 a # & & a 0 W 4 a 9 0 0 * 6 0 4 9 a 0 a a a 0 a 0 0 a V111 a2-3
5. Special Interest Coordination Policy . * got . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . allowable based . . . . . . . VIII .2-3
6. Education/Public Information Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .2-4
Design and Ca
paci Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . abuse vast . . . . . . . . " ad too Dom adds was . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII .2-4
alleges
7. Road Adequacy Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 2-4
8. Functional Classification Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dow add add . . . . . . . . assay . . . . . . . . . . . . ago Mae . . . . . VIIL2-5
&G Airport Designations . . . . . . . . . . . . . saleable deedless . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Voodoo . add adds . . . . . . . . . adds . . . . . . . . . . battles . VIII .2-6
9. Functional Design Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . voltage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . too . . . . . * so . . . . . . .VIII .2-6
10. System Integration Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIIL2-7
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005 Transportation
11. Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .2- 8
12. Aesthetic Design Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIIL2- 8
13. Transportation System Management (TSAP Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII .2-9
14. Pedestrians and Bicycles Policy . . . . . . . . . Goa . . GOOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Date . asset . . . .VIII .2-9
15. Maintenance Policy . . . . . . GOOD . . . . . . . . . . Soo * . . . . . . . Ufa * . . . . . . new . . . . . . . . . . . . * see . . . . . . . . . GOODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .2-9
16 Access Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII . 2- 10
17. Private Roads Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII .2- 10
18. Emergency Response Needs Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII . 2- 10
19. Transportation Demand Management (TDM Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .2- 11
Land Use, Environment, and Economy Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .2- 11
20. Land Use Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .2- 12
21. Environmental Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . wool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 2- 12
22. Economic Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Oak
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 2- 12
Priorities and Fin ancin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .2- 13
23. Project Priority Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .2- 13
24. Financing Policy . . 69 . 9 . . 0 . . 0 . . 4 . . . 0 . 6 . 06 . . 0 . 0 . . . 00 . . . . . . 0 . . . . 0 . 9 . . 6 . . . . . 00 . 009660900 . . 60 . 0 . . . 0 . 6 . . 0 . . . . 04 . 00 .VIII .244
25. Concurrency Management Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIIL2- 14
VIIIJ SY.�TE VIII . 3 - 1
Functional Classification Plan . . . 00 . . 400 . . . . .wagage
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII. 3 - 1
StateRoutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .3 - 1
MajorCollectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .3 - 1
MinorCollectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII. 3 -2
Roads of Regional Significance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .3 -3
TransitSystem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .V11103-5
Dial-a Ride Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 3 -3
Scheduled Route Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .3-6
Parkand Ride Lots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 3 -7
VolunteerServices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . 00 . . 0 . 0 . . 0000060 . . . . . . 000 . 0000066 . . . . 60 . . 00 . . . 00000 . . . . 00050 . 00 . . 0 .VIII . 3 -7
Rail Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SNOW
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 3 -7
Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .3 -8
NewCollector Routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 3 - 8
BelfairBypass Road . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . 0 . . 4006040 . 9 . 0 . . 0 . . 0 . . 04 . 06 . 06 . . . 9 . 90 . 0 . 0006 . 660 .VIII . 3 -9
Transportation System Manageent/Transportation
DemandManagement, G 0 a a 0 0 0 a a 0 a 9 b 9 a 6 * 0 0 4 * 6 0 6 a a a 0 a a 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 & 9 0 a 0 0 0 a a a 0 a 0 D 9 9 6 a 0 0 6 0 0 6 a a a 6 a 9 0 0 0 * 0 0 V 6 G * 0 a 0 a 9 4 0 6 qVI 11 a3 -9
Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 3 - 13
TransitService . . . . . . . . soma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . woo Do * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 344
I14 ROAD DESIGNSTANDARDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .4- 1
Principles of Design Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GOOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII ADS, 1
CollectorRoad S sy tem . . . . . . . . . . . . too . GOODS . . . . . . Novo * WOO . . . . . . . . . . . . GOOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Of * . . . . . . . . . . GOOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII .4-2
NewConstruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Baez . . . . . . . . GOOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII .4-2
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan We November 2005 Transportation
Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . 499 . . . 00 . 0 . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . 06100 . . . . . . 0 . 60 . 01 . 0 . 0 . . . . 000 . . 0 . . . . 49 . 00 . . 0 . 40 . aVIIIa4-2
Low" Volume Local Access Roads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII .4-2
RoadSection . 00 . 0000 . 4 . 000 . . . 6064 . 064096 . 5 . . . . . 6 . . 0040 . 000 . 0 . . . . . . . 01 . 0 . 0 . . . 9 . 9 . . 0 . . . . 90 . 00 . . . . 000 . 69 . . . 00 . 000 . 000 . . . 0 . VIII .4-4
Geoetrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII .4-4
ClearZone. . . . . . . 60 opt pomaded 0 omelets 6 * 0509 was a be boa 94 9 & seats a bosomed 0 we 044 Nov Soo dome a a a a 4 E a 0 a 0 q 9 a 0 0 4 9 p a a 9 2 1 0 0 0 0 6 0 a a a 0 9 a & O VIII . 4-5
ILLS SYST AGE ENT VIII . S - 1
PriorityAnalysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 . 60 . 90 . . 4 . 0 . 100 . 00 . 0 . 0040 . 0 . . . . 0 . 0 . 00 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0090 . . 0 . 0 . . . 04 . 0 . 6 . 00044 . . 0 . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 5 - 1
FinancialPlan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII . 5 -3
CountyRoads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII . 5 -3
Transportation Benefit Districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . mesdames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . saw . . . .VIII . 5 -4
State and Federal Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . add boom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . moo too . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 5 -4
Revenue Forecast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . add some . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . seats . .VIII . 5 - 5
Transportation Improvement ProWEEgram
Concurrence Management System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . S - 8
Principal Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII . S - 15
Transportation Facilities to Meet Concurrency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIILS - 15
Level of Service Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII . 5 - 15
Traffic Impact Fees and Development ReviewWEE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . S - 17
Collector Road System Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII . S - 17
Responsibilities of the Applicant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . S - 18
VIII. 6 STATE TRANSPORTATIONSYSTEM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII . 6- 1
VIII. 7 TRANSPOR TA TION ELEMENT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STATEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 7 - 1
Discussion of Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 . . 000 . . . . . 0 . 9 . . 9 . 06 . . . . . . . . . 04 . . 44 . 4 . 6 . . . . 606 . 0 . . . . . . 0 . 000 . 60 . 0 . . 0 . 0 . . 04 . . . 40 . . 0 .VII174
PlanObiectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 7- 1
Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . map . . . . . . . . . map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . add . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 7-2
Geology, Soils, and Topography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 7-2
AirQuality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 7-3
WaterQuality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . doom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . add . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . moves . . . . .VIII . 7-3
Energy and Natural Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . 0060 .VIII . 7-5
LandUse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VIII . 7-5
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005 Transportation
Chapter V111
41
III BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
Introduction and Purpose
The Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element was updated by the consultant, Skillings
Connolly, Inc . , under the direction of the County Engineer in the Public Works Department
and the Planning Manager in the Community Development Department .
Mason County is primarily rural in nature, with large forest areas, major water bodies, and
rolling to mountainous terrain. Approximately 80 percent of Mason County land is privately
held land devoted to commercial tree fanning. The only urbanized area in the County is
Shelton, where approximately 20 percent of the County's population and approximately 50
percent of commercial activities are located. FIGURE VIII . I - I shows the study area.
This element of the County's comprehensive plan defines existing facilities and establishes
future strategies that include funding, system expansion, and management. The plan complies
with laws and regulations of Mason County and coordinates with land use planning and other
agencies and the public. FIGURE VIII . 1 -2 shows a broad outline of Mason County's
transportation plan and the relationship of the existing facilities, goals and policies, system plan,
and standards and management of the transportation system.
Inventory
Mason County Public Works maintains an inventory of all county roads, which includes their
location, dimensions, attributes, and condition. Also included are inventories of other roadway
features (sign, culverts, bridges, etc) . A combination of surveys, records, plans, field
inspections, and programmatic evaluations are used to define the existing condition of the
County's transportation system. Information from WSDOT and the Mason County
Transportation Authority is used for the inventory and existing conditions for their portions of
the transportation network.
VIII- I . I
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005 Transportation
Traffic Data
Traffic counts have been taken on the majority of Mason County collector roads at key
locations . This was accomplished using recording counters to determine weekly, daily, and
hourly travel patterns . The technical appendix to the transportation element contains this data.
A summary of average daily traffic (ADT) volumes is shown in FIGURE VIIL 1 -3 .
VIIL- 1 , 2
m . _.._ -_ _ .__ ._ M. Jefferson County
i
S iI I
J, FINI MASON CO" UNT1 V1JFN ell
IF
IN
i91
� 4 . . %f
} IF
✓
Kitsap County
,FNN-
e
iPrice ._... —.. . eel .�_'�,+r"^�' r,... ,N
Lake r,eet % ceWattn `
Lek . L
f
N II
# a1 / o/ ` I
tl I It III
Lake " IF IFee \\
Fee NJ I l
V I .. _Jt
9 ,7 75. A
4 ,Feell v
j� 1 i
( ell
h / � Rot•.�e`-�. � fira�rYanwT'� ?
IFNI NJ
ell' IN IN
N1 IF"O,"r t
i Fell OF �JeFtelloy INNNI
111
Fee b
SP p „> a p
t x aW° L � )
e1 IF
O
c
rIe
IIN
NFI
F II
Iit
f r r rl J
Ma FLIlI
La
Nl
uN
,�
p # SkokanhM1 S .:g ' , I` T 1...
ar / ~
t
w°' Lake �� / t
_N
i d .*� ltmeddc qq / e .wI
Cranberry 1 � `� �"W"C � � +L�
a a.:.. Lake > ,, ..r ' e > .
.,, t... eeevlle LOW Mi � ., S "`sy ll. C
iahwaze saloz ' P r„ft r" r h v
De9eervflle Rd , ` g ^,\
Qy Shelton : ee
h Q .:
e° 1 a":J ,_;_" ` Mxead \c' r . 3
m" #
r
vanr e
` ' \ �, gh r
per'
V: 1. ^.HO & .S' Rd
T
FI amwy - 5 a c* t9y + "t`� ,l '� � 3
i , :•; ..,- star A°' Lake , R � � ' Isabella `.. J�'�
Lake ijc ( a� Lake JEFF . , I t� _^......,:. "3
N
�., ` ad �� pP
c,
NA
I
1 • . ` 3 mi. 0 3 mi. 6 mi.
_ f r
i ... .vi � q;. /' �,_ : �,. +„ SCALE IN MILES
�... 1 `' .
/,L/pgcS 8 / y'SF JOB
Grays Harbor County — — -- — -- County Limits
MASON COUNTY TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
STUDY AREA SKILLINGS
Nov 2005 CONNOLLY
\
{
/
\
\ w
, am I \
2 ( § o
m ) z
E � �
m czo CL
e C a)4 k E E / E 2
a) § §
§ & � �
2Q ƒLL � a
k 3 %
m
//g m c
/
§ \ 2 n n \
n . f / E
D ■ k \ § / /
k e
® 7a 7
§ / ° c o m E * m
\ n 2 c ± a: 4
R / /
± § / j o
\ y � , m , . , ,
L L)
\ x $ / % § $ q CM
/ % kd § ƒ cu / / ¥ 2 �
CL = _ Z: £ e
\ k LL C/)o o 0 �
} O ± . , , U
/ 3 a
\ ® $
\ E ®
2 = Cf)
\ ± R2 & @
U
\ 2
Feet, -_ I _,_ e letter
1. IV I =
IF I
Fr
i. : :,
• --_ d°
: e
FeeKitsap County
_ ' _ _
Lake .....� _ _.�.. k ` DewM p1/ .vl
� ;
lake VA � : ` as FIF
�ere
Ier
IZL
t
e�
£ ba > C
c J ` Haven _ 4 . :....
Wll
m' y y Lake B 5 wyo
t 1 - � ; 0 l
w-, l° �1 - / Q
" a 1400 �% -�' 0
r r t3 2�
"r Tee V, w,» �. _� - " ;-; 1�g Ol
Q im Lake / e1Fa�FTahuV / #
Re\
sp �j. 0 Rd IF Vr; aFr
.1 . . .. d5Il1OyybO�F�
IV
i ¢h
Ie
sh° De'e�`ezUk I:
g Rd
11 It
- ,y IV % I � � GP I Felt I �1y�99e�
- IF It 900E
h0 pot rIrIrrVr
FlZIFo
a � � w p II
ti
Fr
_ ' r e 1�, -.gyp " i ,B�dp� � > "� 5 b % ` 1
el
ttA
le
rL
ib
II
LV
eVI
r p01 2 Mason �✓ 0 50 s
q� {"yip ". }
pt0941 ,a0`Y� namNaa Lake ti �00�7 °
skewn .ah ' r sz95j%\ �� ,y V%p 1 �'` " �io�0,2�90� �2 � =
Rd 'l / islF ¢° i ✓� ,„z>' . 509p0� a .
y� ;^ d t
1 A 3p01 1 ° 1 g0 O1 e 1 Unnenck l ' , � e 6 pp100�
\ 80g0 2�00 Cra k6ee
OYa0p OAre 5 a E t$51 J
Hill 1129�� Nil"°° t 35 p901 2A p012o0 lt51041
y Ys q E 1 P 15 P 8901 - - ' 6S o
'� t Lake a[zel 100 \ SR 1o2 ✓ �-k 3Fg0 pr '�L `' . . t �� � � � -� � � '� U
At
le I IV
_ .... y,. pp..__.. .1 1 - , oil �15 �, i _ 1
aPi r Ma NWnaa / 6�1�9p lX69 p Rd p0� € a✓
pD% f sr'e/ron �V. o'er E O, t., 15 i �53 1�—"' ' 2
Fr.
l ec Shelton 12�9$0 A , -A
r.�
t` D/ w , t � __
'.
�FF
Y c
{ > °�i V 11¢/ .... fie,/ .. ff Artadl
O 1 ° & _ 1
ad ✓
WI s Star Lake > s , . 1 a}. Isabella as. / ..�5 -;�+' 'C� ;sr`
V , Lake "ie l � t" ,i " Lake i°q f �tp� • ;�"� � � t✓O � ..;.,. r'
w fi 6
d 1 , 1% L
,�SY,
�_ ��� y 3 mi. 0 3 mi. 6 mi.
r'
m SCALE. 1 = 3 Wieies
A� , SR 108 ` r`�;'tl-^ .-,.. ._..LS __ . l __. .._ ._ �, _ `y
arbor County _. -- -- — — — — County Limits
4 ADT from Mason County Comprehensive Plan
`max ' Dated : April, 1996
4,200 Year2000 ADT from SR101 Connector Study
(6,300) Year2025
TrafficMason County Transportation Element
Average Daily it
Nov 2005 CONNOLLY
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
rigin Destination Survey
Two license plate origin-destination surveys were conducted to analyze existing traffic patterns
as part of the last Mason County transportation study. The information gathered at that time is
still representative of the driving patterns experienced in the county currently, so a new survey
was not conducted as part of this update. The Cloquallum Road/SR 101 survey provided
information concerning the Shelton area, with particular emphasis on Cloquallum Road traffic .
This study provided specific information on traffic from Cloquallum Road to SR 101 . The
Belfair area survey provided information on travel patterns concerning SR 3 , SR 300 , SR 302,
and SR 106 .
The purpose of an origin-destination survey is to determine amount and direction of traffic in a
specific area. The survey identifies where vehicles enter and exit an area or if they stopped
within the study area. A survey is performed by placing surveyors on all major roads serving
an area; the surveyors record the license plate numbers and times vehicles enter or leave an
area. By comparing license plate numbers using a computer-matching program, the volume of
through-traffic between stations can be determined. The survey determines the number of trips
that pass the survey station or stay within the area. This origin-destination survey information
is then used to analyze the existing road system's efficiency. The data provides the basis for
forecasting future travel patterns when coupled with the anticipated economic and population
growth information.
Origin-Destination Conclusions
Cloquallum Road :
• Cloquallum Road carries nineteen ( 19) percent of its traffic to SR 101 in the AM peak
hour and fifty-eight (58) percent in the PM peak hour traffic .
• Seventy-three (73 ) percent of the Cloquallum Road traffic stays in the Shelton area
during the AM peak hour and twenty-two (22) percent in the PM peak hour
® Cloquallum Road carries very little traffic and only 20 vehicles exited on SR 101 during
the AM peak hour and 63 vehicles in the PM peak hour
® This study indicates that Cloquallum Road traffic does not need a direct connection to
SR 101 based on the small volumes currently making this connection. The need for a
direct connection (interchange) cannot, however, be based solely on traffic volumes .
Savings due to travel time and vehicle-miles of travel should be weighed against the
cost of construction before a final decision could be reached regarding the interchange .
Belfair Area :
VIII- 1 . 5
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
® The Belfair survey showed that a majority of traffic around the Belfair area had
destinations in Belfair . This traffic amounted to approximately 60 percent on SR 3 and
approximately 75 percent on other highways.
® Of the remaining 40 percent on SR 3 , 11 percent was through traffic to Shelton, 8
percent was through traffic to SR 106
® Of the remaining 25 percent on other highways, approximately 10 to 15 percent was
through traffic to Shelton and 5 percent was traffic towards SR 106
® An estimate of traffic that would use a new Belfair bypass (if constructed) connecting
SR 3 north of SR 300 to SR 106 is approximately 700 - 800 vehicles in the PM peak
hour and 600 - 700 vehicles in the AM peak hour. This indicates a new two -lane
bypass for SR 3 around Belfair would be justified.
Truck Traffic Patterns
A truck use survey was conducted as part of the last Mason County transportation study. The
information gathered from the survey at that time is still representative of the transportation
routes and demands for trucks in the county currently, so a new survey was not conducted as
part of this update . There were 24 trucking companies in the County at that time which
included dump trucks, heavy haulers, and freight carriers. A total of 10 companies responded
to the mail4n truck survey form. The businesses listed that 40 percent of their deliveries are
made and/or received before 9 : 00 am and approximately 60 percent are between 9 : 00 am to
4 : 00 pm.
Primary routes include approximately 75 percent using SR 101 and 25 percent using SR 3 .
This shows that the trucking industry has a minor effect on the PM peak hour traffic generated
on Mason County roads .
In 1994, the Washington State Legislature commissioned the Cost Responsibility Study (CRS) .
The Transportation Commission recertified the Freight and Goods Transportation System
(FGTS) in 2004 . One of the objectives of the CRS was to establish the FGTS . The CRS
Committee established criteria for determining the several Truck Route Classes, based on
Gross Annual Tonnage carried on the route . Mason County Public Works conducted a truck
classification study and identified 28 road segments that met the criteria established by the
CRS . These are the county roads that bring the logs to the mills and freight and goods to and
from the distribution point and the users . The information is updated as part of the ongoing
traffic counting and classification program.
Mason County FGTS Routes :
Road Name A roximate Landmarks
V111- 1 . 6
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Agate Road SR-3 - Timberlake Drive
Arcadia Road SR-3 - Mill Creek Bridge
Bear Creek- Dewatto Road N of Daly Drive - Old Belfair Highway
Belfair-Tahuya Road SE of Haven Way to SR-300
Brockdale Road Batstone Cutoff Road - USA 01
Cloquallum Road City Limits - Grays Harbor County Line
Dayton -Airport Road Little Egypt Road - SRA 02
Golden Pheasant Road US- 101 - End County Road
Grapeview Road Fire Station - SR-3
Highland Road Shelton - Mat; pcl Road - Cloquallum Road
Johns Prairie Road City Limits - SR-3
Lakeland Drive SR-3 - Old Ranch Road
Lynch road US- 101 - Sells Drive (2nd)
Mason Benson Road SR-3 - Trails Road
Mason Lake Road SR-3 - Trails Road
Matlock Brady Road Shelton - Matlock Road - Grays Harbor County Line
McEwan Prairie Road Mason Lake Road - Brockdale Road
McReavy Road SR- 106 - Brockdale Road
North Bay Road SR-3 - SR-302
Old Belfair Highway SR-300 - Old Belfair Highway
Old Belfair Highway N of Fish Hatchery Road - Kitsap County Line
Old Olympic Highway SR- 101 - Taylor Road
Pickering Road SR-3 - Harstine Island Road
Sand Hill Road SR-300 - Transfer Station
Shelton Srpings Road SRA01 - Shelton City Limits
Shelton Matlock Road Shelton City Limits - Matlock- Brady Road
Skokomish Valley Road US- 101 - Lower Vance Creek Bridge
Trails Road SR- 106 - Mason Lake Road
Vlll- 1 , 7
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Collision Data
Collision data was obtained from the Mason County Department of Public Works and critical
sections (i. e . , sections with five or more collisions per year) were summarized. Using the
Collision Rate formula from the 1996 Washington State Highway Collision Report, collision
rates per million vehicle miles was calculated for each roadway section :
Collision Rate = (Number of Collisions) x ( 1 million)
(Section Length * ) x (AADT * * ) x (365 Days)
* If section length is less than one mile, it is excluded from the formula.
* * AADT = Annual Average Daily Traffic
A critical collision rate is defined by the ITE Traffic Engineering Handbook as the average
collision rate found on a particular class of roadway. The critical collision rates for Mason
County's Collectors is 1 . 77 collisions per million vehicle miles of travel.
TABLE VIII . I - I summarizes the collisions on each roadway segment that has a collision rate
higher than the critical rate, and their corresponding collision rate per million vehicle miles .
This table shows that the highest rate occurred on the Bear Creek-Dewatto Road between the
Public Access Road and Sand Hill Road . FIGURE VI1I . 14 locates these collisions on a map.
The road segments with the highest collision rates are :
Bear Creek-Dewatto Road - Public Access Road — Sand Hill Road
McReavy Road - SR- 106 — Manzanita Drive
Highland Road - N of Little Egypt Road — S of Karl' s House
Cole Road - Lynch Road — Shadowood Drive
Bear Creek-Dewatto Road - Kitsap County Line — Elfendahl Pass Road
Arcadia Road - Mill Creek Bridge — Lynch Road
The majority of these collisions involved a fixed object off the roadway. The leading causes of
these collisions were ( 1 ) excessive speed and (2) driving under the influence of alcohol or
drugs, which indicates the actions of the drivers involved were the cause of the collisions .
Approximately one-third of the collisions in Mason County occur during hours of darkness.
.System Analysis
LOS is the primary method of analyzing the traffic capacity of roadways. Future land use
scenarios and traffic projections are discussed and Collector LOS is summarized. Criteria for
determining roadway deficiencies are described at the end of the chapter.
VX- 1 , 8
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
TABLE VIII . I -1 : Critical Collision Locations (2002 - 2004)
Road Name Approximate Landmarks Length Volume Collisions Collision Rate
(miles) (ADT) (3 year total) (per MVM)
Agate Road Crestview Drive - Timberlake Drive 1 .60 21250 8 2 . 03
Timberlake Drive - Benson Loop Road 1 .28 744 3 2 . 88
Arcadia Road SR-3 - Railroad Bridge 1 .45 41974 15 1 . 90
Railroad Bridge - Binns Swiger Loop Road 1 .42 31125 9 1 . 85
Binns Swiger Loop Road - Mill Creek Bridge 1 . 85 1 ,637 6 1 .81
Mill Creek Bridge - Lynch Road 2 .35 830 9 4 .21
Bear Creek-Dewatto Kitsap County Line - Elfendahl Pass Road 5 . 09 255 6 4 .22
Road
Elfendahl Pass Road - Public Access Road 1 .54 852 3 2 .09
Public Access Road - Sand Hill Road 1 .46 11204 28 14 .55
Belfair-Tahuya Road North Shore Road - Dewatto Road 4.29 353 6 3 .62
Dewatto Road - Collins Lake Road 2. 10 909 7 3 .35
Boundary Road West Matlock-Brady Road - Grays Harbor County Line 2. 31 178 1 2 .22
Cloquallum Road Shelton City Limits - Gravel Pit 1 .45 1 , 592 6 2 .37
Gravel Pit - Rock Bridge #1 3. 10 1 ,280 12 2 . 76
Rock Bridge #1 - Satsop-Cloquallum Road 8. 19 614 21 3. 81
Cole Road Lynch Road - Shadowood Drive 1 .61 11187 9 4 .30
Grapeview Loop Road SR-3 - Fire Station 4.43 594 6 2 . 08
Fire Statin - N of Cronquist Road 1 .67 11078 8 4 . 06
Harstine Island North Harstine Island South Road - North Island Drive 3 . 35 200 2 2 .73
Road
Highland Road N of Little Egypt Road - S of Karl's House 2.00 603 7 5. 30
Lynch Road SR-101 - NE of BNRR Tracks 1 . 10 21648 7 2. 19
Sells Drive (2nd) - Arcadia Road 3. 97 58717 2 .74
Mason Benson Road Trails Road - Mason Lake Drive East 0. 60 1 ,000 2 1 .83
Matlock-Brady Road Ford Loop Rd (1st) - SW of Evers Bridge 2 .62 597 7 4. 09
McEwan Prairie Road Mason Lake Road - Brockdale Road 2.45 3 , 551 21 2 .20
McReavy Road SR-106 - Manzanita Drive 1 .85 540 15 13.71
Manzanita Drive - Commissioner District 1 .65 II J 79 5 2.35
North Bay Drive SR-3 - SR-302 1 . 96 1 ,938 9 2 . 16
North Island Road South Island Drive - Harstine Island North Road 3.09 945 10 3 . 13
North Shore Road W of Blomlie Road - Shorebrook Drive 8.09 761 27 4 .01
Pickering Road W of Fire Station - Harstine Bridge road 1 .77 21174 9 2 . 14
Schneider Road - Benson Loop road 1402 425 1 2 . 11
Sand Hill Road N of Grade School - Bear Creek-Dewatto Road 4 .94 500 8 2 . 96
Satsop-Cloquallum E of Plug Mill Road - Satsop Road E 1 .88 140 1 3 .47
Road
Shelton-Matlock Road Power Lines - W of Power Lines (2nd) 1 . 27 2, 768 9 2 .34
South Island Drive of Waterland Drive - Harstine Island South 2 .42 564 3 2 . 01
Road
ahuya- Blacksmith Bear Creek-Deatto Road - Belfair-Tahuya Road 7 . 95 85 2 2 .70
Road
VIIIA Critical Rate = 1 .77 Crashes per Million Vehicle Miles
VIII- 1 . 9
Jefferson County
i
s Kitsap CountyNY
\
Bcy ...� ... I
IN INt , ,g,,....
Price
Lake _ � . , Creek J"�IN Nwatto ry:
.....� fi -_ Qb a9 4 Lake L
} ` r `o "za'8 54",
NJ
IN
VrVVJ
VNI
IN If I III INrfN
tfr
)_ake : z
ti YNI
4 c' 3 35 : • Z aIle � � e . i O
y f Tee \ IN h i U
r
4 . Lakefra Y n y
'r9ff
P Y
IN
/Pa
f
IN
A 01V Rd ` '' ry
1 f \3 6 . , . Wks`
1.. ,l� .e7'B4Rtl
IN
It I
J It
IN
IN J
r NA
IN
K l
IN
Z
f ' nt4 6 �.° r i
z ':� `IN'..+�-,�; _r Mason 3`'
rV. ' � 'f ' M a lake e J, da � 8 � 'z
S
� F
.. . ' Amishy t crz� ' �. f `IN, /tea W , � ,: "n
y r1Yt..�il.». `r Rd Lam\ _Qe pf� � �� vim, J �J Oitl \(8f Fto
93
vfm
IN N5
VI Cranberry Limerick IN
lie f.00v . Boundary ffws :+` ��; , 2t </ R . .- f 5� Jr,
.
Vie' iiaad 34 rm1 o NNINNV � { =�"\b°y� 313 f =
.\ � l' r •� p \ � ,,i66 IN INt$ 1 tIfIrIII, ,� n+ i �
Nahwatrel ��. \"�' SR 302VIA i- ¢ ,<;• l •AsJ14,1 �„� � / � i f U
�?r Lake ',._. . . _�......._.} tIII .. �/ % cu
$� E U
If
2ztt' �. -...�;SVVI IN
A%�� �/' ' ,ya ��. M1�.' wmod ` Ul y �'�a r. ( ' •a��„ S Ar-
Rd ) yr �x3 1
Rd , Qp f _ �.. , Shelton IN
f C: f - !'� a, ' 3\
/ \ r . .. 1 03 f t 88l
1i /iYL
fs r te61
n m
�� `fir . . ._� 6 a 4F P �' iB t -
,,� �4 / 3 I ,.. . . �6/ '� �f .fNY J If 3,
I If
Lg
ry c en \ r IN / e,�m m Ra `. 26� -F-=?. L c - .. � I , .� l- ' f r, ;..., 7• �, .
qrfr. i_f vsdr .' �w �..- x
Lost a.._ z �Nr% - r
If Lake �c Lake s ,..�.. fi5 r Isabella 7~ v ad I INv •:M '� G��?�� � ...
q `Vc �2 Lake / i9
VIJ NO
Vr
3 mi. 0 3 mi. 6 mi.
ag�F ad rs $ mH \dt
F " w. �` \ SCALE: V 3 Miles
`'atseP ' J, G
"a
�8*
Grays Harbor County — — — County Limits
IN
IJ
ON
Number of Accidents
3x! / Accident Rate
Figure . `
TransportationMason County
CriticalSKILLINGS
® Nov 2005 CONNOLLY
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Level of Service
IX LOS describes the quality of traffic flow on a roadway or at an intersection. The 1997
Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) uses three parameters to describe service quality for
two - lane rural highways .
1 . Average travel speed
2 . Percent time delay
3 . Capacity utilization (volume-to - capacity ratio [v/c] )
The percent time delay parameter is the primary measure of LOS recommended by the
1994 HCM with speed and v/c ratio as secondary measures . Percent time delay is
typically used for extensive operational analysis and involves cumbersome computations .
For planning applications, v/c ratio or speeds are the most common approaches .
U
Average travel speed is not a meaningful indicator of LOS where speeds have been
restricted below 60 mph by an agency through a community. Therefore , v/c ratio or
capacity utilization are the more meaningful indicators for Mason County' s road system .
Level of Service standards for this update will be based on the 1994 Highway Capacity
Manual, which defines six LOS definitions for two lane highways :
Level of Service A : LOS A relates to average speeds approaching 60 mph and delays no more
than 30 percent of the time by slow-moving vehicles . It corresponds to a volume-to -capacity
(v/c) ratio below 0 . 05 for rolling terrain and below 0 . 07 for level terrain, assuming 60 percent
no-passing zones .
Level of Service B: This characterizes speeds slightly over 55 mph on level terrain, with delays
of up to 45 percent of the time . Typical volume-to -capacity (v/c) ratio assuming 60 percent
no-passing zones are 0 . 05 and 0 . 17 on a rolling terrain and 0 . 07 and 0 . 19 on a level terrain.
Traffic flow is stable .
Level of Service C.• This represents average speeds exceeding 52 mph on level terrain and
drivers experiencing delays 60 percent of the time . Corresponding volume-to-capacity (v/c)
ratios for rolling and level terrains are 0 . 18 to 0 . 32 and 0 . 20 to 0 . 34, respectively. Traffic flow
may be said to be at stable conditions until this LOS .
Level of Service D. At this LOS , unstable traffic flow begins to occur. Passing demand is very
high, while passing capacity approaches zero . The fraction of no passing zones along the
roadway has little influence on passing . Motorists are delayed up to 75 percent of time,
although speeds of 50 mph can be maintained on a 60 mph design speed . For LOS D , volume-
to -capacity (v/c) ratios are between 0 . 33 and 0 . 48 on rolling terrain and 0 . 35 to 0 . 59 on level
terrain.
VIII- 1 . 11
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Level of Service E: It is defined as flow conditions having a percent time delay greater than 75
percent and speeds dropping below 50 mph on a 60 mph design speed. Passing is virtually
impossible. The volume-to -capacity (v/c) ratios are between 0 . 49 and 0 . 91 on a rolling terrain
and 0 . 60 to 1 . 00 on a level terrain.
Level of Service F: It represents heavily congested flow with traffic demand exceeding
capacity. Average speed drops below 40 mph on a 60 mph design speed and volume-to -
capacity (v/c) ratios exceed 0 . 91 for rolling terrains and 1 . 00 for level terrain. The percent time
delay experienced by drivers is 100 or more.
Capacity Estimates for Mason County Roads
Mason County roads have varying lane and shoulder widths . These variations result in varying
capacity values . Mason County's Public Works Department provided capacity for roadways
having different lane and shoulder widths . TABLE VIII . 1 -2 shows these capacity estimates for
different roadway types . This table assumes that the terrain is rolling or level in nature and
passing is not possible on 60 percent of roadway sections .
TABLE VIII. 1-2 : Roadway Capacity by Type
Lane Width Capacity in Vehicles Per Hour With Shoulder Widths
(feet)
6 Feet 4 Feet 2 Feet 0 Feet
Level Rolling Level Rolling Level Rolling Level Rolling
12 25405 11542 2, 333 11496 23237 1 ,434 22117 1 ,357
11 2,261 1 ,450 2,213 11419 2, 117 1 ,357 1 , 973 15265
10 21093 15342 2M5 11311 15948 11249 1 , 804 1 , 157
9 1 , 828 1 , 172 1 ,780 1 , 141 1 , 684 11080 13508 13018
Note : Table assumes 60 percent no-passing zones
Source : Mason County Public Works Department
Based on the capacity estimates in TABLE VIII . 1 -2 , and the capacity definitions, LOS analyses
were performed on all Mason County major and minor Collectors . The Collectors rated at
LOS C are listed in TABLE VIII . 1 -3 . Remaining Collectors operate at LOS B or better.
V111- 1 . 12
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
TABLE VIII. 1 -3 : Collector Level of Service in Mason County
Collector Segment 2005 PM 2005 PM Volume / LOS
Peak Peak Capacity
Volume Capacity Ratio
Maior Collectors
Belfair Tahuya Road Elfendahl Pass Road - SR 300 434 1 ,450 0 . 30 C
Grapeview Loop Road Fire Station - Cronquist Road 253 1 ,203 0. 21 C
Old Belfair Highway* SR 300 - Milepost 1 . 4 580 2, 165 0. 27 C
Old Belfair Highway* Milepost 1 . 4 - County Line 430 17997 0.22 C
Shelton-Matlock Road Deegan Road - Carman Road 376 1 ,474 0. 26 C
South
Shelton-Matlock Road Dayton Airport - Dayton Store 292 13203 0 . 24 C
Shelton-Matlock Road Dayton Store - Milepost 10 . 76 268 11418 0 . 19 C
Minor Collectors
Agate Road SR 3 - Pickering Road 325 1 , 311 0 . 25 C
Cole Road Shadowood Road - Craig Road 362 1 ,419 0 . 26 C
Crestview Drive Agate Road - Parkway Boulevard 213 11122 0 .21 C
Lynch Road SR 3 - Milepost 1 . 10 365 1 ,434 0 . 25 C
Mason Lake Road SR 3 - McEwen Prairie Road 314 11512 0. 21 C
McEwen Prairie Road Mason Lake Road - Brockdale 328 1 , 512 0 . 22 C
Road
Sand Hill Road SR 300 - Transfer Station 282 12357 0 .21 C
* Collectors where the LOS criteria is based on level terrain
Operational Review
A review of the County's road system was performed by field inspection. Intersections where
operational problems have occurred—such as sight distance or inadequate traffic control are
listed in TABLE VIII . 1 -4 .
TABLE VIII. 14 : Intersection Problems
Intersection Major Operational Problems
US 101 / Lynch Road Inadequate acceleration distance
SR 106 / McReavy Road Sight distance
SR 106 / Webb Hill Road Sight distance
SR 3 / Johns Prairie Road Intersection geometrics and traffic control
VIII- 1 . 13
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Traffic Model
One of the most important tools of transportation planning is the development of a traffic or
transportation model. A transportation model that accurately depicts the existing traffic
conditions (i. e . , calibrated to the traffic patterns) can often help in making better decisions
about the future transportation system. Therefore , it is important to have an accurate traffic
model for the planning process . The model used for Mason County is TMODEL2 .
There are five basic steps in developing a traffic model :
® Establish traffic analysis zones (TAZs)
® Develop network description
® Allocate land use to the traffic analysis zones (TAZs)
® Calibrate the model to existing traffic conditions
® Forecast future traffic volumes
FIGURE VIILI -5 shows the TAZ map and FIGURE VIIL1 - 6 shows Mason County's road
network used for modeling purposes .
The Mason County TMODEL2 was originally developed and calibrated in 1992 and was used
for preparing the 1996 Transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan. For this current
update the model calibration was reviewed by checking model volumes with actual volumes at
22 locations on the County system. On State routes, traffic volumes were assembled from
WSDOT. PM peak model volumes were converted to average daily traffic (ADT) using a k-
factor of 0 . 09 whenever a model street segment consisted of two or more links; the volumes
were averaged over the segment in the model to determine the value. The calibration review
showed that the model was under assigning traffic on many Mason County roads .
As a result of the calibration review the model was updated by revising the land use
information for the Traffic Analysis Zones. New Traffic forecasts for 2025 were then
generated. Additional calibration reviews showed better results; however, it was still evident
that the model is under assigning traffic on some Mason County roads. In most cases this is
not significant since the overall volumes are low. The differences will not effect major needs
assessments; however, the model will not be useful for analyzing intersection level operations.
TMODEL2 is becoming obsolete as a traffic forecasting model . New models are taking its
place in the travel forecasting field . Future updates of the Transportation element will need to
employ a new Traffic Forecasting Model.
VJJJ- L 14
_" " Jefferson County
__ ,_... ._. w... _... IN .,... _.. - � _ __ .- . _ 11. ,
OFF ON
NO
OFF I
ON NO.
MASON COUNIV .",,., � NN OF . :
I , .� rl
: ,.
IN k
I Nei
(! } "1
f �fFre
Kitsap County
ON
Price
19
_ . .._f ` .� ON
Lake � r � } ` j �.. & k` oewano
NY
e OFF
ON ON N;YY IN
ON IN IF I kl-
III
1 �SYIN I
- �'
i . t
(r
l` Haven -'..w'
=" ; ,t lake OFf
i
NNkFY
p (71 y ( 3 5 qy T
t r ` /I , ... f 'yi; La . . ifawir ahuYa pd f 1I .�h
i '��✓✓ 1iINR4
i FFO ` l , OF I
� ,
3 ! �� ON
i ON 9"Old
los . a �b = trW
INN, IF Ne Feed-
FIFF, Fee
M
y � n
Lm
de rel
IN
1 a Needa
Lak
r o
Cranberry U lick ..:..
rde/ IN NY
- FOR awdwe �~ 4 �• S� Need
,
" O
- C - .rf $
i � t Nahwatzel Sµ 10 � � � �.. _ Feel IF
Lake '� c
}
I �Y�a'F9 ON
rr
Deskavllk Rd kJ-, Rd ' ON
Shelton Li
ON
ON
...�
2
re
a
4>
1 $ OFF,
NY
IF
( ._ Jo-° G;tf
:' 2 ' , " y
,_i s F Fkid —I'dJ+ { 4k
IRS atcheq OFF N
le Rd
ON
3 s �S s .• ; bear ( �.�1 Lost �,,. R om r z , . tsabena Ne
, .<s \0�
yY, 4, Lake �(� ✓
r�
a tY s'
... , �"d Ana
. 1 OFF
Need
Yr Fred
OFF Fee I .,E
NO SCALE
g, SR 1p8 ,,E� , L
ON
Grays Harbor County - NO - - AFFYON County Limits
TransportationFigure V111 . 1wS
Mason County
Traffic ! SKILLINGS
Nov 2 5 5 COMMOLLY
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Future Travel Demand
Future travel demand was forecasted for the 20-year scenario of the comprehensive plan. The
Mason County Public Works Department provided the growth rates in each TA-Z .
In the 20 year analysis, overall growth was calculated to approximately 1 . 8 percent per year.
The TAZs where growth exceeded 5 percent were TAZs 3 , 4, 14, 15 , 16 , 33 , 37, 41 , and 42 .
These TAZs were near Belfair-Tahuya, Harstine Island area, and Mason Lake . However,
commercial growth was limited to traffic analysis zones (TAZs) 4, 5 , 8 , 9 , 18 , 19 , 24, 25 , and
28 . These traffic analysis zones (TAZs) represent Belfair and Shelton Urban Growth Areas
(UGAs) .
The following is a summary of the total land use allocation for the county :
1992 Existing .
Permanent Housing 16, 168 households
Employment 8 , 817 employees
Seasonal housing 6, 315 households
2025 High Growth Scenario .
Permanent Housing 37,254 households
Employment 39, 166 employees
Seasonal housing 9, 935 households
Future Trips
Using trip generation and trip distribution created for Mason County's transportation model,
future trip tables were created for the 20 year analysis. These trip tables give information on
intemal4nternal trips, internal-external trips, external4riternal trips, and external-external trips .
External trips are trips, which are generated outside the County's limits . These trips are shown
in TABLE VIII . 1 - 6 .
TABLE VIII. 14 : PM Peak Trip Table
Trip Category 1992 Existing 20 Year
Internal-Internal 73165 12,713
Internal-External 13280 45563
External-Internal 25255 51769
External -External 297 784
Total 1M97 23 , 829
Approximately 53 percent of trips are internal4nternal while only 3 percent of the trips are
VIII- 1 . 16
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
from external to external areas . This means that only 3 percent of Mason County traffic
travels through the study area without stopping .
Future Traffic Assignment
Traffic assignment for the 20 year analysis was made using the adjusted model volumes .
County roads that were predicted to have traffic volumes in excess of 5 , 000 vehicles per
day were Lynch Rd, John ' s Prairie Rd , Agate Road , Belfair - Tahuya Road, Old Belfair
Highway, and Shelton-Matlock Road .
Future Volume-to- Capacity (v/c) Ratios and Level of Service Deficiencies
Based on the capacity estimates in TABLE VIII . 1 -3 and LOS definitions in TABLE
VIIl . I -2 , a future LOS analysis was performed on all Mason County major and minor
collectors . The future LOS indicated that only one collector—Old Belfair Highway from
SR- 3 to Newkirk Rd operates at LOS D . The remaining collectors operate at LOS C or
better . TABLE VIII . 1 - 7 shows the collectors where LOS is C or lower .
TABLE VHI. 1-7 : 2025 Projected Collector Level of Service in Mason County
Collector Segment v/c Ratio LOS
Old Belfair Highway SR-3 to Newkirk Rd 0 . 40 D
North Shore Rd West of SR-300 0 . 18 C
Skokomish Valley Rd West of SR 101 0 .25 C
John ' s Prairie Rd Brockdale Rd to SR-3 0 .24 C
Agate Rd East of SR 3 0 .25 C
Highland Rd South of Shelton — Matlock Rd 0 .28 C
Lynch Rd Sr401 to Cole Rd 0 .29 C
Cole Rd Lynch Rd to SR-3 0 .33 C
Minimum Standards Criteria and Deficiencies
Mason County Collectors are not deficient from a volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio or a LOS
point of view. Many of the Collectors have pavement widths and shoulder widths that do
not meet current design standards . Some Collectors are also deficient from a vertical
alignment point of view where the grades are too steep ; this is due to the preferred
practice of following the terrain to establish the road, rather than creating excessive cut
and fill sections . Mason County roads are well maintained and properly signed , and are
adequate for use by drivers who are attentive to what they are doing and are driving in
accordance with state laws, the rules of the road , and the signing . Mason County has
established minimum standards criteria to compare existing roads with current design
standards to establish a priority array to maximize road improvement funding .
VIII- 1 . 17
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Mason County's minimum standards criteria for pavement and shoulder width and
horizontal and vertical alignment were determined using A Policy on Geometric Design
Highways and Streets (Green Book) , 2004 edition and the Guidelines for Geometric
Design of Very Low- Volume Local Roads (ADT < 400) , 2001 as published by the
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO ) .
TABLE VIII . 14 shows Mason County criteria . TABLE VIII . I - 8 also shows a rating for
each range of values for a given criteria. A rating of 0 indicates no deficiency or an ideal
condition and a rating of 5 indicates the least desirable condition. A rating of 3 indicates
average conditions of pavement and shoulder width, horizontal and vertical alignment, or
collision rate .
The AASHTO Green Book suggests that a pavement width of between 22 to 24 feet and
a shoulder width of 4 to 8 feet is acceptable where speeds are approximately 40 miles per
hour for volumes less than 400 to over 2000 vehicles per day . (NOTE : 1046ot travel
lanes and 3400t shoulders are no longer acceptable on rural collectors . Under certain
circumstances the shoulder can be reduced to 24eet) Therefore, these values were given a
rating of 3 in TABLE VIII . 14 . For vertical alignment, a grade of 6 to 8 percent is
considered acceptable by AASHTO . The rating for horizontal alignment in TABLE
VIII . 1 - 8 shows a 60 percent no passing as an average condition . This value is an average
condition in Mason County and the capacity estimates were based on the assumption of 60
percent no passing . The critical collision rate described in Collision Data is given a rating
of 3 for this analysis . Based on these ratings, each collector in Mason County was
evaluated for deficiencies . Note that any collector with a rating of 4 or 5 is deficient in the
respective criteria.
A number of Mason County Collectors are deficient in pavement and shoulder width. A
significant number of collectors are deficient in horizontal alignment and a few are
deficient in vertical alignment . In summary, the majority of Mason County's collectors are
deficient by the minimum standards criteria . This evaluation is based on comparing the
existing roadway to current design standards . From an operations standpoint , Mason
County' s collectors are adequate and will be able to accommodate future growth. From a
capacity standpoint, Mason County' s Collectors will be able to accommodate future
growth .
V111- 1 , 18
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
TABLE VIII. 1 -8 : Mason County° s Minimum Standards Criteria Dating for Collector Roads
Criteria Pavement Shoulder horizontal Vertical Collision Rate
Rating Width Width Alignment Alignment (per million
(feet) (feet) vehicle miles)
0 >_ 12 > 6 0% no passing 0 - 2% Ott 1 . 0
1 11 . 1 - 11 . 9 5 - 549 20% no passing 2 . 1 - 4% 1 . 1 - 2 . 0
2 10 . 1 - 11 . 0 4 - 4 . 9 40% no passing 4 . 1 - 6% 2 . 1 - 3 . 0
3 = 10 3 - 19 60% no passing 6 . 1 - 8% 3 . 1 - 4 . 0
4 9 . 1 - 9 . 9 1 - 269 80% no passing 8 . 1 - 12% 4 . 1 - 7 . 0
5 _< 9 . 0 0 - 0 . 9 100% no > 12% >_ 7. 1
passing
VIII-1 , 19
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
VH1.2 Goals and Policies
Transportation System Goals
Mason County's goal is to provide adequate mobility for all people , goods , and services in
an efficient and economical manner . Transportation facilities will be maintained and
improved while minimizing changes to the physical and social environment so as to
preserve the "rural character " of the area. The transportation system shall support
economic growth and development in coordination with the County's Comprehensive
Plan.
Coordination Policies
Mason County's goal is to promote effective coordination between and among
governments , private enterprise , and the community. The County will facilitate effective
use of the transportation system through coordination of the transportation facilities and
services for all types of motorized and non-motorized transportation. These policies
address a wide range of issues which effect Mason County such as :
0 Multi- agency planning and coordination
® Planning for pedestrians and non- motorized vehicles
0 Consistency of transportation programs among jurisdictions
® Coordination of construction projects
® Transit service throughout Mason County
1. Public Participation Policy
Mason County encourages and welcomes public participation in the transportation
planning process .
a) This transportation element was developed with the assistance of the Growth
Management Advisory Committee , established specifically to help prepare the
Comprehensive Plan. Mason County will continue to use a similar committee to
advise and periodically update the plan . Public participation in transportation
planning is encouraged through open workshops and public hearings . Citizen
groups can also provide valuable insight during the planning phase of road
projects .
b) The 6 year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is prepared with the
assistance of the Transportation Improvement Program — Citizens Advisory Panel
VIII-2. 1
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
(TIP - CAP) , and updated on an annual basis . Public hearings shall be held on the 6
Year TIP , as required by law (RCW 36. 81 . 121 ) .
c) Prior to the initiation of major construction projects , adjacent property owners and
area residents will be informed of the project and their input will be evaluated
during the planning process . The intent is to provide the community with an
opportunity to incorporate their input into the project .
2. Intergovernmental Coordination Policy
The County will coordinate efforts in planning, construction, and operation of
transportation facilities with other agencies' programs as appropriate . This coordination
will allow County efforts to support and complement the transportation functions of the
State , Peninsula Transportation Planning Organization (PRTPO) , adjacent counties ,
Shelton and neighboring cities, Mason Transit Authority (MTA) , and other entities
responsible for transportation facilities and services in Mason County. Coordination will
be achieved by :
a) Participating in the activities of the PRTPO .
b) Working with other jurisdictions to plan, fund, and implement multi jurisdictional
projects necessary to meet shared transportation needs ( including right-of-way
preservation and acquisition) .
c) Making transportation planning decisions consistent with WSDOT, PRTPO , and
neighboring jurisdictions .
3. Multi-Modal Coordination Policy
The County will cooperate with Mason County Transit Authority (the MTA) to provide
facilities that will enhance and encourage transit use . The MTA will be asked to provide
input into the County's six-year plan and annual construction program. The County will
support the MTA in :
a) Transit service between the urban centers .
b) Encourage demand-responsive service for Mason County citizens with less
transportation capability, such as elderly and handicapped .
c) Encourage demand-responsive service to the rural residential areas .
d) Transportation capability for access to essential services (i . e . , medical, legal, social
assistance) .
V111-2. 2
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
4. Utility Coordination Policy
The County recognizes the effectiveness of coordinating utility services in transportation
corridors and provides standards that coordinate construction of utilities with existing and
future transportation needs . These will include :
a) Coordinate new utility construction with the County' s six-year improvement plan
b) Coordinate improvement programs being developed by utility agencies' with the
County transportation system
c) Provide standards for repair and maintenance of utilities within the transportation
corridor (i . e . , the County road right- of-way)
d) Establish traffic control standards for new construction and maintenance of utilities
consistent with Part 6 Temporary Traffic Control of the Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices 2003 . (MUTCD) .
5. Special Interest Coordination Policy
The County will assist in the accommodation of special interests that require use of the
transportation system. This will include but not be limited to :
a) Coordinate with the school districts to assist in providing safe and efficient school
transportation. As appropriate, the County will work with the schools to enhance
school bus routes, student walking routes, and crossings . Traffic signing will be
provided in accordance with the MUTCD .
b) Provide for special events such as fairs, parades , athletic events , and large meetings
by making appropriate provisions for safe traffic operations with the minimum
effect on the general public . The cost of such provisions will be assessed to the
organizers of such events as appropriate .
6. Education/Public Information Policy
The citizens and other users of the Mason County transportation system will be provided
information to enhance the users' safety and convenience . The County will appoint a
public information representative from the Public Works Department to provide
coordinated information to the general public and news media. This information will be
coordinated with the Sheriffs Office . Information efforts will include :
a) Informing the public of traffic safety measures for both the road system and
vehicles .
VIII-2. 3
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
b) Directly informing area residents about road projects planned for construction in
their locality .
c) Informing specific neighborhoods about maintenance projects that will affect traffic
flow .
Resign and Capacity Policies
The County's goal is to provide a safe, cost effective, comfortable, and reliable
transportation system. The design and capacity policies are based on AASHTO ' s A
Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets 2004, Guidelines for Geometric
Design of Very Low- Volume Local Roads (ADT < 400) , WSDOT Design and
Construction Manuals , and other proven standards that define criteria for :
Design
Maintenance
® Safety standards
® Roadway adequacy
a Transportation system needs
a Demand management strategies
7 Road Adequacy Policy
Road adequacy is broken down into two separate considerations, congestion and safety.
Mason County will strive to provide a safe road network, which operates at an LOS that
reflects the preference of the community. The County will consider development of a plan
for the future transportation network to guide both private and public transportation
development . This planning should address issues in a multi-model fashion and be
coordinated with other planning processes, in particular the Mason County Master Trails
Plan. The plan should address location, design, and financial issues . Financial issues
should include when public/private partnerships or other financing mechanisms might be
appropriate .
Roads
The County will construct and maintain the road network in accordance with safety
standards established by AASHTO , WSDOT and the MUTCD . Upgrading existing
deficiencies will be accomplished on a priority evaluation that considers collision
occurrence , traffic volumes , and compliance to design standards .
An LOS for the road system is based upon definitions in the 2000 edition of the Highway
Capacity Manual . The County has adopted LOS C for peak hour flow (congestion) on all
rural County roadways and LOS D for roadways lying inside designated UGAs .
VIII-2. 4
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Transit
To be coordinated with Mason County Transit Authority policies .
Pedestrians
Pedestrian walking areas shall be provided, terrain permitting, on all of the County's
collector road system as these roads are improved or reconstructed . This may be
accomplished through the use of shoulder areas, separate walkways, or sidewalks,
depending on the area needs .
Bicycles
Bicyclists will be accommodated in a similar manner as pedestrians . Facilities will be
provided, terrain permitting, on County collectors designated as bikeways in the Bicycle
Plan as these roads are improved or reconstructed . The extent of the bicycle facilities will
be dependent on the classification of the facilities as defined in the Bicycle Plan. For
example, on the routes that are on the collector road system, a minimum 4400t shoulder
should help provide an area which pedestrians and bicyclist can utilize .
8. Functional Classification Policy
Mason County classifies the road network according to Federal, regional, and local
guidelines based on the following :
a) State routes will maintain designations as mandated by RCW 47. 05. 021 .
b) County roads will follow the specified functional classification system in TABLE
VIII . 24 .
c) The designation for "primitive roads " (as defined by RCW 36. 75. 300) will be used
when appropriate .
Mason County Public Works uses the Federal Function Classes (FFC) , as approved by the
Federal Highway Administration, for departmental funding, design, and planning . The
FFCs were last updated in December 2003 , based on the required Urban Area Update
based on the 2000 US Census . The FFC determines which roads are eligible for federal
and state funding programs , and determine the design standards that will be used .
The County supports the Port of Shelton's goals and policies , as outlined in their Shelton
Airport Master Plan and their designation under the Federal Aviation Administration's
classification system for airports .
VIII-2. 5
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
TABLE VIII. 24 functional Classification Categories
State Routes : Roads owned and operated by the Washington State Department of Transportation
(WSDOT) . These highways provide for regional and inter-regional travel .
Major Collectors : Roads that provide for regional and inter-regional travel , typically carrying large
volumes of through-traffic, with limited direct access to abutting properties .
Minor Collectors : Roads that connect neighborhoods and commercial areas to major Collectors and
State highways operated by WSDOT. They provide access to major adjacent land uses and generally
carry moderate volumes of traffic .
Local Collectors : Roads that collect and distribute traffic between neighborhoods, business areas, and
the rest of the collector system . They provide for easy and direct access to abutting properties and carry
low to moderate volumes of traffic.
Local Roads : These facilities provide direct access to abutting property and carry traffic to the
collector system . Local roads typically carry low volumes of traffic at low speeds .
8a. Airport Designations
Mason County supports the preservation of air navigation resources and facilities in the
County by :
a) Providing compatibility with surrounding land uses .
b) Preventing encroachment by development that negatively impacts airport
operations through a coordinated review process for proposed land development
located within the airport influence zone .
c) Supporting adequate ground transportation to move people and goods to and from
the airport .
9. Functional Design Policy
Functional design ensures adequate and safe access to property via a system of public and
private roads .
A range of design and construction standards adopted in Mason County Title 16 shall be
used for secondary roads and roads within developments . Standards for Collectors shall
meet the current edition of WSDOT' s Local Agency Guidelines Manual (LAG Manual) .
These standards include roadway alignment and location, roadway sections, and right- of-
way . All roadway design will be coordinated with Mason County, the City of Shelton,
VIIJ-2. 6
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Washington State Department of Transportation, and the Federal Highway Administration
to achieve compatible design standards . These standards will be :
a) Linked to the level and type of land development served by the transportation
facilities .
b) Consistent with the collector road functional classification .
c) Compatible between jurisdictions .
d) In compliance with Federal (AASHTO) and State (LAG Manual) design criteria . .
10. System Integration Policy
Mason County strives to maintain an interconnected network of roads with appropriate
pedestrian and bicycle facilities to serve the citizens' travel needs . This is achieved by the
following :
a) The present road system is the foundation which meets the majority of the
County' s current transportation needs .
b) New routes designed to serve either new development or to reduce congestion and
conflicts will be established after thorough review of economic , environmental, and
public interests .
11. Safety
The goal of the County is to provide a safe roadway system maximizing the use of existing
facilities and prioritizing the improvement program with special consideration of safety
issues :
a) Incorporate safety features into all facets of the transportation system; AASHTO
and the LAG Manual will provide guidance in the application of these safety
features .
b) Monitor high-collision locations and evaluate these areas to provide solutions for
corrective action.
c) Pursue grants for safety improvements from State and Federal sources .
d) Maintain a sign inventory and monitor sign condition for compliance with the
MUTCD .
12. Aesthetic Resign Policy
The design and maintenance of the roadway system will include attention to aesthetic
qualities . Special consideration will be given to maintaining the natural and manmade
amenities of the community :
VIII-2. 7
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
a) Establish cooperative programs to enhance the roadway appearance ( i . e . , Adopt-
A-Road Program) .
b) Preserve the scenic character of road corridors with designs that follow as much of
the old alignment as possible . Realignments and major changes to the original
corridor will be topics specifically addressed with area residents in the planning
phase of the project .
c) Maintain standards for erosion control, which encourage retention and restoration
of native vegetation, and naturally occurring landscaping for roadway projects .
d) Coordinate with other agencies and local communities to consider the
establishment of design guidelines and/or standards for urban gateway areas . The
intent of the review is to determine how best to guide both private and public
development in corridors identified as important gateways to the urban growth
areas .
13. Transportation System Management (TSM) Policy
Promote efficient operation of the transportation system through TSM strategies which
will maximize the efficient use of existing systems without major changes to the overall
road configuration. Considerations will include :
a) Access control for major and minor collectors to minimize disruptions in traffic
flow .
b) Geometric improvements to improve traffic flow and capacity.
c) The use of traffic signalization and other intersection treatments to control traffic
flow as these systems become warranted .
14. Pedestrian and Bicycle Policy
Encourage and provide a safe means of travel for pedestrians and bicyclists on the County
road network . Mason County will provide facilities for non-motorized travel by:
a) Incorporating improvements for non-motorized travel into programmed road
improvement projects . The most appropriate design for these facilities will be
determined on a case by case basis .
b) Exploring opportunities to provide low- cost improvements within the existing
public right- of--way that improves conditions for non-motorized travel modes .
c) Developing a Bicycle Plan and Pedestrian Plan in coordination with the Mason
County Master Trails Plan and the Future Transportation System Network Plan .
VIII-2. 8
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Improved shoulders , off-street trails , and off- street paved corridors are examples of typical
improvements , which will accommodate non-motorized travel .
15. Maintenance Policy
The County will maintain the road network to provide safe , reliable , and effective
movement of people and goods . Specific maintenance considerations will include :
a) Emergency repairs required for public safety will receive the highest priority.
b) Provide safe and reliable roadway surfaces through pavement patching, sealing and
surface treatments .
c) Maintain visibility of traffic control and safety devices .
d) Maintain drainage facilities in proper working order .
e) Maintain roadside vegetation to meet safety requirements . If possible , this will be
done in a manner compatible with the natural character of the land .
f) Provide traffic control for maintenance work in accordance with Part 6 of the
MUTCD .
16 . Access Policy
The County will provide (or limit) access to the road network in a manner consistent with
the function and purpose of each roadway. The County will strive to consolidate access
points on State highways, major and minor collectors in order to reduce interference with
traffic flow on the collectors and discourage through-traffic on local access streets . To
achieve this , the County:
a) Supports the State's controlled access policy on all State highway facilities .
b) Encourages and may possibly assist landowners cooperative efforts , in preparing
access plans that emphasize efficient internal circulation and discourage multiple
access points to major roadways . Special design features (Traffic Calming) may be
used to discourage excessive through-traffic on local access roads such as
geometrics (roadway layout) , signing, traffic circles, and pavement treatment .
c) Encourage access to private developments through a system of local collectors and
local access streets , thus limiting direct access onto the arterial ( State) and primary
County network .
d) Encourages consolidation of access in developing commercial and higher density
residential areas through frontage roads, shared use driveways , and local access
streets , which intersect with collectors at moderate to long spacing .
V111-2. 9
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
17. Private Roads Policy
The County shall permit and promote construction of safe private roads accessing private
properties .
The County requires private roadways to meet the minimum design standards required by
the Mason County Fire Marshal per the Uniform Fire Code . These standards can be
found at the Public Works Department , the Building Department, and Department of
Community Development . Private roads which are intended to be someday adopted into
the County' s road system must meet the minimum standards found in the Mason County
Title 16 per Policy 9—Functional Design Policy.
18. Emergency Response Needs Policy
Police, fire protection, and medical response services are critical uses of the roadway
system. The County will coordinate and integrate emergency response needs into the
transportation program. This will include :
a) Coordination of maintenance and construction work with emergency response
agencies .
b) Review elements of the roadway system that support emergency response services
to help determine where improvements can serve to enhance emergency response
capabilities .
19. Transportation Demand Management (TDAV Policy
The County will encourage the implementation of a TDM system through the following
strategies , as mandated by Washington State law. TDM encourages alternate modes of
transportation to reduce the numbers of single-occupancy vehicles . These include :
a) Encouraging the use of high- occupancy vehicles (HOV)—bus , carpool, and
vanpool programs—through both public and private programs under the direction
of the MTA .
b) Encouragement and support for non-motorized travel.
c) Promoting flexible work schedules to encourage use of transit , carpools , or
vanpools .
d) Encouraging employers to provide TDM measures in the work place through such
programs as preferential parking for HOVs, improved access for transit vehicles ,
and employee incentives for using HOVs . This will coordinate with the
Washington State law considering trip reduction programs for major employers .
VIII-2. 10
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Land Use, Environment and Economic Policies
The transportation system will support development in accordance with the Mason County
Comprehensive Plan .
20. Land Use Policy
The County transportation system is a critical component of land use planning . The
relationship between the transportation system and land use is based on mobility and
access needs . Land use creates the transportation demand and the road network serves to
provide circulation between the land use elements . Compatibility between transportation
services and land uses is critical to the success of the County's comprehensive plan .
a) Mason County will strive to maintain the rural character of the road system with
designs that emphasize safe road networks and aesthetic qualities that make the
County unique .
b) The existing and future land use plans shall provide the basis for access needs .
c) The transportation system shall support the County' s needs resulting from
population and economic growth .
d) To meet future travel needs , transportation corridors shall be preserved by
obtaining sufficient right-of--way and controlling access to the road network.
e) To meet future travel needs, the County will consider developing a future
transportation network plan . The plan will help guide the establishment of new or
improved roads and other transportation facilities during private or public
development . The plan should support the Mason County Comprehensive Plan
and be coordinated with the Mason County Master Trails Plan .
21. Environmental Policy
The design of transportation facilities within the County shall minimize adverse
environmental impacts resulting from both their construction and operation.
a) Environmentally sensitive areas shall be protected and, if unavoidable impacts
occur, appropriate mitigation shall be implemented . Special attention will be given
to wetlands , aquifer recharge areas , fish and wildlife habitat, floodplains, and
geologically hazardous areas .
b) The construction and maintenance of the roadway system shall strive to be
compatible with the natural characteristics of the area . Erosion control, water
quality, and re -vegetation methods will be applied where appropriate .
VIII-2. 11
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
c) The transportation improvement program shall coordinate with the State and
Federal resource agencies to ensure compliance with regulations and best design
practices to minimize impacts on the environment .
22. Economic Policy
The transportation system shall be compatible with the economic and development goals
of Mason County. County emphasis will be based on :
a) Safe and convenient service to existing business and industry which minimizes
impacts to residential areas .
b) County goals for the transportation system will be consistent with economic
growth and private development .
c) The County shall establish and maintain a process to assess the traffic impacts of
new development .
Priorities and Financing
The County will continue to develop a transportation system that distributes costs and
benefits equitably to the citizens . The maximum return from expenditures of County funds
will be accomplished through wise use of the limited resources ( such as land, fuel, and
money) . The County has the responsibility and challenge to make the best use of the
limited funds available to finance transportation projects . It is the intent of Mason County
to secure funding and allocate these funds in a consistent and equitable method .
23. Project Priority Policy
a) A standardized, well documented, and objective process shall be used to establish
priorities for transportation expenditures .
b) The prioritization process shall include, as a minimum, the following factors :
• Traffic Volumes
• Traffic Collisions
• Roadway Width
® Horizontal Curvature
• Grade
Sight Distance
0 Clear Zone Criteria
® Fund Leveraging Ability
® Structural Adequacy
® Drainage Adequacy
® Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
® Current Service Rating (Economic, Recreation, Commercial, Civic)
VIII-2. 12
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
® Future Service Rating (Opportunities for expansion of the transportation
network or implementation of the network system plans in cooperation with
private development or improvement projects .)
Dote : These considerations are not listed in their order of their importance and are not
necessarily comprehensive
24. Financing Policy
a) Establish a procedure that maximizes the available funding from State and Federal
grant programs .
b) May require traffic impact mitigation from new development in accordance with
the County' s concurrency management policy.
c) Encourage the use of Local Improvement Districts (LIDs) by property owners to
upgrade roads to meet County standards .
d) Maintain a capital improvement program that balances expenditures for the
transportation system with available funding resources .
25. Concurrency Management Policy
As required by the Washington State Growth Management Act, the transportation element
of the County's comprehensive plan must contain a concurrency policy (RCW
36. 70A . 070. 6e) . This policy requires new development to mitigate traffic impacts, which
reduce the LOS or safety below the County's adopted standards . Mitigation measures are
required to be implemented concurrently with the proposed development to accommodate
or offset the impacts which the proposed development may have on public facilities . If
impacts cannot be properly mitigated, the new development may be denied. It is not the
intent of this policy to adversely impact an individual property owner who wishes to short
plat a single tract of land . However, it does recognize the need to analyze those areas,
which have the potential for providing dense growth due to a single subdivision and/or
several consecutive subdivisions . The result of such an analysis may require contributions
toward improvement costs of roads which cannot support additional traffic volume
resulting from new subdivisions . Short plats established in the same locality within a six-
year time frame may be considered as one contiguous development if there is a substantial
cumulative impact to the area.
a) The County may require construction or financial commitment for significant
traffic impacts on County roads .
b) A Latecomers Agreement Program may be drafted and administered by the
County. This type of agreement will help landowners recover some costs
associated with road construction which directly benefits a future developer .
c) Improvements shall conform to County road standards .
V111-2. 13
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
REFERENCES
X Mason County Code
Highway Capacity Manual, 1997 , Transportation Research Board, Washington D . C .
Local Agency Guidelines, WSDOT Highways and Local Programs Division , Olympia,
WA
Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices , 2000 , Revision 3 , American Traffic Safety
Services Association, Fredericksberg, VA
Mason County Title 16 Plats and Subdivisions, 1991 , Mason County Code
Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 2004 , AASHTO, Washington
D . C .
Guidelines for Geometric )Design of Very Low-Volume Roads (ADT < 400) , 2001 ,
AASHTO , Washington D . C .
PRTPO Comprehensive Plan , 1995 , Clallum, Jefferson, Kitsap, and Mason Counties
Revised Code of Washington 35 . 72 and 35 . 91 - Latecomers Clause
Revised Code of Washington 36. 75.300 - Primitive Roads
Revised Code of Washington 36 .78 - Growth Management Act
Revised Code of Washington 36. 81 . 121 - 6-Year TIP
Revised Code of Washington 47. 05. 021 - State Route Classification
Revised Code of Washington 47 . 40 - Adopt-a-road
Uniform Fire Code, 1994 , International Fire Code Institute , Austin, TX
Adopted by Washington State - June , 1995
Adopted by Mason County - March, 1996
VIII-2. 14
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
II 3 SYSTEM
The Mason County transportation system is comprised of the State Routes , Major Collectors,
Local Collectors, Local Access Roads, transit, railroads, and bicycle/pedestrian routes . The
backbone of the system is the collector roadways that serve the majority of travel in and
through the County.
Functional Classification Plan
The functional classification system is a uniform method of defining the collector roads that is
accepted by local, State, and Federal agencies . The purpose is to classify roads by their
primary use in serving traffic as through-trips or varying degrees of access to adjacent property.
FIGURE VIII . 3 - I shows the Mason County functional classification system for use in GMA
planning and analysis.
State Routes
The principal state routes serving Mason County are US 101 , SR 3 and SR 106, SR 108 , SR
119 and SR 302 . The purpose of these highways is to provide for regional and inter-regional
travel and provide connections to recreational and population areas.
State Route SR From To
SR 3 SR 101 Kitsap County Line
SR 101 Jefferson County Line Thurston County Line
SR 102 (Dayton Airport R SR 101 Day" Airport Road
SR 106 SR 101 SR 3
SR 108 Grays Harbor CogMy Line SR 101
SR 119 e Cushman Rd SR 101 Staircase Road
SR 300 Belfair State Park SR 3
SR 302 SR 3 Pierce County Line
Major Collectors
Major Collectors are roads that have a primary function of carrying traffic to and from major
traffic generators . Some local access is provided, but the primary function is for through-trips .
These Collectors typically have speed limits between 35 and 45 miles per hour (mph) and
many connect to freeways .
Minor Collectors
Minor collectors serve as connecting roads between neighborhoods and provide some through-
trips with additional local access . The minor Collectors also provide access to major
community-wide traffic generators (i. e . hospitals, schools) . Speed limits are between 30 and
VIII-3 . 1
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
45 mph and they typically connect to major collectors .
The prime transportation routes through Mason County are U . S . Route 101 running north and
south. The northern section of this highway is on the eastern side of the Olympic Peninsula
along Hood Canal. The southern section of this highway passes through Shelton and connects
with Olympia. SR 106 extends easterly from U. S . 101 at the Skokomish Indian Reservation
and runs along the southern side of Hood Canal. SR 106 intersects SR 3 south of Belfair. SR
3 , from Bremerton and other points on the Kitsap Peninsula, enters Mason County at the
Belfair area and runs m a southwesterly direction past Mason Lake to Shelton. SR 300
provides access to the southern tip of the Tahuya Peninsula from its intersection with SR 3 .
SR 302 branches off SR 3 toward northwest Pierce County. SR 108 south of Shelton
intersects with U. S . 101 at Kamilche and continues southwesterly to McCleary (in Grays
Harbor County) , providing connections with Aberdeen and points along the Pacific Ocean. SR
119 (Lake Cushman Road) extends east-west from US 101 in Hoodsport .
TABLE : Collectors in Mason County
Collector From To
Major Collectors
Arcadia Road SR 3 - Binns Swiger Loop
Belfair Tahuya Road Elfendahl Pass Road SR 300
Brockdale Road Shelton City Limits McReavy Road
Grapeview Loop Road Stadium Beach Road SR 3
Harstene Bridge Road Bridge
Johns Prairie Road Brockdale Road SR-3
Old Belfair Highway* SR 300 - Milepost 1 .4 County Line
Pickering Road SR 3 Harstene Bridge
Shelton-Matlock Road City Limits Mile Post 10. 76
Minor Collectors
Agate Road SR 3 Pickering Road
Cole Road Shadowood Road Craig Road
Crestview Drive Agate Road Parkway Boulevard
Harstine Island South Road Island Shore Road County Line
Kamilche Point Road Old Olympic Highway County Line
Lynch Road SR 3 Milepost 1 . 10
Mason Lake Road SR 3 McEwen Prairie Road
McEwen Prairie Road Mason Lake Road Brockdale Road
Sand Hill Road SR 300 Transfer Station
V111-3 . 2
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
®acts of Regional Signilcance
The PRTPO has identified roadway of regional significance in Mason County.
Local roads that are not classified under the Mason County functional classification system but
have regional significance are :
Roadway From To
Dayton Airport Rd Shelton Matlock Road SR 102
Hurley-Waldrip Rd SR 108 Junction SR 101 Junction
MeReavy Road SR 106 Junction Blockdale Road
Purdy Cutoff Road SR 101 Junction SR 106 Junction
Old Olympic Highway ffighway SR 101 SR 101
Clifton Lane SR 3 Junction I SR 300 Junction
Mason County's road system consists of major and minor collector roads . Information
concerning the collector system was provided by the Mason County Public Works
Department.
As FIGURE VIII . I -3 illustrates, Pickering Road, Brockdale Road, Arcadia Road, Mason
Lake, and Agate Road are some of the Collectors which have an ADT in excess of 2, 000 .
These volumes indicate that currently County Collectors operate at a satisfactory level, with
very little capacity problems .
Mason County Public Works uses the FFC system in their planning activities. Eligibility for
state and federal grants and funding programs is based on the FFC of the road. In order to
maximize the amount of state and federal funding Mason County roads receive, their road
planning processes, priority array, and analyses include all roads that are classified as arterials
and collectors in the Federal Function Class system. The FFC of a road also dictates the design
criteria to be used when a road is improved . FHWA administers the establishment of and
approves the FFC in each state . Proposed updates to the FFC system can be made at any time
as the functionality of roads change over time .
V111-3 . 3
.-� �,. ..
;
, I It
V8 `
A
,
IF V
f Ki r s � ti -J to
Ill
IF f
« _ I If
f IF
.,
IF
Fv
If
If
s j
r j
FII
i
IF I if
I IF
t
IF IF Fri.
t
>� IF yff
IF IF �n „d" _ t v <
It IF f
i i v I
If If
^) If
If
All-
II
✓, f' i 2
a . _:...�
IF
It-f
IF
sad /
IF
41 .
It
If FA It IV 7 V
1-4
1.
1 IF VI1 `
III IF
� '
r fI
I IF
�`
F� j� `
Vj
ft
I IF "I'lr.roft FA
i
It � I
IF
It
p: } FIF
It
OFF—I
Pg
r-x-�
i
/ '.,`
f IF L
IF, if IF fAr II
fif
)ffl III
/ f
/I If
If IFF,
I-
fV
IF 2f Fort t
\ q ' 1111Fi � ` \
If
It
Fly . , . i_.._.... ;�.. I
F If
It
IF
3 mi. 0 3 mi. 6 mi.
1 '
C . IF SCAIF 1 " = 3 Miles
. � IFF, i r!t:}f ..
t
It
Major Collector State Route
Minor Collector - w
Figure
ClassificationMason County Transportation Element
Functional LL
Nov 2005 CONNOLLY
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
FFC Roads
Road Name From Location To Location
Rural Major Collector FFC 07
Agate Road SR-3 Timberlake Drive
Arcadia Road SR-3 Lynch Road
Bear Creekl-Dewatto Road Elfendahl Pass Road Old Belfair Highway
Belfair-Tahuya Road North Shore Road SR-300
Brockdale Road Batstone Cutoff Road McReavy Road
Clifton Lane SR-3 SR-300
Cloquallum Road Shelton City Limits Satsop-Cloquallum Road
Cole Road Lynch Road Craig Road
Craig Road SR-3 Cole Road
Dayton Airport Road Little Egypt Road SR402
Grapeview Loop Road SR-3 SR-3
Harstine Bridge Road Pickering Road South Island Drive
Harstine Island North Road Harstine Island South Road North Island Drive
Highland Road Shelton-Matlock Road Cloquallum Road
Johns Prairie Road Shelton city Limits SR-3
Lynch Road SR401 Arcadia Road
Mason Benson Road SR-3 Mason Lake Drive East
Mason Lake Road SR-3 Trails Road
Matlock-Brady Road Shelton-Matlock Road Grays Harbor County Line
McEwan Prairie Road Mason Lake Road Brockdale Road
McReavy Road SR- 106 Brockdale Road
North Island Drive South Island Drive Harstine Island North Road
Old Belfair Highway SR-300 Kitsap County Line
Pickering Road SR-3 Harstine Bridge Road
Purdy Cut-Off Road US401 SR406
Sand Hill Road SR-300 Bear Creek-Dewatto Road
Shelton-Matlock Road Shelton city limits Matlock-Brady Road
South Island Drive North Island Drive Harstine Island South Drive
Trails Road SR- 106 Mason Lake Road
V111-3. 5
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Rural Minor Collector FFC 08
Agate Road Timberlake Drive Agate Road
Bear Creek-Dewatto Road Kitsap County Line Elfendahl Pass Road
Boundary Road West Matlock-Brady Road Grays Harbor County Line
Brockdale Road McReavy Road US401
Cloquallam Road Satsop-Cloquallum Road Grays Harbor County Line
Crestview Drive Agate Road Parkway Boulevard
Deckerville Road Matlock-Brady Road Grays Harbor County Line
Dewatto Road Belfair-Tahuya road Dewatto-Holly Road
Dewatto-Holly Road Dewatto Beach Drive Kitsap County Line
Dickinson Avenue City Limits Jones Road
Elfendahl Pass Road North Shore Road Bear Creek-Dewatto Road
Harstine Island South Road South Island Drive Camus Drive
Kamilche Point Road Old Olympic Highway 90 Degree Turn North
Mason Lake Drive West Trails Road Mason Lake Road
North Bay Road SR-3 SR-302
North Shore Road Belfair-Tahuya road Dewatto Road
Old Olympic Highway US401 Kamilche Point Road
Parkway Boulevard Crestview Drive Shorecrest Drive
Pickering Road Harstine Island Drive Agate Road
Satsop Cloquallum Road Cloquallum Road Satsop Road East
Schaefer Park Road Matlock-Brady Road Satsop Road East
Shelton Springs Road US- 101 Shelton City Limits
Shelton Valley Road Shelton-Matlock Road Cloquallum Road
Skokomish Valley Road US401 475 ft. West of Govey Road (DNR)
Tahuya Blacksmith Road Bear Creek-Dewatto Road Belfair-Tahuya Road
Urban Collector FFC 17
Walker Park Road Arcadia Road Shelton City Limits
Transit �Kystern
The MTA initiated transit service December 1 , 1992 by establishing a Public Transportation
Benefit Area (PTBA) Board with the following goals :
VIII-3 . 6
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
To develop a coordinated system of affordable public transportation that : operates within
existing financial limitations, maximizes the use of existing transportation resources including
volunteers, and is available, to some extent, in most areas of Mason County.
MTA has begun partnering with Federal, State, regional, local and private transportation
entities to improve planning and coordination of services . Current service includes dial-a-ride
service, scheduled route service, van pool/car pool coordination and volunteer transportation.
Dial-a4ide Service
This service was started with a system of service zones designed to allocate operations based
upon identified locations of population densities . Current service zones consist of 7 areas
covering the populated areas of Mason County that can be safely accessed by bus service .
Service is on reservation basis and is subject to availability.
Hood Canal West; Lake Cushman
Service is 7 : 30 am to 6 : 30 pm —Tuesday and Thursday.
Agaite, Shorecrest, Timberlakes, Harstine Island
Service is 7 : 30 am to 6 : 30 pm - Monday - Friday
Dayton, Matlock
Service is 7 :30 am to 6 :30 pm Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.
North Mason, Grapeview
Service is 7 :30 am to 6 : 30 pm Monday - Saturday
Tahuya
Service is 7 :30 am to 6 : 30 pm Monday and Friday
Star Lake, Cloquallum
Service is 7 :30 am to 6 : 30 pm Tuesday and Thursday
Mason Lake to Shelton
Service is 7 : 30 am to 6 : 30 pm Monday, Wednesday and Friday
Scheduled Route Service
Route I Shelton to Hood Canal and Brinnon
Service is 8 : 15 am to 4 : 30 pm Monday to Friday
Route 2 Shelton — Belfair
V111-3. 7
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Route 2A via SR 3
Service is 7 : 05 am to 8 :20 pm Monday to Saturday
Route 213 via SR 106
Service is 7 : 00 am to 4 : 55 pm Monday to Saturday
Route 3 Be fair to Bremerton
Service is 5 : 35 am to 7 : 15 pm Monday to Saturday
Route 4 Be (air
Service is 7 : 30 to 4 :40 pm Monday to Friday
Route 5 Shelton Town Loop
Service is 7 . 35 to 8 : 15 Monday to Saturday
Route 6 Shelton to Olympia
Service is from 6 :00 am to 7 :40 pm Monday to Friday and
7 : 30 am to 6 : 30 pm on Saturday
Route 7 Shelton North Loop
Service is 7 : 55 to 5 : 33 Monday to Friday and
11 : 55 to 4 : 33 on Saturday
Carpool and Van Pool Services
Mason Transit coordinates carpool and vanpool services for groups of commuters traveling
from Mason County to destinations outside Mason County.
Park-and-Ride Lots
There are four designated park-and-ride lots in Mason County:
Location Capacity Usage Maintenance
Pickering Road and Highway 3 30 < 10% County
Shelton-Matlock Interchange 30 0- 10% State
Highway 8 and Highway 101 20 78% State
Cole Road and Highway 3 20 25-30% State
Volunteer S'ervdees
VIII-3. 8
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Transportation services for special populations (i. e. , elderly and handicapped) are provided by a
number of different social service and community-based organizations . The majority of these
services operate with volunteers using their own cars or vans. Organizations that are able to
provide van transportation include the Area Agency on Aging for Lewis-Mason-Thurston
Counties (contracting with Intercity Transit) , Skokon sh Indian Reservation, and Exceptional
Foresters . Organizations that operate with volunteers are Harstine Island, North Mason
County Chamber of Commerce, Fiercely Independent Elders, Catholic Community Services,
Senior Activities, Colony Surf, and Matthew House . The availability of volunteers can be a
limiting factor in an organization's ability to provide these services .
Rail Transportation
There is no passenger rail transportation in Mason County. Rail services are used primarily by
the lumber and wood products industry. The main Mason County rail line follows the same
general alignment as SR 3 from Shelton through Belfair. From Belfair, the line goes north to
Bremerton and Bangor. The right-of4ay for this segment of the railroad is owned by the U. S .
Government and operated and maintained by Burlington Northern Railroad (BNRR) . The line
south from Shelton is owned by BNRR and runs in a southwesterly direction to McCleary and
Elma in Grays Harbor County.
The Simpson Timber Company owns and operates a line from Shelton to the Dayton/Matlock
area. This line is used exclusively for the timber business. While Simpson and other timber
concerns had previously used rail extensively in their operations, all but this one remaining line
has been closed.
Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities
Mason County has two designated pedestrian/bicycle trails; these are : ( 1 ) on Brockdale Road
from Wallace Boulevard to Island Lake Drive and (2) on Arcadia Road from SR 3 to Binns-
Swiger Road. Other informal paths off the roadway may exist within neighborhoods, but
otherwise bicycle and pedestrian travel is on the roadway or roadway shoulder. Much of
Highway 101 has a shoulder wide enough to accommodate bicycle travel. However, SR 106
and SR 3 generally do not have sufficient shoulder width to safely accommodate pedestrian and
bicycle travel and both are heavily traveled. The County's standard asphalt road provides for
at least a 546ot shoulder. This type of roadway shoulder can be used by bicycle and pedestrian
travel. The factor which may disrupt continuous shoulder paving is the contour of the land—
rather steep hillsides .
In September of 2004, the Mason County Board of Commissioners signed a Resolution that
established a County trails committee . The work of the committee led to the development of a
V111-3. 9
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Master Trails Plan. The Trails Plan developed six new policy statements that specifically
address trails .
1 . Destinations — Develop trails that lead to or between specific points of interest or
attractions .
2 . Population Center Linkages/Mobility — Develop trails that provide access and mobility
to , from, or between population centers .
3 . Local Circulation — Develop trails to facilitate access and transportation within urban
areas or areas of intense rural development.
4 . Opportunities — Develop trails that are designed or located to take advantage of
existing or future opportunities.
5 . Off-Road Vehicle Trails — Develop trails that either lead to parks or sites that allow
ORVs; or trails that allow ORVs as an acceptable use . (Designating trails specifically
for ORVs to relieve the pressure on trails designated for bicycle or pedestrian traffic . )
b . Water Resources — Develop trails that utilize, promote, and provide access to fresh and
saltwater activities.
Transportation System Management/Transportation Demand Management
Strategies for efficient utilization of existing transportation systems are called transportation
demand management (TDM) strategies . These strategies do not involve new road
construction, but do reduce demand for new facilities . Specific strategies for future
improvements should include :
Park-an&Ride Service
Remote parking lots should be located at transit stops to allow those users beyond the normal
1/4 mile walking distance to drive to a transit stop .
VIII-3 , 10
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Shuttle Systems
Short-distance transit services should provide reduced auto dependence (i. e . , shuttle service
from places of employment to restaurants and shopping areas) .
Employment Transit Subsidies
Employers should subsidize their employees' use of transit by giving cash subsidies for purchase
of transit passes .
Ridesharing
Carpooling and vanpooling offer tremendous potential for improving utilization of existing
transportation facilities . Modest increases in ridesharing should produce measurable
improvements .
Alternative Work Hours
Promotion of staggered work hours should spread peak period demand. An example of this
concept should include flex-time, which gives employees personal choice to determine their
work hours.
Parking Management
This strategy should include limiting the supply and availability of parking, preferential parking
for carpools and vanpools, or reducing the amount of free parking provided to employees.
Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities
Provision of bicycle/pedestrian facilities should be based on the type of area served and related
travel needs for pedestrians and bicycles . The general types of travel by these users are
recreation, school, and commuting. As part of the transportation plan route, it is important to
designate pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Minimum needs to serve this type of traffic should
be based on adequate safety, and convenient service . Design and provisions of facilities should
implement the future transportation network system plan, bicycle plan, pedestrian plan, Master
Trails Plan, or other county plans as appropriate.
It is generally felt that all collector roads should have minimum areas for bicycle/pedestrian
lanes . Where appropriate, they should be separated from the road and serve the type of travel
warranted for the specific area.
Transit Service
VIII-3 . 12
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Mason County has a transit program underway that is providing service to the communities
and connections between the activities centers . Some of the key elements that need to be
considered in the transportation plan relating to transit service are :
® Ridership
® Service Areas
® Social Needs
® Cost of Service
® Special Areas
® Route Structure
The Mason County Transportation Authority is providing planning for the transit system. The
Mason County Transportation Plan will coordinate with this agency's work to ensure that the
two plans are compatible .
VIII-3. 13
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
II4 ROAD DESIGN STANDARDS
The adopted design standards for roads in Mason County have been developed to provide
cost-effective design that is consistent with the road users' driving expectations and meets the
public safety needs . The needs of motor vehicles, bicycling, and pedestrians are all elements of
the transportation system.
The application of design standards creates the basic geometric configuration of the roadway.
However, the philosophy of design establishes the character of the roadway by integrating
sensitivity to the terrain, environment, and visual appearance . Mason County's philosophy is to
design new or improved roadways in a manner that retains a natural and rural character
consistent with the prudent use of resources . The use of curvilinear horizontal and vertical
alignment can give a more interesting and changing visual effect while not sacrificing safety,
convenience, or economy. Retaining and restoring natural vegetation to the graded areas of
the roadway will enhance the visual appearance while minimizing erosion.
Principles of Design Standards
The design standards for Mason County roads incorporate :
• Local Agency Guidelina City and County Design Standards, Washington State,
November 2004
• A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, AASHTO, 2004
These standards cannot provide for all situations. Specific conditions may require deviations
from adopted standards, but must be done using professional judgment to obtain a design that
is justified and considers economic, environmental, and public welfare .
The design standards are intended to achieve the following principles :
• The roadway meets the needs of safe, economic, and convenient transportation for the
public .
• The roadway design shall be sensitive to the environment and rural character of Mason
County.
• The design will balance the life cycle costs of construction, maintenance, and resources .
VIII-4. 1
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005
Collector Road System
The Mason County collector road system design standards will conform to the guidance and
standards in the Local Agency Guidelines City and County Design Standards, Washington
State, November 2004 . The geometric standards of the roadway sections are shown in
TABLE VIII .44 . FIGURE VIII . 44 shows the definition of roadway section elements .
The County desires to retain and enhance the natural environment and rural character of the
collector road system. To accomplish this, special considerations are necessary for the design
and maintenance of the roadways .
New Construction
Road construction that involves new location, significant realignment, or major widening will
consider:
Natural terrain to minimize grading requirements for cuts and fills
• Retention of natural drainage courses, water bodies, and wetlands
• Retention and enhancement of natural vegetation
Maintenance
Roadway maintenance is to be accomplished to retain the areas adjacent to the roadway (clear
zone) , kept clear of fixed or non-traversable objects, and provide a surface that is safe for use
by errant vehicles. This area will be maintained with low-growing vegetation that serves as
erosion control as well as providing a natural appearance.
Low- Volume Local Access Roads
To maintain the rural character of Mason County's low-volume roads, the following principles
will apply:
• Paved roadway surface will be minimized to reduce drainage requirements and lower
maintenance costs .
• Disturbance or removal of vegetation and trees will be minimized.
• Disturbance of soil will be minimized to reduce potential scarring of hillsides and
erosion.
VIII-4. 2
0
� o
E A
N
p� +moo
e• µy O N M � .-� �--� �
� A H
O
Ma
^ ® O
a+
F jr, N O O O O d.
r w-q
?, O
O
N n
ti L .fl q
d �
Qj
C A cOC zs 'd
U
s O N k M O N
.fir Y
^a ti cd M
O N . 7:; O
O cu
_
7. as M .�-, .-+ '� O., s, �
O Oa � N cC
N
bAo
LL
U A O , �M
0 3
0 Y
CN v
Ntj
40i � N O
U Fn -fl N O N
C�j G
cf A. rn O
UE „ •;
Edi
U
V � d v0 f'-� O .� .--� � L" � F•a
rz
•� T . � O U ti.y Q
o W 3 p a�D c
O v ro O 0N
Ego �9
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005 Transportation
SHOULDERED
ROADWAY
RAV
ROAx WMik
�Hrrut �t� sHmiio�R
o
EaressIEraT sLop
�a
0"s iJ# i 4 EtD� Wt NlfiG St11 ilAi# iR t
OR UtHER SPAGiAL PurtPOSSES
FIGURE . 44 o Definition of Roadway Elements. Shoulder Roadway
(Does not include widening for guardrail or other special purposes)
Low- Volume Local Access Roads (continued)
® Roadways will provide access to property at a minimal disruption to the natural
environment.
® Where appropriate and safe, curvilinear alignments will be used .
These principles will apply on local access roads forecasted with less than 400 vehicles per day
traffic volume. Collisions on these roads are less than 50 percent of the average collision rate
for Mason County. The result of collisions is property damage only with limited injuries . A
non-continuous street will not exceed 700 feet in length without an adequate turn around.
Truck traffic will be limited to serving the local property owners only.
Private Road Section
The Uniform Fire Code specifies that there will be 20 feet of unobstructed access to any
building. A 2400t shoulder is required for a total roadway width of 24 feet. A 2 percent cross
slope must be provided to ensure removal of water from the roadway surface . Private fire
apparatus access standards are shown in Table VIII .4 .2 .
Geometries
The minimum design speed for determining horizontal and vertical curves and maximum
grades will be 25 mph. This may not be the posted speed, so warning signs must be integrated
into the design. Stopping sight distance will be designed for 30 mph to provide an
unobstructed view of the roadway for 200 feet in front of each vehicle . Passing sight distance
VIII-4. 4
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005 Transportation
and intersection sight distance will be controlled by appropriate signage and striping. No
bicycle or pedestrian facilities are required unless a part of the bicycle/pedestrian plan or near
school/commercial/industrial areas .
Clear Zone
Drainage facilities provided through borrow ditches will be a part of the clear zone . Utilities
and other obstructions (i. e . , culvert head walls) will be located on the outside of drainage
facilities as much as possible . Tree and vegetation removal will be mina ized except to remove
an obvious hazard/obstruction on the outside of a curve or to provide stopping sight distance
on the inside of a curve .
TABLE VIII. 4-2 ; Private Fire Apparatus Access Road Standards
Min Min. Curvature Structural * Cul-De-Sac
Dwelling Easement Roadway Max. * * * Sight Max Degree/ Capacity and
Units Width* * * Section Grade Distance Min Radius (Bridge) Turn Around
1 -2 30' 12' * * 14% 200' 90 Deg in 50' NONE NO* * * *
34 40' 20' 14% 200' 38 Deg/ 150' 1-1-20 YES
5-9 40' 20' 14% 200' 38 Deg/ 150' 1-1-20 YES
10-20 60' 20' 12% 200 ' 20 Deg/ 287' H-20 YES
21400 60' 26' (3 'shldrs) 12% 200' 20 Deg/ 287' H-20 YES
NOTE : A MINIMUM VERTICAL CLEARANCE OF 13 FEET 6 INCHES MUST BE MAINTAINED ON ALL ROADS
* HS-25 IF ACCESS IS NEEDED TO AREAS WHICH MAY PROVIDE HEAVY LOADS . Licenced Engineering Required.
* * SEETHE SECTION FOR DRIVEWAY STANDARDS ON PAGE 5.
* * * THE MAXIMUM GRADE OF 12% AND THE 60' EASEMENT MAY APPLY TO THOSE DEVELOPMENTS OF LESS THAN 10
DWELLING UNITS, IF THE POTENTIAL DENSITY SERVED BY THE ACCESS ROAD COULD EXCEED 10 DWELLING UNITS .
* * ** ENOUGH OPEN SPACE MUST BE PROVIDED TO ALLOW EMERGENCY VEHICLES ROOM TO TURN AROUND AT
THE END OF THE DRIVEWAY.
VIII-4. 5
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005 Transportation
II5 SYSTEM AGE ENT PLAN
The Mason County Transportation System Management Plan provides a process to control,
prioritize, and finance the transportation improvement program. FIGURE VIII . 5 - 1 graphically
shows the process for managing the County transportation system. The key elements are :
® Priority analysis
® Financial plan
® Transportation improvement plan
® Concurrency management system
This report provides an evaluation of the existing system and identifies deficiencies in pavement
and shoulder width, horizontal and vertical alignment, and safety. These deficiencies have been
prioritized into a six-year and twenty-year transportation improvement program (TIP) .
Priority Analysis
Transportation improvements are selected for construction by the County Commissioners
using the goals and policies, local knowledge, and an evaluation of physical and operational
criteria . The criteria include pavement width, shoulder width, alignment characteristics, and
safety. The evaluation of physical and operational criteria provides priority analysis . This is
coupled with the other selection considerations to develop the transportation improvement
program.
Mason County's Collectors were rated using the physical and operational criteria established in
Section VIIL l . The Collector and Arterials that are already included in the Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) are given the highest priority. That is, a roadway having the
highest total score was given the highest priority and roadways with lower scores were given
lower priority. The list of projects was subsequently divided into six-year improvement
programs (TIPS) based on current and future funding availability. The financial plan over the
20-year period is discussed in the next section.
VIII-5. 1
\ �
\
/
\ \
m . g _
m \ § � . g ± >
a) * 6 \ / ®
% § 0 R > \ § 02
06 / � � ( � /
E 3 = F � 2
q § k \ 02 m3 � § � m
3c � 4 Ez
LU5 / [ w
/
\
\
0 c � \
o g E
k � E 5 m E
tm o CL \ �
k
\
> £2 \/ M \ { f 7
< § � §
E CL a 2
LOP\ 52 E E
% / u 2
\ / n
ƒ //
\ � >
/ a)
R = §
� / \
G e U
\ �
R 2
\ M
/ E
/ w ® / m
± \ 7
S ac
\ / $ /
\ y
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005 Transportation
Financial Plan
Funding a transportation system involves incorporating the resources from county, state,
federal, and private sources . The blending of these resources is dependent upon the needs of
the jurisdiction, as well as the political philosophies of the responsible governmental units. The
following provides a discussion of funding resources.
County Funds
A county has the ability to utilize revenue from the following sources :
General Funds
Tax revenues that are not dedicated to specific use can be used by a county for the
transportation system.
County Road Fund — Portion of Property Tax
Property tax up to $2 . 07 per $ 1 , 000 assessed valuation can be used for roads in unincorporated
county areas . This funding source makes up almost half of the County' s road budget . A
portion of this budget, limited by RCW 36 . 33 .220, can be diverted to other sources for services
rendered to Public Works such as law enforcement for traffic and work site operation.
Fuel Tax
The county' s portion of the tax received from fuel sales is distributed by the state to the various
counties based on population and road mileage in accordance with a standard formula.
Vehicle License Fee
A vehicle license fee up to $ 15 can be applied by a county for general transportation. This is
subject to referendum. These fees are not currently used by Mason County.
Special Fuel Tax
Based on voter approval, a 10 percent fuel tax can be added for highway construction by a
county. This tax is not currently utilized by Mason County.
Transportation Benefit Districts
VIII-5. 3
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005 Transportation
A special taxing district can be formed for transportation purposes to issue voter-approved
general obligation bonds, revenue bonds, special property taxes , and Local Improvement
Districts (LIDS) . These districts can range in area from an entire region (special property
taxes) to a neighborhood LID .
,State and Federal Assistance
Transportation Equity Act for the 21" Century (TEA -21)
The Transportation Equity Act, 2005, updates and continues the TEA-21 passed in 1998 .
Funds are made available to the State of Washington and local agencies from federal revenue
sources .
The Transportation Equity Act, 1998, provides funds that are made available to the State of
Washington and local agencies from federal revenue sources . This program incorporates a
number of special programs such as bridge replacement, railroad/highway crossing, and hazard
elimination projects .
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA)
This Federal Transportation Act of 1990 was the predecessor TEA-21 and operated under the
same general guidelines. Mason County still has a few projects in the &Year TIP which were
funded under this program.
Federal Forest Funds
Based on the Federal forest lands within a county, funds are provided to construct and maintain
roads within these Federal areas .
Transportation Improvement Account (TM)
This is a State-funded program for local agencies to alleviate and prevent traffic congestion
caused by growth. This program has been established from revenue obtained from Washington
State's gas tax.
Urban Arterial Trust Account (DATA)
This is also a State-funded program for traffic improvements to alleviate congestion. It is
funded by Washington State's gas tax and allocated to communities based on priority
evaluation of needs .
Rural Arterial Program (RAP)
VIII-5. 4
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005 Transportation
This is a State4unded program for counties to improve rural collector roads .
County Arterial Preservation Program (CAPP)
This is a program with Washington State funding to counties to preserve existing paved county
Collector roads .
Community Economic Revitalization Board (CERB)
This program provides low4nterest loans and occasional grants to finance access roads for
specific sector development .
Public Works Trust Fund (PWTF)
This is a low-interest loan program for public works improvements.
Private Sources
Based on State and Federal legislation of The Growth Management Act, The State
Environmental Protection Act, and The National Environmental Protection Act, mitigation for
new development can be assessed based on the requirements to serve the traffic demand
generated by the new development .
Revenue Forecast
Mason County has used a wide range of funding sources for their transportation program.
Using this past history of funding and estimating how it may change in the future, a revenue
forecast has been prepared. TABLE VIII . 54 shows the analysis of future revenues . This
information was developed using the average revenue the County applied to the transportation
system in the past. This was then used to create a base year amount for each funding source.
The base year was then expanded using estimated percentage annual increases considering the
growth of the County, changes anticipated in funding sources, and economic conditions. It is
important to note that the revenues and construction costs have not been adjusted for inflation.
The changes are only the result of growth.
VIII-5. 5
0
0
0 0 0 0 69 0 0 d O 01 M
O1 O vl O in
r� v1 Ln d
N r�9 6s G9� E M Eoq
N
69
d O O O O O O N O N 00
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - O dt O
O O O U\ O Ln V'1 O a1 00
O0 vi vi 00 dt O N O
p Vl O kn Ln 00 1� O in
p - kn r� N N N 00 M
N p; rfs 644 s4 69 69 69 N
69
O O4) d
kn O O O fs9 O 69 10 O Vl [�
M O O D O Vl O N --
l� � O l� O 01 O O N
O �O In 6r? N N N -- 00 0
O 6s 61a 64 N 69 69
N 69 6e
M O O O O O O o0 O
N 0 0 0 0 0 0 �t 0 [� d
N 0 0 0 vl 0 0 ct O M vl
O Ln
p a1 O kr) Ln 69 -
p N 00
N 00 64 64 69 6FJ 64 N Ef}
69
kn
00 O O O O O O - O 00 r�
O N O t� kn kn to N
O kn fas N qtt
N 69 64 N bS 64 N
h 59
0
N
Z U
iU O O O O O O O O O O O
� w 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00
o 0 0 0 00 O V�) kn O rn
y vi N O to N O
m kn N 00 N to d O �o
N M N E.0 64 U4 rGS 6N9 � O �� N
tz r�
a
m �
� U
O
U a�ct+ c� U
U
o fl p cd d a gyp ,"
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005 Transportation
TranWortatfon Plan and Improvement Pro ram
A Transportation Plan for the 20-year period was developed for Mason County utilizing the
priority analysis and financial plan as previously discussed . The recommended plan for the
Collector road system is shown in FIGURE VIII . 5 -2 . Projects scheduled to be funded in the
next six years are listed in the 2006-2011 Transportation Improvement Program shown in
FIGURE VIII . 5 -2A. The revenue forecast indicates that adequate funds are available to fund
the projects contained in the next six year Transportation Improvement Program. TABLE
VIII . 5 -2A shows the list of projects over the 20-year period.
Concurrence Man yge ent System
The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) specifies that a transportation element
of a city or county comprehensive plan must incorporate a concurrency management system
(CMS) into their plan. A CMS is a policy designed to enable the city or county to determine
whether adequate public facilities are available to serve new developments . This process is
shown in FIGURE VIII . 5 -3 .
The transportation element section of the GMA defines the CMS as follows :
"Local jurisdictions must adopt and enforce ordinances which prohibit development
approval if the development causes the LOS on a transportation facility to decline below the
standard adopted in the transportation element of the comprehensive plan, unless
transportation improvements or strategies to accommodate the impacts of development are
made concurrent with the development. "
"Concurrent with development implies that public infrastructure improvements and
strategies that are required to service land development be in place, or financially planned for,
within six years of development use. "
VIII-5, 7
in
el It
Fill I, IF
I on IF If IF I
IF I a o„� onTea � m..:.+t -,�. r :,ZdU . fi
!`
If
f/
ILL /If
/ - . .IV
1IV If
ILL Ift, 1FjF
15C ILL ,IF 4
y I
Ll
r �� ` 10
V If
r VVV
> F, `
VV
i
1 r
t f�G j / L t �, L ojl j .
. .
t
x r �
ft . ; to 'r r ..
r 6Ifair
LLfVII
f 1 4 B _pass
IF
nV
LrIL
II
F
i . :
r - ; I ,
r #
Y'
j f
4 '
v / �
'- 1 t rVI- II.'\ n
/ j
�r t } ® rO f
r
4 I
i
x f ff ft
_ I fr
r
r 1 V1 �
ti r
_.._r
r f
IL
1 O
In I
If
IF
FLLIII-I
i i� t / I p - . ` II
f t . � l
f9 II-
II
If
LI
VL
t (y
j'F ' 1a a � A :1
( \ x / t k s
`1. ( L
VI
It
taw- - z Y T i ( r J r rz
I �'. � : ,.�✓ II IFIVA
�^``�f . i r is ,r "� ti 'rI''�
L II
F
...rr ,.._....... �` .3�
/ mi. 0 3 mi. 6 ml.
r F
E , . r' SCALE: 9 ' = 3 Miles
i { t
j
® Simmons Road Extension ® Ifarstine Bridge Road ^ Ifarstine Island Drive ® Ryan Road Connection
® Pickering Connection ® John's prairie Road - Mason Lake Road 9 0 Belfair Urban Growth Area
® Grapeview Loop Cutoff ® cReavey Road • Mason Lake Road i i Allyn Urban Growth Area
In I
ILI
ORasor Road North O Fredson Road connection NOTE: The numbers have no significance other than to show the
general location of the potential route.
Figure Vill ® 5w2
Mason County Transportation
Potential New Roads SKILLINGS
Nov 2005 CONNOLLY
U
r O O O N IOO (.O M (0 O N N O
O O _ _ M O O M OJ M O to N M N 05
CD
N (0 M N N I` co .-- W co N
C 00 0
} N N N 0 N V N f° O
POUM) �- r cV 0)
� N
O
LO 0) N Nt
O
w r �
d V N LOO
N O N O
U Nt N N N LO nj N
O
N
LO m NC:)
M
~ n N C)
LU V In N O (O N
LO
N O (0
00LO CD O O O O
O U co
N N N tOO (00
O
N
2 > LO O N V N
w I� r (0
CL LO N LOO CDO N ILO
M LO
0 O O O O N (O 0 O
oU VO N N N ONi (M LO m
N
IO 0) M dM' (nD N
d In LO O) O
N N m
h
C O O O O O co O
O U cy)O O O O (p N O 00
6V
` M r M M O N
V N M In
w o 0000 p
a M 1�
r
r
N
( OOO ON OIr) O O
p to O U M M
O O N
N Cl
o
M LO LO f� N u�
a
uj cot� O N t0 N N N r N Ion Ion
rn `� o In In o In o (on m ti rr M n
v V' In v, 6 ui In 07 W OR
w (D O O M (V M co �- Lo N (0 r
N 2
(ry E a O N O N O co
LO v O LO Nf (0 IN QJ 4 W4: CR Lo CD M W Lq
= m M O O (V O W) N V) (n
N
O C O N
(a G N CL (7 � N R
N .0 CV M N Y
G� C u G N E OC N o a R
Y c c c c l c E CO o N c o N U Y m
q h o U � � E � c °) (a gI�d � � o ° o � � � oocu
a`6iia � c (�oBS �
m U) (` (DmU) m � rzw � 2in0o � � m0U) x1- � m20� UMa
U `"
0
O O r t�2 V' IO (0 r� 00 0) Or� EN N M V' IO (O � N ONN N M � In (0 r 00 'W O M tO P� M O N N
n n
N N
O O O m M
O O lf) U� tL'7 u7 to Lo O N N
N N N N (N N N N N O) et
O
O LO d
r C6
w
L
O
a 0
O o
O O LO
N N N N N N o 00
N LO
LO LD
co n
O
M
O
p � O
00 N
V_ tF
co
co
O
00
M
CNO M
L
W
W
O 0
tO O
M
O
ti
coLO
r Vj
C ti
M �
M
N
N O
n
00 co
U� 00 M
O L6 1%:
co
N
M
�r
i
O L O
ti
W 9T M M 000 C6 N W co
N
? p
rCV) Q) O coO 00 � 0p
s rio p op vp o
3' w
O U � � F@ � Om � N � � ® � c
m @ m h
C G y N Y(� J L1J O J Z C'7 A C
w N N O e- .� `- O .O 7 'O F— LL9 C tp p
c LQ �aS PO o m o �i m v�i � � 0 U) 9xa� E Z, >> c�
Smh_ wzU) 0� U0 N w hW W m s
Eco
O M `. gU
U N CO4t O n Icola)
O fn d II
N N N N NNN N CM p b
°y wawa
+� N n o0 I 0 I 0 ® v v v
N N N N N N N N M ce) Z ".
0
0
i o
0 0
o
OLD
I
Er co O N M (D O co P� O _Lo M (D �P N O LO M O O
O MV
O l0 W m w r� M M c- N M O rY CO (D COM O n N I�,
U M r M <- M (O qY N N M CO (D (D r� M V M M M 00 O) 00 (D
N
a
_0) O m M
c) E a a a) tL ri a
E c 3 c a a od ou
3 � a a
o Q Z a .� 'C^: mo a a
a) ( ) a) a) a) a) a) L aEQ agmi a) 0 a a�i) -o�i) a�i) •° �i) �i) a a a co -0 a O o
m m m m
-
o �-- 08) a0)) 8) 9 o oQ) 9) 0) cD
c a 06 a a a a a a a a a a a a s a a a a
a) is cca a�'i cca cco cca c c c c c c cn u) c c C c c
E c m m m m m m c c m m m m m m
oc c c Z c c c c o c c c c c c o o c c > c c c C >
10) N .0) — rn rn 0) 0) U _) m 0) 0) 0) 0) U U rn 0) 06 0) C;) m 0) 06
aoi aroi `o ami aa)) am) ami a�'i ami ami ami am) am) 0 0 ami ami `o s aro) aa)) ami Lo
w _ Of SD� Of Of rY Z Of w rKoc� cj� 0� Z Z wcl� _ rl� w w w m
D
0
p m aUi
L m > a Q 70 >_
Y m to a 0
0 p J Y p O a) c h
�j a) _ a) L O i
a U m c m N a (0) m � V)) ti
0 0
0 NUpU m.'Ci rocca r s .vi co a •y3 .m> '� y L m U Ao Q io M W
U) a 0. 0 a
0a'
o m m cr
o Y
� �o m
o oo o �
Wff�`0)
00 o
o O m o m � X m om o o
Cl' � y1. r. r.
oc o ai a
L 00) W CO W o wZ > c Z U U c o 0 W p o
Z CD a) -j c Z U E E a .0o o� ofCO a U U) 00Z p U •� ( n Z ( ) 00
oo o -
�
N r2
N w
N
O O M E
N U') (O t0
?o � NMM m • 4Tc O N O c t0 ti CY) LO
(D 0�od � r r N
OD A NLO00 Gi
t[ O Nr w m m O O O (ri (6
a) (D ti M
d' I Z (O tri D) O 0i C. 5 Q (+) CV (OOL
p� O
ti L
E
rlu
� 0 m
(o <- (V L co
0 i
CL
wmo mN
QmmM
O (O a
Of aOU) a
O b -'
o O m m a O 00 O a a a a O
0 (�a m '�' L o a O CE O m a C� o m m Uq -mFQQN-, mm mi •'mc =cac U c L 3a) 3a>) aO) >mO >mO
LO
OL
sWo
IO cr 0CL Q.O aO o Oro o Co L>m+
Co
(If UQJ O Mm0)m ro
o m a) m e oa ro
L -0
—
co tl) dUo o a `ai U a 0. L
Q � N FD a) � Co O c M m o 0 N
CC m m m cLa$oi
(n Z U d Z U � Z W (n co Z � U U` m (L � W m m
0
0
i o
0 C)
IT- 0 0
69. Ln LD ,n
Y LO LO O O LO LO LO N O) N LO LO (h (,.) LO lf7 Lf') GO)Q) O CV M (C) (D �_ LO coo0 co_ N N co M O ( ) O (O (o LO O N <- M I� �t
0) O V (D 6) N Ln M O) LO M O V ty- (D O M qq' c- M M O (D O ct O
LO U O LO r r I� r r (D p) LO I� r- (D (D M LO O LO LO (D f� r
{ 70
N
3 L O L
C (aa) C
L L a) w � N LL a) _O O N 'O O
-O Q) 'a oZS Op L N C °g N O N 0 C
MIC:
Q MID d E co IL
(n Q O C p 0 'O 00 c ; � a �
@ C C @
� � -o c d D C06 c c c co c c cu Un c am L@@ c c M
N c 0 c c a) o 0 0 c N m a) a) 0 c 0 c a) 0 o 0 o 0 0 0
z -0 N E N N -o > a E N E E E E .2 0 E ( ) "0 -0 S E E a -o -o
a O 'O Q) a IdMMM,-O 7 7 a) .O a) N N N 7 'O 0 "o 7 7 C N C Ui 7 C� > > o °� o > >> > > > > o > > 0 0 0 > , o 0 0
@ @ @ > L �p � @ 7 @ @ @ @ .0 > @ L .IC t @ a ou ..0 L .0
c c � c 0- c c cn o a w a cn w (n Un Una _ cn CO co
0 E m C O C O 0) C O C C O) C C C C C O) C O) C C C C 0) C C C
O Q) a) a) N a) N a) a) a) a) N N a) a) a) a) a) N a)
(6 U (Q 'O @ 'O @ t6 '6 'C 'B 'O (a 'O "O 'O 'O (6 '6 @ "O a -O -O 'C .0 -O '6
>
_� U C)
@ 0) @ a) N a) U
cz
o rn E Nam: U h
g U o cu
0 0 0 0 0 u) c a) � ti
m a) MMO C p _O � � U a) c @
J o a o@ -0 co o �`p cca = U o m o Y aoi
Z m o@ a>'i o cn �- a0i m 0) 0 � � 1.
— e @ > @ � cso
V Q M5 0 W o .> > Y 0 > 0 S o 0 "J_. 0) Z
=) m a E Y Q o- 0) s �i w m o co _c 0 U ° o N o 0 0
o > p E a°'i � 0 0 0 0 0 c � c L U)
N O @ O E J @
�) 0 cn D U W a m I,MMMMp W (D w 0 E cn W Z t con o a`� 0 w
I.
m E o@ °� a) 0 E z o rn _ 0 z
LO .c c m o — a) o c o E E E c E@ o E E
,� v r cn o 0 U m S W w 2 m Ii o Un co rn c�v m LO
a m rC°i
Q m Q r Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q N LO O Q Q O O O Q O Q Q O N O
N
Y
U
_ E O
cq N
coa co (D O co tiO I (Oco
� A A r tO (0 r f�
o coM O 00 O co LO
t` co co I c- M N (O
r CC t ' r� ao (q CLV �uMJ r
°'IM oo ( o L mob NO co(oLn b Lb N r W O N 0N Lb O) M MOcjN Lj CA
cti � M O (5 O I� Lo L6 N r r N N N r CD N N V CD r 'cf (h r r 0) r
N
tn
z
N
C
I I r I
O IMo MID cu O
U p p @ @ p N I I I I N @ I I I I I
� Ig coI O O -6 Q' ' •O 'O -0 'O ' O 'O 'O 'O 'O 'O
o o Co f o �o �o �o M!or o -c o 0 0 0 0
IM
'� -le Cuo x Y c S o a f �- N M
a) o o w cnv a) o <n 0 0 I I
elf co 'Q Q V 0 �' •> O OMM"iO O O �' o .O Uma wo O O co O O 0 0
UE n n O @ is � E ® io cis co @ � @ p p io momm io is io io
o _ o > o U a 0 0 0 0 0 _ > 0 cco 0 0 0 0
co 'p @ o E N c a) @ o `� �i a) a) a) a) o 0) E a) a) a) a)
N L a) (0 @ L a) LM4,MA, L L L ..0 @ @ L L C .0 .0 S
m Q m U w Un I— Un m U U w Un (n Un Un U S Y FM,,- c Q CO S I— Un Un Un u)
\
� o
\ /
\ o < o o \ a 7 7 \
G 2 / 2 » 7 w 3 5
\ \
/ \ (
0 = }
\
\ \ \ \ \ \ \§
ƒ % ( / / / / /
ƒ \ \ \ \ k \ \ \
E
ca
70
/
\ \ 0
\ i �o CL
2\ ° 0
0 & c 2
\ E5 \ / \ \
% \ \ m \ r of 0 U \
= o I ± 7 m @ &
k 2 \ 0 2 2 \ \ /
10 0 » p o m «
t 0 E 3 0 W m R
4 9 \ f e f m o a
m0 \ � W 6
. 2 k / j» f S
y \ / � G 0 0 § a
& / \ \ \ / \ /
%
\
\ ? E #
o R /
= w o 2 2 > z 2 ±
\
\
[
$
\
/
` � #
/
a / m
( W � d = _ _ _ _
Q "0 _ < e Cc n n
_ 2 g t / / / � i
\ k k b / » » a » *
\ ± ± 2 I } } / /
\
\
/
\ §
\ §
7 \ ) Z
/ k )
° o ? e § S
2 \ @2 sC � §
L \ § §
/ 0 $ 2 / < E
/ / ko / / ~ ( � 2
v \ / 2
- - - - - 0 \ / / k \ §
cu
0.
§ E
U 3 0
= m \
sc )
§ EE \
R / \ \ a %
\ Lo /
\ ® / » .
- a2 4
� 2 \ $ §
\ » Cc
\
\ n \ < \
/ k �Lo
\
_
t
\ / L �
\ \ \ 2 a)a / $
z ca E D O : L 3
% ± )
\ < < . . . . .
' r ±
CO
\
R
\ 7 %
02 ƒ
a ƒ EBB
\ / Wk a / . $
e
\ y I . U \ /
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan — November 2005 Transportation
Principal Components
The concurrency management system (CMS) for Mason County includes the following
components .
® Identification and definition of facilities and services to be monitored .
® Establishment of LOS standards .
® Identification of when, in the development approval process, the concurrency test is
applied.
® Responsibilities of the applicant and Mason County defined for determining capacity.
Transportation Facilities to Meet Concurrency
The Collector road system (as defined in Section VIII . 3 ) that serves Mason County will be
monitored to determine impact of new development on the established LOS standards .
The County Collector system is anticipated to meet the traffic capacity standard of LOS C
through the 20-year planning period . The design standards for the Collector road system,
which related to the physical features of the road (i. e . , width of lanes, shoulders, etc.) , will be
addressed in the 20-year TIP . However, localized improvements may be required to ensure
safe traffic operations of the new development facilities.
The State Highway System is an integral part of the County's Collector road system and will be
monitored to determine conformance with the LOS standards established by the County.
Capacity and design standards will be applied to new development that impact the State
Highway System and localized improvements may be required as part of the development
approval. Although the State system generally will meet capacity standards, there are areas
that will not meet minimum design standards . The County will work closely with WSDOT to
encourage timely completion of needed highway improvements to bring the system up to the
County's designs standards .
Level of Service Standards
LOS standards apply to all new development projects that generate ten or more peak hour
vehicle trips during an average weekday on any segment of a Collector road or intersection. If
the proposed development generates less than ten vehicle trips per hour, minimum design
standards will be met as described below.
LOS will be determined based on the assumption that the existing Collector road system
improvements that are included in the County's current six-year TIP are in place . Existing
deficiencies that are corrected by the six-year TIP will not be considered a deficiency for the
VIII-5. 15
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan — November 2005 Transportation
new improvement .
Two LOS standards will be the basis of compliance with concurrency requirements : traffic
capacity and design standards.
Traffic Capacity
The Collector road system will meet the LOS C . Capacity LOS is defined in the 2000
Highway Capacity Manual and is based on peak hour traffic during the most critical or highest
volume times of the day.
Design Standards
The Collector road system will meet the geometric and road section standards for the Collector
classification defined in Section VIIIA—Road Design Standards . Water and sanitary sewer
services will be coordinated with other project requirements .
Minimum design standards for projects that generate more than twenty vehicle trips per hour
shall include :
1 . A minimum 2646ot-wide street section with sufficient traffic capacity to serve the
existing and project-generated traffic . The road will connect from the proposed development
to the closest fully constructed collector street .
2 . A paved pedestrian path that connects from the development to either an equivalent
path or sidewalk on the Collectors serving the development where appropriate .
Existing Deficiencies
As per the analysis in Section VIII . 1 , pg VIII1 . 18 , Mason County does not presently have any
existing LOS or traffic capacity deficiencies on the road system. Furthermore, only one road
segment in the County is expected to fall below LOS C, albeit just barely, for the preferred land
use alternative in the 20-year time frame . Suffice it to say that Mason County has very few
capacity concerns .
Growth has caused traffic volumes to increase to a point that several roads in the County have
fallen below the design standards (Section VIII . 4) needed to support those volumes. Some of
those roads are County Collectors and are scheduled for reconstruction in the six-year TIP .
These projects correct the many of the existing deficiencies on the system .
Growth Deficiencies
VIII-5. 16
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005 Transportation
Growth may cause some localized capacity concerns not anticipated in the transportation
model. Overall, the County road system will provide a LOS C or better for the next 20 years .
New development may be required to mitigate impacts to the system if the proposed project
will require a higher design standard to properly service the additional traffic .
Note : Mitigation will only be required if the affected road does not meet current standards .
Traffic Impact Fees and Development Review
Because of the absence of significant capacity concerns, the County sees no need for a traffic
impact fee system at the present time . It has been shown that the County can financially
support the needed improvements over the next 20 years.
The County may require a traffic analysis through the SEPA review process to determine
whether significant, localized impacts could be expected from a new development. Any need
for mitigation from the developer will be dealt with at that time (i. e . , access issues, impact to
design standard thresholds, etc.) . If it is found that a development will cause significant
impacts to the surrounding road system which cannot be mitigated, the development may be
denied .
Collector Road System Compliance
The Collector road system and project funding that has been prepared for the County
transportation system will provide facilities to meet capacity and design standards. The
transportation improvement program has been based on prioritization of the projects and will
be accomplished based on the anticipated financial resources. If development occurs that is
compatible with the improvement program, there may be localized development improvements
required to the collector system. At specific locations, the concentration of traffic by new
development may cause a need for road or intersection improvements to provide adequate
capacity or operational feature .
-+-H-f-Responsibilities ofApplicant
The project applicant will provide the following information for concurrency review :
VIII-5. 17
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan — November 2005 Transportation
1 . Traffic Impacts to be performed by a qualified Traffic Engineer.
2 . Recommended offsite traffic improvements .
3 . Development site traffic plan to include street sections, traffic control plan, and signing.
The traffic impact studies will be prepared in accordance with the County's adopted
requirements .
VIII-5. 18
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan - November 2005 Transportation
II 6 tS'T4TE TRANSPOR T4Tl NSYSTE
Table VIII . 6- I lists a brief inventory of the state highways located within Mason County. The
State Highway System Plan is a publication produced by WSDOT which provides a
comprehensive review of the state system and identifies specific deficiencies and summarizes
respective remedies. The State Highway System Plan establishes the LOS status of the state
highways in Mason County and the surrounding region. For highways of statewide
significance, the LOS thresholds are as follows :
Urban Areas : LOS "D"
Rural Areas : LOS "C"
Copies of this State Highway System Plan are available for distribution at :
Washington State Department of Transportation
Washington State Transportation Plan
P. O. Box 47370
Olympia, WA 98504-7370
360-705-7962
Mason County regularly coordinates with WSDOT, both directly and through active
participation with, the Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization (PRTPO) . It is
through these joint efforts that Mason County maintains consistency with the State and the
surrounding jurisdictions .
Route BMP EW From Location To Location Lanes L&ngth LOS
SR 101 314.63 331.74 Mason/Jeffemon County Line SR 119 Jafloodspoit 2 17. 11 B
SR 101 331.74 343.44 SR 119 Jeffloodsport SR 102 Jet/Dayton- Rd 2 11.70 C
SR 101 343.44 349. 16 SR 102 Jct/Dayton-Airport Rd SR 3 Jet 2 5.72 C
SR 101 349. 16 353.05 SR 3 Jct SR 108 JctJS Casino 4 3.89 B
SR 101 353.05 356.92 SR 108 kt/Squwdn Casino MasonfDaurston Co. Line 4 3.87 B
Total 42.29
SR3 0.00 1. 19 SR101/SR3Jct Shelton Ci Limits So. 2 1. 19 C
SR 3 1. 19 3.58 Shelton City Limits So. Shelton City Limits East 2 1 2.39 D
SR 3 23,26 24.91 SR 302 Jct in AUyn SR 106 Jct/Enter Belfair 2 1.65 D
SR 3 24.91 26.38 SR 106 Jct/Enter Belfair SR 300 Jct in Belfair 3 1.47 D
SR 3 26.38 28.20 SR 300 Jct Mason/Mtsap County Line 3 1.82 D
Total 28.20
SR 119 0.00 10.93 SR 101 Jet. in Hoodspott Staircase Rd 2 10.93 B
SR 106 0.00 20.09 SR 101 Jct SR 3 Jct 2 20.09 B
SR 102 0.00 2.86 SR 101 Jct D on rtRd 2 2. 86 B
SR 108 4. 18 1196 MasoMGrays Harbor Co. Line SR 101 Jct/Squaxin Casino 2 7.78 B
SR 302 0.00 5.01 SR 3 Jct in Aflyn Mason/Pien e County Line 2 5.01 B
SR 300 0.00 3.35 Belfair State Pads SR 3 Jct in Belfair 2 3.35 C
Grand Total 120.51
V111-6. 1
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan — November 2005 Transportation
New State Routes
e4(air Bypass Road
A bypass highway would be constructed to redirect SR 3 through-traffic around the
community of Belfair. The proposed alignment would begin on SR 3 at MP 23 . 70 near North
Mason High School and continue generally in the northeasterly direction until it connects with
SR 3 north of Belfair at approximately MP 28 . 00 near the Mason / Kitsap county line . The
new State Route is largely within the Belfair Urban Growth Area.
VIII-6. 2
„-
JI
NO
{ IJ L INIF /
�- in
ji
kkF
IN It IN INN
IN IN IfInk,lynt, Z ' N
IN
i
✓'
i.
r.
r j ?
IN
IF J
r IN IF
I IN INIt I
Ix In r 11
a .t Of
s TA '
% IN IN. /
If z �I Ink IN
�C It ' s -
y
((
00
% If
z
�.., �� IN In I
r IN
�I B Ifair
JN
k9 In iJe
In NC F, . _
Ifs'
r
( Inki ..
y r ;f IN
r.. on I IF
f T
Ink —s-- / ., ken 2
f IfINI
IN
IN
{;
J rid
Id
•,I a�=F � rj' J/ SIII
t
k /j
,11
Yf
kI
IN
Ntk
(� 7 , / I ;
1 ! 9v
i
f
J
}', t f
i \
i
:. — . .... .�,-- h
r
r t :Y y t`I V' L....� r f : + '
r �.._1_j j
3 x k F
Z
1 MT r l ; /
' . ! "• k
- 1 i tit < s
f {
}} '- ,�. - a f �J
% ?ii—
\ t"F / k ? +
1 _ -
J > F £ 9h tf 7 Ft j . T
i
t / � ,. i Ct 6._s
N -
3 mi. 0 3 ml. 6 mi,
,i i }„ / < t
/ N0,, w
t , s, SCALE: 9 ' = 3 Miles
... / { 1 �I NJ
IN
FN
. . 1 ...- . .. ......... _ _-__....._.
Belfair Bypass Connector —
Figure
Mason County Transportation
Belfair Bypass Connector SKILLINGS
Nov 2005 CONNOLLY
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan — November 2005 Transportation
VIR 7 TRANS TRANSPOR TATT N ELEMENT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPAC'T STAT'E ENT (E L So )
Discussion of Issues
The Washington State Growth Management Act of 1990 requires that all counties experiencing
growth and development meeting the criteria of the act adopt or update their comprehensive
land use plans to comply with the provisions of the Act. One requirement of the Act is for
counties to develop goals and policies in the form of a transportation element that is consistent
with the land use element of the comprehensive plan.
The transportation element consists of goals and policies aimed at providing a safe, cost-
effective, comfortable, and reliable transportation system. As required by the Growth
Management Act, it contains a concurrency policy, which prohibits development approval if
the development causes the LOS or safety on a transportation facility to be reduced below a
prescribed level, unless measures are implemented concurrent with construction to
accommodate or offset the impacts on that facility. Other policies contained in the
transportation element focus on finance, design, public and inter-governmental coordination,
and system management .
Plan Objectives
It is the intent of the proposed updated comprehensive plan to provide for transportation
facilities that meet the needs of Mason County residents for the next 20 years . The following
objectives form the framework of this :
• Provide adequate mobility for all people, goods, and services .
® Establish an effective transportation planning process in Mason County.
® Provide a safe, comfortable, and reliable transportation system.
• Ensure compatibility between transportation facilities and surrounding development.
® Minimize negative environmental impacts on the physical and social environments so as
to preserve the "rural character" of the area.
VIHI 7. 1
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan — November 2005 Transportation
Sinicant Impacts and Mitiga.tionMeasures
Geology, Soils, and Topography
Affected Environment
The construction of roads involves removing or adding material, compacting soils, and
spreading of asphalt or other impermeable surfaces . The transportation element has several
goals and policies, which may require the construction of new roads or widened existing ones.
The expansion of shoulders to accommodate bicycle lanes or pedestrian facilities will require
additional asphalt surfaces. The construction of new roads in urban growth areas may be
necessary to accommodate development . The construction of new facilities will be required to
achieve the prescribed LOS and eliminate safety problems where deficiencies exist. It is likely
that there will be environmental impacts associated with these structures .
Impacts
Grading for road construction changes topography and has a potential to divert or modify
stream and surface drainage patterns . Because roads are usually long and continuous, stream
flow diversion can be extensive . Modification of the natural streambeds can create unstable
conditions which may cause settlement or erosion. The removal of natural vegetation can also
change the stability of soil and topography. Other conditions can increase runoff with
associated impacts on the soils and geology in the area.
Mitigation Factors
Preservation and restoration of vegetation will mitigate erosion impacts and provide an
aesthetically pleasing experience for the motorists. Natural vegetation stabilizes soils, helps
retain water runoff from road surfaces, and prevents erosion of soils . Design of drainage
facilities that includes ditches and restored streambeds through the use of proper grades,
construction materials, and runoff control will minimize the impacts of construction.
During the construction of new or expanded facilities, it is necessary to protect exposed areas .
Siltation traps and water control techniques can retain soils during construction.
Protection of wildlife and watersheds requires that County roads be managed in accordance
with the WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual that incorporates the Department of Ecology's Best
Management Practices .
V111- T 2
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan — November 2005 Transportation
Air Quality
Affected Environment
The surface transportation system primarily affects emissions of carbon monoxide (CO) from
vehicles. Other pollutants generated by traffic include the ozone precursors, hydrocarbons, and
nitrate oxides . Fine particulate matter also is emitted in vehicle exhaust and generated by tire
action on pavement (or unpaved areas), but the amounts of particulate matter generated by
individual vehicles is small compared with other sources . Sulfur oxides and nitrogen dioxide
also are emitted by space heating and motor vehicles, but concentration of these pollutants are
generally not high except near large industrial facilities .
Impacts
The transportation element of the Mason County Comprehensive Plan will have minor impacts
on air quality in the area. Increased traffic flow will increase the pollutants in the air.
Construction activities can also create dust and related air pollutants .
Mitigation Measures
The transportation element introduces a variety of strategies aimed at reducing single.
occupancy vehicle use and promoting alternative modes of transportation. These strategies
will reduce the impacts on air quality. Traffic demand management strategies include
incentives for the use of alternative transportation modes and disincentives for the use of single-
occupancy vehicles . The construction of improved roads will provide more uniform traffic
flow with better pavement surfaces . This will improve the efficiency of the automobile, thus
reducing vehicle emissions .
Water Quality
Affected Environment
The transportation system collects, transports, and retains water that is the natural runoff. The
roadways may require changes in natural drainage courses and can change the rate of runoff.
The roadway is also a source of pollutants that can infiltrate the water source.
Impacts
The construction of new or rebuilt roads will result in increasing impervious surfaces which
may cause adverse impacts on surface water quantity and quality. The change ul runoff
characteristics can have an effect on groundwater due to potentially decreased recharge area
Vlll- 7. 3
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan — November 2005 Transportation
and diminished water quality. The compaction of soils and the introduction of other
impermeable surfaces reduces the soil's natural infiltration capabilities and can increase
contamination of lower lying soils . Surfaces that formerly were able to absorb and moderate
surface water runoff are replaced by non-absorbing surfaces that shed water . The paved
surface also is a source of non-point pollution, exhaust, oil, transmission fluid, and radiator
fluid from automobiles . The runoff washes these pollutants into ditches and eventually into the
lower lying soils, rendering them of less quality. Loss of riparian vegetation due to pollution
can increase the problem of erosion adjacent to the roadway.
Mitigation Measures
The construction of detention ponds, biofilters, settling ponds, and erosion protection will be
used in design and construction of new roadways to protect surface water quality.
Maintenance practices by the County will incorporate the same methods of water quality
protection and enhancement .
Vegetation and Wildlife
Affected Environment
Much of the County road system is bordered by natural vegetation and wildlife habitat. Stream
corridors, shorelines, and wetlands are sensitive areas that can be affected by the construction
of new or expanded roadways .
Impacts
The construction of new roadways or widening of existing County roads reduces the wildlife
habitat and removes natural vegetation. Increasing the number of vehicles on the County roads
will increase the exposure of animals to auto -related collisions, threatening not only the animals
but the motorist. Greenbelts located in proximity to open areas—like clearcuts—provide deer
and other animals with shelter and food. The preservation of roadside vegetation creates a
buffer for the enhancement of scenic roads that may increase the number of animals exposed
traffic .
Mitigation Measures
The environmental policy of the transportation element is aimed at natural vegetation and
wildlife protection . Avoidance of wildlife habitat, stream corridors, wetlands , and shorelines
will retain wildlife habitat and reduce impact on natural vegetation . Technologies are currently
being developed to deter large animals such as deer and elk from entering a road corridor. Use
of these types of measures could be implemented in wildlife corridors which come in contact
VIII- T 4
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan — November 2005 Transportation
with major roadways . Public awareness beyond the usual deer crossing sign can help inform
the public of the hazards of automobile and animal collisions.
Energy and Natural Resources
Affected Environment
The transportation system creates demands on energy and natural resources . The powering of
vehicles requires energy and the roadways require space that affect natural resource areas such
as timberlands and agricultural areas .
Impacts
The primary impact of the transportation system on the energy and natural resources is the
consumption of energy resources and consuming area for transportation facilities .
Mitigation Measures
The primary measures included in the transportation element of the proposed Mason County
Comprehensive Plan would be the goals and policies which offer alternative modes of
transportation and strategies which will reduce single-occupancy vehicles. Additionally,
consideration of construction methods that minimize space requirements and impacts on
natural areas will reduce the effects of the transportation system on energy and natural
resources .
Land Use
Affected Environment
The relationship between a transportation system and land use is based on mobility and access.
Land use creates the transportation demand and the road system serves to provide circulation
between the land use elements .
Impacts
The transportation plan has been coordinated with the Mason County Comprehensive Plan
and is consistent with the growth patterns and policies set forth by the County. On a local
level, the timing of land use changes and the mix and density of land uses could be affected to
some degree by the transportation system. However, it is assumed that community plans and
area zoning would continue to exercise primary control over the location, mix, and densities
and land uses . Land uses adjacent to the road network would be directly affected where right-
VIII- 7. 5
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan — November 2005 Transportation
of-way acquisition displaces or encroaches on existing uses .
Mitigation Measures
Interlocal agreements can be used to coordinate actions on transportation issues . As
community plans are prepared and updated, their visions will be coordinated with the
transportation planning efforts of the County. The Mason County transportation element will
be reviewed and updated regularly to respond to land use planning changes. Consistency and
compatibility of the transportation and land use elements of the comprehensive plan will require
continual review by the County. The County will also conform to the requirements of the State
of Washington Growth Management Act which specifies that the transportation element will be
compatible with the land use element.
Some impacts will be unavoidable . Land will be consumed as more right-of--way is needed for
new construction and major widening projects . Some existing land uses will be displaced .
Developers may be required to assist the county in the provision of additional transportation
facilities needed to serve new developments in proportion to the impacts and needs generated
by their projects . This may make the cost of developing land more expensive than if no
Mitigation were required.
Land Use Alternatives
Four land use alternatives, described in the Rural Element, were analyzed to determine their
respective traffic impacts on the transportation system in Mason County. Increased population
in any of these four alternatives will result in increased traffic and demand for transportation
system improvements. The impacts associated with these improvements are discussed above.
The degree to which a project impacts the surrounding environment will vary depending on the
specific conditions associated with that project.
The impacts to the transportation system associated with congestion (a result of growth) were
also studied. This analysis was performed using a transportation model (TMODEL2) . The
traffic forecast for the 20 year projection for each land use alternative was calculated by the
model and discussed in Section VIII . 1 - 17 . Anticipated employment and housing factors were
used to update the traffic analysis zones in the traffic model. The following is a summary of the
results for the 20 year growth forecast :
® The findings show that there is no significant difference in the amount of traffic loaded
onto the road network by any of the four land use alternatives . This implies that
impacts associated with overall road usage will be relatively the same in each land use
alternative.
VIII- 7. 6
Mason County Draft Comprehensive Plan — November 2005 Transportation
® Traffic in the County will essentially double over the neat 20 years .
® All county roads should continue to operate at a LOS C or better. A few roads may
fall to an LOS D if a localized spike in the growth rate occurs in an area which
concentrates traffic to a single road .
® Mason County roads are generally safe for drivers who are reasonably attentive to
driving, obeying the laws, rules of the road, and the signing . Impacts associated with
perceived safety deficiencies will necessitate improvements to the road network. The
need for these safety improvements primarily exists on roads built before modern day
design standards were put into practice . As these improvements are made over the
next 20 years, collision rates may decrease.
VIII- 7. 7
Pkk.,p PROPOSED ADDENDUM L
PROPOSE ® CHANGE
Policy 1 , Public Participation Policy :
a) This transportation element was developed with the assistance of the Growth
Management Advisory Committee, established specifically to help prepare the
Comprehensive Plan. Mason County will continue to use a similar committee to advise
and periodically update the plan. Public participation in transportation planning is
encouraged through open workshops and public hearings . Citizen groups can also
provide valuable insight during the planning phase of road projects .
Be revised to read :
a) This transportation element was developed with the assistanee of the &ewth NlanagemepA Advise
CoRffnittee9 established speeifieally te. help prepare the Compfehensive Plan . Masen GeufAy wiI4
plan. Public participation in
transportation planning is encouraged through open workshops and public hearings . Citizen groups
can also provide valuable insight during the planning phase of road projects .
Mason County Comprehensive flan — � 45 Update health and Human Services Element
raft — As recommendedi visCommission
Chapter x1i
ELEMENT
XII4 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this section is to describe goals and strategies that promote a healthy living
environment for the betterment of the community. A healthy community environment is
influenced by many factors . Research focusing upon the interaction between health and the
environment shows that health is not only affected by the direct pathological impacts of various
chemical, physical, and biological agents, but also is strongly influenced by factors on broader
physical and social environments . These include ; urban development and transportation, safe
housing, and opportunities for recreation.
XUI 2 ASSESSMENT
Mason County has one incorporated city (Shelton) , and two Urban Growth Areas (Allyn and
Belfair), with most of the county population located in the extensive rural areas . Seniors and
retirees choose to live in Mason County due to its proximity to. large population centers and the
relative affordability of local housing.
• A majority of Mason County residents live in unincorporated parts of the county
(83 % ) as compared to 17% in the incorporated area (Shelton) .
• Mason County has a larger percent (16. 7%) of the population that is 65 years of age
or older compared to Washington State (11 .3 % )
• Washington ' s Office of Financial Management is forecasting the percentage of
population 65 years of age and older in Mason County will increase to 27.9 % by
2025 .
Mason County fares poorly in the death rates (age-adjusted* ) from selected diseases when
compared to the rest of Washington .
• Death from diseases of the heart : Mason County rate of 2 .23/ 1 , 000 people compared
to state rate of 1 .90/ 1 , 000
• Death from major Cardiovascular Disease : Mason County rate of 2 . 97/ 1 , 000 people
compared to state rate of 2 . 73/ 1 , 000 ,
Page XII . 1
Mason County Comprehensive Plan - 2005 Update Health and Human Services Element
• Death from Influenza & Pneumonia: Mason County rate of 25 . 7/ 1 , 000 people
compared to state rate of 18 . 5/ 1 , 000 .
• Death from Chronic Lower Respiratory : Mason County rate of 58 . 2/ 1 , 000 people
compared to state rate of 46. 2/ 1 , 000 .
• Death from Chronic Liver Disease : Mason County rate of 17. 0/ 1 , 000 people
compared to state rate of 9 . 2/ 1 , 000 .
* age-adjusted rate; rate per 1 ,000 age-adjusted to US 2000 population.
Mason County also fairs poorly in terms of death rates for all adults, and life expectancy when
compared to the other 38 Washington counties :
• Among all adults over 18 years of age, Mason County has the loth highest death rate
in the state, with an age- adjusted rate of 1 ,324/100,000 people as compared to the
state average of 985/100, 000 people .
• Mason County has the 3rd highest premature adult death rate in the state .
• Mason County children born in 2001 have a life expectancy of 76 years compared to
78 years for state . This is the 51h lowest life expectancy rate in the state.
Mason County motor vehicle death and non-fatal hospitalization rates are high compared to state
figures :
• Mason County' s motor vehicle death rate is 23 . 5/1 ,000 people compared to sate rate
of 12.5/1 ,000 .
• Mason County' s motor vehicle accidents non-fatal Hospitalizations rate is 88 .2/1 ,000
compared to state rate of 47. 6/1 ,000 .
Research shows that the health of a community is not exclusively determined the quality of the
health care system; social determinants of health have been identified as most influential
indicators of health. Social determinants of health are associated with income, education levels ,
and other social factors . On many of the social determinants of health factors, Mason County
does not compare favorable to the state average .
• Mason County has the I lth lowest per capita income among Washington counties ,
with an average of $24, 689 compared to a state average of $33 ,254 . (2003 )
• The percentage of family households living under the poverty level in Mason County
is 15 % compared to state average of 11 % . ( 1999)
• For Mason County family households with young children; 23 % are living under the
poverty level , compared to a state average of 1 % ( 1999)
Page XII . 2
Mason County Comprehensive flan — Gy05 Update Health and unman Services Element
There have been significant changes in family structure as well . Between 1990-2000 , the number
of children living with "other relatives" grew at a faster rate within the county (99 % increase)
compared to state (56 % increase) . In 2000 , over 12 % of Mason County children under the age
of 17 years were living in a household that did not include either biological parent, compared to
the state average of 8 % . Additionally :
• The birth rate of unmarried mothers in Mason County is significantly higher than
statewide, 41 . 3 % to 28 . 0 % respectively (5 -year rate 1997 -2001 ) .
• Mason County' s rate for children served by Children with Special Health Care Needs
Program is nearly double the state rate, 10 .2/1 ,000 children compared to 6. 0/1 ,000
(2004) .
• The number of accepted child abuse and neglect cases rates is greater in Mason
county, 52 .7/1 ,000 children, than the state rate of 36. 5/1 ,000 (2004)
Although Mason County compares well to the state in percent of adult with some college
education, the county does not compare favorable with regard to the percent of adults with a BA
degree or higher;
• 16 % of Mason County residents have a BA degree or higher, compared to the state
average of 28 % . (2000)
• Nearly 17 % of Mason County residents over the age of 25 have not completed high
school or it ' s equivalency, compared to a state average of 13 % . (2000)
In 2005 , the National Association of Counties (NACO) through funding by the Federal Office of
Rural Health Policy, completed a survey of Mason County residents to learn public opinion and
useful information regarding Mason County' s health care system. The survey revealed that over
25 % of Mason County residents felt there are not enough doctors in Mason County. This affirms
the findings of the US Department of Health and Human Services, which has consistently
designated Mason County as a Health Professional Shortage Area (HPSA) for primary care
providers , dental care providers and mental health care providers . This survey additionally
revealed that :
• In the past 18 months , at least one member of over 64 % of Mason County households
has been to a specialist.
• Nearly 75 % of the patients treated by a specialist cited a referral or health coverage
as the reason for selecting this specialist .
Other factors related to life style behaviors (such as physical activity) can be directly influenced
by the. communities we live in and contribute to the overall health of the community:
Page XII . 3
Mason County Comprehensive Plan - 205 Update Health and Human Services Element
Mason County residents are more reliant of their private vehicles compared to the
state : 91 % of Mason County residents use private vehicle to travel to work compared
to 86 %® statewide .
Only 2 %® walk or bike to work, compared to state average of % .
Only 1 % use public transportation, compared to state average of 5 % .
• 42 % of Mason County work force worked outside the county.
• 32 % have commutes that are between 30- 59 minutes one-way, while 13 % travel an
hour or more to get to work.
These commuting patterns are not unexpected in a rural community, but can be contributing
factors in lowering the percentage of citizens exercising routinely.
XUI 3 ANALYSIS
As a rural community, populations are dispersed and services are limited in many communities .
As a result, most county residents are highly dependent upon the automobile as the primary
means to access goods and services . This can limit opportunities for walking or bicycling as a
means for exercise . The county could offset this through the development of public trails to
promote walking or bicycling, and improving the quality and accessibility of county recreational
facilities . The county could also increase efforts to inform the citizenry of the many
opportunities for exercise and relaxation within Mason County provided by the numerous
County and State Parks , and Olympic National Park.
Within the more densely populated urban growth areas, alternative modes of transportation are
encouraged. However, much of the supporting infrastructure is not yet in place. The County
has plans to develop a Master Parks Plan in 2006, and should integrate this plan with the XXX
parks and public trails called for within the various sub-area plans of the urban growth areas .
This would further support the development of walking or biking trails within the urban growth
areas , and improve access to the many recreational facilities within Mason County.
Access to local, affordable, quality health care is important to promote community health.
However, as in other rural communities, patients regularly travel out of the area to receive
medical services and treatment. Primary reasons for this include : ( 1 ) the limited number of
health care providers located in Mason County; (2) recent migrants to the county choose to retain
the services of providers they are already familiar with, (3 ) local providers are not affiliated with
the group insurance plans provided by local employers , and : (4) Northeast Mason County
residents (Allyn and Belfair) are closer to emergency and urgent care providers located in Kitsap
County than Mason General Hospital . Local access to medical services likely result in a greater
number or residents taking advantage of these services, thus improving community health.
Improving local access to medical services will be more critical as the proportion of residents
over 65 years of age increases , and would support economic development objectives regarding
expansion of the health care sector. results of the NACO survey should be utilized in the
Page XII .4
Mason County Comprehensive Plan — 2005 glndate Health and Human Services Element
preparation of refined goals , policies , and strategies that address community needs and improve
health care services within Mason County. This could include identifying and developing
strategies specifically crafted to :
Identify gaps in the health care service and delivery system in Mason County, such as
the shortage of primary care providers , and identify strategies to addresses these gaps ,
Promote and support programs and services that meet the specific health and social
needs of the range of households within Mason County,
• Study the feasibilty of establishing a Medical Savings Account Plan for Mason
County citizens, and;
Establish a Federal Qualified Health Clinic (FQHC) in Mason County.
County, regional and state social programs also influence the health of families and the
community. Social programs can offer a range of services , including suppling food to needy
families , subsidized child care, and providing leaning aids for developmently disabled childern,
to name a few . These programs respond to families and individuals in crisis ; but by providing
various means of support can have a profound, positive affect on the entire community. Mason
County should strive to promote a community where people can balance work, family, friends
and community involvement. This can be achieved in part by promoting and supporting a
system of practical, functional, and accessible social programs .
It is particularly important that local groundwater and critical aquifer recharge areas are
protected in Mason County, as private and small community wells are the source of drinking
water for most Mason County residents . A number of policies and programs that help protect
critical aquifer recharge areas and assist in the management of watershed areas are already in
place and carried out at a local and state level . Group A (public water supply wells) and Group
B (smaller public water supply wells) systems are required to perfom periodic testing to verify
delivered water meets accepted quality thresholds; however, once installed there is no
requirement for periodic testing of private wells . Additionaly, Group A and B wells are typically
deeper than private wells, making these community wells less suscepible to contamination than
the more shallow private wells . Thus, by encouraging community water supply systems, the
County would increase the liklihood of residents having access to reliable, clean drinking water.
Mason County may wish to consider crafting supplemental polices that would increase the
quality and reliability of the water supply system by promoting community wells to reduce the
need for less regulated new private wells, and reevaluating countywide storm water management
policies as increased development occurs in the urban growth areas .
XII4 GOALS AND POLICIES
General County-wide Planninz Goals and Policies :
Goal 1 :
Mason County shall promote and support local and regional health care planning, and ensure
health care planning focuses on the primary local health care needs .
Page XII . 5
Mason County Comprehensive Flan - 2005 Update Health and Human Services Element
Policies :
1 . 1 : Mason County will improve public and private sector participation in health and
human service planning and implementation activities .
1 . 2 Mason County shall periodically conduct an update to the community health
assessment.
[Refer to XII. 5 A . for implementation strategies and objectives . ]
Goal 2 :
Mason County shall support policies and practices that promote safer drinking water.
[Refer to XII. 5 B . for implementation strategies and objectives . ]
Goal 3 :
Mason County shall promote and support policies and programs that improve local access to
public trails and recreational facilities .
Policies :
3 . 1 : Mason County will advocate for new road development and road upgrades that will
accommodate safe bike/pedestrian pathways .
3 . 2 : Mason County will work with Washington Department of Transportation during the
planning of highway upgrades to build safe bike/pedestrian pathways in desired locations .
3 . 3 : Mason County will support policies that advocate alternative (non-automobile)
access to community amenities .
3 . 4 : Mason County shall evaluate and improve methods advising residents of the
abundant county, state, and federal recreational facilities within Mason County.
[Refer to XII . 5 C . for implementation strategies and objectives . ]
XII-5 IMPLEMENTATION STRATIGIES AND OBJECTIVES
Strate,-ies and Obiectives to promote a healthier living environment:
A. Mason County shall develop an action plan to determine which human and health-related
planning processes/efforts will benefit from County participation and input, and will ensure
that the County is appropriately represented in these planning activities . Methods and
objectives would include :
Page XII. 6
Mason County Comprehensive Plan — 2005 Update Health and Human Services Element
1 . To work with the community to identify gaps in health care service and delivery
system, and identify strategies to addresses these gaps .
2 . To identify on- going planning processes , identify the lead agency, and evaluate the
role of County representation in the planning process .
3 . To consider establishing a Community Health Care Task Force to address health care
issues .
4 . To complete an inventory of county staff involvement in on-going health and human
service planning activities .
5 . To identify the most appropriate stakeholders to represent the county, and ensure that
that representative has the needed information/data to properly advocate for the
community, as a whole.
6 . Mason County will use its political capital to encourage absent stakeholders and
critical partners to participate in county-wide planning activities to achieve healthier
lifestyles .
B . Evaluate existing programs and policies regulating lands within critical aquifer recharge areas,
consider establishing policies and programs encouraging community water supply systems,
and consider updating countywide storm water management policies . Considerations would
include :
1 . Reducing the number of new private wells within the urban growth areas by promoting
the development of infrastructure (drinking water, sewer, transportation) that is
necessary to support the development of high-density housing in designated areas .
2 . Exploring strategies (policies, incentives, and/or practices) that encourage multiple-
party wells .
3 . Exploring strategies (policies, incentives, and /or practices) that encourage multiple-
party on- site treatment systems or community sewer systems .
4 . Consider periodic updates to the countywide storm water management policies and
programs that address potential negative effects of increased urban style development .
C . Support implementation of the Public Trails Policies and establishment of a network of
pedestrian and bicycle paths within Mason County. Components may include :
1 . Supporting and promoting pedestrian-oriented development that provides access to
community amenities (like shopping, social/health service facilities, places of
worship , schools , and recreational facilities) within designated portions of the urban
growth areas .
Page XII . 7
Mas®n County Comprehensive flan — i005 URdate Health and Herman Services Element
2 . Carefully consider the need and anticipated usage of trails when prioritizing county-
funded trails projects .
3 . Consider establishing unimproved trails (i . e . gravel or decomposed granite) and
evaluating usage over a period of time prior to committing funds for paving or
constructing other trail improvements .
Page XII . 8
Draft - November 15 , 2 O ,
It I
Chapter V
HOUSING
elationsie to the Growth Management Act
The Growth Management Act requires that comprehensive plans include a housing
element . This requirement grew out of concerns over affordability, availability , and
housing condition . The public also identified environmental regulations and the
infrastructure financing demands imposed by GMA as potentially having negative
impacts on housing . As a result , GMA set the following as a statewide goal for housing .
"Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic
segments of the population of this state, promote a variety of
residential densities and housing types, and encourage preservation of
existing housing stock . "
GMA also requires that housing elements recognize the "vitality and character of
established residential neighborhoods . Further, housing elements must :
1 . include an inventory and analysis of existing and projected housing needs ;
2 . include a statement of goals , policies , and objectives for the preservation ,
improvement , and development of housing ;
3 . identify sufficient land for housing, including , but not limited to , government
assisted housing, housing for low- income families , manufactured housing ,
multifamily housing , group homes , and foster care facilities ; and
4 . make adequate provision for existing and projected needs of economic
segments of the community .
Housing Policies
GMA requires Counties planning under GMA , and the cities within them , to jointly
prepare countywide planning policies to guide development of their comprehensive
plans . The following policies are excerpts from Mason County's Countywide Planning
Policies . They represent policies that both Mason County and the City of Shelton will
use to prepare the Housing Elements of their respective Plans .
6 . 1 Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of
the population , promote a variety of residential densities and housing types ,
and encourage preservation of existing housing stock .
3V- 1 , i
Draft - November 15 , 2005
6 . 2 Define and establish the need for affordable housing through development of
a Housing Plan .
6 . 3 Encourage affordable housing through innovative land use techniques such as
clustering , planned unit development , infill housing incentives , density
bonuses , etc .
6 . 4 The housing and land use elements of the Comprehensive Plans for Mason
County and its Urban Growth Areas will include an assessment of land
availability and general criteria for siting special purpose housing within the
Urban Growth Areas to ensure that such housing can be accommodated .
6 . 5 Within the Urban Growth Areas , a wide range of housing types , densities , and
mixtures will be encouraged .
6 . 6 As part of a comprehensive program to address the affordability issue ,
examine current local regulations and policies for impacts on housing cost .
Prior to adoption of any new ordinance or regulation affecting home building ,
evaluate the impact on the provision of affordable housing options .
6 . 7 To avoid tightening of the urban land supply and rising housing cost , Growth
area boundaries may be drawn to accommodate a county-wide population
greater than Office of Financial Management ( OFM ) projections . It is
recognized that growth will occur outside of Growth Areas .
6 . 8 Affordable housing should be convenient to public transportation , major
employment centers , and public services .
6 . 9 Affordable housing needs will be examined in both city and rural contexts .
Strategies to address housing affordability will reflect local definitions of
affordable housing , urban and rural values , cost and availability of land ,
infrastructure cost , private property rights , and broad - based citizen
involvement .
V- 1 . 2
Draft - November 15 , 200 :Y
Mason County Land Use Policies
The Mason County Land Use Policies in Chapter III , Section 8 , contain a number of
policies that are related to housing and are intended to implement housing goals and
address housing needs . These include ,
• Encouraging a range of lot sizes , development densities and housing types to meet
the needs of a diverse population and provide affordable housing choices for all
income levels .
• Establishing an Urban Growth Area large enough to minimize restrictions on the
residential land supply that would limit access to affordable housing for numerous
economic segments of the County ' s residents .
• Providing for clustering , planned unit developments , and other innovative
techniques which will result in a greater variety of lot sizes and housing types .
• Providing for a new fully contained community, which is required to provide for
variety of housing options for households with different incomes .
V- 1 . 3
Draft ® November 15 , 200t)
SEPAIGMA COMPLIANCE
Overview
The Mason County comprehensive plan was prepared using an integrated process for
complying with the requirements of the Growth Management Act and the State
Environmental Policy Act . TABLE V . 2 - 1 , GMA / SEPA Housing Requirements, identifies
the elements addressed in this Housing chapter that satisfy requirements for collection
of data , analysis of consistency and impacts , and mitigation in both GMA and SEPA .
Under the SEPA / GMA integrated strategy , the analysis of these elements will focus on
the requirements of GMA as the means to achieve compliance with both GMA and SEPA .
TABLE Vo2 = 1 GMA/SEPA Housing Requirements
Element / Requirement GMA SEPA
(WAC 365 - 195 ) (WAC 197- 11 )
Inventories 310 ( 1 ) , ( 2 ) 440 ( 6 ) ( e )
Forecast 310 ( 1 ) 2 (2 ) 444 ( 2 ) ( b )
RCW 36 . 70A . 070 (2 )
Analysis 310 ( 1 ) 7 (2) 440 ( 6 ) (e )
RCW 36 . 70A . 070 ( 2 ) 444 ( 2 ) ( b )
Strategies 310 ( 1 ) , (2 ) 440 ( 6 ) (e )
RCW 36 . 70A. 070 (2 ) 444 ( 2 ) ( b )
V-2 . 1
Draft - November 15 , 206
EXISTING /
Overview
Mason County uses four sets of housing data to address housing issues within the
County . They include population , affordability , housing type , and housing condition .
Together, these data create a picture of existing conditions of housing within Mason
County and the County ' s future housing needs .
® Population addresses the existing and forecast population of Mason County by
watershed and the demand that the forecast population creates for housing
countywide and within each watershed .
® Affordability analyzes the cost to rent or purchase housing in relationship to
household income .
® Housing Type identifies the kind of housing available throughout the County . It
describes housing in terms of single family, multifamily , manufactured homes , and
group quarters .
® Housing Condition describes the quality of Mason County ' s housing stock . In 2002 ,
a housing survey was conducted by a group of college students as part of a Housing
Needs Assessment report prepared by Common Ground . The students used five
categories to evaluate the condition of the housing stock . They included Category
1 - Sound , Category 2 - Good / Basically Sound , Category 3 - Needing
Maintenance / Repair, Category 4 - Deteriorated , and Category 5 -
Dilapidated / Uninhabitable .
Population
Mason County relies on population data provided by the U . S . Bureau of the Census and
Washington States Office of Financial Management . The Washington State Office of
Financial Management prepares the population forecasts .
Mason County's population reached 49 , 405 full time residents in 2000 according to the
U . S . Census Bureau . This reflects an increase of more than 18 , 200 since 1980 . Only
17% of this growth , however , occurred in the City of Shelton , with the majority being
in the unincorporated areas of the County . Further , Mason County grew at a much
greater rate ( 31 . 7% ) that the state of Washington ( 21 . 1 % ) as a whole . A recent housing
study ' shows the geographical location of population and households in Mason County
for 2000 . According to this study, the highest concentrations of population are in the
Shelton and along the Hood Canal and inland waterways . Population increases over the
last decade can be attributed mostly to net migration . The Washington State Office of
Financial Management ( OFM ) reports that 93 . 3 % of the total population increase
1 Mason County and City of Shelton Housing Needs Assessment , April 29 , 2004
V- 3 . 2
Draft - November 15 , 20U.
between 1990 and 2000 was the result of people moving into the area . The OFM
further projects that county ' s population will increase to 75 , 088 by 2025 , which is an
approximate increase of 28 . 4% over the next two decades . In accordance with GMA ,
Mason County has considered three different forecast growth rate scenarios through
2025 , the County ' s 20 - year planning horizon . The County has selected the
intermediate growth scenario for planning purposes , and anticipates that an additional
25 , 683 people will reside within Mason County by 2025 .
Lor abHitta
Federal and state governments define housing as being affordable when the occupants
are spending 30% or less of their gross household income on housing costs . For rental
housing , housing costs include rent and utilities . For owner- occupied housing , housing
costs include mortgage principal and interest , property taxes , property insurance , and
utilities .
Income Distribution
The government uses standard categories to classify income levels and determine
eligibility for housing programs and resources . Income levels are based on percentages
of the median household income within the County . The following list provides
definitions for income levels commonly used to characterize housing affordability :
® Extremely Low. Income: Below 30 percent of the median income .
• Very Low Income : Between 31 and 50 percent of the median income .
• Low Income: Between 51 and 80 percent of the median income .
• Moderate Income: Between 81 and 95 percent of the median income .
• Middle Income . Between 96 and 120 percent of median income .
• High Income : Above 121 percent of median income .
The 2000 census reports that the median family income in Mason County was $44, 246
in 1999 . The Washington State Office of Financial Management ( OFM ) reports that the
Mason County median household income in 2000 was $41 , 273 . TABLE V . 3 - 2 , Income
Distribution and Housing Costs, illustrates the income ranges of Mason County families .
It also identifies the affordable cost of housing for each of income classification .
Just over nine percent of County's residents earn incomes that place them in the
extremely tow - income category . This means they live on less than $ 1 , 106 per month .
Affordable housing for that nine percent of the population would have to cost less than
$ 331 . 84 .
TABLE V . 3 - 2 : Income Distribution and Affordable Housing Costs - 200
Monthly 2
2 Source : Mason County and City of Shelton Housing Needs Assessment , April 2004
V-3 . 3
Draft - November 15 , 206 _
Annual Income Affordable Percent
Income Status Definition Range sHniising Costs 4 Number Total
Extremely Low Below 30% of Below $ 13 , 273 . 8 331 . 84 21005 9 . 36%
Income Median Income
Very Low Income Between 31 % and . Between $ 342 . 90 to 2 , 666 12 . 44%
50% of Median $ 13 , 716 . 26 and $ 55107
Income $ 22 , 123
Low Income Between 51 % and Between $ 564 . 14 to 3 , 374 15 . 75 %
80% of Median $ 22 , 565 . 46 and $ 884 . 92
Income $ 35 , 396 . 80
Moderate Income Between 81 % and Between $ 895998 to 1 , 662 7 . 76%
95% of Median $ 35 , 839 .26 and $ 1 , 050 . 84
Income $421 03170
Income above 95% Median Family $42 , 476 . 16 and $ 1 , 061 * 90 117715 54 . 67%
Income above
Source : U . S . Census 2000
Housing Needs Assessment
The U . S . Department of Housing and Urban Development ( HUD ) calculates housing
need for every county in the nation . Households that pay more than 30 percent of
their incomes for rent or housing costs are considered in need of housing assistance .
Households with incomes under 50 percent of median income are eligible for most
assistance programs . This analysis includes households earning between 50 and 80
percent of median income because a significant number of them also pay high
proportions of their income for housing . Most households that earn above 80 percent
of median income can afford rental . housing .
TABLE V . 3 - 3 , Housing Assistance Needs, shows households in need as analyzed by HUD
for Mason County as a whole . In 2000, more than 68 percent of renter and more than
67 percent of owner households in Mason County earned 30 percent or less of the
median county income or paid housing costs that exceeded 30 percent of the
household 's income . Of the households that earned between 31 and 50 percent of
median income , more than 73 percent of renter and more than 53 percent of owner
households paid more than 30 percent for housing . Just over 30 percent of renter and
42 percent of owner households earned between 51 and 80 percent of median income
also paid more than 30 percent of incomes for rent .
3 Annual Income Ranges derived from Census 2000 population figures ; distribution percentages in
" Definition " column applied to Census 2000 Median Family ,lncome for Mason County of $44, 246
4 To calculate Monthly Affordable Housing Costs , it is assumed that 30% of the household income is used
for housing costs ( mortgage or rent ) , therefore the annual income was multiplied by 30% and then divided
by 12 monthly payments ,
Vw14
Draft - November 15 , 20L _
TABLE V . 3 - : Housing Assistance Needs - Low and Moderate Income
Households 2000
Households Gross Rent (% of Income ) Households Owner Costs (% of
Households by Number of % with % with Cost Number of % with Cost % with
Income Renters Cost Burden Owners Burden Cost
Burden > 50% > 30% Burden
> 30% > 50%
< 30% Median 774 68 . 6 58 . 0 11054 67 . 4 54 . 7
Income
31 % to 50% 705 73 . 6 27 . 5 1 ) 066 53 . 4 34 . 0
Median
Income
51 % to 80% 749 30 . 8 2 . 7 21430 42 . 5 1 14 . 7
Median
Income
> 81 % Median 11689 2 . 1 0 . 5 10 , 377 16 . 2 3 . 0
Income
Total 31917 33 . 6F� 17 . 1 14, 927 26 . 8 10 . 8
Source: CHAS Data Report (http : / / socdsohuduser. org / scripts / odbic . exe / chas / reports , htm ) '
According to the 2000 HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy ( CHAS ) , 643
renter households were at risk of homelessness , meaning that they earned less than 50
percent of median income and paid more than 50 percent of their incomes for rent .
Housing affordability is a complex and changing issue . Interest rates tend to fluctuated
dramatically affecting the number of people who can afford to buy a home . As the
federal government continues to reduce its role in low income housing , a greater
burden will fall on local government to assist low income and special needs
households .
Housing T_ P
Mason County had 25 , 515 housing units in 1999 according to the 2000 Census . Of these ,
approximately 70 percent were single family units . Further, 18 , 912 or 74 percent of
these units , were permanently occupied . The remaining 6 , 603 units , 26 percent ,
consisted of seasonal residences or unoccupied units . Mason County Public Utility
District No . 3 reports that the number of its seasonal customers within the County has
decreased over the past few years , as more and more seasonal residents make Mason
County their primary home . TABLE V . 3 -4 , Number of Units by Structure , presents the
number and types of housing units in Mason County as of the 2000 census . It also
identifies owner- occupied and rental housing for the permanently occupied units .
TABLE V . - . Number of Units by Structure Type ® 2000
V-1 5
Draft - November 15 , 206
ItType of Housing I I Percent I Vacant Occupied
Structure Total of Total Units Total Owner Renter
Single Family
Detached 17854 69 . 97% 4824 13030 10979 2051 .
Attached 247 0 . 94% 77 170 78 92
Total Single Family 18101 70 . 94% 4901 13200 11057 2143
Multi - Family
2 Units 328 1 . 28 % 102 226 49 177
3 - 4 Units 205 0 . 80% 23 182 4 178
5 - 9 Units 241 0 . 94% 0 241 8 233
10 - 19 Units 93 0 . 36% 9 84 5 79
20 - 49 Units 226 0 . 89% 12 214 0 214
50 or more 58 0 . 23 % 0 58 7 51
Mobile Home 5447 21 . 35% 977 4470 3616 854
Boat, RV, Van , etc . 816 3 . 20% 579 237 201 36
County Total 25515 100 . 00% 6603 18912 14947 3965
Source : United States Bureau of the Census, 2000
Housing Stock
According to the 2000 census data , owner- occupied housing accounted for 79 percent
( 14, 947 units ) of the County's occupied units . This is significantly higher than the
statewide average of 65 percent . Single - family units represent the vast majority
( 70 . 94 % ) of the County's 2000 housing stock . Mobile homes and trailers account for
21 . 35% of the housing units in the County . Multi -family units comprise approximately
4 . 5 % of the County's housing stock . Most of the multi -family housing is located in the
City of Shelton .
The total housing stock grew just over 12 percent from 1990 through 2000 . TABLE V . 3 -
5 , Existing Housing Stock , illustrates the composition and size of Mason County ' s
housing stock as of 2000 . It shows the percent increase in numbers of units by housing
type since the 1990 Census . Single - family units saw the largest percent increase ,
followed by mobile homes ( including RV ' s , boats , and vans ) and multi - family units .
The ratio of housing types remained constant however, with single family units
accounting for 71 percent , multi - family units equaling just over 4 percent , and mobile
homes representing nearly 25 percent of the total units .
V- 3 . 6
Draft - November 15 , 200 _
TABLE V . 3 - 5 . Existing Housing Stock ® 000
Type of Housing Unit Number of Percent of Total Percent Change 1990 =
Units 2000
Single - Family 18 , 101 71 % 13 . 5 %
Mufti - Family 1 , 151 405 % 9 . 1 %
Mobile Homes 6 , 263 24 . 5 % 10 . 6%
Total Number of Units 25 , 515 100% 12 . 6 %
Source : Washington State Office of Financial Management; U . S . Census 2000
Home Ownership
TABLE V . 3 - 7 , Housing Units - Mason County and Surrounding Counties, presents the
rate of home ownership in Mason County as of the 2000 Census . It demonstrates that
the County has a lower rate of home ownership than generally occurs in its neighboring
counties and Washington State as a whole . Further, the percentage of the County's
housing stock made up of mobile homes and trailers is among the highest compared
with other counties and the state .
Approximately one quarter of the existing housing units in Mason County are mobile
homes and trailers . These units tend to be more affordable but have a higher rate of
dilapidation than other types of housing within the County . Therefore, while many of
the residents of Mason County are homeowners , it should not be assumed that they are
not in need of housing assistance programs . TABLE V . 3 -4 also identifies Mason County's
relatively low concentration of multi -family units . According to 2000 Census
information , the percentage of multi - family units in several surrounding counties , as
well as the state , is more than double that of Mason County .
V- 3 . 7
Draft - November 15 , 200 _
TABLE V . - 7 : Housing Units ® Mason County and SurroundingCounties ,
2000 Census
Total Percent Percent Percent Percent
Jurisdiction Housing Units Owner Single Family Multi - Family Mobile
Occupied Homes$
Mason 25 515 59 % 71 % 4% 21 %
Ctaltam 303683 64% 71 % 11 % 18%
Gras 327489 57% 70% 14% 15%
Jefferson 14, 144 76% 74% 8% 18%
Lewis 29 , 585 71 % 68% 11 % 20%
Pacific 13 , 991 75 % 68% 7% 24%
Thurston 861652 67% 66% 20% 14%
Washington 22451 , 075 65 % 65 % 26% 9%
State
$Including RVs, Boats , Vans, etc.
Source : U . S . Census , 2000
HouSir) Q' Qu® lit9/
Overview
The age of a structure can indicate the amount of repair or maintenance that may be
needed to maintain the safety and habitability of the structure . As a structure ages , it
requires more maintenance , without which it may fall into disrepair . TABLE V. 3 - 8 ,
Year Structure Built, chronicles the age of Mason County's housing stock , the number
of homes that are either renter or owner occupied , and the number of vacant units . It
shows that the greatest percentages of homes in the County were built in the 1970s .
Nearly 60 percent of the occupied housing units in the County are owner occupied .
TABLE V . 3 - 8 , Year Structure Built, also demonstrates that , with the exception of
homes built prior to 1969 , ownership rates are greatest for structures built in the
1970 ' s . Ownership rates decrease consistently from 1970 to 2000 . Renter rates also
show a pattern of higher renter occupancy for units built in the 1970s . Both
observations could be attributed to the largest number of units in the county being
built between 1970 and 1979 , meaning that there are more of them to own and rent .
V- 3 . 8
Draft - November 15 , 20G _
[TABLE V . - ® Year Structure Built
Total Percent of Occupied
Year Built Units Total Vacant Units Total Owner Renter
1995 to 2000 3 , 767 14 . 8 % 920 22847 2 , 388 459
1990to1994 3 , 456 13 . 5 % 655 2 , 801 2 , 501 300
1980 to 1989 4 , 857 19 % 1 , 294 3 , 563 2 , 834 729
1970 to 1979 61214 24 . 4% 1 , 740 41 474 31475 999
1960to 1969 21984 11 . 7% 1 , 126 1 , 858 12411 447
1950to1959 11655 6 . 5 % 415 1 , 240 875 365
1940to1949 1 , 247 4 . 9 % 258 989 688 301
Before 1940 1 , 335 5 . 2% 195 11140 775 365
Total 25 , 515 100000% 6 , 603 18 ) 9121 14, 947 3 , 965
Source : United States Bureau of the Census , 2000 Census
ousin¢ Condition Survey
In 2002 , a housing survey was conducted by a group of college students as part of a
Housing Needs Assessment report prepared by Common Ground . The survey obtained a
visual assessment of the overall exterior of the single- family house in Mason County .
The students used five categories to evaluate the condition of the housing stock . They
included Category 1 - Sound , Category 2 - Good / Basically Sound , Category 3 - Needing
Maintenance / Repair, Category 4 - Deteriorated , and Category 5 -
Dilapidated / Uninhabitable .
TABLE V . 3 - 9 , Mason County Housing Condition Survey, presents the findings of the
survey . Out of the 191 housing units surveyed in Mason County, excluding Shelton ,
71 . 2% of the County's housing stock fell within categories 1 and 2 . Twenty five percent
of the houses sampled fell within either category 3 or 4 . Housing in category 5 was
just over 4 percent .
Table V . 3 - 9 Mason County Housing Condition Survey
Number of Housing Units by Rating
Survey Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating Total
Units
Areas
1 2 3 4 5 Surveyed
North
24 22 6 5 1 58
41 . 1 % 37 . 9 % 10 . 3 % 8 . 6 % 1 . 7% 100 . 0%
South
26 24 4 5 3 62
41 . 9 % 38 . 7% 6 . 5 % 8 . 1 % 4 . 8 % 100 . 0%
East £t 11 19 22 4 0 56
Central 19 . 6% 33 . 9 % 39 . 3 % 7 . 1 % 0 . 0% 100 . 0%
V- 3 . 9
Draft - November 15 , 20 ,
West
10 0 2 0 3 15
66 . 7% 0 . 0% 13 . 3 % 0 . 0% 20 . 0 % 100 . 0 %
Shelton 69 100 58 26 8 262
26 . 3 % 38 . 2 % 22 . 5 % 9 . 9 % 3 . 1 % 100 . 0%
Total 140 165 . 0 93 . 0 40 . 0 15 . 0 45.3 . 0
Units by
Rating 30 . 9 % 36 . 4% 20 . 5 % 8 . 8 % IN 100 . 0%
Source : Mason County and City of Shelton Housing Needs Assessment , April 29 , 2004
VA HOUSING NEEDS
Housing Demand
The population in Mason County is expected to increase from 53 , 789 in 2005 to 85 , 088 in 2025 ,
( an increase of 31 , 299 ) . Using 2005 figures , a population of 53 , 789 in a county with 25 , 515
housing units , approximately 1 housing unit is needed for every 2 . 5 people 5 . This represents a
demand for approximately 12 , 520 additional housing units . Using the Housing Stock
percentage rates from page V= 3 . 6 , single family units would increase by 8 , 760 , multi - family
units would increase by 563 units , and mobile homes and trailers would increase by 2 , 6736 .
Housing Affordability
Approximately 37 . 55 % of the housing demand ( 5 , 165 units ) is a combination of purchase
and rental housing that is affordable to households earning less than 80% of the
County ' median income . This includes 9 . 36% ( 1 , 287 units ) for Extremely Low-Income
households , 12 . 44% ( 1 , 711 units ) for Very Low- Income households , and 15 . 75 % (21166
units ) for Low- Income households . The affordability of the single- family housing is
based on at least 20% of that housing being manufactured housing . This compares with
the actual rate of manufactured housing at 21 . 35 % in 2000 .
5 31299 2 . 5 = 12 , 520
6 Housing unit projection calculations : 12 , 520 x 69 . 97% = 8 , 760 ; 12 , 520 x 4 . 5% = 563 ; 12 , 520 x 21 . 35% _
2 , 673
V 4. 10
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revised Comprehensive tElement
LAND USE
1 - 1 iNTRODUCTION
The Washington State Growth Management Act requires counties planning under the act to
adopt a comprehensive plan that includes a land use element and a rural element . The land
use element identifies the proposed distribution of land uses and addresses other concerns
such as the protection of groundwater quality and quantity, drainage , flooding , and storm
water run - off and potential mitigation measures . The rural element addresses rural lands in
the county that are not specially designated for urban growth or natural resource use .
Because of the interconnection of the two elements , both elements have been included in the
Land Use Chapter .
Purpose of The Land Use Element
The land use element identifies the existing land use conditions throughout Mason County,
projects the land requirements to the year 2025 to meet projected growth , and determines
how that growth should be accommodated , given the goals and policies developed in the plan .
Overview of the Land Use Plan
The lands of Mason County, which are within the jurisdiction of the county, have been divided
into three categories of performance districts . These are urban growth areas , resource lands ,
and rural lands . Each of these categories is described below .
Urban Growth Areas
An urban growth area is an area where more intensive development is planned , along with the
infrastructure needed to service this growth . All cities , including the City of Shelton , are
defined as urban growth areas . In addition , other unincorporated areas may be designated for
urban growth when additional land is needed to accommodate the expected population
increases and job growth . The urban growth areas , which are designated in Mason County,
include the City of Shelton , with a portion of its surrounding area , and the unincorporated
communities of Allyn and Belfair . These communities currently support a mix of residential ,
commercial , industrial , civic , and public uses .
Within Shelton , Allyn and Belfair , residential uses provide a variety of housing choices
including medium to high - density single family and multifamily . Commercial development
includes retail and other business uses . Industrial uses may include light and heavy industry ,
production , manufacturing , and resource - based uses . In addition , a broad range of civic and
public facilities such as schools , churches , libraries , parks , courts , and City and County
government exist within these communities .
November 15 , 2005 1 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revised r ive Plan Element
Ural Lands
Rural lands are divided into several classifications . These classifications identify performance
districts through which rural growth will be managed . These districts include the following :
Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development ( LAMIRD )
• Rural Activity Centers ( RAC )
® Hamlets
® Rural Commercial / Industrial Areas
• Rural Tourist / Recreational Areas
Fully Contained Community ( FCC )
Master Planned Resort ( MPR )
Rural Area ( RA )
The Rural Activity Centers ( RACs ) include Hoodsport , Taylor Town and Union . Hamlets include
Bayshore , Dayton , Deer Creek , Eldon , Grapeview , Lake Cushman , Lilliwaup , Matlock , Potlatch ,
Spencer Lake , and Tahuya . The Rural Area is divided into several different areas shown on the
Future Land Use Map , page 4 . These areas reflect different allowed residential densities of
one dwelling per 2 . 5 acres , one dwelling per five acres , one dwelling per ten acres and one
dwelling per twenty acres . Also among the rural lands are Rural Tourist / Recreational Areas
and Commercial / Industrial Areas that are also mapped .
In addition , the ability to designate new fully contained communities has been created in this
plan . The fully contained communities are new urban growth areas that can be designated
through a comprehensive plan amendment on land that was previously designated as rural
land . Urban population growth may be allocated to the new communities when they are
created . Criteria are established in the plan for evaluating proposals for new fully contained
communities when such changes are considered .
The rural lands are described in more detail in the rural lands section of the Land Use chapter,
section IV- 8 . Policies for rural lands are located in the Planning Policies chapter, section III = 3 .
Resource Lands
Resource Lands are those areas in the county that have been identified as especially
important for the tong - term commercial production of timber and agricultural goods or for the
extraction of mineral resources . As such , they receive special protection to discourage their
conversion to other uses . Mason County has designated and protected three types of resource
lands . These are Long -Term Commercial Forest Lands , Agricultural Resource Lands , and
Mineral Resource Lands of long - term commercial significance . The county also designated
forest Inholding Lands that are subject to special restrictions to protect adjacent Long -Term
Commercial Forest Lands . In addition to designating these resource lands , the county has
adopted protections for agricultural and forest land uses elsewhere in the county .
More information on the resource lands can be found in the Land Use chapter , section * 5 .
November 15 , 2005 2 Draft
DRAFT ® Planning Advisory isi
Revised r i Plan Element
Policies regarding these lands are in the Planning Policies chapter, section III -4 .
Watersheds
Land use and land planning is also organized by watersheds . Mason County includes seven
watersheds : Case Inlet , Chehalis , Hood Canal , Lower Hood Canal , Oakland Bay , Skokomish ,
and Totten - Little Skookum . Drainage patterns determine the boundaries of watersheds .
Watershed management plans or action plans have been adopted for three watersheds .
Totten - Little Skookum , Oakland Bay, and Lower Hood Canal . Sub - area plans were developed
for North Mason County (the Lower Hood Canal ) , South - East Mason County (the Totten - Little
Skookum ) , and Harstine Island ( part of the Totten - Little Skookum ) . The watershed plans were
developed in cooperation with adjoining counties that shared the watershed , the Indian
Tribes , state agencies and the public , under the guidance of the Puget Sound Water Quality
Authority . Information from these plans and goals and policies developed for them have been
used in developing the Comprehensive Plan , its policies , and its implementing regulations .
Urban Growth Areas - Shelton
The following goals provide a statement of the intent for the City of Shelton urban growth
area . The goals provide a basis for interpretation of the specific policies contained herein .
These goals were developed jointly by the City of Shelton and Mason County .
1 . To establish general guidelines for orderly growth within the Urban Growth area for
Shelton .
2 . To provide for cooperation between Mason County and the City of Shelton in planning
and guiding development in the Urban Growth Area .
3 . To provide landowners and the public generally with certainty about the types of land
uses that will occur and or the processes that will be provided for changing those uses
as the areas urbanize .
4 . To provide a framework for detailed land use and service provision plans and studies
that wilt facilitate efficient use of public funds .
5 . To coordinate regulations and utility standards to minimize public and private costs .
6 . To provide for land use densities and types , development standards , and provision of
urban type services within the UGA that are compatible with the City of Shelton
Comprehensive Plan .
November 15 , 2005 3 Draft
DRAFT ® Recommended y tPlanningvisCommission
Revised Comprehensive tan Element
November 15 , 2005 4 Draft
A
r
� k
##
ISM
s c a
A " I' llAAA- A _ 2
_ 14
. �I TA A-
S ;�r
A All
A Am
AAI A A a A
I A, 3
i
�A`-
l , .
DRAFT - As Recommendedthe Planning AdvisorV Commission
Revised Comprehensive Plan Element
IV. 2 POPULATION
The Mason County Comprehensive Plan was developed based on both historical trends and
future projections of Mason County ' s population . Using this information , future development
demands and appropriate ways to manage land use in the county were developed . The
projections used were prepared by the state Office Financial Management in January 2002 . It
was estimated in the Office of Financial Management Medium Series projection that the total
population for Mason County would be 64, 007 by the year 2015 and 75 , 088 by 2025 . This
would mean an increase in the total population of the county of 21 , 299 people , or 28 . 4% over
the 20 - year period from 2005 to 2025 . ( Please see TABLE IV . 2 = 5 for population projections . )
While an increase in population this large sounds remarkable , the historic population growth in
Mason County in the 20 years from 1970 to 1990 was 83 % . In the last thirteen years , from 1990
to 2003 , the population grew an additional 31 % .
Population Growth : Historical Trends
In 1960 Mason County's population was 16 , 251 , only slightly more than one third of the
County's population in 2000 . During the decade of 1960 to 1970, the statewide population
grew by 19 . 6 percent , or 1 . 8 percent annually . At the same time , Mason County's population
grew by 22 . 3 % ( an average rate of two percent annually ) to reach a 1970 population of 20 , 918
(see TABLES IV . 2 - 1 and iv . 2 - 2 ) .
TABLE IV . 2- 1 : Population by Decade - Washington State and Mason County
Population
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Washington 21378 , 963 22853 , 214 31413 , 250 411322353 41866 , 663 5 , 894, 121
State
Mason County 15 , 022 16 , 251 202918 31 , 184 387341 49 , 405
Source : Bureau of the Census , Washington State Office of Financial Management
TABLE IV. 2- 2 . Population Growth by Decade - Washington State and Mason County
PP - nt rhanop
50- 60- 70- 80- 90- 50- 60- 70- 80- 90-
60 70 80 90 00 60 70 80 90 00
Washington 19 . 9 1906 21 . 1 17 . 8 21 . 1 1 . 8 1 . 8 1 . 9 1 . 6 1 . 9
State
Mason 8 . 2 28 . 7 49 . 0 23 . 0 28 . 9 0 . 7 2 . 5 4 . 1 2 . 1 2 . 6
County
Source : Washington State Office of Financial Management
The 1960 ' s marked the start of a period of rapid County - wide population growth that has
November 15 , 2005 6 Draft
DRAFT s Recommended by the Planning Adviso [yCommission
Revised Comprehensive la Element
continued into this decade . Between 1960 and 1970 , the County experienced a population
increase of 28 . 7 percent (4 , 667 people ) , an average annual rate of 2 . 5 percent . By 1970 ,
Mason County Is population had grown to 20 , 918 . During the same period , the statewide
annual rate of population increase was of 19 . 6 percent ( an average annual growth rate of 1 . 8
percent ) .
During the 1970's , both the County and the State experienced the fastest rates of population
increase in recent history . The County's population rose by an average rate of 4 . 1 percent
annually , totaling an increase of 49 percent . At the end of the decade the population had
increased by 10 , 266 people bringing the total population to 31 , 184 ,
Meanwhile , the State' s relatively stable annual rate of population growth increased very
slightly from 1 . 8 to 1 . 9 percent , amounting to a population increase of 21 percent .
The rate of population growth slowed somewhat during the eighties . Between 1980 and 1990 ,
the County's population grew by an average annual rate of 2 . 1 percent amounting to a ten
year increase of 23 percent and a total population of 38 , 341 . Statewide population growth
during the decade totaled 18 percent ( an average annual rate of 1 . 6 percent ) .
While it is commonly believed that much of the State and County's growth occurred during the
1980's , the actual rate of growth for the decade was the slowest experienced in the County
since the 1950's . The 10 , 266 people added to the County population between 1970 and 1980
exceeds the 7 , 157 increase during the 1980's by approximately 43 percent .
Between 1990 and 2000 , the county ' s growth rate took a slight upward turn with a 28 . 9 %
population increase . In addition , the number of people in Mason County increased by more
than 11 , 000 in the past decade , the highest increase in more than 50 years .
Population Growth : Current Trends
In the past , Statewide population growth has been concentrated in the more metropolitan
counties along the Puget Sound corridor. During the 1980's , 70 percent of the state's
population growth occurred in King , Pierce , Snohomish and Kitsap Counties . In 1993 , the
previously mentioned counties accounted for only 35 percent of the State ' s growth . However,
by 2004, these same counties accounted for more than 52 % of the state ' s growth .
One explanation for this recent shift in population growth is what is called " rural rebound , "
which has been experienced throughout the western United States . Essentially , the
population has migrated towards areas of the state that have a more rural character, greater
availability of land , and consequently lower (and costs . Additionally , the rapid technological
advancements being made today allow a growing number of people to telecommute to work
from home . It is increasingly more common for people to live in the more rural areas of the
State while retaining jobs with companies based in the metropolitan areas .
November 15 , 2005 7 Draft
DRAFT ® C gift t 1 V1 issi
Revised Comprehensive t t t
In the 1990s , Mason County's population grew 28 . 9 percent (total of 11 , 064 ) from 38 , 341 to
49 , 405 . This represents an increase average of 2 . 6 percent annually in that period , about 30
percent higher than the state rate . By 2000 , Mason County ranked eleventh in the State in
population growth rate .
Population Growth : Pr9jections for Future Growth
The Comprehensive Plan was based on the Medium Series population projection prepared by
the state Office of Financial Management ( OFM ) . The OFM prepared a reasonable range of
population projections , with a Middle Series projection as that office ' s estimate of the most
Likely outcome . The decision to use the medium series projection for planning purposes was
based on a recent slowing of growth rates in the county that trends toward the medium series .
Growth in Mason County is still expected to be strong based on the assumptions given below :
1 . The majority of Mason County's population increase comes from migration within the
State , therefore the expected decrease in statewide population growth (due to a
decrease in in - migration ) will have a limited impact on the County's growth trends , and
Mason County' s population will continue to grow at a rate faster than the statewide
average .
2 . Technological advances make it possible to work for companies located in the more
metropolitan areas along the Puget Sound corridor, while still living in rural areas .
Since Mason County is in relative proximity to Olympia , Bremerton , Tacoma , and
Seattle , it is a desirable location for those looking to live in a rural area while
telecommuting to work in metropolitan areas .
3 . Given that Mason County is a popular destination for retirees , the County is expected
to experience a higher rate of population growth as baby- boomers continue to retire ,
and a higher conversion rate of seasonal residence to year round occupancy .
TABLE IV , 2. 6 . Countywide Growth by Incorporated/Unincorporated Status 2001 = 2004
Population Percent of Total Growth
2001 2002 2003 2004 01 -02 02-03 03 -04
Incorporated 8 , 470 82495 81545 8 , 695 12 . 5 12 . 5 25
(Shelton ) _
Unincorporated 41 , 130 41 , 305 417655 42 , 105 88 . 5 88 . 5 75
Allyn * 1 , 792
Bel fair* 645
Shelton * 2 , 553
County 49 , 600 49 , 800 50 , 200 50 , 800 100 100 100
Source : Washington State Office of Financial Management , 2004 .
* Estimated populations based on 2004 Assessor' s data for residential parcels located in the UGA' s .
Total number of residential parcels (with an improved value of more than $ 20 , 000 ) was multiplied by
an estimated 2 . 5 persons per household .
TABLE IV . 2 - 6 illustrates the percentage of the County' s growth that is in the City of Shelton
versus other areas of the County, but it does not show the rate at which each of these areas is
growing . TABLE IV . 2 - 7 shows the annual average rates of growth for both the incorporated
November 15 , 2005 8 Draft
DRAFT ® i s t i visa isst n
Revised Comprehensive l
and unincorporated areas , and for comparison , the County' s annual rate of growth . This table
illustrates that the City of Shelton had been growing at a much slower rate than the
unincorporated areas of the County , which were experiencing moderate growth rates . Each of .
these growth rates increased in 2004 and the city of Shelton now has a more . rapid growth rate
than the unincorporated areas of the County .
TABLE IV . 2 - 7 . Annual Rate of Population Growth by
Incorporated/Unincorporated Status 2001 - 2004 .
Annual Rate of Population Increase
2001 - 2002 2002- 2003 2003 - 2004
Incorporated (City of 0 . 30 0 . 59 1 . 75
Shelton )
Unincorporated 0 . 43 0 . 85 1 . 08
County 0 . 40 0 . 80 1 . 19
Source : Washington State Office of Financial Management , 2004 .
Factors Affecting Growth
Population trends are influenced by a number of factors . These factors include the number of
births minus the number of deaths , referred to as natural increase , and net migration , which
is the number of people moving to an area minus the number moving from that area . Net
migration in itself is influenced by a variety of factors that may vary from year to year .
Factors Affecting Growth : Net Migration and Increase
TABLE IV . 2 - 9 illustrates the fluctuating influence that net migration and natural increase have
on both the State's and County's populations . During the 50's , all of the growth that occurred
in Mason County was due to natural increase . The - 77 . 3 percent growth due to net migration
reflects that more people moved out of the County than moved in during that time period . At
the same time , 81 percent of statewide growth was due to natural increase , and the
remaining 19 percent were due to net migration .
During the 60's , net migration began to have a greater impact on both the State and County's
populations . While the percent of growth due to net migration has experienced upswings and
down turns in the State , the County has been increasingly influenced by net migration since
1960 . Between 1990 and 2000 , net migration accounted for 93 . 2 percent of all growth in the
county .
November 15 , 2005 9 Draft
DRAFT As C din t lsu 1 sl
Revised i tElement
TABLE IV . 2 - 9 : Components of Change - Washington State and Mason County
1950 - 1960 1960 - 1970 1970= 1980 1980- 1990 1990-2000
Natural Net Natural Net Natural Net Natural Net Natural Net
Increase Migration Increase Migration Increase Migration Increase Migration Increase Migration
Washington 384, 069 90, 182 305 , 528 254, 502 245 , 504 473 , 408 365 , 152 369 , 158 392 , 000 635 , 000
State
Percent of 81 19 54 . 6 45 . 4 34 . 1 65 . 9 49 . 7 50 . 3 38 . 7 61 . 3
Total
Change
Mason 2 , 179 950 1 , 239 3 , 428 1 , 292 81974 12795 51362 750 10, 310
County
Percent of 177. 3 -77 . 3 26 . 5 73 . 5 12 . 6 87 . 4 25 . 1 74 . 9 6 . 8 93 . 2
Total
Change
Source : Washington State Office of Financial Management
TABLE IV . 2 - 10 provides greater insight into Mason County's population growth . ! Data regarding
the number of people moving to the County from either out of State or out of County was
provided by the Washington State Department of Licensing , and is a record of the number of
people from elsewhere applying for driver' s licenses . By comparing the figures shown for net
migration , total change and people moving to the County from out of State / Country, it is
possible to make a number of deductions about the growth experienced during a particular
year.
For example , between 1990 and 1995 , natural increase in the county was higher than it has
been over the past ten years . This table also reflects that more than 90% of Mason County ' s
growth since 1990 has been due to net migration - people moving here as opposed to being
born here .
TABLE IV. 2 - 10 : Components of Change 1990- 2005
1990= 1995 1995 = 2000 2000- 2OO5
Net Migration 6 , 024 4, 256 4, 110
From Out of 47037 41033 11971
State/Country
Natural Increase 537 247 274
Total Growth 61561 41503 41384
Percent Net 91 . 82 94 . 51 93 . 75
Migration
Percent Natural 8 . 18 5 . 49 6 . 25
Increase I I I ::]I
Source : Washington State Office of Financial Management and Washington State Department of Licensing .
Total growth represents net migration plus natural increase . The numbers reflected in "From out of
State / Country " are included in Net Migration ,
1 Minor discrepancies between data sets exist due to variations in sources and collections dates These
discrepancies are not substantial in nature and do not affect the context of the this or any other
section of this element .
November 15 , 2005 10 Draft
DRAFT ® t i Advisory isi
Revised iElement
Factors Affecting Growth : Seasonal Population
Mason County experiences seasonal fluctuations in population . Although seasonal residents
are not included in the County's population statistics , they must be considered since there is
definite increase in demand for certain types of capital facilities during the summer months
when seasonal population is high and tourism is at its peak .
In order to approximate the seasonal population variation , the County has used billing
addresses from both PUD # 1 and PUD #3 customers . In this case , a seasonal resident is one
who receives utility billings at an out of county address .
According to PUD # 1 and #3 billing records , roughly 30 to 35 percent of County utilities
customers are seasonal . Using this as an indication of seasonal population , the County' s
population increases accordingly during the summer months . This seasonal population tends to
be concentrated along the County's waterfront . Thus , in 2004 , the population increased from
50 , 800 people in the off season , to approximately 66 , 040 during the height of the season .
Seasonal increases in population will have a number of long term impacts on the County ,
particularly along the County ' s waterfront areas . Visitors and seasonal residents contribute to
peak congestion resulting from vehicle and pedestrian traffic . Seasonal population increases
will also continue to place increased demands on County services . Those services , which are
designed to accommodate the average and peak demands of resident populations , are often
under severe stress during seasonal population peaks .
Population Distribution in the Future Land Use Plan
The future land use plan has three Urban Growth Areas ( UGAs ) , three Rural Activity Centers ,
and several Hamlets . The UGAs include the City of Shelton and the communities of Allyn and
Belfair . The Rural Activity Centers include Union , Hoodsport and Taylor Town . The Hamlets
include Bayshore , Dayton , Deer Creek , Grapeview, Lilliwaup , Matlock , Potlatch , Spencer Lake,
and Tahuya .
In addition to those districts designated in the Comprehensive Plan , the county has also
adopted the approach created in the Growth Management Act of reserving a share of
projected population growth for future urban growth in Fully Contained Communities . These
Fully Contained Communities are not designated and will not be allowed to develop until after
they are approved by a comprehensive plan amendment . When specific proposals are
identified and approved , population from the Fully Contained Community reserve will be
allocated to that proposal . This approach is discussed in greater detail in other sections of the
Comprehensive Plan .
The county has estimated how the future growth in population will be distributed among the
different districts created in the Comprehensive Plan . TABLE Iv . 2 - 15 presents the additional
population levels and the share of County growth that would be experienced in each of these
areas in the year 2025 .
November 15 , 2005 11 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the Planning iCommission
Revised iv laElement
TABLE IV . 2- 15 : Area Growth Projections for Mason County 2005 - 2025
Area Share of Growth Additional Population
Shelton Urban Growth Area 33% 10 , 500
Belfair Urban Growth Area 18 % 5 , 600
Allyn Urban Growth Area 7% 2 , 250
Fully Contained Community 3% 17000
Reserve
RAC - LAMIRDS 1 . 5 % 469
Rural Lands 37% 11 , 480
Total County 100% 317299
County- ide Planning Policies
In 1992 , the City of Shelton and Mason County adopted the County -Wide Planning Policies to
cooperatively guide each agency' s GMA Planning processes . The County-Wide Planning Policies
contains several provisions which address population growth and capacity . They include
agreement or cooperation in determining :
1 . Urban Growth Area designations around incorporated cities , based on distribution
patterns of projected population growth and existing concentrations of population
density;
2 . Urban Growth Areas designated in other areas of the County, based on population
growth and distribution patterns and existing concentrations of population .
Mason County Planning Policies
The Mason County Planning Policies are intended to provide the basis for future land use
decisions . The policies are incorporated in Chapter II of Comprehensive Plan . The Mason
County Planning Policies contain numerous policies intended to guide population growth and
to mitigate its impacts . Those policies call for :
1 . Designating an Urban Growth Area of sufficient size to accommodate projected
population for the next 20 years .
2 . Minimizing restrictions on the supply of urban land and offsetting rising housing costs
by designating an Urban Growth Area of sufficient size to accommodate growth 25%
greaterthan projected .
3 . Planning , design and financing of facilities and services that recognize the impacts of
population and provide urban levels of service in urban areas .
November 15 , 2005 12 Draft
DRAFT ® As Reconi , nended1 vi Commission
RevisedrElement
We 3 EXISTING LAND USE AND FUTURE LAND USE ANALYSIS
Introduction
This section of the Land Use Chapter identifies Mason County ' s current land use patterns . It
describes land use on both a countywide and Urban Growth Area level . Data presented in this
section was compiled from the Mason County Tax Assessor ' s database .
efinitions of Land Use Categories
Residential
This category includes properties that have any type of dwelling unit placed upon it , except
those with an improvement value of less than $ 20 , 000 . The Assessor considers properties with
improvements valued at less than $ 20 , 000 as vacant . Residential uses include single family ,
multi family, mobile homes , convalescent centers , rooming and boarding houses , etc . In
addition , this category includes personal properties that have a building ( other than a dwelling
unit ) with an improvement value of greater than $ 20 , 000 .
Rural Vacant
This category includes parcels determined vacant by the Mason County Assessor ' s office .
Additionally , this category includes Lake Cushman leasehold properties and residential and
personal property with an improvement value of less than $20 , 000 .
Commercial
This category includes properties used for wholesale and retail trade , service industries ,
health care providers , and warehouses . This category also includes privately owned open
spaces , such as privately owned parks and other privately owned entertainment and
recreation facilities .
Agriculture/Aquacul ture
This category includes all agricultural properties , tidelands , fisheries , and aquaculture related
land classes .
Forestry
This category includes all properties in open space forest lands , classified forests , designated
forest lands , forest - related activities , and Christmas tree farms . The Forestry category does
not include Long Term Commercial Forests designated under Mason County ' s Resource Land
Ordinance , Ordinance Number 77 = 93 , as required by GMA .
Long Term Commercial Forests
This category includes only those lands designated as Long Term Commercial Forests under
Mason County ' s Resource Lands Ordinance , Ordinance Number 77 - 93 , as required by GMA .
Mineral Extraction
This category includes mining activities and mining services .
November 15 , 2005 13 Draft
DRAFT ® in i ion
RevisediElement
Transportation
This category includes all parcels related to transportation uses including railroads , rights - of -
way , motor vehicle transportation , mass transit, aircraft runways , and parking lots .
Utilities
This category includes all parcels used for utility related purposes including communications ,
electrical , natural gas , water, and sewage related uses ; land fills ; and pipelines .
Tax Exempt
This category includes parcels used for public purposes including government , civic , schools ,
business associations , professional membership organizations , and publicly owned recreation
uses . This category also includes parcels owned by the City of Tacoma for hydro - electric
purposes .
Distribution of Land Uses
Introduction
This section characterizes the current land use patterns in Mason County . The Mason County
Assessor ' s Database provided the primary source of data for this section . In addition , the
National Park Service provided data related to the National Park and Forest lands , and the
Squaxin Island and Skokomish Tribes provided data related to tribal lands .
Countywide Land Use
Mason County includes approximately 620 , 06-37 acres of land , about 972 square miles , and an
additional 57 , 600 acres , 90 square miles , of water . Approximately 154, 086 acres of Mason
County lie within the boundaries of the Olympic National Park and the Olympic National
Forest . The incorporated City of Shelton occupies an additional 3 , 900 acres of Mason County
and Tribal lands account for approximately 8 , 187 acres of the County .
GMA requires that the Mason County Comprehensive Plan designate lands within the County by
four broad classifications . Those classifications include urban , rural , resource lands , and
critical areas . Mason County also has substantial Federal lands and some Tribal lands .
Within Mason County, designated long term commercial forest lands , national park lands and
national forest lands are not available for development . Those two classifications combined ,
account for approximately 56 . 8 percent of the land within Mason County ,
The Mason County Assessor maintains land use data under many narrowly defined land uses .
For planning purposes , these uses were grouped into eleven broad categories . Those
categories include Residential , Vacant , Agriculture / Aquaculture , Commercial , Industrial ,
Forestry , Long Term Commercial Forest Lands , Mineral Extraction , Transportation , Utilities ,
and Tax Exempt . The Assessor does not maintain data on Federal or Tribal lands . The
comparison and analysis of land use data in this section , therefore , is based on the amount of
land tracked in the Assessor ' s database and not the entire amount of land within the County .
It also does not include land uses within the City of Shelton .
November 15 , 2005 14 Draft
DRAFT ® i Advisoryi i
Revised ivPlan Element
The Long Term Commercial Forests classification includes approximately 199 , 590 acres of
Land . This classification represents the largest single land use within Mason County .
TABLE IV . 3 - 1 illustrates the total acreage in each land use category on a countywide basis , as
well as the percent of the countywide total that each land use category represents .
In addition , TABLE IV . 3 - 1 shows the percentage of improved , unimproved , partially improved
or timbered land for each land use category .
TABLE IV . 3 - 1 : Mason County Land Use - Percentage of Total County Acreage
Percent Percent of Total Acreage
of
Land Use Total County Improved Unimproved Partially Timbe
Acreage Total Improved r
Residential 33 , 137 5 . 347:30 64 . 74% 0 . 79% 34 . 44% 0 . 03 %
Vacant 52 , 656 11 608_4 15 . 33% 73 . 07% 11 . 20% 0 . 4%
9%
Commercial* 3 , 538 0:780 . 57 35 . 65% 19 . 41 % 43 . 92% 0 . 56%
Industrial* 544 0-, j-z0 . 09 89 . 28% 1 . 24% 9 . 52% 0%
0
Agri/Aquaculture 9 , 845 2-A-71 . 59 86 . 94% 5 . 73% 7 . 32% 0%
Forestry 139 , 556 30:7522 . 0 . 03% 6 . 17% T O % 87 . 63%
51 %
LTCF 199 , 590 419832 . 0 . 36% 23 . 29% 0% 76 . 35%
19%
Mineral 152 0430a02 63 . 79% 12 . 76% 23 . 68% 0%
Extraction %
Transportation 21368 00-520 . 38 88 . 38% 11 . 23% 0 . 4% 0%
%
Utilities 21079 01160 . 33 10 . 97% 84 . 84% 4 . 21 % 0%
%
Tax Exempt 10, 429 2,31 . 68% 28 . 81 % 67 . 67% 3 . 49% 0 . 03%
In I
Olympic National 154 , 086 24 . 85% In n I in
Forest
City of Shelton 31900 0 . 63 % In In
Tribal Lands 87187 1 . 32% 1 Inn I In
Total 620 , 0674 100% 10 . 14% 22 . 96% 6 . 78% 60 . 57%
53;964
Source : Mason County Assessor' s Office , 2004 , and Mason County Department of Community Development
*Assessor' s data only reflects primary use of land and does not identify secondary uses like home - based businesses
2 Parcels are classified by the Assessor ' s office as improved , unimproved timber, or a combination of all three
Partiallyy rp oved parcels contain improved acres as well as unimproved and/or timber acres
November 15 , 2005 15 Draft
DRAFT ® s Recommended by the Planningvi ii
Revised Comprehensive
TABLE IV . 3 - 2 shows the number of parcels and acreage that are improved , unimproved ,
partially improved , or timbered within each land use category .
TABLE IV . 3 = 2 : Mason County Land Use
Partially Improved
Improved Unimproved Acres Timber
Land Use Parcels Acres Parcels Acres Imp . Unimp . Timber Parcels Parcels Acres
Residential 19 , 564 21 , 454 100 262 81091 3 , 288 33 13732 2 9
Vacant 41400 81072 16 , 297 387478 . 11608 4 , 252 36 815 5 209
Comm ' [ 509 11277 25 686 325 17228 1 53 1 20
Industrial 40 486 2 7 20 31 0 7 0 0
Agri/Aqui- 617 8 , 560 244 564 405 102 213 26 0 0
culture
Forestry 3 39 245 81605 11883 357 81382 286 21380 1223290
LTCF 12 710 174 46 , 507 0 0 0 0 727 152 , 373
Mineral 6 97 2 19 6 30 0 1 0 0
Extraction
Transp , 417 2 , 093 61 266 4 5 0 4 0 0
Utilities 204 228 69 1 , 764 12 73 3 4 0 0
Tax 625 31005 247 71057 151 212 1 22 3 3
Exempt
Total 26 , 397 46 , 021 1 17 , 466 104 , 215 1 121505 9 , 578 81669 121950 1 31118 274, 904
Source : Mason County Assessor' s Office , 2004 , and Mason County Department of Community Development
Urban and Rural Land Use Patterns
Mason County includes three Urban Growth Areas outside the City of Shelton . These include
the Belfair, Allyn , and Shelton Urban Growth Areas ( UGA ) . The Belfair UGA is located in the
northeastern corner of Mason County and covers approximately 2 , 200 acre . Just south of
Belfair along the western shoreline of Case Inlet of the Allyn UGA consisting of approximately
1 , 400 acres3 . In the southeastern region of Mason County is the Shelton UGA, encompassing
5 , 500 acres that surround the Shelton city limits . The remaining rural portions of the County ,
excluding the UGA ' s and the city of Shelton , is approximately 610 , 900 acres .
Mason County has chosen to undertake its GMA planning efforts based on information for the
UGA and the County rural areas .
The following paragraphs provide a detailed breakdown of land uses by urban and rural areas .
To locate Mason County ' s UGA ' s , see FIGURE IV . 3 - 1 .
3 Total acreage for Allyn may vary from other sources due to different calculation methods . This total was obtain
using assessor parcel data and may not accurately reflect acreage totals obtained from other sources or by other
methods .
November 15 , 2005 16 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the Planningvis ii
Revised iv
Mason County
Urban Growth Areas
�r
Legend
�.
110,
Allyn UGA
K 'y
Beifair UGA
y Shelton UGA
Masan County Reads ;
Road Ownership r� rrr r�
C
County Roads Ile
State Highways
' US Highways
Mason County Boundary J. ;
�Egg ,
Fi r� y �p` ,Rh. v
LI
November 15 , 2005 17 ® raft
DRAFT ® As RecorroinendedPlanning ViralCommission
RevisedivPlan Element
el fair Urban Growth Area
Unincorporated Belfair is the primary commercial center in the Northeast corner of North
Mason County . Mason County recently identified Belfair as an Urban Growth Area ( UGA ) of
approximately 2 , 200 acres . The current population within the UGA is approximately 900 .
However, Belfair serves residents within a larger rural geographic area with a population of
approximately 23 , 000 as well as tourists visiting the Hood Canal and unique Theler Wetlands .
While new development is on the rise in Belfair, the town is in the midst of trying to develop a
particular character or ' theme ' based around the Theler Wetlands as the town ' s anchor .
Belfair is also home to over 150 businesses located mostly along State Route 3 . With the
anticipated addition of pedestrian facilities , the continued development of a consistent town
theme , an improved local economy , and the completion of the Pacific Northwest Salmon
Center, Belfair will be served as a destination well into the foreseeable future .
Forestry represents the primary land use within the Belfair UGA encompassing more than 877
acres , and accounting for 40% of the area ' s total land
TABLE IV . 3 -4 details the distribution of land uses within the Belfair UGA based on the
Assessor ' s database .
TABLE IV . 3 -4 : Belfair UGA Land Use
Total Acres
Improved Unimproved Timber Total
Residential 375 27 1 403
Vacant 183 300 0 483
Commercial 166 17 0 183
Industrial 3 4 0 7
Agri/Aquaculture 25 7 0 32
Forestry 41 0 836 877
Mineral Extraction 0 8 0 8
Transportation 6 46 0 52
Utilities 14 41 2 57
Tax Exempt 55 1 0 56
Total 868 451 839 2 , 158
Source : Mason County Assessor ' s Office , 2004 , and Mason County Department of Community Development
November 15 , 2005 18 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revised ivPlan Element
TABLE iv3 . 4A summarizes the land supply and population data for the Belfair UGA .
Table IV -4A Land Supply Summary
Zone Gross Acre Percent Net Less 20% Less 25% Times Times 2 . 5
Available Unsuitable Suitable for roads for Market Dwelling persons/u
Acres Unit/Acre nit
Long Term 9 0% 9 7 . 2 5 . 4 16 . 2 41
Agriculture
( LTA)
Festival 0 56% 0 0 0 0 0
Retail ( FR)
General 90 56% 39 . 6 31 . 68 23 . 76 0 0
Commercia
l (GC )
Mixed Use 44 56% 1936 15 . 488 11 . 616 116 . 16 290
(MU )
Business 78 56% 34 . 32 27 . 456 2000592 0 0
Industrial
( B- I )
Multi 71 32% 48 . 28 38 . 624 28 . 968 289 . 68 724
Family
Residential
( R- 10 )
Med . 674 24% 512 . 24 409 . 792 3076344 1536 . 72 3842
Density
Residential
( R- 5 )
Single 302 47% 160 . 06 128 . 048 96 . 036 288 . 108 720
Family
Residential
( R- 3 )
GC= BI 58 56% 25 . 52 20 . 416 15 . 312 0 0
Total 1326 5617
Population
Allyn Urban Growth Area
The Allyn UGA lies along the upper , western shoreline of the Case Inlet in eastern Mason
County . Lower Allyn makes up the original community first platted in 1889 . It has a mix of
residences and commercial business covering 385 acres . Lakeland Village , a planned
residential development , makes up the largest land area and population base .
State Route 3 connects Allyn to several major regional cities . Shelton is 18 1/2 miles to the
south and Bremerton , in Kitsap County , is 16 miles to the north . The Belfair Urban Growth
Area is just 4 'h miles north .
November 15 , 2005 19 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the Planningvis ii
Revised ivPlan Element
TABLE IV . 3 - 5 details the distribution of land uses within the Allyn UGA based on the Assessor ' s
database .
TABLE IVo3 - o Allyn UGA Land Use
Total Acres
Improved Unimproved Timber Total
Residential 461 18 0 479
Vacant 71 298 0 369
Commercial 84 63 0 167
Industrial 1 0 0 1
Agri/Aquiculture 153 0 0 153
Forestry 1 17 119 137
Mineral Extraction 0 0 0 0
Transportation 47 19 0 66
Utilities 25 4 0 29
Tax Exempt 14 2 0 16
Total 857 421 119 11417
Source : Mason County Assessor' s Office , 2004; Mason County Department of Community Development .
November 15 , 2005 20 Draft
DRAFT ® As RecomhiiendedPlanning visorCommission
Revised Comprehensive l t
TABLE IV . 3 - 5A summarizes the land supply and population data for the Allyn UGA .
Table IV3 - 5A Land Use Analysis for Allyn
Zone Available Acres Acres Dwelling DU less DU less Populati Populati Total
Acres less 20% less 25 % Unites 20% 25 % on on 2002
Right of Market ( DU ) right of Market Total* Total** to
Way Factor way Factor 2005
Adjust
ment**
Resident 60 48 36 213 170 128 320 320
ial 1 ( R-
1 )
Resident 179 143 107 371 297 223 557 696
ial 1
Platted
( R- 1 P )
Resident 13 10 8 119 95 71 179 179
ial 2 R= 2 )
Resident 21 17 12 382 306 229 573 573
ial 3 (R=
3 )
Village 23 18 14 95 76 57 143 143
Commer
vial (VC )
Village 14 11 8 120 96 72 180 180
Resident
ial
Resident 140 112 84 469 375 281 704 704
ial 1
Recreati
onal ( R=
1 R)
Total 450 360 270 1789 1415 1061 2654 2793 2243
*Total capacity for allocation of population (2002 parcel data)
**Total capacity for allocation of population with no Right of Way adjustment for Lakeland Village small lots .
Shelton Urban Growth Area
The Shelton UGA includes 5 , 500 acres and contains parcels that currently bisect its boundary .
The existing land use patterns within the Shelton UGA can generally be described as
containing a mix of land uses including residential , industrial , recreational areas , resource
lands and undeveloped areas . Existing residential development is the predominant land use in
the UGA , encompassing approximately 32% of the total land area . Resource lands equal
approximately 25 % of the total area , transportation related uses account for 12% , and other
uses such as manufacturing , trade and services , and cultural / entertainment / recreation
represent 15 % of the land uses . Undeveloped land account for approximately 16 % of the land
use in the Shelton UGA .
TABLE IV . 3 = 6 details the distribution of land uses within the Shelton UGA based on the
November 15 , 2005 21 Draft
RecommendedDRAFT As i vis isi
Revised Comprehensive lElement
Assessor ' s database .
TABLE IV . 3 = 60 Shelton UGA Land Use
Total Acres
Improved Unimproved Timber Total
Residential 1 , 009 94 0 1 , 103
Vacant 226 609 0 835
Commercial 208 32 0 240
Industrial 381 14 0 395
Aqui/Agriculture 72 0 0 72
Forestry 10 14 1 , 371 17395
Mineral Extraction 0 12 0 12
Transportation 657 5 662
Utilities 39 18 0 57
Tax Exempt 194 160 0 354
Total 2 ,796 1 , 358 11371 57125
Table m3 - 6A summarizes the land supply and population data for the Shelton UGA
Table IV . 3 - 6A Population Projection Summary
Commercial/Industrial Residential
Designated Lands Designated
Lands
Total Vacant Lands (VL ) 660 . 89 1290w83
Redevetopable/Underdevelope 523 . 37 40 . 33
d Lands ( RUL ) '
Critical Areas Discount Factor
VL 530 . 3 1035 . 8
RUL 420 . 0 32 . 4
Roads/Public Lands3
VL 397 . 8 776 . 9
RUL 315 . 0 24 . 3
Market Factor
VL 298 . 3 582 . 7
RUL 157 . 5 12 . 1
Total Developable Area 455 . 8 594 . 8
Estimated Number of 2379
Residential Units
Estimated Population ( 2 . 5 5948
persons per household )
1 All parcels where improvement value / land value < 0 . 5
2 % of land in UGA associated with creeks , rivers , wetlands , lakes , and geologically hazardous areas
3 25% Discount factor
4 25% for vacant lands ; 50% for redevelopable lands
Mason County Rural Areas
The rural areas of Mason County include all those lands not within the City of Shelton or the
November 15 , 2005 22 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revised iv lElement
Allyn , Belfair, and Shelton UGAs . TABLE IV . 3 - 7 details the distribution of land uses within
Mason County ' s rural areas based on the Assessor ' s data of December 2004 ,
TABLE IV. 377e Mason County Rural Areas Land Use
Total Acres
Improved Unimproved Timber Total
Residential 272700 3 , 410 0 31 , 110
Vacant 97200 41 , 524 245 50 , 969
Commercial 12144 1 , 801 20 2 , 965
Industrial 121 19 0 140
Agri/Aquaculture 87716 660 0 91376
Forestry 1 , 870 81931 1282346 139 , 147
Long Term Commercial 710 46 , 507 152 , 373 199 , 590
Forest
Mineral Extraction 103 30 0 133
Transportation 1 , 385 200 0 11585
Utilities 161 1 , 773 1 11935
Tax Exempt 21893 71107 4 10 , 004
Total 54 , 003 71 , 962 280 , 989 446 , 954
Source : Mason County Assessor ' s Office , 2004 , and Mason County Department of Community Development ,
Land Capacity (Build Out) Analysis
Introduction
An analysis of land use in the rural areas was conducted using individual parcel data for
various rural districts and zones . These included : Hoodsport , Union , Taylor Town , the
Hamlets , Independent Commercial / Industrial Areas , Long Term Commercial Forest Lands ,
Agricultural Resource Lands , inholding Lands , and the remaining county rural land not falling
into any of these classifications . Parcel data was obtained for the County from the Mason
County ' s Assessor ' s office in December of 2004 . From this complete list of County parcels ,
parcel data for the Allyn , Belfair, and Shelton UGAs were separated out and analyzed by
different methods and discussed other sections of this Chapter . The remaining County parcels
were broken down into the above districts and zones . Once divided , each category was
individually analyzed to determine the approximate population potential should each parcel
be developed to its fullest residential capacity . This was done in the following manner .
Methodology
Parcel data was first organized by current land use in accordance with the codes as provided
by the Assessor ' s office . The Assessor's office uses several thousand land use codes to describe
the specific land use of each parcel . In order to determine the number of parcels and amount
of acreage in each area that is currently devoted to various land uses , land use codes were
grouped into broader land use categories ( i . e . Residential , Commercial , Transportation , etc . )
Once divided by existing land use , the zoning classification of each parcel was determined .
This illustrated what the land was currently being used for and what its potential residential
November 15 , 2005 23 Draft
DRAFT ® C i Advisoryi i
Revised Comprehensive
use was according to its zoning district . For example , a parcel with an existing land use code .
of vacant located within a Rural Commercial zoning district has a one dwelling unit per acre
potential , according to the Development Regulations for that zone . Therefore , this vacant
parcel could have at least one dwelling unit constructed on it thereby adding at least 2 . 54 new
residents per dwelling unit to the area . By analyzing the existing land use of each parcel with
respect to its zoning district , it is possible to estimate the number of additional residents to
the rural areas should a each parcel be developed to its full residential potential . This type of
calculation and analysis was conducted for each of the districts and zones mentioned above
and are summarized in Table IV . 3 - 7A .
TABLE IV . 3 - 7A - Rural Land Capacity Summary
# of Total
# of
# of Total DU Additional Estimated
# Of Existing (existing DU
Land Use Parcels Dwelling + additional Additional Residents Population
Units ( DU ) ®Ua DU ) ' ( 2 . 5 people ( 2 . 5 people
per DU ) x total DU )
Residential* 18 , 809 182787 543 19 , 340 1 , 358 482350
Industrial 20 0 7 7 18 18
Transportation 391 0 460 460 11151 1 , 151
Utilities 219 0 358 358 895 895
Commercial 356 0 481 481 1 , 203 11203
Aqua/Agriculture 905 0 21523 2 , 523 61308 67308
Mineral 8 0 3 3 8 8
Extraction
Forestry 2 , 395 0 9 , 964 91964 24, 910 24, 910
Vacant 18 , 932 0 20 , 789 1 202789 1 51 , 973 51 , 973
Totals 427035 18 , 797 352128 53 , 925 87, 823 134 , 815
Totals 37 , 176 557973 92 , 943 1397935 .
w/Clustering**
* Parcels qualifying as residential have been given a residential land use code by the Assessor' s office and have an
improved value of more than $20, 000 according to the Assessor' s data dated December 2004. Parcels with a
residential land use code but an improved value of less than $20 , 000 are classified as vacant .
**Clustering allows certain land uses to increase the number of potential residences located on one parcel
providing the parcel meeting specific criteria (See Development Standards and Critical Areas Ordinance ) .
Clustering is only permitted in Inholding , Long Term Commercial Forest , and Agricultural Resource land uses .
aDwelling units can only be constructed on parcels at least . 29 acres in size due to septic requirements . Any
parcel smaller than a . 29 acre was not considered for additional dwelling units .
' The total number of additional dwelling units is an approximation as many parcels are not suitable for residential
development even though they may be classified as such .
4 2 . 5 is a standardized approximate number of people that may occupy a dwelling unit as specified by the U . S .
Census .
November 15 , 2005 24 Draft
DRAFT ® Planningvis isi
Revised iv l Element
Analysis
The calculations illustrated in Table IV . 3 - 7A reflect an estimated increase of 53 , 925 dwelling
units to the rural areas should the land be developed to its fullest residential use . This type
of " build out " development could increase the population in the rural areas , not including the
City of Shelton or the UGAs , by as many as 92 , 943 people for a total estimated rural
population of 139 , 935 ,
The l='uture LandWN N& PlariR
The Future Land C1se Flan Map includes designated areas for the National Park and
Fi►rest, Long Term C� rrrmercial Forest Lands a»d thear ialdrfr 'lancl , Arc�c(tur
Resvuce Lzinds, Urban Growth Areas 11GAv' mI R1lNu NiilL-
ral ��tr IN
�rtlI
y NAN
Centers �rnd Rural Areas
Mineral Resarce Lands yre»g Term Cammecil forest handNN-
y ire also desgnae , but
that desrgnatinri rs air cryerlay on other dsstrrbts, prfn�arity tfre bores€ t,ani'%% art the RIN
uraC
Areas ThIN l
e Fian alsca provN7 IN idIN N es fa11 r a pop�rl NINN ation reserve fbr passIlN
ible (=ally Cgntiraed
Conrmunrtre This arilysi does n'ot address populat3a' epancininthe forest anNN
dNl;s,or
the> Natiorr Park or Forest areas becauIIl%se, althouN-qegh some chewet��i9Iiment gray Cie passible, it
is e�rtremel y lirrfited and trot expected � The analysis for the papu�a��ap reserve i� also
trec� te� differently because f>�e �trr�Catran of � fu11�r aa�ttartted ea�munrtie� xs not t�nar�faa
The pnalysis, therefore, ad"dres�es, land demand, but � does �nt3asddressLLiaiid ��p�Cy�
TheIN
prctpnsed tTNil , 2rhanrarth� �lre'as include the Cri�yaf Shelton aad the Carrr�»ties of
Bel fair and AllyIN
iN -n Ru ANN ral Acthirrty CIN enters include UrtivIN n, Taylor Town, anhlcadspart
hen rncludrnglxot11%h IN
the alY�cated and the reIN-serveri`perptatran the estimate itiai
approximatelNi y 6ercaertt oMason Cautty� rs will be rqurrecf tv accommiNI IN IN
NTi� odate
therowtNA N7
h associated wifh Masan County's ZQ year populatian �fareccrs��IIN TABLE l� 3 '
11
identifies �th� sr�pirly ofa�a �%�bhe land Within e�►+th ttr�; � the p��cent � t�e
countywide dertmcrnd'_frgm the^ allocated papulcitio» drstribsuted to each �!atershed
7,48LE /V 3- 1 IN
8 La NO IN - NN
NO, f r Surnrriar
7`b- NNNcl-
tat Amore~~ IN
II lz
Supply ,Per�e Li IIN t t Deiirclnd �'ercerti:
steel a UGAIN
�411 „rx UGA
lfarr , UGA
Courtlyi IN
IN
NRYT41, illIN
ION
Tatal
The demand for land for the (=ally Contained Communities rslN estimated to e
acres The means that ,the grand fatal of laird demaIN
nded ; is estimated to be
acres ( } cif aheIIN�! year p9NN
pul"Nilaliz tian isl-i prc e�cte0 1v be urba
and allocated or reser�edor theIlrtiar Grawtl� Areas dnd the Fullyantarned
Co►nmtinites : Withinthose areas the allowed de»city ranges from
cinis er acre r redentral d�veCcrl3 ente The rirtbr Can ` se. Flara �"equrras
November 15 , 2005 25 Draft
DRAFT owAs Recommended by the i i isi
Revised Comprehensive l
upprakel imately r Iris faw urban ;levels pf devvefapment, ar percent of the
County 's net land suprply fVet kind supply, in this case, means tund, nat atreaaly
derrefatied ar desrgnuted fcrr a use ether than development such as Cvn Teri»
Cammerciuf Forest Ldnd This urban land demand includes gppraximately
acres for residentraf uses and acres few nan resictentiaf uses:;
The Future Land iJ$e Pfan ~desrgdr i a proximal fy acres: csr urban t vels ;af
cfevelopmnent tftroughout the County The totel urtian ldn'd der»and, not including the
IV
Band needed for, the F r1fy doe) )f ed Com�rrunzty, as acres The dafferen e
bet► een the urban tond apply and demand a acres The prdpert , rf the Part of
5heltan as not rn the ��newd( fund market, rt rs rat cvurfubfe for resadent�af d��i�e�ap�nent,
n
and ' it can only be expected �a gccamrnodate a share of the expected non resrdentrat
grelf
wthT
, p% 61-pre � ete� Ile —IVIe,percetat zaf the 2 =IIIyeur� ZQ WiA
pulatrcanrar�rtlts= rltaatec tQ the Rurr (
Actar�aty Centers and the ftraf hrec Water qu lrs}tpnrfcr , deeIt toprnent st�rdard ��
and the VI
he f ,
a u th and onrrrznmentrrl crrterra are usec �EQ establish fat sre. CamfrtVVtV eI IV IV d,
these staVVIVnI'lldards �!�ff l �Cef ysesuf n e� devILI,elopment pattern , that oufd require
,Vtapproratef k hcre fpr we �denra�l � hrs �rplsr� rrrn, telr
Qcs ► +3thm the Ru ' ctty Centers and awes ? in Rrarec This
re resenfs event tlrtaf pf fp the tQtctf rstenra[ tar
p ° _ p
demand ;
TA E 'lY 3 19 dtspfays thedrstwrt�utaan of the land supply fend demand, demanc# by us`e,
and popufr� tran by ilran, Rural Aeti�rity Center (RAC} r updturaf ,4reu
November 15 , 2005 26 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended bythe PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revised r iv n Element
TT;; hTp 1 % / Z _ 10 1 7nA Av ilahility � nr1 1 � nrl Ilom � nrl G rnm � ry
a—rr— tity a�-rcr-Land--vc�-i�ur-rv-�n-rrrrccr
November 15 , 2005 27 Draft
DRAFT As Recommended by the Planning vi ii
Revisedi n Element
TABLE IV . 3 - 20 Land Capacity Summary - - Urban Lands (acres )
Area (all acres Residential Non - Residential [ otaLdand Land Supply
res )** Land Demand Land Demand* Deman
Urban Growth
Areas
Shelton 930 489 1419 1419
- Belfair 449 60 509 509
- Allyn 233 21 254 254
Totals 1612 570 2182 2182
* Exclusively non - residential
* Net acres excludes unavailable lands , unsuitable lands ; 20% roads 8 25% market factor
Countywide Planning Policies
In 1992 , the City of Shelton and Mason County adopted the Countywide Planning Policies to
cooperatively guide each agency's GMA Planning processes . The Countywide Planning Policies
contains several provisions that address land use growth and capacity . They include
agreement or cooperation in determining :
1 . Urban Growth Area designations around incorporated cities , based on distribution
patterns of projected population growth and existing concentrations of population
density;
2 . Urban Growth Areas designated in other areas of the County, based on population
growth and distribution patterns , and existing concentrations of population .
3 . Designation of Rural Lands ,
4 . Level of Service standards for the Urban Growth Areas and Rural Lands .
5 . Multimodal transportation systems based on regional priorities and the comprehensive
plans of Mason County and the City of Shelton .
6 . Need and delivery of affordable housing throughout Mason County and the City of
Shelton .
7 . Economic development priorities and actions .
8 . Balance among property rights , environmental protection , and public trust .
9 . Permit processing procedures and shared permitting responsibilities within the Shelton
Urban Growth Area .
1 . Support and protection for Mason County ' s resource - based economy .
November 15 , 2005 28 Draft
DRAFT ® i l i vis ii
Revisediv l Element
11 . Preservation , protection , and , where appropriate , development of open space and
recreation facilities .
12 . Environmental management for water resources , critical areas , and wastewater
disposal .
13 . Public involvement for preparation of the County ' s and City ' s respective
comprehensive plans and development regulations .
14 . Siting and levels of service for utilities , capital facilities , and transportation
improvements .
15 . Identification and preservation of historic and archeological significance .
Mason County Planning Policies
The Mason County Planning Policies are intended to guide future land use and capital facility
investment decisions . The policies are incorporated a Chapter III in the Comprehensive Plan .
The Mason County Planning Policies contain numerous policies intended to mitigate the
impacts of population growth and land use . Those policies call for :
1 . Encouraging the preservation and protection of water quality, critical areas , Resource
Lands , and open space .
2 . Encouraging the development of passive and active recreation areas .
3 . Adopting permanent critical area regulations .
4 . Adopting permanent Resource Lands regulations .
5 . Encouraging affordable housing .
6 . Providing for a range of housing types including single family, multi - family, and mobile
homes .
7 . Designating an Urban Growth Area of sufficient size to accommodate projected urban
population for the next 20 years .
8 . Minimizing restrictions on the supply of urban land and offsetting rising housing costs
by designating an Urban Growth Area of sufficient size to accommodate growth 25 %
greater than projected .
9 . Minimizing sprawl by allowing sufficient densities within urban areas to reduce the
demand for conversion of rural lands to urban areas to accommodate the 20 - year
forecasted urban population .
1 . Providing for a sufficient land supply within urban areas to meet the housing demand of
November 15 , 2005 29 Draft
DRAFT ® m i Advisoryi i
Revised ivPlan Element
the 20 - year forecasted urban population .
11 . Establishing Working Rural Areas (WRA ) and designating urban areas within the WRA
that would become part of Mason County ' s Urban Growth Area ,
12 . Adopting development regulations that guide the location and siting of residential and
non - residential uses within the WRA .
13 . Adopting development standards and design guidelines to manage growth and
development within WRA areas .
14 . Designating an area for a new Fully Contained Community ( FCC ) as part of Mason
County ' s Urban Growth Area .
15 . Adopting development regulations to guide the location and siting of residential and
non - residential uses within the FCC .
16 . Adopting development standards and design guidelines to manage growth and
development within the FCC .
17 . Adopting development regulations that guide the location and siting of residential and
non - residential uses within the urban area .
18 . Adopting development standards and design guidelines to manage growth and
development within urban areas .
19 . Planning , designing , and financing of facilities and services that recognize the impacts
of population on urban areas and provide for urban levels of service in urban areas .
20 . Planning , designing , and financing of transportation facilities and services that
recognize the impacts of population on urban areas and provide for urban levels of
service in urban areas .
21 . Planning , designing , and financing of utilities that recognize the impacts of population
on urban areas and provide for urban levels of service in urban areas .
22 . Providing for a sufficient land supply within Rural Activity Centers ( RACs ) to meet the
housing demand of the 20 -year forecasted population within RACs .
23 . Adopting development regulations that guide the location and siting of residential and
non - residential uses within the RACs area .
24 . Adopting development standards and design guidelines to manage growth and
development within RACs areas .
25 . Providing for a sufficient land supply in Rural Areas to meet the housing demand of the
0 - year forecasted population within the Rural Area .
November 15 , 2005 30 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory iisson
Revised ivPlan Element
26 . Adopting development regulations that guide the location and siting of residential and
non - residential uses within the Rural Area .
27 . Adopting development standards and design guidelines to manage growth and
development within the Rural Area .
28 . Planning , designing , and financing of facilities and services that recognize the impacts
of population on rural lands and provide for rural levels of service in Rural Activity
Centers , Rural Community Centers , and Rural Areas .
29 . Planning , designing , and financing of transportation facilities and services that
recognize the impacts of population on rural lands and provide for rural levels of service
in Rural Activity Centers , Rural Community Centers , and Rural Areas .
30 . Planning , designing , and financing of utilities that recognize the impacts of population
on rural lands and provide for rural levels of service in Rural Activity Centers , Rural
Community Centers , and Rural Areas .
31 . In developing the annual transportation improvement program , the County is
responsible for reviewing the basic transportation network that serves the entire
community .
32 . Mason County, the City of Shelton and the identified UGA area should develop and
adopt concurrent " Engineering and Development Design Standards " to regulate growth
and transportation development in the UGA areas .
November 15 , 2005 31 Draft
DRAFT ® i vise issi
Revised Comprehensive n Element
IV. 4 CRITICAL
Geologically and us Areas
Geologically hazardous areas include areas susceptible to landslide , erosion , earthquake or
other geological events . In many cases , hazards can be reduced or mitigated by engineering ,
design or modified construction practices . Because of their susceptibility however, some of
these areas may not be suitable for new development .
Mason County ' s Interim Resource Ordinance identifies three types of Geologic Hazard Areas : 1 )
Landslide Hazard Areas ; 2 ) Seismic Hazard Areas ; and 3 ) Erosion Hazard Areas . Landslide
Hazard Areas are lands that have an increased potential for landslides and other earth
movement . Seismic Hazard Areas are lands that are particularly susceptible to damage from
earthquakes and other seismic activity . Lastly , Erosion Hazard Areas are lands that are more
susceptible to excessive erosion .
Landslide Hazard Areas
A landslide is a rapid down slope movement of a mass of material such as rocks , soil , or other
debris . The speed and distance of movement , as well as the amount of material , vary greatly
and depend on a combination of geologic , topographic and hydrologic factors . Especially
susceptible to landslide hazards are marine bluffs and unconsolidated glacial deposits on steep
hillsides ( greater than 40 percent ) .
Potential Landslide Hazard Areas are areas that meet the following criteria .
1 . Areas with indication of earth movement such as debris slides , earth flows , slumps and
rock falls ; or
2 . Areas with artificial over steepened or unengineered slopes , i . e . cuts or fills ,
3 . Areas containing soft or potentially liquefiable soils ;
4 . Areas unstable as a result of stream incision , stream bank erosion , and undercutting by
wave action ;
5 . Slopes greater than 15 % ( 8 . 5 degrees ) , except areas composed of consolidated rock ,
and having either of the following :
a . Steep hillsides intersecting geologic contacts with a relatively permeable
sediment overlying a relatively impermeable sediment or bedrock ; or
b . Springs or groundwater seepage .
A key indicator of potential landslide areas is slope of the land . Approximately 10% of the
landscape in Mason County ( excluding Olympic National Forest and Olympic National Park
areas ) has a slope of 15 - 30% , and approximately 3 % has steeper slopes of 30 = 45 % ( see FIGURE IV-
4 . 1 , Landslide Hazard Map ) .
November 15 , 2005 32 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revisedr sivPlan Element
The risk of landslide occurrence depends on a number of factors including soil vulnerability ,
slope , and the degree of water saturation . Development activities can increase the risk by
exposing soil through clearing , altering natural drainage patterns , excavating the "toe " of
slopes , or increasing soil moisture content .
An important measure of potential risk for landslide when development occurs is land clearing
and alteration for development . Potential impacts to Mason County can be assessed based on
the relative amount of land converted to urban uses during the 20 -year planning under each of
the alternatives .
In addition to the critical area regulations , the comprehensive plan minimizes the amount of
land cleared for development by directing up to 70 percent of the County ' s growth into Urban
Areas . Further, options such as Working Rural Areas and Resource Conservation Master Plans
require clustering and open space . Both techniques reduce the amount of land disturbed by
development while maintaining overall rural densities .
Seismic Hazards
Seismic Hazards occur in areas subject to severe risk of earthquake damage as a result of
seismic induced settlement or soil liquefaction . These areas include soils containing high
organic content ( e . g . , wetland soils ) , areas of loose sand and gravel , artificial fills , landslide
deposits , and fine - grained soils with high water tables .
Seismic Hazard Areas are areas susceptible to ground failure , including the following .
1 . Mapped geologic faults ;
2 . Areas of poorly compacted artificial fill ;
3 . Areas with artificially steepened slopes ;
4 . Post - glacial stream , lake or beach sediments ;
5 . River Deltas ;
6 . Areas designated as potential Landslide Hazard Areas ;
7 . Bluff areas ;
8 . Deep road fills and unsupported fills .
Seismic Hazard Areas are shown on the Mason County Seismic Hazards Map ( FIGURE IV-4 . 2 ) , as
documented by the Coastal Zone Atlas of Washington and Geology and Related Groundwater
Occurrence , Southeastern Mason County, Washington , Water Supply Bulletin 29 .
November 15 , 2005 33 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
CAI
LU
elm z � R
w
N >¢ .It. . .. . .. , A A K3R1 HS€ 1 M4flA n5ti
i
71
f
3 �
1"'tff
Ya
i+
Is
t i
11 MjA
if ,
�� rl
Ih
tot
1
f
1
! .
A b It
r tVA
„R
1
,j51re
It
`W
IA
I
N VSA NGH1 Nii1 N131 4p31 NQIk
November 15 , 2005 34 Draft
DRAFT ® i Advisoryi si
Revised ivElement
LU
v�
LU lie
w y,
MCC LU
3
UA J
_ Nrei - - Nasa xzzi N ,4x ...noire Xaca
3 F
y i
I 3
i
1
i r
( N
G b t
y
a
f
-
r i ! t
� t
t
& _ !4 f �_ 'n 1n F A -c
Nx
WWW
il
WWW
A #
r } {{ y n it
,.
l i i
L
1, 71 ti
iWI
- v+.vna .. .rv..uxH .•• •- rr. — ex .w.na vwmax wwe .m® r . a,wrr . nux �mv °-taw + _t � 4 wk uwwau � 4 -'i•••
NfSa X $aa Mdd1 N4Sa N6bA NgkA
November 15 , 2005 35 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revised Comprehensive l
All structures in Mason County are subject to the engineering and design requirements of the
Uniform Building Code for earthquakes . Seismic hazards requirements focus on effects to
buildings and other facilities from intense ground shaking and / or liquefaction . Attention to
seismically induced landslides could also cause structural damage to buildings , particularly on
steeper slopes and shoreline bluffs . In addition , the critical area regulations do not allow
significant public buildings in seismic hazard areas ; and the future land use plan directs most
growth away from these areas .
Erosion Hazard Areas
Erosion is a natural process in which the land surface is worn away by the action of water,
wind , ice or other geologic processes . The most common cause of erosion is water falling or
flowing across the land . Factors contributing to erosion hazard are soil type and slope .
Erosion hazards generally occur on erosive soils where slopes exceed 15 percent .
The Mason County Interim Resource Ordinance classifies Erosion Hazard Areas as areas that
have an Erosion Index of 8 or greater as determined by methodologies found in the United
States Department of Agriculture , Soil Conservation Service " Food Security Act Manual , Title
180 , Second Edition , August , 1988" .
The erosion process can be accelerated by development activity that exposes and disturbs
soils so they are more vulnerable to erosive forces . Further, increased areas of impervious
surfaces reduce the infiltration of rainfall , increase stormwater runoff, and result in even
greater erosion potential . Increased runoff, erosion , and sedimentation may adversely affect
the physical and biological characteristics of streams and other water resources .
Erosion Hazards are similar to Landslide Hazards in that they are both often created by, or
aggravated by development activities such as clearing and grading . The comprehensive plan
controls the hazards through the critical areas regulations and by concentrating development
in suitable areas .
Mason County Planning Policies
The recommended policies contain several policies intended to mitigate the impacts of
development in geologically hazardous areas . The policies focus on :
1 . Adoption of a permanent Critical Areas Ordinance to identify and designate
geologically hazardous areas .
2 . Identifying areas in which development should be prohibited or restricted due to
geological hazards .
3 . Adopting new standards for effective erosion control .
4 . Requiring a geotechnical report for proposal located on Landslide Hazard Areas .
5 . Development standards such as vegetative management , drainage , and buffers .
November 15 , 2005 36 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revised iv
Wetlands
Wetlands are natural ecosystems that serve a number of important beneficial functions . They
assist in reducing erosion , siltation , flooding , and ground and surface water contamination .
Wetlands provide habitat for wildlife , plants , and fisheries . They may also assist in recharging
groundwater supplies . In addition , wetlands provide opportunities for recreation and
education .
In wetlands , the soil is at least periodically saturated or covered with water . These water
conditions support special kinds of plants called hydrophytes ( Greek for "water loving' ) . Soils
that have been saturated for a sufficient length of time certain properties and are referred to
as hydric soils . An area must exhibit all three of the following characteristics in order to be
classified a wetland :
1 . Inundation or saturation of the soil by water;
2 . The presence of wetland plants ( hydrophytes ) ; and
3 . The presence of hydric soils .
Wetlands are generally divided into five classes : Riparian wetlands are associated with rivers
and streams ; Marine wetlands are found along ocean shores ; Estuarine wetlands occur where
fresh water and salt water meet ; Lacustrine wetlands are associated with lakes ; and
Palustrine wetlands include upland freshwater wetlands fed by ground or surface water . The
wetlands identified within Mason County include all of these classes .
For the purposes of protection and regulation , wetlands are designated as Category I ,
Category II , Category III , or Category IV . The Washington State Department of Ecology
established these categories .
Category I applies to the most valuable wetlands . These wetlands include a particularly rare
plants or animal species , represent a high quality , rare wetland type , are regionally rare , or
provide irreplaceable functions and values .
Category II applies to wetlands that provide habitat for very sensitive or important plants or
animals , are difficult to replace , or provide very high functions and values , particularly for
wildlife habitat .
Category III applies to wetlands that support a variety of wildlife species and occur more
commonly throughout Mason County than either Category I or II wetlands .
Category IV applies to smaller, isolated wetlands that have less diverse vegetation but provide
important functions and values .
Mason County includes an abundance of wetland areas . Most of these areas are associated
with larger freshwater and saltwater systems . The Natural Heritage Program identifies only
high quality native wetlands , category 1 under the Western Washington Rating System . As of
1992 , there were approximately 20m25 Category I wetlands documented in Mason County .
November 15 , 2005 37 Draft
DRAFT ® s i vis is
Revised Comprehensive t
In total , however, approximately 38 , 290 acres in the County have been mapped as wetlands as
documented by the National Wetland Inventory ( see FIGURE IV- 4 . 3 , Mason County Generalized
Wetland Inventory Map . Agricultural wetlands and isolated wetlands under one acre in size
are exempt from most of the regulatory requirements of the Mason County Critical Area
Ordinance .
The alteration or destruction of wetlands can eliminate or reduce the variety of biological and
hydrological functions that wetlands perform . Direct impacts may result from clearing ,
grading or filling in advance of development . Of equal potential are indirect impacts from
new development , which may alter surface water flows , or interrupt the infiltration of
groundwater .
New development may increase volumes of sediment - laden runoff entering wetlands . This
may inhibit the wetlands ' natural capacity to remove nutrients and process chemical and
organic wastes . In addition , increased sedimentation within wetlands may reduce their ability
to temporarily store flood waters and increase the risk and magnitude of downstream impacts .
November 15 , 2005 38 Draft
to
DRAFT too As Recommended by the Planning AdvisoryCommission
Revised Comprehensive Plan
COO
anc
4*9
LU
CD
LU
- a
LU _ .
uj 0
._.....
a rax asv I:.. xeca ..NMI. aeaa xols
I) �
fN
to ii.
s+ A i }h[ i
y 1 ,,, . - ,-
SrLt4
tl isto �
1 t ! +
c
ir
,44
x
1 _$
k • ' A W _ _ 1
1
To -•fit y :+ • ,� �' ' ,,,, t
Vc
woo— if
tIZEw
1 4 No '4 y SJf 11"".
M it kkNel
T 1 6a
tee
too "'Mou
EA
"R F y(lhr3 +F%F• 'i i� h^t „�, '' — IW 2"Sct ~ '!s
G i t -- i _ 1...d f .u-1
` ;# W N a p
1 yi , . _ d45 '9A 8 t
+x F.. ww y ! k H -
tqlp .i:+M.df .A'. too,"
_ �._ k . � 1 ,.wW _ u ewo mala M
wool MM2'3, M blJ W "Win WACWO
x YZA aural 7q bEl x121 a682. xmti
November 15 , 2005 39 Draft
DRAFT twoAs Recommended by the i vis ii
RevisedComprehensive
Wetlands may also often provide groundwater recharge . Development activities in areas near
or hydrologically connected to wetlands in recharge areas could interrupt infiltration to the
groundwater system .
The ;compreheosive.. plan concentrates growth , all®catng as much as 77
percent of the
County ' s poputatic ri growth to Urban Areas : (t also provides fQr p rman rif open space -and
designatedataral resource areas iri development allowed w�fihin Rural Areas .%
Countywide Planning Policies
The Countywide Planning Policies call for Mason County and the City of Shelton to :
1 . Encourage the retention of open space ; and
2 . Protect the environment and enhance the County ' s quality of Life * including air and
water quality, and the availability of water .
Mason County Planning Policies
The recommended policies contain several policies intended to mitigate the impacts of
development on wetlands . The policies focus on :
1 . Avoiding impacts to wetlands due to development and ensuring that no net loss of
wetlands in terms of acreage , function and value occurs .
2 . Adopting permanent regulations for wetland protection that provide for : restrictions on
clearing , grading and filling ; stormwater runoff controls ; construction practices ;
sufficient buffers to sustain wetland functions ; and mitigation and / or restoration .
Mason County has adopted interim regulations to protect critical areas , including wetlands .
The Western Washington Growth Management Hearing Board has ordered the county to re -
assess those regulations , but until that can be done , the current regulations will remain in
effect .
Fish and Wildlife Habitat
Mason County contains an abundance of marine , freshwater and upland habitat for fish and
wildlife . Preservation of fish and wildlife habitat is critical to protecting suitable
environments for animal species , and in providing an important part of the local quality of life
for County residents and visitors .
November 15 , 2005 40 Draft
DRAFT ® n i Advisoryissi
Revised Comprehensive l n Element
One of wildlife` s most important functions is in maintaining the health and diversity of
ecosystems . Each species has its role in an ecosystem . When a species is eliminated , the
ecosystem loses the functions it performed . As a result , the balance of the ecosystem is
sometimes irreversibly lost or diminished . Given the inter- relation of all species in an
ecosystem , species elimination may result in unpredictable consequences , though some
consequences of habitat impact are known in advance . For example , a loss of marine
invertebrates and kelp from over- harvesting ultimately affects the quality of habitat for larger
fish , mammals and birds .
Fish and wildlife also provide important recreational and economic benefits such as hunting
and fishing opportunities . The continued prosperity of the commercial and recreational fish
and shellfish industries depends on maintenance of excellent water quality and unpolluted
habitats for fish , shellfish , and their food sources .
Fish and wildlife habitat also provide significant social benefits . Mason County residents are
accustomed to occasional encounters with wildlife such as bald eagles , great blue heron and
elk . Wildlife provides the opportunity to educate the public about biological and ecological
processes . Other less quantifiable benefits include wildlife viewing , and maintaining the
historical , cultural , and spiritual values of Native American Tribes and the general public .
The Mason County Interim Resource Ordinance guides management of the County ' s Fish and
Wildlife habitat . It divides critical fish and wildlife habitat areas into two classes : 1 ) Aquatic
Management Areas ; and 2 ) Terrestrial Management Areas .
Aquatic Management Areas
Mason County includes three principal river systems and numerous lakes , small rivers , and
streams . The Skokomish and Hamma Hamma rivers are swiftly flowing , deeply incised rivers
that originate high in the Olympic Mountains and empty into Hood Canal . The East and Middle
Forks of the Satsop River originate in the Olympic Mountains , converge at the southwestern
corner of the County and flow southward into the Chehalis River . All of the eastern part of
the County is drained by smaller streams which flow only short distances before reaching
outlets to Puget Sound . Many of the small streams , as well as the larger systems , support
significant fisheries , including anadromous fish . Other surface waters are made up of
numerous lakes and wetland areas , some of which include Cushman , Mason , Nahwatzel , Lost ,
Isabella , Island , Cranberry , Limerick and Spencer lakes .
The waters and shorelines of Mason County are an important resource . In addition to their
natural beauty , and cultural value , they provide the base for a sizable shellfish industry ,
aquaculture , fish and wildlife habitat .
Aquatic Management Areas as classified and designated include the following :
Class I Management Area
All areas under the jurisdiction of the Mason County Shoreline Master Program ; except
State designated Harbor Areas pursuant to RCW 79 . 90 . 020 and Article XV of the
Washington State Constitution .
November 15 , 2005 41 Draft
DRAFT ® c PlanningAdvisoryis i
Revised iv
Class II Management Area
All areas defined as Type 2 , 3 , 4 , or 5 waters as established in WAC 222ml & 030 , pages
19 through 24 , including all naturally occurring lakes and ponds not considered
wetlands and not under the jurisdiction of the Mason County Shoreline Master Program ;-
errl all larrlc Within •
a 200 font of the erdinary high wateF marls of Typo 7 wateT-s
er-dinar-high water r;a * of Type 3 �.; tee
c . 50 feet of the. ord-inary high water-irk of-Type 4 waters ; „ r
d . 25-feet of the erdir+ar-y-high water marl. of Type 5 Nyator
The water typing system has been established by the Department of Natural Resources and is
based on the size and character of the water body . Type 1 waters are the larger water bodies
and rivers that have been classed as Waters of the State , such as the Hood Canal and the
Skokomish River . As the size of the river or lake is reduced , the water type becomes a 2 , 3 , or
4 , until a type 5 water is identified . Type 5 waters may be dry beds most of the year,
providing only winter flows . ( See Mason County Resource Ordinance , page 56 ) i
Marine Habitat Areas include the following :
1 . All kelp beds ( members of the brown algal family Laminariales including Alaria
marginate, Alaria nana, Alaria tenuifolia, Egregia menziesii , Eisenia arborea ,
Pterygophora californica, Agarum cribosum , Agarum fimbriatum , Costaria costata,
Cymathere triplicate , Hedophyllum sessile, Laminaria spp . , Pleurophycus gardneri ,
Dictyoneuropsis reticulata , Dictyoneurum californicum , Lessioniopsis littoralis,
Macrocystis integrifolia , Nereocystis luetkeana, and Postelsia palmaeformis) and all
eel grass beds ( Zostera spp . ) . These areas are important salt water habitats that
support valuable species , providing habitat for plants , fish , shellfish , sea birds and sea
mammals .
Recent maps of the location of kelp and eel grass beds in Mason County were not
available for inclusion in this Plan . The Washington State Department of Natural
Resources reports that floating Bull kelp occurs off of the west shore to the southwest
tip of Squaxin Island . The location of eel grass beds can change over time , making the
locations of eel grass beds , particularly the deeper, subtidal species hard to track . Eel
grass has been found throughout Hood Canal in the past ( 1995 Mason County Shoreline
Inventory) .
2 . Priority shellfish areas including .
a . All public and private tidelands or bedlands which are approved or conditionally
approved by the Washington Department of Health for shellfish harvest ;
b . Any Shellfish Protection District created under RCW 90 . 72 ; and
November 15 , 2005 42 Draft
DRAFT - As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revised iv tElement
c . Areas with all of the following attributes : broad intertidal areas , bays with
geographically restricted wave action and circulation , poor or limited flushing ,
warmer water temperatures , seasonally reduced salinity , and increased
potential for algae bloom .
3 . All identified smelt spawning areas ( these are mapped in the 1995 Mason County
Shoreline Inventory) .
To protect and preserve aquatic resources , the County has designated the following areas as
Aquatic Management Areas .
1 . All areas under the jurisdiction of the Mason County Shoreline Master Program ; except
State designated Harbor Areas pursuant to RCW 79 . 90 . 020 and Article XV of the
Washington State Constitution ;
2 . All Type 11 , III , IV waters as established in WAC 222 - 16 - 030 , including all naturally
occurring lakes and ponds not considered wetlands and not under the jurisdiction of
the Mason County Shoreline Master Program , and all lands within ( see FIGURE IV-4 , 4 ,
Mason County Stream Type Maps
a . Inn feet of the el:dinaFy high water marl. of Tune II waters ;
he 100 feet of the e diRaary high ater-maFk of Type te, i
Go 50 feet of the erdinaFy high water marl. of Type IV waters
v v feet cw�rc� rc of v n � ary��rrrrnucc� 1 c-rr-rraccrr.
d . 25 feet-of-the eFdiRary high water mark of Type 5 waters -
These areas not only protect the aquatic habitats , but they provide preserved areas for
habitat for non - aquatic species and establish wildlife corridors between the larger areas of
habitat and open space .
November 15 , 2005 43 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the Planningvi ii
Revised Comprehensive tElement
we
t a It
E
� i �� 3l V Y3rq '4V .,A Mt"' .rr xnrvap (� q-CL
[
L io
I �
L1 x
g
14
kd
It...
0
t � } r r t 1 fit • ,
c
a
1733
e IC
{It
IF
It
f
F f =
w r �
g R ` t is 1 ij
{It + " -
j t I., — 1z PAS
M
A E > v tCC
CC .�., '
It% It
i
I , ..:
i
�!M l761�NSAng! ttrIttoawI _ � .,. +r... .. .wQtt III, III,
. .i HIHSxc1k 1"ao-i • i rr.r xo2tMt fiht'![ r `^ m. n�. .w a, na. ..l
I
i
_ ,., m_ _ ,
,z .I.
November 15 , 2005 44 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningiCommission
Revisedr i
Terrestrial Management Areas
All development activities have the potential to impact native plant and animal species .
Terrestrial Management Areas are those areas where the presence of state endangered or
state threatened terrestrial species have been identified . The Mason County Critical Area
Ordinance specifies that all development in these areas shall be consistent with State and
Federal law .
TABLE IV-4 . 1 is a compilation of the Priority Habitats and Species and Special Non - Game
Species in Mason County . It is summarized from data provided by the Washington State
Department of Fish and Wildlife in December 2004 .
There are also a number of publicly and privately managed natural areas in Mason County that
have been designated as preserves or refuges . These areas are important for fish and wildlife
habitat , scenic vistas , protection of sensitive plant species , and preservation of open space .
The Washington State Department of Natural Resources manages three Natural Area Preserves
in Mason County . They include 17 acres at Oak Patch Lake , 28 acres on Skookum Inlet , and a
56 - acre site on Totten Inlet . The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife manages a
number of properties in the County , including the 172 - acre Skokomish River Tidelands Wildlife
Area and the 122 - acre Union River Wildlife Area .
Mason County also includes a number of properties managed by the Hood Canal Land Trust
( HCLT) . HCLT is a non - profit organization that either owns properties outright or manages
them under the terms of conservation easements . Key HCLT sites include the Klingall and
Jimmy Bryan Wetland Preserves , 88 acres on the north side of Lynch Cove and 140 acres along
the Union River under a conservation easement .
November 15 , 2005 45 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the Planningvis i
Revised Comprehensive Element
TABLE IV-4o 1
Priority Habitats and Species and Special Non - Game Species in Mason County
ULLUSCS CRUSTACEANS
Newcomb ' s littorine snail Dungeness crab
Pinto abalone Pandalid shrimp
Goeduck clam BUTTERFLIES
Hardshell clams Johnson 's hairstreak
Olympia oyster Mardon skipper
Pacific oyster Makah copper
Razor clams Oregon silverspot
ECHINODERMS Puget blue
Red urchin Valley silverspot
FISH Whinge checkerspot
River lamprey AMPHIBIANS
Green sturgeon Oregon spotted frog
White sturgeon Western toad
Pacific herring Cascades torrent salamander
Olympic Mudminnow Columbia torrent salamander
Channel catfish Dunn ' s salamander
Eulachon (smelt) Van Dyke ' s salamander
Longfin smelt BIRDS
Surfsmelt Brandt ' s cormorant
Bull trout/ Dolly Varden Brown pelican
Chinook salmon Cassin ' s auklet
Chum salmon Common loon
Coastal resident / Searun cutthroat Common murre
Coho salmon Marbled murrelet
Kokanee Short - tailed albatross
Pink salmon Tufted puffin
Pygmy whitefish Nonbreeding concentrations of : loons ,
grebes , cormorants , fulmar shearwaters ,
storm - petrels , and alcids
Rainbow trout / Steelhead Breeding concentrations of : cormorants ,
storm - petrels , terns , alcids
Sockeye salmon Black - crowned night heron
Westslope cutthroat Great blue heron
Pacific cod Aleutian Canada goose
Pacific hake Brants
Walleye pollock Cavity nesting ducks
Black rockfish Nonbreeding concentrations of : Barrow ' s
goldeneye , common goldeneye ,
bufflehead
Bocaccio rockfish Harlequin duck
Brown rockfish Swans
Canary rockfish Waterfowl concentrations
November 15 , 2005 46 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the Planningvis ii
Revised iv tElement
China rockfish Bald eagle
Copper rockfish Golden eagle
Greenstriped rockfish Merlin
Quillback rockfish Northern goshawk
Redstripe rockfish Peregrine falcon
Tiger rockfish Blue grouse
Widow rockfish Mountain quail
Yelloweye rockfish Wild turkey
Yellowtail rockfish Sandhi [ [ crane
Lingcod Snowy plover
Largemouth bass Nonbreeding concentrations of : plovers ,
sandpipers , phalaropes
Smallmouth bass Pigeons
Pacific sand lance Spotted owl
English sole Vaux ' s swift
Rock sole Pileated woodpecker
MAMMALS Oregon vesper sparrow
Keen 's myotis (bat) Purple Martin
Western gray squirrel Slender- billed white - breasted nuthatch
Killer whale Streaked , horned lark
HABITAT
Aspen stands Prairies and steppe
Caves Riparian
Cliffs Rural natural open space
Estuary Snags and logs
Freshwater wetlands and fresh deepwater Talus
Instream Urban natural open space
Marine / estuarine shorelines Vegetated marine / estuarine
01&growth / mature forests Oregon white oak woodlands
Sensitive Plants and Plant Communities
The existence of rare and sensitive plants and plant communities is increasingly threatened by
the intensive development created by the County's population growth . One of the primary
objectives of the GMA is to protect the natural environments that are required to support
these communities .
The following is a list of rare and sensitive plant species for Mason County provided by the
Washington State Department of Natural Resources , Natural Heritage Program December,
2004 .
November 15 , 2005 47 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the Planningvis ii
Revisedsiv
Scientific Name Common Name State Status
Boschmiakia hookeri Vancouver Ground - cone Potential Concern
Botrychium ascendens Triangular- lobed moonwort Sensitive
Carex circinata Coiled sedge Sensitive
Carex obtusata Blunt Sedge Sensitive
Carex pauciflora Few- flowered sedge Sensitive
Carex scirpoidea var. scirpoidea Canadian Single- spike Sedge Sensitive
Chrysolepis Chrysophylla Golden chinquapin Sensitive
Claytonia lanceolata var pacifica Pacific lanceleaved springbeauty Sensitive
Cochlearia officinalis Scurvygrass Sensitive
Erigeron aliceae Alice ' s Fleabane Sensitive
Githopsis specularioides Common Blue - cup Sensitive
Lobelia dortmanna Water Lobelia Threatened
Ophioglossum pulsillum Adder's - tongue Threatened
Parnassia palustris var neogaea Northern grass of parnassus Sensitive
Potomogeton obtusifolius Blunt- leaved pondweed Sensitive
Spiraea densiflora var. splendens Subalpine Spiraea Potential Concern
Woodwardia fimbriata Chain - fern Sensitive
In addition to monitoring rare plants , DNR also maintains a database of sensitive native plant
communities and native wetland areas in the County . The Mason County Sensitive Plants Map ,
presented in the 1995 Mason County Shoreline Inventory, shows the general locations where
these natural features exist . Because of the sensitive nature of these areas , only the general
area (section to quarter- quarter section ) where these features are known to occur is shown on
the map as documented in Appendix F of the 1995 Mason County Shoreline Inventory.
The impacts of development to habitat include the replacement of woodlands , pastures and
other undeveloped areas with buildings , roads , parking lots , landscaping , and other structures .
Depending on the location , density and intensity of uses , this may result in the removal and
displacement of habitat and cause some wildlife species to relocate to other areas . Since
most habitats are currently assumed to be at or near their carrying capacity, displaced
animals may perish .
Loss of wetlands , riparian areas and adjacent fields may affect the overall number and variety
of wildlife and waterfowl . Loss of riparian vegetation could also affect migrating or nesting
areas . Plant and animal species can also be affected by erosion and sedimentation of
streams , coastal waters , and wetlands . Shoreline and related over- water development can
harm valuable kelp and eelgrass beds .
In addition to the critical areas protections adopted by the county , the comprehensive plan
concentrates development , allocating approximately _ 63 percent of the County ' s
population growth and associated development to Urban Areas . The Urban Area will
however, .accnurit fior less -than = percent of > he C unty' s11 :,tand :area ; ;%The comprehensive
plan also provides for permanent open space and designated resource areas in development
within Rural Areas . These features will promote the protection , preservation , and
enhancement of fish and wildlife habitat .
November 15 , 2005 48 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the Planningvis ii
Revised ivPlan Element
County-Wide Planning Policies
The County- Wide Planning Policies call for Mason County and the City of Shelton to conserve
fish and wildlife habitat .
Mason County Planning Policies
Mason County ' s Comprehensive Plan policies intended to mitigate the impacts of development
on habitat . The policies focus on :
1 . The County providing fish and wildlife habitat information to the public as part of the
development process ;
2 . Adopting new regulations for habitat protection which are consistent with the Mason
County Shoreline Master Program ; and
3 . Managing site development activity to reduce / minimize off- site erosion , siltation or
other reductions in water quality .
Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas
The State of Washington 's definition of aquifer recharge areas for GMA planning purposes
focuses on existing areas of supply which are vulnerable to contamination : Areas with a
critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water are areas where an aquifer that
is a source of drinking water is vulnerable to contamination that would affect the potability
of the water (WAC 365 - 190 - 030 ) .
Groundwater exists in underground layers of porous rock or soil called aquifers . Water stored
in aquifers reaches the ground surface through springs , wells , or by seepage into surface water
features , including wetlands . Surface waters replenish , " recharge " , aquifers through seepage
from streams , takes , and wetlands , and from precipitation that percolates through soil or
rock .
Potable water means water suitable for drinking . Groundwater provides virtually all of Mason
County' s potable water . Protecting aquifers and aquifer recharge areas , therefore , is critical
to maintaining Mason County ' s water supply . Aquifers exist throughout the County . The
groundwater supplying most of the County ' s water is obtained from the aquifers running
through the coarser and more permeable glacial and fluvial sedimentary deposits . The older,
undifferentiated sedimentary deposits provide large quantities of water for industrial and
municipal wells . Bedrock forms the bottom of the groundwater layer although fractures and
joints in the relatively impermeable rocks may yield small quantities of water . Most of Mason
County enjoys an abundance of good quality water, however, the state Department of Ecology
has identified some areas such as the Kennedy and Goldsborough drainages where this may Rot,
he +� "�-�rrcthere are concerns . The-re is nn PFGhihi + inn nn new water rights in these dr- inages
9
but ,, further suFfaee Nyater o�n�nrnPnrio + inns ►, henn cstnvppCdThese basins have been closed to
� arrcrcc o a cc.. cr� � v rm�r crvT-r�--rrCi-®'c;vc�-r
new surface water appropriations . (WAC 173 = 514 ) . nrrnrrinn + n the Deportment of EGelegy ,
am flows may be This eaR form a basis fnr thp dppliat�
the gFOURd water in the. se areas. is hydmle. gically GGRRer=ted to these streams . if gFound wat &F
water rights in the ores
November 15 , 2005 49 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the Planningvi ii
Revised iv t rt Element
Precipitation provides the primary source of recharge for Mason County ' s groundwater .
Precipitation Within the County averages 64 inches annually . It increases rapidly towards the
Olympic Mountains where , at Lake Cushman , precipitation is in excess of 100 inches per year .
Water levels in wells are typically within 125 feet of the land surface . The quality of
groundwater in an aquifer is inextricably linked to its recharge area . Approximately 24 , 970
acres have been mapped as Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas in Mason County ( see FIGURE IV -4 . 5 ,
Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas ) .
All Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas in Mason County are classified as having either an Extreme ,
High or Moderate recharge potential , as defined by the County' s Resource Ordinance (Mason
County Ordinance No . 77 - 93 ) .
Urban development has two potential impacts on groundwater resources : 1 ) increases in
impervious surfaces reduce the volume of precipitation available to recharge groundwater,
and 2 ) urban development may introduce pollutants into the groundwater system . When
groundwater recharge is reduced , groundwater supplies may be depleted . In many instances ,
this is coupled with withdrawals of groundwater in excess of recharge capacity . Potential
long - term impacts include reduced capacity of water wells , reduced flows in groundwater- fed
streams , and depletion of water supplies to lakes or wetlands .
Pollutants can be introduced into the groundwater system through a variety of means . They
include failing septic systems , agricultural chemicals and animal waste , urban runoff, solid
waste disposal , and leaking underground storage tanks .
County- ide Planning Policies
The County- Wide Planning Policies call for Mason County and the City of Shelton to :
1 . Protect Resource Lands and Critical Areas .
2 . Protect the environment and enhance the County ' s quality of life ; including air and
water quality, and the availability of water .
November 15 , 2005 50 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revised ivPlan Element
uj
LU
i F3 ? E
LU to
N tEt N631 HZVI Nw62 MD'6A Ntlit -
---_. _—_ _ .._._...._ . . ...._.... ............ .._...._.-_._ _-.-......- ...... .-... ........_ . .._ . . . !
[ r
, t
-
i - I
ffi
IV r
IOI�
' 4 � k '' x• � � � I
3 ' . • k
e r +° z
I44
iV�11 IV
t _ `'_"�d � s to
`
fe -�IV 1. Y s t
w z aI`,� c tm [H
zs .a
}}}
00
z.
�.ILL
i
ir
Illljtjtj '- w
3 � I t 3 i
IMP 1tff V1, If
If
� .
IV
1¢ 3 YF.
�y 1
w If
e fi $ if
..
..... k - i i
yif Vw
rIk fl .
I 'w
IV VI ^ .� ..._ ..
I w
1IV
R
'r3 0 Mtlu <.r s�xuntl rclran T
N to Nor1 Ngo Ntt1 0 01 1 N & 2
November 15 , 2005 51 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommendedi visCommission
Revised ivPlan Element
Mason County Planning Policies
The planning policies contain several policies intended to mitigate the impacts of
development on aquifer recharge areas . The policies focus on identifying and regulating land
uses that could have a potential significant impact on groundwater quality or quantity .
The Natural Systems , On - Site Sewage Disposal , Clearing and Grading , and Stormwater and
Surface Water Elements of the Harstine Island Sub -Area Plan contain policies for the
protection of groundwater quality and quantity .
The Shoreline , On - Site Sewage , Groundwater Management , Monitoring and Education Elements
of the North Mason Sub - Area Plan contain policies for the protection of groundwater quality
and quantity .
The Commercial and Industrial Land Uses , Natural Systems , On - Site Sewage Disposal and
Treatment , Clearing and Grading , and Stormwater and Surface Water Elements of the
Southeast Mason Sub -Area Plan contain policies for the protection of groundwater quality and
quantity .
In addition , Mason County has adopted interim regulations to protect critical areas , including
aquifer recharge areas . As part of the joint planning effort to be made by the City of Shelton
and Mason County, the county will continue to examine whether additional protections are
needed within the urban growth areas to adequately protect the critical areas .
Flood Hazard Areas
Flood hazard areas are lands subject to a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any
given year . In Mason County they include areas identified as potential or historic flood areas
in the Department of Ecology's Coastal Zone Atlas or areas identified as "Zone A" flood areas
on the National Flood Insurance Program Flood Insurance Rate Maps Mason County .
Flooding in Mason County generally occurs from. November through April . The greatest cause
of flooding is heavy rainfall combined with snow melt . The Mason County Flood Insurance
Study lists four areas as most susceptible to flooding . Those areas include the Skokomish ,
Tahuya and Union Rivers , and Gotdsborough Creek .
The Skokomish River Valley floods several times annually . In recent history there have been
large flood events in 1955 , 1972 , 1990 , and 2003 . Many homes , pastures and personal
property were damaged in those years as well as lessor damage on a more frequent basis .
Flooding on the Tahuya River and Goldsborough Creek have been known to cause some
damage , whereas the Union River tends to have high flows , but minimal overbank flooding .
Flooding of marine shorelines is caused by a number of factors , which can occur individually or
in combination . They include extreme high tides , waves generated by winds , tsunamis of
distant origin , and locally generated seismic waves or boils . Wind - driven waves , superimposed
on extreme high tides , represent the most common form of coastal flooding in Mason County .
Floodways , floodplains and coastal flood areas are identified by the Mason County Federal
Flood Insurance Study FEMA maps .
November 15 , 2005 52 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revised i Plan Element
The comprehensive plan protects Flood Hazard areas because it concentrates urban
development on the least amount of land , considers the suitability of the land for
development through the use of performance standards , and provides for significant open
space and resource use areas in development within the Rural Area .
The County- Wide Planning Policies call for Mason County and the City of Shelton to protect
Critical Areas .
November 15 , 2005 53 Draft
DRAFT As Recommended by the Planning vi rCommission
Revised Comprehensive l Element
IV * 5 NATURAL RESOURCE LANDS
Natural resources abound in Mason County and provide the foundation for the County's
economy . While timber has played the dominant role , other natural resources including
agricultural lands and minerals , have also fostered economic development within the County .
EgEg Forest Products
Without question , timber is the foundation upon which Mason County ' s economy is built .
€ems-Forest Products continues to be Mason County ' s premier natural resource industry .
The early explorers marveled at the vast timber expanse in the region , describing it as "thick
as fur on a dog ' s back . " For 140 years , Mason County ' s extensive forests have supplied logs ,
Lumber, building components , pulp , and other products to national and international markets .
9
pub [ iG and pFivate ferest tand . This eRSHres that the Gut of timbeF weuld net. exceed the
ff
the U . S . Forest SepArze . The agFeernent , P. .;; Ilpd the Shetteri QepeFative SustaiRed Yield Unit.
Long Term Commercial Forest lands and Feizestry Forest Products represent the primary land
uses throughout Mason County and within each of its seven watersheds . FIGURE IV- 5 . 1 , shows
the Long Term Commercial Forest and Inholding lands in Mason County . As previously
mentioned in the discussion of Mason County land use , these figures do not include federal
and tribal lands . Thus , Long Term Commercial Forest lands and Forestry play an even greater
role in the County's land use , due to the acreage that the U . S . Forest Service maintains as well
as lands forested by both the Skokomish and Squaxin Island Tribes ,
Mason County currently has an abundance of forested lands with long term commercial
significance . Although continued population growth will place additional demands on forest
resources , these are not expected to significantly effect the County ' s forest resources during
the 20 year planning period . Impacts associated with forestry operations include erosion and
sedimentation , noise from machinery and vehicles , fugitive dust , and the visual impacts of
harvested areas . The state Department of Natural Resources is responsible for regulating these
impacts . The comprehensive plan concentrates urban development on the least amount of
land . It also provides for permanent open space and resource use areas in development
allowed within the Rural Areas .
November 15 , 2005 54 Draft
r, ✓ar a �. �
r
a
u
� .
DRAFT - As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory ii
Revised niv
County- Wide Planning Policies
The County- Wide Planning Policies call for Mason County and the City of Shelton to :
1 . Maintain and enhance natural resource based industries , including those dependent on
forest resource lands ; and
2 . Encourage the conservation of productive forestry lands .
Mason County Planning Policies
The Mason County Planning Policies contain policies intended to mitigate the impacts to forest
resource lands . These policies focus on .
1 . The designation criteria of Long Term Commercial Forest ;
2 . Ensuring that forestry operations are conducted according to forest practices
regulations ;
I Lot size and development policies for designated forest lands ; and
4 . The establishment of various performance districts intended to concentrate growth and
protect critical areas and resource lands .
Mason County has adopted interim regulations to protect resource lands , including forest
resource lands .
The Forest Land Use Element of the North Mason Subarea Plan contains policies addressing
Forest Resource uses .
The Forest Land Use Element of the Southeast Mason Subarea Plan contains policies addressing
Forest Resource uses .
Agriculture
The State of Washington 's GMA guidelines define agricultural land as land primarily devoted to
the commercial production of horticultural , viticultural , floricultural , dairy , apiary , vegetable ,
or animal products or of berries , grain , hay, straw , turf, seed , Christmas trees , or livestock ,
and that has long term commercial significance for agricultural production . Long term
commercial significance includes the growing capacity, productivity, and soil composition of
the land for long term commercial production , while considering the land ' s proximity to
population areas , and the possibility of more intense uses of the land .
Agricultural practices have taken place in Mason County since the early days of logging . The
clear - cutting practices of those early logging companies opened a considerable amount of
County land to agriculture , particularly to dairying and cattle raising . Crop production was
November 15 , 2005 56 ® raft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the Planningvi ii n
Revised r sive Plan Element
limited to the growing of hay , berries and potatoes . In the eastern part of the County where
the weather was milder, extensive vineyards and fruit orchards were planted .
Despite its rich agricultural history, however, Mason County is not well - endowed with the
resources necessary to create a strong competitive advantage for agricultural production .
Consequently, agriculture ' s current role in Mason County's economy is relatively minor . There
are 320farms currently in operation in the County covering approximately 21 , 641 acres . This
represents nearly 3 . 5 % of Mason County ' s land area .
Continued growth in Mason County is likely to increase land use conflicts between urban uses
and remaining agricultural uses . As land values rise , the potential economic returns will likely
increase the pressure on owners to sell or develop their properties .
Much of the agricultural land within the County is located in the rural areas , outside the
UGA ' s .
In order to better conserve agricultural lands of long- term commercial significance , Mason
County designated Agricultural Resource Lands in its interim resource ordinance . A total of
5 , 947 acres were designated and implementing regulations were adopted in January of 2000 .
The amendments also provided for continuing protections for lands in agricultural use , but not
qualified as lands of long - term commercial significance .
The comprehensive plan also directs up to _ 63 percent of the County's growth into Urban
Areas . Further, the plan provides options for development, which grant incentives to preserve
open space and limit the developed area to only a part of the site . This approach is called
"clustering . " Both techniques reduce the amount of land disturbed by development and make
more land available for agricultural use , while maintaining overall rural densities and rural
character.
County- Wide Planning Policies
The County- Wide Planning Policies call for Mason County and the City of Shelton to :
1 . Maintain and enhance natural resource based industries , including those dependent on
agricultural resource lands ; and
2 . Encourage the conservation of productive agricultural lands .
Mason County Planning Policies
Many of these policies serve as mitigation to reduce the potential impacts to agricultural
lands . These policies direct most growth to Urban Areas , protect the right to farm , and
support best management practices for agricultural operations .
The Agriculture Element of the North Mason Sub - Area Plan contains policies addressing
agricultural uses .
The Agricultural Land Use Element of the Harstine Island Sub - Area Plan contains policies
November 15 , 2005 57 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory ii
RevisediElement
addressing agricultural uses .
The Agricultural Land Use Element of the Southeast Mason Sub -Area Plan contains policies
addressing agricultural uses .
Mineral Resource Lands
The State of Washington 's GMA guidelines define mineral resource lands as lands primarily
devoted to the extraction of minerals , or that have known or potential long term significance
for the extraction of minerals . Minerals include gravel , sand , and valuable metallic
substances .
FIGURE IV- 5 . 2 , Mason County Mineral Resource Map , shows the location of known and potential
mineral resources . The mineral resources identified on the map are based primarily on soil
types identified by the SCS in the Mason County Soil Survey and the Department of Ecology in
the Coastal Zone Atlas of Washington . It should be noted that many of the soil characteristics
which increase an area's potential as a source of mineral resources also increase its potential
for aquifer recharge (see AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS ) .
Mason County contains a near- infinite supply of construction aggregate ( i . e . , sand and gravel ) .
There are three remaining , undeveloped , large sources of high - quality sand and gravel located
in close proximity to the waters of Puget Sound , such that materials can be transported from
the site by barge to water- dependent metropolitan construction aggregate markets also
located on the Puget Sound tide lands . Two of these large deposits of aggregate are located
in Mason County . They include the proposed Hamma Hamma site at Eldon on Hood Canal , and
the permitted Johns Prairie site north of Shelton on Oakland Bay . Both Mason County sites
contain a high - volume source of high -quality sand and gravel . These resources are suitable for
processing into a wide variety of finished construction aggregate classes , all meeting.
government and ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials ) specifications .
Mason County has 18 operating surface mines at the present time The Mason County Resource
Ordinance designates approximately 2 , 519 acres as mineral resources lands and protects the
future use of these areas for mineral resource extraction. The Washington Department of
Natural Resources recommends that a 50 year supply of mineral resources be protected . For
the lands designated by Mason County, it is estimated that the Winter Creek site alone has 14
times a 50 year supply of gravel and sand at population projections for the year 2020 .
Continued population growth may place additional demands on local mineral resources .
Impacts associated with mineral extraction include erosion and sedimentation , noise from
machinery and vehicles , fugitive dust , and the visual impacts of excavated areas .
The County- Wide Planning Policies call for Mason County and the City of Shelton to maintain
and enhance natural resource based industries .
The planning policies in the plan are intended to mitigate the impacts to mineral resource
November 15 , 2005 58 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended bythe PlanningAdvisor ii
Revised i lElement
Lands and focus on :
1 . Ensuring that mineral resource operations comply with appropriate development
standards ; and
2 . Ensuring that excessive noise and light levels do not result from mineral resource
operations .
November 15 , 2005 59 Draft
DRAFT ® As RecommendedPlanning Advisory Commission
Revised Comprehensive lElement
{ J
S
� d
f
u
1
}
1
i
� u
Ld
i _ . _ _. .- . . _. .. .. _111 .
9911111
Nbz t Nt2' qr3 Ndti Nd{ i.
{E
{t
i
t
'fig i
t
711
07
��°
tR
it
t
A
1E . . x 3
f
F : R.,.�.._$- 3-•. 3m ._,}iR ""' Rly
it
{r
hr
91 ,
zz
Ir
a F A _ • ' It 1R t .. R�' �
i
JI
Wl YNYY¢ G�1
1 � '4# 4CWSi@ _ . . 11(i �lll9fLYR# EE
I
E
Gy�y
.__.... ..._..... ..............._ .. ........ ..... . _ ... ...... ., .-........, .. ...... ,..,.... . ...M.,. ,i
® raft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory ission
Revised Comprehensive t
IV. 6 OPEN SPACE
There are three kinds of open spaces land : private , common use , and public open space .
Private open space includes farms , forest lands , and other parcels of undeveloped land .
Common use open space is land within a residential development or other development that is
designated for common access by the residents of the development or by the general
community . Public open space is publicly - owned land available for recreational use of the
entire community . Open water areas , such as the Hood Canal or lakes , is also often
considered as open space because it creates a sense of openness .
Open space land is valuable to the community for a number of reasons . It can provide
recreational opportunities , it is aesthetically pleasing , it enhances the quality of life in urban
areas , and it increases property values . It creates natural boundaries , which can act as
greenbelts and define neighborhood identity and can protect natural resources such as
groundwater recharge areas , streams , soils , tidal areas , agricultural areas , and wildlife . Open
space often provides habitat areas for wildlife .
Open space land is an essential component of rural character . Without adequate open space ,
the land will not appear rural . Rural character is discussed in the rural lands section of this
chapter .
Mason County enjoys extensive open spaces . In addition to the Olympic National Park and
Olympic National Forest , there are significant tracts of state owned or privately held timber .
Farmlands in river valleys , particularly the Skokomish , also are open space lands . A detailed
listing of park and recreation facilities in the County is presented in the Capital Facilities
element of the Mason County Comprehensive Plan .
FIGURE IV- 6 . 1 , Existing Open Space Map , shows the existing open space in Mason County in
terms of the following four categories as documented in the 1992 Mason County Growth
Management Report :
1 . Private Commercial Forest - Includes all privately held properties under the Designated
Forest , Classified Forest or Open Timber current use tax programs . While these
properties do not have public access rights , they fulfill many of the traditional
functions of open space .
2 . Streams , Ponds and Floodplains - Includes all water bodies that are rated by DNR as
Type I through IV Waters . Undeveloped floodplains associated with those waters are
also considered existing open space , but are not shown on the map .
5 The designation of Open Space shall in no way violate or void any private property ownership rights and does not
imply or create access to Open Space property.
November 15 , 2005 61 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revised ivElement
3 . Electrical Transmission Lines - Includes only those main transmission lines that are for
regional distribution .
4 . Other Open Space - Includes all properties under the Open Agriculture and Open Space
current use taxation programs , National Park Service lands , National Forest Service
lands , State and local public recreation areas , natural preservation reserves , tribal
natural areas , and landslide hazard areas .
Continued growth in Mason County is likely to increase the pressure for conversion of existing
open space to urban uses . As land values rise , the potential economic returns will likely
increase the pressure on owners of larger tracts of undeveloped land to sell or develop their
properties .
The comprehensive plan provides for the preservation , protection , and enhancement of open
space It does this by directing up to 63 percent of the County ' s growth into Urban
Arees Ttie land demanded for thisgrowth isINN of fihe area of the county .
Also, the c IN
oIl mIINprehensive IN plan provltlII1IIeseIr
fqr lacer livesINN% IN td cluster deveIN lopment, as wekl :as
re st
df to land meedec� fc r deveiopmen Y+nl actually be designated acid us d fcir opIN
en
space f Both techniques r�ducXe the �arr�rnant ofland �isturbecl by development
Open space that will generally be preserved under the plan include : Long-Term Commercial
Forest lands , Agricultural Resource Lands , local parks , state parks and other state lands , the
Olympic Nation Park and the Olympic National Forest , land slide hazard areas and their
associated buffers , flood ways , streams and their associated vegetation area , wetlands and
their associated buffer areas , lands preserved as part of a clustered development plan , lands
preserved as part of the designation of a fully contained community or a master planned
resort , and major utility corridors .
111 11 2t the "futuread lase lV1ap r7pe 5pce �' shaw� sore of the lands pratected 'ir
th cornprehensi e plan; 'These include bon - f rr t dmm c� l wrest k ads, gr Cgltqt` l
Rs %i�rce Lards, oal pairks state parks fin¢ otherat lands the Olympic National PIN
ark and
thympsl�latidiitFtCet � teep lees wetlands, strern , antl �3or unity corridors The
mapiowever, rranricitr� r" 1f tie ripen spac � z�beoaiesvne , such the open S IN
pace
�gred to + stablhafulty' caantaindamri �� �arenofiied , atien 'orre ` t IN
bNINNee"INn
det �nnecit t Cirri , hee as are conse ' k h panrects � �, of the
` cir>1a ly s nee i d o Ari d "£ c s i r w le velr m t i i+l sI e Caunty by
one dear 21 , spore acresrill �atla be d dicated open s�ae��II
Tlirnap also e
ddehot seN
w oNNV
ther openII
15
spe�that wi � e � i �� sa�ncuetadINNI 1 , n'e dNI esxnec NN
IeeNNel
Brest
lands an NNNI7d nan das gnated a r uktu a ��l nci �at� tne� end of t111 plabnin p 'rrodN' > � ' htse hands
INNI
%
will remain open ' �pac ` because most of such lands' are not needed , for d'eveloprnent endIN
faIZ
be expected to be left in the%se productive uses ; The total of vacant rural land . and :rwon '
designates agricuktural ' or forestry lands (52 , b51i + (� 139; 55�a } is
INN
"II }
apprIoxsmately acres , but the land used for developifieht is estirnatJd to total .on:ly
� } acres car abeUt portent pf that �andr ;'Taus tihi� roug�i
anakystis shows tiat about an ,additional ages of private land sFould ,rema� n as ®pen
space diari this .planning pe � od , niat ,is. not shown; an Chas mapm
November 15 , 2005 62 Draft
DRAFT ® c Planning i isi
Revisedr ive Plan Element
County" Wide Planning Policies
The County- Wide Planning Policies call for Mason County and the City of Shelton to :
1 . Define uniform terminology , definitions , standards and methodology for regulations
affecting agricultural resource lands , an important part of the open space system .
2 . Establish goals for open space and buffers within the UGA .
30 Include policies for the protection of open space in the Land Use Elements of their
Comprehensive Plans .
Mason County Planning Policies
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Policies provide for the protection of open space
throughout the County . They focus on :
1 . Requiring the protection of open space provided by critical areas .
2 . Encouraging , through incentives , the protection of public open space within new
developments .
3 . Coordinating with State agencies to improve access to saltwater shorelines .
With the adoption of policies and regulations to protect critical areas , the county has
established protections for many areas that will result in additional open space .
The Long-Term Commercial Forest Lands are essentially open space lands , although that is not
the primary reason the are protected .
There are also planning policies included in the comprehensive plan that specifically address
the protection of open space .
November 15 , 2005 63 ® raft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revised Comprehensive lElement
if
.h "
N �
�� d� � �, § '� � d �✓ .. ' '« _ - ' � .,P Lug r... 1`'� r ,:y. � iywu � _ "'�l
Jf , Y�j�}t`
a �, ' . p ,� r .s '. . .fi r ,rf' c, N., .`�''y,,. t �+' r dry
P E ppp
' f v `
t- �b.F.YT � `�. s . F �'w .�>2.�i�•.`' a� \ . '4 t��' .cr\.� � � \� �, . :4
1 '
4
66
Ti
. * 1 dda a srw wwr vum
"V&to CQm Orcu FW.at ExiSW19 Open SpaCe
ORwr Opon Space
Spooms & Ponda Mason CountyeA n n a i� aen r W r Comprehensive Pearl
Elackltal TtatusnNssdon fgrridoe
c.wca:aeB. COuWr �s.a u.. atlw o v •,aa, E 11r {�— o
1U01 & XaM" lad xgtlltln'k pn a Ai0A6 RtaP0. NNe IIP'dge .
M64 "0"64 wflbh Ce e"14 MMtIPt0.t
November 7 , 2005 64 Draft
DRAFT ® As RecommendedPlanning Advisory Commission
Revised Comprehensive t
uj
AMC CO
LU
CO
Fit
co Le LU
m g
$ & . v pr. i
CL
01
LAW
tI CPA 4i# L Ndti N6ty
S4
3
Fil
IF
It
IF
FLIM
Fi Fir
TFw
dill
lit
IF z
will
IF
Il tit II IF
'Y'i`w � Y ••^t��..n v.} yam, -.
i
Rk F
is
�w
I
E
# � s
e
a
� i
U 11 iYlvtf rµ'+Ad'� sF �NSl9 �R�t� .-�i�
November 7 , 2005 65 Draft
DRAFT ® s Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revised Comprehensive lElement
IV. 7 WATER QUALITYIRUNOFF
Mason County has an abundance of marine and freshwater areas that include Puget Sound ,
Hood Canal , and thousands of rivers , streams , lakes , ponds , and wetlands . Surface water
flows in the County result from precipitation . Precipitation occurs year round . It tends to be
particularly heavy during the months of November through April , when heavy rainfall at the
lower elevations combines with seasonal snowmelt in the mountains .
Mason County ' s drainage system for surface runoff is characterized by thousands of small
tributaries which form the several hundred streams and rivers that eventually make their way
into Hood Canal , Oakland Bay, Totten Inlet , Skookum Inlet and Case Inlet ( see FIGURE IV . 4 -4 ,
Mason County Stream Type Map , in the Critical Areas section ) . Some of the larger of these
rivers include the Skokomish , Union , and Tahuya Rivers .
Mason County ' s natural drainage system contains hundreds of lakes and ponds that further
help to moderate the effects of surface water storm flows . The largest of these include : Lake
Cushman , Mason Lake , Cranberry Lake , Lake Limerick , and Lake Nahwatzel .
The County has over 38 , 000 acres of documented wetlands , 20 - 25 of which have been listed as
High Quality Native Wetlands by the Department of Natural Resources .
Mason County has done a significant amount of planning to address issues of stormwater
management and water quality . As discussed in section IV- 1 of this chapter, the county has
cooperated with the adjoining counties , tribes and the state to develop specific watershed
action plans or management plans . The county has implemented water quality protections in
several ways . For example , the county has created a clean water district and stronger on - site
septic system controls including an operations and management ordinance . In the North Bay -
Case Inlet area, the county is in the design and construction phase of a sewer system intended
to eliminate water quality problems in that area . The county also adopted the " Skokomish
River Comprehensive Flood Hazard Plan " to identify means of managing flooding problems .
Mason County ' s management of stormwater is primarily regulatory . In December of 1997 , the
county adopted a stormwater management ordinance , which was one of the actions proposed
in the county ' s watershed action and management plans . It is also one of the goals of the
state 1994 Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan . The stormwater management
ordinance supplemented the existing stormwater management requirements contained in the
county ' s subdivision ordinance , interim resource ordinance , and other county ordinances . This
ordinance addresses many of the stormwater concerns by requiring appropriate design and
best management practices for new development or redevelopment for both water quantity
and quality .
Other county management of stormwater is in the form of conveyance in road side ditches ,
culverts , bridges and such , which are part of the county roadway system . As discussed in the
November 7 , 2005 66 Draft
DRAFT ® S io Planning Advisoryissl
Revised sip lan Element
Capital Facilities Chapter , section Vk10 , the six year capital facilities plan anticipates $9 . 5
million in drainage improvements .
The City of Shelton has provisions for stormwater management in its 2004 Comprehensive Plan
and city ordinances . The Capital Facilities Element and Utilities Element of the city plan
discuss existing provisions and the need for continued joint planning between the city and the
county to coordinate stormwater management in the urban growth area .
New development almost always results in the clearing of vegetative areas and increases in
impervious surfaces . The purpose of the plans and ordinances discussed above is to remove or
minimize the impacts that can be caused by development . If not appropriately designed ,
urban development often results in the impacts of increased soil erosion and sedimentation
during and after clearing ( see EROSION HAZARDS ) ; encroachment into streams and wetlands ;
alteration of stream courses ; and loss of critical habitat . Urban development can result in
nonpoint pollution of surface waters . Increased runoff from development may also increase
the incidence of downstream flooding and erosion .
Pavement , roofs , and other impervious surfaces may allow less water to infiltrate into the
soil , thereby decreasing groundwater recharge and increasing runoff (see AQUIFER RECHARGE
AREAS ) . Reductions in the amount of natural vegetation may also increases runoff rates and
volumes . Because a major portion of urban runoff originates from streets , buildings and other
developed areas , runoff may contain nutrients , bacteria , and toxic substances such as metals
and organic chemicals .
These impacts are also addressed in the comprehensive plan in a number of ways discussed
below .
The plan provides for performance districts , which require clustering and open space . Both
techniques reduce the amount of land disturbed by development while maintaining overall
rural densities . The open space design provides additional protection to wetlands , floodways
and streams .
The Countywide Planning Policies call for Mason County and the City of Shelton to provide for
the protection of water quality and address public education , stormwater management , and
watershed management .
The Mason County Planning Policies include a number of policies for the protection of water
quality in Mason County . They focus on .
1 . Countywide water conservation and efficiency strategies ;
2 . Countywide education efforts on water use , conservation and protection ;
3 . Ensuring that the Mason County Comprehensive Plan is compatible with the Mason
County Shoreline Master Program ; and
4 . Promoting the concept of watershed management .
November 7 , 2005 67 Draft
DRAFT s Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revised Comprehensive tElement
The comprehensive plan also include the following :
1 . The Land Use Element to include policies which address water quality and runoff .
2 . The Natural Systems , On - Site Sewage Disposal , Clearing and Grading , and Stormwater
and Surface Water Elements of the Harstine Island Sub -Area Plan contain policies that
address water quality and runoff .
3 . The Shoreline , Surface and Stormwater Management , On - Site Sewage , Groundwater
Management , Monitoring , and Education Elements of the North Mason Sub -Area Plan
contain policies that address water quality and runoff .
4 . The Commercial and Industrial Land Uses , Natural Systems , On - Site Sewage Disposal ,
Clearing and Grading , and Stormwater and Surface Water Elements of the Southeast
Sub - Area Plan contain policies that address water quality and runoff .
5 . The Capital Facilities Element calls for the adoption of a Stormwater ordinance based
on the Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual .
November 15 , 2005 68 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the Planningvis ii
Revised Comprehensive lElement
IV . 8 RURAL LANDS
Description
The rural lands are those lands which are outside of the designated urban growth areas , but
which are not designated as resource lands . Mason County has created a number of
performance districts by which to regulate land use in the rural lands . These districts are
described in this section . The planning policies , which control the land uses in the districts ,
are contained in the planning policies chapter .
Ural Character
Mason County is predominately a rural county . The rural lands element , therefore , focuses on
maintaining rural character as the County moves forward to accommodate growth during the
next 20 years . Many features contribute to the rural character of Mason County . They include
land features , landscapes , and land uses . Many of the elements contributing to the county s
rural character were identified during the county° s visioning process . They include :
• Rural Activity Centers
• Hamlets
• Wetlands , streams and lakes
• Shorelines
• Forests
• Pastures and meadows
• Hills and mountains
• Vistas of mountains , forests , or water
• Farmlands and farm buildings
• Rural highways and roads
• Small areas of more intense developments such as small scale commercial and
industrial development , tourist related businesses , and small groups of residences on
smaller lots .
• Resource - related industries such as quarries , timber and wood processing facilities .
• Majority of businesses in Mason County are located outside of the Urban Growth
Boundaries
Rural areas also include well - separated small communities located along major arterials and
state highways that serve the needs of surrounding rural residents and enterprises . These
communities are characterized by limited public services , small commercial uses , and single
family houses often on small lots . Community services may include a school , post office , fire
stations , churches , community centers and granges . There may be some multifamily
development .
Performance Districts
The plan makes use of rural performance districts to provide an organizing structure . The
November 15 , 2005 69 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revised Comprehensive lElement
districts are methods for accomplishing the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan .
Each performance district is intended to achieve a distinct function and may allow for a
variety of uses that are consistent with that function . In addition , each performance district
has a set of performance standards with which development must comply and which ensure
that the goals of the plan are met within the district . Several classifications of rural
performance districts are provided in the plan . They include :
Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development ( LAMIRD )
® Rural Activity Centers ( RAC )
® Hamlets
® Rural Commercial / Industrial Areas
• Rural Tourist / Recreational Areas
Fully Contained Community ( FCC )
Master Planned Resort (MPR )
Rural Area ( RA ) with residential densities of 1 unit per 5 , 10 , or 20 acres
Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development ( L IRD )
Rural Activity Centers
Rural Activity Centers ( RAC ) include existing communities with an established settlement
pattern . These communities include a mix of uses , typically on small lots . They serve
residents of the surrounding rural area , seasonal residents , and tourists . RACs also include
concentrations of commercial , service , industrial , and civic uses but are not served by urban
levels of facilities and services . Residential areas include small lot , single - family
neighborhoods and some small - scale and low - rise multifamily housing . Businesses typically are
found near or on the highway that runs through the community . In Hoodsport the commercial
development is primarily concentrated into a small "downtown " area . Union has fewer
businesses and more scattered commercial activity . Taylor Town has small clusters of
commercial development near some of the road intersections and a larger number of
businesses scattered over the area of the RAC . Existing industrial uses within RACs are often
stand - alone businesses such as welding shops , small shake mills , or food processing operations .
RACs within the County will experience some limited growth over the next 20 years . Average
residential densities will increase as much of the land has already been platted into small lots ,
many of which are conforming and buildable . Business uses will likely grow somewhat . The
majority of growth within the RACs will focus on retail , commercial , tourism and industrial
uses necessary to support the residential growth in the Rural Area . Because of their past
pattern of development and location next to water bodies , some RACs may require some
means of collective wastewater treatment to protect water quality . However, these systems
are not envisioned to be urban level sewer systems . A feasibility study was recently completed
for the Union area , and the water quality problems of Hoodsport are being examined .
Stormwater treatment may also be needed to address the existing development . These areas
are expected to have small amounts of additional commercial and industrial development but
November 15 , 2005 70 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the Planin vi Commission
Revised r ive Plan Element
to concentrate the growth in a way that protects the surrounding rural area and resource
lands from sprawling patterns of development . Under the state Growth Management Act ,
these areas of more intensive rural development are allowed to fill in with small scale
commercial or industrial development and lower density residential development . This
growth is contained within the boundaries of the rural activity center and kept to a smaller
scale and intensity in tune with the rural character of the community . Conflicts with resource
lands are minimized by encouraging growth in these more compact areas , generally well
removed from the resource lands . Families seeking a rural lifestyle will not need to buy
oversized lots . This makes the housing more affordable and expands the variety of housing
choices . They also need not be isolated in remote locations so that limited services such as
transit , fire protection , and police protection can be provided more efficiently or quickly at a
rural level of service .
Hamlets
Hamlets are intended to provide a focal point and community identity for surrounding rural areas ,
while they meet some of the immediate needs of the rural residents , resource dependent
industry, and visitors . They wilt provide a rural level of services and facilities . Hamlets may
include one or two civic , community, or retail uses such as a post office , community center,
church , grange , or gas station . The community centers will be some distance from each other and
from the urban centers . They are not intended to compete with the urban areas or RAC ' s as
employment centers or commercial centers . Residential development at these centers is allowed ,
as infill but only with Rural Area standards . The designated area of the Hamlets will be kept
small . The designated area will not necessarily include all of the businesses or services that may
be identified with the community center-in conformance with RCW 36 . 70A . 5 (d ) .
Isolated Areas of Commercial/Industrial Use
Isolated Areas of Commercial / Industrial Use presently exist in Mason County . They are small
enclaves of businesses , which serve the surrounding rural residents , and or industrial uses ,
which manufacture and export a product . These areas are intended to remain and to have the
ability to expand slightly, keeping within the rural character of the county . These businesses
do not require urban services and will not be afforded urban services in the future . These
areas will have a delineated boundary based on the built environment as July 1990 , and
respecting the existing neighborhood identity of the area , and reflecting roads and natural
features . Boundaries wilt attempt to avoid irregularity . Uses will meet the standards set out in
the Rural Area Performance Standards .
Isolated Areas of Tourist/Recreational Use
Isolated Areas of Tourist / Recreational Use reflect existing areas in Mason County and their
slight expansion , and allow for the development of new areas . There areas consist of
recreation / tourism businesses with no permanent residences , except for those of the owners
or caretakers . Such areas may include uses such as small scale resorts , recreational vehicle
parks , golf courses , and small stores serving such uses . These areas must be served by
appropriate rural services to the area only and cannot contribute to urban sprawl or the
November 15 , 2005 71 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommendedthe Planningvis ii
Revised Comprehensive l Element
extension of urban services .
Rural Areas
Rural Areas ( RAs ) within Mason County are those areas that are intended to maintain their
rural character, while allowing some development . In Rural Areas , the rural landscape will
remain dominant , and include a variety of protected natural features . Urban development
will not be allowed in the Rural Areas . Resource uses such as farming , forestry , aquaculture ,
and mining are protected . Residential uses are allowed , provided that they are rural in
character . Industrial and commercial uses are allowed if they are resource dependent or are
cottage industries operated by residents of the property . Small - scale recreational and tourist
uses consistent with a rural nature may be allowed . Larger - scale recreational and tourist
projects may be allowed under the provisions for Master Planned Resorts . Existing commercial
and industrial uses that are non - conforming will be allowed to continue and to expand within
limits . Resource dependent industrial and commercial development will be protected from
encroaching incompatible uses through performance standards , which will buffer one use from
the other .
Fully Contained Communities
A Fully Contained Community is not a designated area but a reserved capacity for new urban
development that will be characterized by urban densities and intensities , urban
governmental services , and meets the criteria established in the comprehensive plan and in
RCW 36 . 70A . 350 . The comprehensive plan has reserved population to allow the creation of
new Fully Contained Community . Fully Contained Communities can be created in the Rural
Lands ; however, the approval of a Fully Contained Community requires a comprehensive plan
amendment . When a specific location and plan for a Fully Contained Community is approved ,
then population will be allocated to that project . In order to receive approval , the proposal
must meet a number of criteria , which are established in the Planning Policies Chapter of the
Plan .
Master Planned Resort
A Master Planned Resort is a self contained and fully integrated development in a setting of
significant natural amenities that includes short -term visitor accommodations associated with
a range of developed on - site indoor or outdoor recreation facilities . It may also include
permanent residential uses as an integrated part of the overall resort development .
Development of the Master Planned resort is controlled through the planning policies .
November 15 , 2005 72 Draft
DRAFT ® As Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission
Revised Comprehensive lElement
IV. 9 HISTORICALPRESERVATION
As Mason County continues to grow , it is important that the past of the county not be
forgotten or destroyed . The state and federal governments have developed inventories of
those sites and facilities that have special historical importance . Some of the sites are
formally listed on an historical register, which provides some tax and other advantages to
their owners for preserving their historic attributes . Native American tribes also have sites
identified of cultural or historical significance . Many sites are probably not known .
FIGURE IV- 9 . 1 , Public and Historic Lands and Facilities , shows those sites identified by the
county .
The county intends to cooperate with the state agencies and the area tribes to protect
historically and culturally important areas . The comprehensive plan contains planning policies
to guide the county in the protection of these areas .
November 15 , 2005 73 Draft
DRAFT ® sRecommended by the PlanningAdvisory ii
Revised Comprehensive In Element
i
t �r Jet .kr a ✓'' I "".,� - € _ 3 �3 F � }�}'�?'ij Try,
IN MON.
LA
' ; 12 2,fig c7 frryr�
1 , i +. i . ..,,,.,, � _ j f . r r. 4� r—� . j 6 - -
ko
_
It
f �
jt
November 15 , 2005 74 Draft
MEMORANDUM
Date : November 8 , 2005
To : Mason County Planning Advisory Commissioners
From : Bob Fink
Subject : Population Projections and Allocations — The Urban Area Boundaries
Mason County must determine the population projection that will be used in the 2025
comprehensive plan update . We must also determine an allocation of population to the
county ' s urban areas . Finally, we must make appropriate adjustments to the urban area
boundaries to assure enough land for the allocated population .
The staff s recommendation is to not change the boundaries of the urban areas (with a
minor exception) . The sub -area plans are incomplete for both Allyn and Shelton . They
are not ready for action . The VanBuskirk ' s rezone request is the minor exception. You
recommended approval of the proposal . The proposal reduces the Belfair UGA
approximately 10 acres and its capacity by about 40 people . It is not seen as a meaningful
change .
The staff s recommendation preserves the status quo until next year. When the sub-area
plans are ready, we will revisit the issue . Please refer to previous memos dated August
15th, August 22nd, and November 1st, for background information and alternatives .
Page 1 of 1
Finalt — November 21 , 2005 as recommended by the
PlanningAdvisory Commission
I e 10 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AND FULLY CONTAINED
COMMUNITIES
Purpose : Master Development Planning in Mason County is intended to facilitate long
range , predictable and innovative development possibilities on large tracts of land . A
Master Development Plan allows larger properties with unique characteristics or
circumstances benefit from more detailed and thorough planning of future
development to accomplish desired land development over a multiple year and
phased term . A Master Development Plan provides a common and interrelated
development theme within the boundaries of the Master Development Plan , while
ensuring its integration and compatibility with the surrounding community and land
uses .
A Master Development Plan requires the implementation of additional design and
performance standards for all aspects associated with development of the site ,
including protection of the environment and natural features , construction of utilities
and roadways , and site construction . Low Impact Development ( LID ) techniques shall
be incorporated into all Master Development Plans . LID is a land use development
strategy that emphasizes protection and use of on - site natural features , integrated
with engineered , small - scale hydrologic controls at the parcel and subdivision scale to
manage stormwater and more closely mimic pre - development watershed hydrologic
functions .
The intent of a Master Development Plan is to : preserve unique , fragile , and environmentally
critical areas ; provide efficient use of the land and infrastructure ; implement low impact
development techniques ; promote innovative , quality design ; and provide for the inclusion of
on - site amenities such as open spaces , community facilities , enhanced landscaping , and
recreational opportunities . Uses allowed within the Master Development Plan should be .
consistent overall with those uses allowed within the base land use districts , provided that a
Master Development Plan may allow for more flexibility in density, the location of uses and
development standards in a manner consistent with the intent of the base land use district . A
Master Development Plan allows for a mixture of residential and non - residential land use
development types , such as clustering of single - family residential dwellings , attached
residential units , zero lot line development , public facilities , and commercial and office uses .
A Master Development Plan shall be applied through the Mason County Development
Regulations and be accompanied by a Development Agreement .
Separate provisions are necessary that address unique conditions when locating a Master
Development Plan within an Urban Growth Area , or within lands designated rural . A Master
Development Plan could also be appropriate for areas adjacent to but outside existing Urban
Growth Boundaries . When a specific location is identified for a Fully Contained Community
within Mason County , a Master Development Plan will be required to demonstrate consistency
with the Comprehensive Plan and RCW 36 . 70A . 35 ,
November 7 , 2005 1 Draft
Figure IV . 10 . 1
Potential Master Development Plan Area Within An Urban Growth Boundary
Potential Master Development Plan Area
within an Urban Growth Area
A�
wt5 RRag � Legend
Potential MDP area
— State High +Aays
�,...<, R - a B_t 13elfair UGA
LTCF _ ,„ ' 7��, y ,» , ti 's " i j Parcels
Zoning Code
® Lakes
r GC-
AG
fo .
RR5
i
�a°� v
U S .
e
P.I In 10 FeMal:ts1311 61
R4 re leo ceo
GCGele meCOmmeme
Gcslikif ratcanmelcml- elsaesa
Ralstral
• Z` LTA lnlgAM AgWOUR II UGA
MUMked Use
R-10 Re:1a1 U31 to
_ Rd Rt6 Ut k1W13
;;, 7k°" •"�• AGRloIgM Pg6cltlra1La10
R19101 IgRm CommtIC61 P°Rat
+ pp RIg1611M I He$ Wi
Y g gft10R1 . I Res Fk 11a I to
♦E g. � -+ - :_ . :::: RR70RIaIRe[ Ittiffi 12O IS
RRS qI MI Res/k IffiIS
Mason County, WA
w g Department of Community Development
Shelton , WA November 7 , 2005
t
5
0 2500 5,00o 10 ,000
Feet
November 7 , 2005 2 Draft
Figure IV ® 10 . 2
Potential Master Development Plan Area Within Designated Rural Lands
Potential Master Development Plan Area
within Rural Designated Lands
e
RR20
i
RR20 RR 10
oodsport
yfkfEROLL56I1 mF f RAC
I : ANSI
I �
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
RRS . . . . . . . . . RR/0: : : : : : : : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : : : : : .. .� J
Lake Cushman h : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : _.._....-..., _.- ; I
. . . . I . . . . . . . . . f .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
c : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :
� 50 c:r
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
RR20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : : : : : : . . . . . : : : :
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : i
L7CF
RR20
Legend
Potential MDP Area RRS Zoning Code 2b h 1kq Delk td
rr tt MU R10 IAM IV Ce 14I
State Highv�ays t_- __...I Parcels RR10 RYBIReskkk=110
_ RR20 RIBIR SM031M
Transmission Line ® Lakes RRS RI01RUMIC215
L1CF tob" n Cammtmwomst
Rural Activity Center
Mason County, WA
N Department of Community Development Shelton , W4 November 7 , 2005
wg
5544f{ 0 10000 21000 4, 000
s
Feet
November 79 2005 3 Draft
Master Development Plan Policies
Land Use
MDP 1 . Adopt regulations to guide the location and sitting of Master Development Plans
within rural and urban areas , consistent with policy direction contained
throughout the Comprehensive Plan . These regulations shall :
MDP 1 . 1 . Clarify that a Master Development Plan is appropriate for large
contiguous areas of land under common ownership or control ,
with common characteristics and connectivity . Include criteria
for when and where a Development Master Plan may be
appropriate within rural lands and within urban growth areas .
MDP 112 . Require a Master Development Plan for any Fully Contained
Community established pursuant to RCW 36 . 70A . 350 .
MDP 1 . 3 . Require that adequate road , water, drainage , sewer and / or
septic capacity exist or is planned to meet the demands of the
proposed development within the Master Development Plan .
Consider alternative standards for utilities and roads that
address rural and urban character and utilized low impact
development techniques in harmony with the unique
environmental characteristics of the area .
MDP 1 . 4 . Provide transportation circulation that addresses public service
and emergency response requirements and the needs of
pedestrians and bicyclists .
MDP 1 . 5 . Provide levels of service compatible with the project ' s location ,
development intensity and the surrounding lands uses . Proposed
Master Development Plans in rural areas shall not require urban
services .
MDP 1 . 6 . Ably MDP techniques to industrial / commercial development as
well as mixed use residential and non - residential land uses .
MDP 1 . 7 . Include a process to allow phased development within the Master
Development Plan in an orderly, coordinated , and thoughtful
manner . The phasing plan for the development shall
demonstrate that the various segments of the development are
served by adequate public facilities and services .
MDP 1 . 8 . Encourage flexibility in design to promote a variety of housing
types , densities , and affordability . Accommodate a mix of
commercial , retail and residential uses , as well as opportunities
for social and cultural expression while preserving the areas
natural features . Individual lot sizes should vary in a Master
Development Plan to promote a range of housing options and the
preservation of unique and fragile environmental features and
critical areas .
November 7 , 2005 4 Draft
MDP-4-. 7.MDP 1 . 9 . Guide e the incorporation of LID techniques in
the development and management of the area within the Master
Development Plan where appropriate .
A4DPA4-, MDP 1 . 10 . Include technical guidance on the use of LID techniques
in public and private developments with in the Master
Development Plan . These techniques shall ,
i . Preserve the site characteristics , including natural terrain ,
drainage patterns , soil structure and native vegetation ;
ii . Preserve the natural hydrologic cycle , including vegetative
rainfall interception and evapotranspiration , and groundwater
infiltration and percolation to the extent the subsurface
conditions permit ;
iii . Mimic natural rainfall capture capacity in areas of site
disturbance , and ensure the protection of property and public
safety in the design of overflow capacity , and
iv . Incorporate measures to manage stormwater within the Master
Development Plan that will preserve enhapee water quality
downstream .
A" '.�roD 1—; o * MDP 1 . 11 . Require all Master Development Plans to include
specific design guidelines and development standards to ensure
that the proposed development promotes community identity ,
has a consistent theme , and is integrated and compatible with
its surroundings .
n"DID; MDP 1 . 12 . Allow for increased density and / or a reduction in
dimensional standards within the Master Development Plan when
enhanced on - site amenities are incorporated into the overall
development , such as open spaces , community facilities ,
landscaping and buffers , recreational opportunities , and other
similar amenities that benefit the community and the
environment and exceed the existing minimum requirements .
MDP 1 . 13 . Improve the design , quality , and character of new development
so as to reduce energy consumption and demand and to minimize_
adverse environmental impacts including degradation of wildlife
habitat and important natural features in the area
MDP 1 . 14 . Foster and ensure a rational pattern of relationship between
residential , business and industrial uses so as to complement and
minimize impacts on existing neighborhoods ,
MDP 1 . 15 . Ensure coordination of commercial and industrial buildin
designs that will be harmonious and blend with each other and
the natural environment .
November 7 , 2005 5 Draft
Water Et Sewer Utilities
MPP 2 . Water and sewer utility infrastructure in master development plans shall be
designed with quality components , and to be operated and maintained
efficiently .
MPP 3 . Potable water service shall be consistent with coordinated water supply plans
for urban growth areas ( UGAs ) , and provide through community - based systems
for planned developments in rural areas . SuGh rural systems shl uld prefavnk
n rl rrc'77v�.-. `-o--cercu'
MPP 4 . To the extent available , Master Development Plans should utilized reclaimed
water supplies in addressing non - potable water demands .
MPP 5 . Development within a UGA shall plan for wastewater service consistent with
sewer service plans for the UGA and current development standards and the
costs for capacity borne by the development .
MPP 6 . Clustered development is encouraged to maximize the-efficiency in the
delivery of utilities of ,,-„ at, , = ter �n r + rGVicinnc , taking into account the
proximity to connection outside the development .
MPP 7 . Development in future phases of a Master Development Plan that will be served
by wastewater collection and treatment shall be planned to facilitate future
connection to a public system with attention to the location of those lines in
public rights of ways or easements that will ultimately be the responsibility of
the sewer service provider .
MPP 8 . Development in areas not planned for future public sewer service shall provide
community- based collection and treatment systems , preferably maintained by
a public entity, consistent with the best available knowledge of hydrogeologic
connectivity and the potential impacts to surface and groundwater resources .
MPP 9 . Development shall address the storage location and collection of solid waste
and recyclable materials . In UGAs , developments shall facilitate curbside
collection of solid waste and recyclable materials .
Parks and ®pen Space
MPP 10 . Improvements and phasing in a Master Development Plan shall address
adequate passive and active parks and open spaces consistent with the
standards in the County - Wide Parks Plan ( to be updated in 2006 ) .
MDP 10 . 1 . Parks and other recreational or trail facilities shall be designed
and developed consistent with industry standards for quality of
materials , safety and efficient operations and maintenance .
November 7 , 2005 6 Draft
MPP 11 . Master Development Plans shall include , and not preclude , connections when
adjacent to future or existing open space corridors and trail connections , with
internal trail facilities for community circulation .
MPP 12 . Master Development Plans with access to surface water amenities shall
incorporate access for residents and visitors outside the proposed
development .
November 7, 2005 7 Draft
Comprehensive2005 Mason County I
Revisedi ii
EssentialiFacilities
Essential public facilities BCC hearing Nov. 2005 A
MASON COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Glossary pg . viii
Definition as revised :
Essential Public Facilities : Those facilities that are typically difficult to site , such
as airports ; state education facilities ; state , or regional , and local transportation
facilities , including operations and maintenance facilities ; state and local
correctional facilities ; solid waste handling facilities ; and in - patient facilities
including substance abuse facilities , mental health facilities , and group homes .
and
MASON COUNTY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Jan . 18 , 2005
page S
Definition as revised :
Essential Public Facilities . Essential Public facilities include facilities such as prisons ,
correctional facilities , juvenile detention centers , courthouses , wastewater/sanitary
treatment facilities and systems , solid waste facilities , transportation facilities ( including
public works operations and vehicle maintenance facilities ) , airports , and hospitals .
Essential public facilities BCC hearing Nov. 2005
Airport Overlay Zone Ordinance
( DRAFT ® s Recommended by the PlanningAdvisory Commission it
WSDOT Edits of 11 / 17/05 Incorporate !*
Chaptermm
New 17 . 40 , Mason County
1m4 . 01 0 TITLE
The ordinance codified in this chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Airport
Overlay Zone Ordinance . "
1 ® 4 00 PURPOSE AND INTENT
( 1 ) Purpose
The Airport Overlay Zone Ordinance has two fundamental purposes .
(A ) To minimize the public ' s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards that
would result from incompatible land use development around Sanderson Field ;
and
( B ) To protect Sanderson Field from potential encroachment by land uses that are
incompatible with airport activities and that may impair the planned develop =
ment and use of the airport .
( 2 ) Intent
The intent of this chapter is to .
(A ) Implement policies of the Mason County 20 Comprehensive Plan and the 4-9-W
Port of Shelton , Sanderson Field Airport Master Plan .
( B ) Establish land use zoning regulations around Sanderson Field that are specifi -
cally designed to address issues of compatibility between the airport and sur-
rounding land uses . Regulations are established with respect to compatible
land use , noise , safety, and height limits ( airspace protection ) .
17940 * 030 APPLICABILITY
( 1 ) Affected Land Use Activities and Structures—General Applicability
(A ) In general , this chapter applies to the following activities and structures situ -
ated within the Airport Overlay Zone established as the Safet .4- Land Use Com -
patability Zones (Map 1 ) and the Airspace Protection Areas (Map 2 ) .
( 1 ) Proposed land divisions .
( 2 ) Proposed new construction .
1
H : \2005 COMP PLAN UPDATE\Summary of 2005 updates\Airport0vertayZoninp PAC WSDOT 11 22 doc4 Ant
4 '-,z-4ae DRAFT
( 3 ) Changes to the existing uses of land or structures to the extent that such
changes require review under other applicable regulations .
( 2 ) Uses and Structures Not Affected
This chapter does not apply to .
(A ) Existing development as of the effective date of this chapter for which no ex -
pansion or changes of use are proposed even if the existing uses are not in con -
formance with the standards herein .
( B ) Aviation and related development or use of airport property for aeronotical
purposes .
( C ) The manner in which aircraft operate on the airport or in the surrounding air-
space .
17 . 40 . 040 DEFINITIONS
The following definitions apply for the purposes of this chapter .
(A ) "Airport " means Sanderson Field airport in Mason County . This includes the
terminal , fixed - base operations , and the area of land designated and set aside
for the landing and taking off of aircraft , including all necessary taxiways , air-
craft storage and tie - down areas , hangars , and other necessary buildings , and
open spaces , designated for the storage , repair, and operation of aircraft , and
utilized or to be utilized in the interest of the public for such purposes .
( B ) "Airport Manager " means the Port of Shelton Board of Commissioners or an -
other person delegated to represent the Board for the purposes established in
the Airport Overlay Zone Ordinance .
( C ) "Federal Aviation Regulations ( FAR ) Part 77 " means that part of federal regu -
lations dealing with obstructions to air navigation .
( D ) 'Temporary Special Events " are ones (such as balloon fairs or an air show at an
airport ) for which a facility is not designed and normally not used and for which
extra safety precautions can be taken as appropriate .
( E ) "Residential Density " means the number of dwelling units , including detached
secondary units , on a specific parcel , site , or land use development divided by
the gross acreage of the parcel , site , or development .
( F) "Special Function Land Use " means land use for which the significant common
element is the relative inability of the people occupying the space to move out
of harm ' s way ; this includes schools ( K - 12 ) , hospitals , nursing homes , daycare
centers and other similar uses
G4
k =}.LQL "Structure " means an object , including a mobile object , constructed or in -
stalled by man , including , but without limitation , buildings , antennas , towers ,
cranes , smokestacks , earth formation , and overhead transmission lines .
2
H • \2005 COMP PLAN UPDATE\Summary of 2005 updates\Airport0vertayZoning PAC WSDOT 11 22 docwt \ Am\ A07 oAr \A/CnnT
g , 'n 0 DRAFr
{ }� " Usage Intensity " is the number of people occupying a specific parcel , site ,
or land use development divided by the gross acreage of the parcel , site , or
development . Usage intensity criteria are applicable to all types of land uses
except residential .
17 , 40 . 50 AIRPORT OVERLAY ZONE MAPS
The area of the Airport Overlay Zone is defined by two maps as established below .
( 1 ) - Land Use Compatibility Zones (Map 1 )
(A ) The Safety- Land Use Compatiblity Zones map depicts the boundaries of the
Sanderson Airfield influence area and airport land use zones for which various
compatibility criteria are defined in this chapter . The Safet 1Land Use Com -
patibility Zzone boundaries take into account incompatible land use activity ,
relative risks of aircraft accidents in various portions of the airport environs ,
noise and other associated activities that may impact the operations of the air-
port in the future .
( B ) Specific factors upon which the boundaries of the safetyLand Use-Csompati -
bility Zzones are delineated are as follows :
( 1 ) Zone 1 - Runway Protection Zone ( RPZ ) : This zone is trapezoidal in shape
and centered about the extended runway centerline . It begins 200 feet
beyond the end of the area usable for takeoff or landing . The RPZ dimen -
sions are a function of the type of aircraft operating at the airport and
the approach visibility minimums associated with each runway end .
( 2 ) Zone 2 - Inner Safety Zone ( ISZ ) : This Encompasses a rectangular area
that is positioned on the extended runway centerline , and adjacent to
the RPZ boundary . For runway 5 - 23 , Zone 2 extends approximately 2 , 300
beyond the RPZ boundary .
( 3 ) Zone 3 - Inner Turning Zone ( ITZ ) : The ITZ boundary is defined by a trian -
gular shaped area that is positioned along each side of the RPZ and ISZ
boundaries . For Runway 5 - 23 , the ITZ extends approximately 4, 500 feet
from the inner width of the RPZ , within a 60 - degree sector of the ex -
tended runway centerline .
(4 ) Zone 4 - Outer Safety Zone ( OSZ ) : The OSZ is a rectangular area that is
also centered on the runway . For Runway 5 - 23 , the OSZ is 1 , 000 feet
wide overall ( extending 500 feet laterally from the runway centerline )
and extends approximately 3 , 000 feet beyond the ISZ .
( 5 ) Zone 5 Sideline Safety Zone ( SSZ ) : For Runway 5 - 23 , the SSZ boundary is
defined by a 1 , 000 foot centerline offset on each side of the runway that
connects the ITZs on each end of the runway .
( 6 ) Zone 6 - Traffic Pattern Zone (TPZ ) : Encompasses an area surrounding the
runway of approximately 5 , 000 feet , as depicted in Airport Land Use
Zoning map .
3
H : \2005 COMP PLAN UPDATE\Summary of 2005 updates\AirportOvertayZonino PAC WSDOT 11 22 docH * � AmN Am onr ,eic
O Airspace Protection Areas (Map )
The Airspace Protection Areas map depicts the airspace surfaces defined for Sanderson
Field in accordance with Federal Aviation Regulations , Part 77, Subpart C . For the
purposes of this chapter, planned future runway configuration or types of runway ap -
proaches are assumed in the Airspace Protection Areas . The critical airspace surfaces
are defined by a set of five types of surfaces as follows :
(A ) A primary surface is longitudinally centered and extends 200 feet beyond each
end of the runway . The width is 1 , 000 feet for Runway 5 - 23 . The elevation of
any point on the primary surface is the same as the elevation of the nearest
point on the runway centerline .
( B ) Approach surfaces are longitudinally centered on the extended runway center-
line and extend outward and upward beginning at, and at the same elevation
as , each end of a primary surface . Approach surface dimensions and slopes for
each runway end are as follows :
( 1 ) Runways 23 :
( a ) Inner edge width : 1 , 000 feet .
( b ) Outer end width : 16 , 000 feet .
( c ) Length : 50 , 000 feet .
( d ) Slope : 50 to 1 ( 1 foot vertically for each 50 feet horizontally ) for the
inner 10 , 000 feet of length and 40 to 1 for the outer 40 , 000 feet .
( 2 ) Runways 5 .
(e ) Inner edge width : 1 , 000 feet .
( f) Outer edge width : 4, 000 feet .
( g ) Length : 10 , 000 feet .
( h ) Slope : 20 to 1 .
( C ) Transitional surfaces extend outward from the sides of each primary surface
and each approach surface . These surfaces slope upward one foot vertically
for each seven feet horizontally ( 7 : 1 ) , measured at a 90 degree angle to the
runway centerline and extended runway centerline , and continue to where
they intersect a horizontal or conical surface . For those portions of a precision
approach surface which extend through or beyond the limits of the conical sur-
face , the adjacent transitional surfaces extend a distance of 5 , 000 feet hori -
zontally from the edge of the approach surface , measured at a 90 degree angle
to the extended runway centerline .
( D ) A horizontal surface is established at an elevation of 254 feet above the highest
point on airport runway 5 , and 269 feet above the highest point on airport run -
way 23 , specifically 419 feet above mean sea level . The inner edge of the
horizontal surface is defined by its intersection with transitional surfaces . The
outer edge is defined by drawing arcs with radii of 10 , 000 feet centered on the
runway centerline at each end of the primary surface of Runway 9 - 27 , then
connecting the arcs with lines drawn tangent to them .
4
H : \2005 COMP PLAN UPDATE\ SunlnlaDZ of 2005 updates\AirportOvertayZonino PAC WSDOT 11 22 docH2, AQ-Z oe �r
" '��a,, ,- DRAFT
( E ) A conical surface extends outward for a distance of 4 , 000 feet from the pe -
riphery of the horizontal surface and upward at a slope of one foot vertically
for each 20 feet horizontally (2001 ) a
17 An-� QAQ ArrI7QwrAQ11 ITV ;7riI=I6 DDr) DOC1711 R Akin ' tcPc
0 Y®S ®' G � � 1SB 'Y4 �'�'r'9•
5
H : \2005 COMP PLAN UPDATE\Summary of 2005 updates\ AirportOverlayZonino PAC WSDOT 11 22 doc
14,22-4eE DRAFT
Lan se Compatibility Zones (Map 1 )
ja
a ` flij
rs � (
i ail I
I14,
` � s �m
C � g
MAUI
TOM
101.
rr
t�{{
om
r-
r s �
k 3 �
a
A,
c t
.z
t F �
' R
99
a,.'3`JR
q
h
DRAFT
Airspace r cti n Areas )
jif
� emn It
� � �
WIN
B H a All
Pf * � 7
fA Off
t� Yda tr
It
JA
y l
1
r �
ze
14
F_
IP
r414,
en , 4XVIrt
UA BM
� e
c k
i 2 v
x
r
f
f
� a ��8.�. � '-.- .i j ! t.• is
i
e id
Ell
Re � Ie
k. .r s 9
�y f
le
r �, z
s
R
All
E
b
K l
f
DRAFT
17 . 40 . 070 DENSITYAND INTENSITY LIMITATIONS
DEVELOPMENT
( 1 ) Residential Development Density Criteria
Any subdivision of property for the purposes of residential development within the
Safet Use Compatibility zones shall comply with the following density crite -
ria .
(A ) Safet rr Land Use Compatibility Zones 1 , 2 and 5 : No new residential land divi -
sions are permitted . No new residential dwellings permitted , except infill in
Zone 5 as provided in subsection ( 87) of this section .
ESafety-Land Use Compatibility Zones 3 and 4 : No new land divisions for the
purpose of creating additional multi - family residential parcels, except as per-
mitted in Section 17 . 40 . 070 ( 2 ) . Residential land divisions for single family de -
velopment are limited to one dwelling unit per five acres . Other residential de -
velopment must comply with usage intensity ( Section 17 . 40 . 060 ) and deed noti -
fication ( Section 17 , 40 . 090 ) requirements . Infill development is allowed as pro =
vided in subsection ( 87) of this section .
( 2 ) Mixed Use Development
If residential uses are proposed to be located with nonresidential uses in the same
or nearby buildings on the same site , they shall be treated as nonresidential devel -
opment provided the residential development does not exceed 30% of the overall
square footage of the structures . The occupancy of the residential portion shall be
added to that of the nonresidential portion and evaluated with respect to the non =
residential usage intensity criteria defined in Section 17 . 40 . 060 .
( 3 ) Special Function Land Use
Special Function Land Uses as defined in 17 . 40 . 040 ( F) shall be prohibited in the
Land Use Compatibility Zones 1 , 2 , 3 , and 4 . New special function land uses are
also prohibited in Zone 6 ; however , expansion of such existing uses are conditioned
upon review for impacts to the airport .
L4)k3 }--Nonresidential Development Usage Intensity Criteria
Any proposed nonresidential construction or use of land within the Land Use Com -
patibility Zones shall not be permitted if they exceed the following usage intensity
limitations .
(A ) Zone 1 : No people other than aircraft occupants , airport personnel , and other
persons authorized by airport regulations .
( B ) Zone 2 : No more than 5 people per acre average over the site .
( C ) Zone 3 : No more than 25 people per acre average over the site .
8
H : \2005 COMP PLAN UPDATE\ Summary of 2005 updates\AirportOvertayZonino PAC WSDOT 11 22 docll �` ^ nZ3 ^ nZ�n
44-'� DRAFT
( D ) Zone 4 : No more than 4 people per acre in buildings and no more than 75 peo -
ple per acre outside of buildings .
( E ) Zone 5 : No more than 5100 people per acre average over the site .
Usage Intensity Calculation Factors
The maximum number of people permitted on a site within the Land Use Compati -
bility zones shall be calculated based on the following factors .
(A ) All people ( e . g . employees , customers , visitors , etc . ) who may be on the prop =
erty are to be included in the calculations .
( B ) The calculations must reflect the total number of people on the site at any
time , except temporary special events .
( C ) All usage intensities are calculated on a gross acreage basis including the use ' s
share of adjacent roads and permanently open lands .
( D ) Intensity on the property under review shall be calculated for each acre of the
site by a site plan identifying each one acre area and the respective use and
density . The one - acre areas indicated are to be rectangular in shape , not elon -
gated or irregularly shaped . To the exent that the parcel is irregularly shaped ,
the site plan shall show the best fit of the one acre or portion of one acre areas
consistent with the intent of this chapter .
k5 J61 Usage Intensity Data Sources
The usage intensity of all individual uses highly depends upon the specifics of the
proposed land use and its design . Where necessary to determine the acceptability
of a particular proposal within the Land Use Compatibility zones , the anticipated
number of people per acre can be calculated based any of the following methods :
(A ) The number of automobile parking spaces required on the site : Unless a sub -
stantial number of people would arrive at the site by means other than auto -
mobile (or would park off site ) , the anticipated number of people on the site
can be estimated to be at least equal to the number of automobile parking
spaces required for the use . A higher number shall be assumed for uses that
typically attract more than one person per vehicle .
( B ) International Building Code (IBC) occupancy levels : The anticipated maximum
number of people occupying indoor facilities on a site can be assumed to be no
higher than the total floor area of the proposed use divided by the minimum
square feet per occupant requirements listed in the IBC . Because the IBC cri -
teria represent highly intensive levels of usage , the number obtained through
this calculation can normally be divided in half for the purposes of the usage
intensity criteria in this section .
( C ) Documented Survey or Analysis Results : A project applicant may provide evi -
dence , such as surveys of existing uses similar to the type proposed , docu -
menting that specific features of a proposal would result in a usage intensity
lower than that assumed using the methods indicated above . Acceptance of
such evidence shall be at the discretion of Mason County .
9
H : \2005 COMP PLAN UPDATE\Summary of 2005 updates\AirportOvertayZonina PAC WSDOT 11 22 docI4 • ^ m C V4DOT
441.71 Parcels Lying within Two or More Land Use Compatibility Zones
If a parcel proposed for residential subdivision is split by a#pGFt— and Use CEom -
patibility Zzone boundaries , the total number of dwelling units permitted shall be
calculated as if the parcel were multiple parcels divided at the compatibility zone
boundary line . Similarly , if a parcel proposed for nonresidential use is split by
compatibility zone boundaries , the usage intensity shall be calculated as if the par=
cel were divided at the compatibility zone boundary line . In both cases , however,
the development density or intensity allowed within the more restricted portion of
the parcel can ( and is encouraged to ) be transferred to ( clustered on ) the less re -
stricted portion even if the resulting development in the latter area then exceeds
the criteria for that compatibility zone . This transfer of development is also al -
lowed with respect to multiple parcels proposed to be developed as a single proj -
ect .
{-7)M Infill Development
Where substantial incompatible development already exists adjacent to the site of
the proposal , additional infill development of similar or less intensive land uses may
be allowed to occur even if such land uses are not allowed elsewhere in the Land
Use Aires Compatibility Zones . This exception does not apply within Land Use
Airport Compatibility Zones 1 or 2 . A parcel can be considered for infill develop -
ment if it meets all of the following criteria .
(A) The parcel size is no larger than 2 acres .
( 13 ) The site is at least 65 % bounded (excluding roads ) by existing uses similar to , or
more intensive than , those proposed .
( C ) The proposed project would not extend the perimeter of the area defined by
the surrounding , already developed , incompatible uses .
( D ) The proposed project would not, in the case of a residential subdivision , have a
density greater than the average of that on other parcels within 300 feet of the
perimeter of the parcel to be subdivided ; or in the case of a nonresidential
use , have a usage intensity more than 50% above the intensity permitted in ac -
cordance with Section 17 . 40 . 070 of this chapter .
( E ) The proposed project will not otherwise increase the intensity and / or in =
compatibility of use through special use permits , density transfers , or sub -
divisions .
17 . 40 . 080 AIRSPACE PROTECTION AREAS - HEIGHT LIMITATIONS
( 1 ) Basis for Height Limits
Protection of navigable airspace from obstructions that can be hazards to aircraft
flight requires establishment of limits on the height of structures , trees , and other
objects in the vicinity of Sanderson . These limits are primarily based upon Part 77 ,
Subpart C , of the Federal Aviation Regulations ( FAR ) , but also may take into ac -
count the United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures ( TERPS ) and
10
H : \2005 COMP PLAN UPDATE\Summary of 2005 updates\Airport0vertaVZoninq PAC WSDOT 11 22 docH * 407-1 Arn7 DAr wcnn-r
4 '�,,,. DRAFT
applicable airport design standards published by the Federal Aviation Administraw
tion .
( 2 ) Criteria
(A ) No structure shall penetrate or be permitted to have a height exceeding that of
the critical airspace surfaces defined above , except as specifically necessary
for airport operations .
( B ) Variance proceedure height adjustments from the height limit criteria may be
permitted subject to the Mason County development code and only if all of the
following conditions are met :
( 1 ) There is located another existing object or obstruction ( terrain , trees ,
buildings or other structures of greater height ) within a 200400t radius of
the proposed object .
( 2 ) The owner of the property agrees to take responsibility for ensuring that
any obstruction marking and / or lighting required by the Federal Aviation
Administration is installed , operated , and maintained , unless the Airport
Manager has agreed in writing to be responsible for such installation , op -
eration , and maintenance .
( 3 ) The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted an aeronautical study
of the proposed object and determined that the object would not create
a hazard to the navigable airspace of the airport .
( 3 ) Notification to Federal Aviation Administration
Nothing in this chapter shall diminish the responsibility of project proponents to
submit a Notice of Construction or Alteration to the Federal Aviation Administration
if required in accordance with Subpart B of Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77,
"Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace . "
17 . 40 . 090 OTHER REQUIREMENTS
( 1 ) Deed Notification
(A ) As a condition for approval of new development within the approach surfaces
( 17 . 40 . 050 (2 ) ( B ) ) shown on the Airspace Protection Areas Map (Map 2 ) , or Land
UseAirj)ert Compatibility Zones 2 , 3 , 47 5 , and 6 (Map 1 ) ; a notice shall be re-
corded with the county auditor prior to final approval of new subdivisions ,
short subdivisions , building permits , conditional use permits , special use permit
or other similar permits , unless said notice is already recorded on the property .
Said notice shall state : "This property is located adjacent to an airport and
routinely subject to overflight activity by aircraft using the airport ; and that
residents and tenants may experience inconvenience , annoyance , or discomfort
from the-noise , smell or other effects of aviation activities . "
11
H : 12005 COMP PLAN UPDATE\Summary of 2005 updates\Airport0ver1ayZonin9 PAC WSDOT 11 . 22 . docH:1A0,7\A( SAC-WS99T
9 , . '^—�, �',�� DRAFT
17 . 40 . 100 NONCONFORMINGCONDITIONS
(A ) Land uses and structures not in conformance with this Airport ' pd Use.patibility Zone Oerdinance as of the effective date of the chap _
ter may continue in use under the following conditions .
( 1 ) Continuation of the use must not be in conflict with other development
regulations .
( 2 ) A nonconforming use may be changed to another nonconforming use only
if the new use does not involve expansion of the affected land area , an
increase in building size , or an increase in the intensity of usage (i . e . the
number of people per acre ) .
( 3 ) Once a nonconforming use or structure has been abandoned as defined by
Section 1 . 05 . 016 of the Mason County Development Regulations , then any
future use of land or buildings must conform to the provisions of the Ma -
son County Development Regulations .
( B ) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted to prevent normal maintenance of
existing uses and structures .
17 . 40 . 1 10 REVIEW PROCEDURES
(A) Applications for land uses or land use development within Airport Overlay Zone
shall include the following information .
( 1 ) Property boundaries and acreage of the project / proposed use , including
the geographic relationship to the Land Used Compatability and Air=
space Protections Zones .
(2 ) Location , elevation , and height of all existing and proposed buildings ,
structures , and utility lines . The applicant may also be asked for the lo -
cation , elevation , and height of trees .
( 3 ) A description of the proposed land use including the number of dwelling
units and / or number of people expected to occupy the site .
( B ) In consideration of an application for a building , structure , or other use , the
reviewing official may require the applicant to submit a certificate from a reg -
istered professional engineer or a licensed land surveyor clearly indicating the
average ground elevation , maximum elevations of proposed structure ( s ) and
the critical airspace surfaces based on the established airport elevation and
USGS datum . The registered professional engineer or a licensed land surveyor
shall determine elevations plus or minus one foot shown as mean sea level
( msl ) elevation and maximum elevation above the airport runway elevation .
( C ) When the-Fr-opesed users one of chArP listed in Table 17 4n— 0604�reguested
the application shall also include the analysis of the proposal with respect to
the density and intensity limitations contained in Section 17 , 40 , 070 ,
12
H : \2005 COMP PLAN UPDATE\Summary of 2005 updates\AirportOverlayZoninq PAC WSDOT 11 22 docu . ram ram Drat urcnnT
1 , . 'ems DRAFT
( 1 ) Review Criteria
(A ) In reviewing such proposals , the Mason County Department of Community De -
velopment shall consider the following factors :
( 1 ) The compatibility criteria adopted by the County ,
( 2 ) Characteristics of the proposed land use development .
The County may consult with the Airport Manager or Washington Department of
Transportation , Aviation Division , before making a determination .
( B ) The review of variances from height limits under Section 17 . 40 . 080 shall be
considered a Type II Adminstrative variance .
13
H : \2005 COMP PLAN UPDATE\Summary of 2005 updates\AirportOvertavZoninq PAC WSDOT 11 22 docH Am eQZ RAC WSP T
4-1-22:dec DRAFT
Comprehensive2005 Mason County
Review
Accessory Uses on Agricultural
Mason County Resources Ordinance BCC hearing Nov. 2005 �,
17 . 01 . 061 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCE LANDS
The purpose of this Section is to maintain and enhance natural resource based
industries , to encourage the . conservation of commercial agricultural lands , and to
discourage incompatible land use .
A. CLASSIFICATION
The following criteria shall be used in identifying lands appropriate for
Agricultural Resource Lands :
1 . The property has an existing commercial agricultural use ( as of the date
of designation ) or where the property was used for agricultural purposes
as of January 1991 , where identified by property tax classification in the
Open Space - Agriculture property tax classification program pursuant to
Chapter 84 . 34 RCW or where agricultural use has been identified as the
principal use of the property , are presumed to meet this criteria ; and
2 . The property has a minimum parcel size of ten ( 10 ) acres ; and
3 . The parcel has Prime Farmland Soils ; or
4 . The property is surrounded by lands qualifying under classification criteria
1 to 3 above ; or
5 . The property is an upland fin-fish hatchery .
Provided that, property owners may apply to have their land designated as
Agricultural Resource Lands upon a showing that the property is eligible for and
participates in the Open Space - Agricultural property tax classification program
pursuant to Chapter 84 . 34 and upon a showing that either that the property has
Prime Farmland Soils or that, in some other fashion , the agricultural use has
long -term commercial significance . Such applications shall be reviewed by the
county as provided for in the annual amendment process for the county
comprehensive plan and development regulations .
B . DESIGNATION
Lands of Mason County which have been identified as meeting the classification
criteria for Agricultural Resource Lands , and are so specified on the official
Mason County Map , available at the Mason County Planning Department , titled ,
" Mason County Agricultural Resource Lands " or as thereafter amended , are
hereby designated as Agricultural Resource Lands .
C LAND USES
Development and land uses and activities allowed in the Agricultural Resource
Lands or on adjacent lands are as specified in the Mason County Development
Regulations and other applicable ordinances , codes and regulations .
Accessory uses that support , promote , or sustain agricultural operations and
production are allowed and shall comply with the following standards :
Mason County Resources Ordinance BCC hearing Nov. 2005
( i ) Accessory uses shall be located designed and operated so as not to interfere
with natural resource land uses and shall be accessory to the growing of crops or
raising of animals ;
( ii ) Accessory commercial or retail uses shall predominately produce store or
sell regionally produced agricultural products from one or more producers
products derived from regional agricultural production agriculturally related
experiences , or products produced on -site . Accessory commercial and retail uses
shall offer for sale predominantly products or services produced on -site , and
( iii ) Accessory uses may operate out of existing or new buildings with parking and
other supportive uses consistent with the size and scale of existing agricultural
buildings on the site but shall not otherwise convert agricultural land to
nonagricultural uses .
Accessory uses may include compatible commercial or retail uses including but
not limited to , the following :
( i ) Storage and refrigeration of regional agricultural products :
( ii) Production , sales , and marketing of value-added agricultural products derived
from regional sources ;
ON) Supplemental sources of on -farm income that support and sustain on -farm
agricultural operations and production :
( iv) Support services that facilitate the production marketing and distribution of
agricultural products ; and
(v) Off-farm and on -farm sales and marketing of predominately regional
agricultural products and experiences , locally made art and arts and crafts and
ancillary retail sales or service activities .
D . DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS .
a ) Development Standards for Proposed Land Uses .
1 . Front yard setback : 25 feet
2 . Side and rear yard setbacks : Side and rear yard setbacks for the
residential dwelling is 20 feet , for accessory buildings shall be 20
feet, for accessory structures used for agricultural purposes or
home occupations shall be 50 feet , and for buildings of non -
residential land uses shall be 50 feet .
3 . Floor Area Ratio : 1 : 20 , except for fire stations .
4 . Size : 5 , 000 sq . feet maximum (or up to 7 , 500 sg . feet with a
special use permit) for non -agricultural and accessory
buildings except for dwellings and agricultural buildings
5 . Height : 35 feet except for agricultural buildings cell towers
antennas , or water tanks .
Mason County Resources Ordinance BCC hearing Nov. 2005 C
b ) Proposed land uses shall meet the review standards for land uses
established in the Mason County Development Regulations including
Section 1 . 03 . 020 ( Matrix of Permitted Uses ) and Section 1 03 021 ( Home
Occupation and Cottage Industries ) .
E . PREFERENTIAL RIGHT TO MANAGE RESOURCES AND RESOURCE USE
NOTICES
1 . For land owners who have land designated as agricultural resource lands ,
provisions of " Right to Farm " provided under Section 17 . 01 . 040 . C . 5 shall
fully apply .
2 . All plats , short plats , large lot subdivision , development permits , and
building permits issued for activities on , or within 500 feet of lands
designated as agricultural resource lands shall contain the following
notification : "This property is within or near designated agricultural
resource lands on which a variety of commercial activities may occur at
times and that are not compatible with residential development.
Residents of this property may be subject to inconvenience or discomfort
associated with these activities including , but not limited to : dust , odor,
noise , and chemical applications . "
Mason County Resources ordinance BCC hearing Nov. 2005 �
Comprehensive2005 Mason County I
Review
Heighti its on Development on InclustriakZoned
Mason County Development Regulations BCC hearing Nov. 2005
MASON COUNTY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
1 . . 030 Develoment Requirements and Performance Standards
1 . 03 . 032 Development Densities and Dimensional Requirements
C . Dimensional Requirements . Dimensional requirements include setbacks , building
height restrictions , and maximum allowed lot coverage . These requirements for
each Development Area are set forth in FIGURE 1 . 03 . 032 ; consult the specific
adopted urban growth area plan for density and dimensional requirements for the
applicable zone designation .
Maximum height restrictions shall not apply to storage silos , antennas ,
transmission towers , ar water tanks on lands in all zones and on Resource Lands ;
and shall not apply to incineration facilities boilers electrical or generating plants
or industrial facilities on lands zoned as industrial areas .
1 . 04 . 400 RURAL INDUSTRIAL ( RI )
.....................
1 . 04 . 404 Building Regulations .
A. Floor Area Ratio . 1 : 5 in Rural areas or 1 : 3 in RAC , except for fire stations .
Be Size . 7 . 500 sq . ft. maximum or reviewed through Special Use Permit.
C . Height. ,
oF ter to No maximum height for incineration facilities boilers electrical or
generating plants , or industrial facilities on lands zoned as industrial areas
Mason County Development Regulations BCC hearing Nov. 2005 B