Print this page

Campbell: Concerned methodology for Comp Plan doesn't acknowledge facts

To the Editor,

Growth Management planning, i.e. preserving rural lands and concentrating growth in towns, seemed like a good idea at the time and, vs. not planning, it still does. The devil is in the details.

Discouraging sprawl, concentrating growth in towns and making adequate provision for affordable housing, however, is an economic non-sequitur. Concentrating growth makes land scarce and expensive. Fortunately, GM has produced a methodology to assess the demand for and supply of developable land in our towns, Eastsound and Friday Harbor. San Juan County is applying that technology[1] (Draft Land Capacity Analysis Methodology) to Eastsound but, apparently, not in Friday Harbor.

That is unfortunate because under GM, counties have the ultimate authority to determine population figures and determine urban growth boundaries (Reading v Thurston Co. 94-2-0019).

It is important because, in order to discourage sprawl, San Juan County has stipulated that it will allocate 50% of growth to UGA’s. Yet the Friday Harbor Population and Land Supply Report has its own methodology which fails to acknowledge that:

County Ordinance 16-2009 allocates 50% of San Juan Island population to the Friday Harbor UGA or,

The non-resident, recreational home growth in this county has exceeded 200% of resident population home growth for the past decade and must be accounted for as well.

In short, San Juan County must analyze the Friday Harbor UGA Land Capacity with the same methodology as they use for Eastsound if the County expects to be compliant with GMA with respect to

Encouraging growth in UGA;s

Discouraging sprawl, and

Making adequate provision for affordable housing.

John M. Campbell


copyright 1999-2020