Council Legislation

Ordinance No. 2017-6s

Title: An Ordinance of the Pierce County Council Adopting the 2017 Amendments to the Pierce County Comprehensive Plan Policies and Land Use Designations; “Gig Harbor Community Plan” Policies; and “Key Peninsula Community Plan” Policies; Adopting Findings of Fact; and Setting Forth an Effective Date. (2017 Comprehensive Plan Amendments)

Status: Passed

Sponsors: Councilmembers Derek Young

Final votes

April 18, 2017
Aye Aye Nay Aye Aye Aye Aye

Additional legislative records are available below Collapse All  Expand All

Public Comments

Name Date Comment
Karen 2/24/17 4:35 PM I would like to read the proposed ordinance 2017-6 but can not find it on your site. The instructions on the letter were of no help. I called and received direction to this site. But I still can not find the ordinance so that I can read it. Very frustrating !!!
Karen & Larry Stewart 3/2/17 5:16 PM For our property on 14721 Pioneer Way E, Puyallup, WA
Jon Barkas 3/5/17 2:32 PM I oppose ordinance 2017-6 as proposed. The planning commission has ignored an extensive agricultural resource land (ARL) study and staff recommendations to update the comprehensive plan and make it more consistent with state law. I am a land owner with less than 10 acres and have had my land use rights taken by Pierce county when my parcel was designated ARL from R-10 without notice. About 1/3 of my parcel is developed and the remaining land has never produced more than 1.5 tons of hay per acre that can be farmed (about 7-8 tons maximum/year.) This produces barely enough revenue to qualify for my small current use tax break, and is not a viable farming operation. I have requested removal from ARL and staff recommended my parcel (0619076001) be changed back to R-10 zoning in the ARL amendments originally proposed in the public hearing I attended. The Land Use committee has thrown all this aside to keep the old arbitrary ARL designation "system." While 40+ acre farm fields are being carved up for development in my neighborhood, I can't even divide my parcel with 2 existing houses on it and on which I pay over $8000/year in property taxes. How is this viable agricultural land when I can't even come close to growing enough to pay my property taxes? The existing and proposed (2017-6) criteria for ARL designation in Pierce county does not meet the intent or purpose of Washington State land use laws and is effectively a "taking" of my land use rights. It's time that the Pierce County council stand up and do it's job to protect the rights of small land owners in rural Pierce county instead of protecting nonresident developers that are chopping up the large farms around us. Jon Barkas
Vanessa Bannon 3/16/17 9:16 AM I am concerned about the size of the ARL designation in the central and southern district being significantly larger than the other 3 districts. If such large areas of land are required for agricultural use, then that allows smaller parcels to be developed. This area lacks the infrastructure to support any more development. Utilities will be further strained, and the roads cannot support increased traffic. At present, 224th between Mtn Hwy and Meridian is overloaded and there is no alternative or parallel road that's easily accessible. I think allowing an ARL designation that aligns with the rest of the county (10 acres) is all the area can support, until - or if - infrastructure is improved.
Erin O'Hagan 4/2/17 8:54 PM I am writing to ask Councilwoman Ladenberg to support Amendment 1 and reject amendment 5. Farm land is critical to our county and we need to protect it. THank you
Joanne Babic 4/2/17 8:54 PM I support protecting farmland from development.
Mac Buff 4/2/17 9:02 PM Follow the recommendations of the scientific study: support Amendment 1, reject Amendment 5.
Shannon Lynn 4/2/17 9:14 PM I am writing to you to ask that you please vote to protect farmland as recommended by the Fresh Look study. Please support amendment #1 and reject amendment number #5 on Agricultural Resource Lands in proposal #2017-6. This is an important issue that will affect our environment and these scientific finding should be what are adhered to by our legislation. I would love to hear an update. Thanks!
Pattie Green 4/2/17 9:24 PM I'm writing about the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan that would change the way land is designated as Agricultural Resource Lands. I support the thoughtful work of the Fresh Look study, and would like to urge you to follow their recommendations in this matter. Please vote for Amendment #1, and reject Amendment #5. Thank you.
Emily Patterson 4/2/17 9:27 PM Regarding Proposal #2017-6. Many of us feel very strongly about the Fresh Look Study. Please support Amendment 1 and reject Amendment 5. Thank you.
Phillip Venditti 4/2/17 10:31 PM Please support Amendment #1 to protect as much agricultural land in our county as possible from "development." We need to maintain sustainable sources of food and maintain the livelihood of farmers in our region. Thank you for considering this request! Respectfully, Phillip Venditti and Yuna Min
Cheryl Kopec 4/2/17 10:42 PM Hello, I am urging the Council to accept Mr. Young's Amendment #1 on proposed ordinance 2017-6, and reject Mr. McCune's Amendments 2, 3 & 5. I believe our county's farmlands are one of our greatest treasures, and they should be preserved to every extent possible. Once they're gone, they're gone! What would Pierce County be without our daffodil and berry farms? I don't know of anybody who grew up here who didn't spend a summer, or at least a day (me!) picking strawberries for pocket money. Let's strenuously guard and preserve our heritage and our precious farmlands. Remember, you can't eat money -- or concrete!
Cathryn woon 4/3/17 7:08 AM Please vote for Amendment 1 and oppose 5. Thank you.
Anneliese M Simons 4/3/17 8:32 AM Please support Amendment # 1 and Reject Amendment # 5 on the Agricultural Resource Plan, Proposal # 2017-6. Our farmlands and food sources need protection. Thank you, Anneliese Simons
Danielle Cruver 4/3/17 9:17 AM I support Amendment 1 but please vote no on Amendment 5. Please save priceless farmland. I support the Fresh Look Study. Thank you.
Kris Symer 4/3/17 3:07 PM Support Amendment 1. Oppose amendment 5. Critical that we protect our farmlands from development. This also tends to minimize floodplain development, which is consistent with Floodplains by Design.
Carol Ebbs 4/4/17 8:58 AM I urge you to support amendment #1 and reject amendment #5. Please support the Scientific Research for this proposal.
Diane McAlister 4/4/17 9:19 AM Dear Councilmember: I'm late, unfortunately, but want to let you know that I hope you voted to follow the recommendations of the Fresh Look study in the matter of Proposed Ordinance 2017-6. I'll hope to be more timely in my comments in the future!! Thank you! Diane McAlister
Elizabeth Barkas 4/17/17 12:36 PM I support Amendment No. 1 Proposed Ordinance No. 2017-6s Based upon the findings and recommendations contained in the “A Fresh Look at Pierce County Agriculture” report, dated September 12, 2016. Predominant parcel size: Three of the four Agricultural Production Districts (Valley, Plateau, and Peninsula) have a minimum parcel acreage of 10 acres and the Central/Southern district has a minimum parcel acreage of 40 acres. These minimum acreages reflect the type of agricultural activity/practices typically associated with each District and contain adequate lands to sustain long term commercial significance for agriculture. For those that don't meet ARL criteria can opt in: Several property owners whose property didn’t meet the ARL designation criteria requested to have their property voluntarily included in the ARL designation. PALS Supplemental Staff Report #3 dated February 1, 2017, provides a list of properties in which the owners have requested the ARL designation. Several property owners whose property didn’t meet the ARL criteria and were enrolled in the Farm and Agricultural Open Space taxation program requested the Rural 10 (R10) designation, rather than the Rural Farm (RF) designation. PALS Supplemental Staff Report #1 dated January 11, 2017, provides a list of property that requested the R10 designation.