Attachment 1 Summary of Options · Two options proposed for designation criteria and Map N-2: Option A-1 and A-2. Both options are currently reflected in the Draft of Map N-2. •Option

Attachment 1

Summary of Options

BoCC Brief 10/15/20202020 Comp Plan Update: Mineral Lands

ATTACHMENT 1 – SUMMARY OF OPTIONSBoCC Brief – October 15, 20202020 Comprehensive Plan Update

OPTIONS:

Decision Point “A”

Designation Criteria and Mineral Lands Map

Option A-1 Maintain current designation criteria.

Designates 140,086 acres.

Option A-2 Amend designation criteria to allow for co-designation1 of mineral lands and agricultural lands.2

Designates 142,170 acres. (Approx. 2,084 co-designated LTA/MRL)

Decision Point “C”

Plat Resource Use Notice Requirement

Option C-1 Maintain current language in 18.04 TCC, requiring a resource use notice 1,000-feet from designated mineral lands for plats.

Consistent with state law, RCW 36.70A.060(b), minimum required is 500 ft.

Option C-2 Reduce language in 18.04 TCC to require a resource use notice 500-feet from designated mineral lands for plats.

Consistent with state law, RCW 36.70A.060(b), minimum required is 500 ft.

Decision Point “D”

Options for New and Expanding Operations on Undesignated Mineral Lands

Option D-1 Code language in 20.30B TCC that would allow for expansion of existing operations only onto designated mineral resource lands.

Option D-2 Code language in 20.30B TCC that would allow for expansion of existing operations onto undesignated mineral resource lands, including the undesignated 1,000-foot separation distance from UGAs and parks.

Option D-3 Code language in 20.30B TCC that would allow for expansion of existing operations onto undesignated mineral resource lands, including the undesignated 1,000-foot separation distance from UGAs and parks; expansion or new operations within the undesignated 1,000-foot separation distance from parks up to an existing barrier; expansion or new operations within the undesignated 1,000-foot separation distance from parks when the park was donated by the same mining operator.

Decision Point “E”

Evaluating Mineral Lands Map at Site-Scale

Option E-1 Code language in 20.30B would consider a whole parcel designated at site-level and eligible to apply for a permit when 0.25 acres and at least 5% are mapped as designated.

Option E-2 Code language in 20.30B would consider a whole parcel designated at site-level and eligible to apply for a permit when any amount of the parcel is mapped as designated.

Option E-3 Code language in 20.30B would consider a whole parcel designated at site-level and eligible to apply for a permit only when the entire parcel is mapped as designated.

Mineral Lands Element – Options

1WAC 365-190-040 (7)(b) "If two or more natural resource land designations apply, counties and cities must determine if these designations are incompatible. If they are incompatible, counties and cities should examine the criteria to determine which use has the greatest long-term commercial significance, and that resource use should be assigned to the lands being designated."

2Proposed amendments to rehabilitation requirements for lands that are co-designated with agriculture are included in the Thurston County Code as draft language but would only move forward with option A-2

https://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=365-190-040

ATTACHMENT 1 – SUMMARY OF OPTIONSBoCC Brief – October 15, 20202020 Comprehensive Plan Update

Long Term Forestry Review – Options

Decision Point “F”

Long Term Forestry Amendments

Option F-1 Make no change to any of the 7 parcels. Leave Long-Term Forestry designation, land use, and zone as-is.

Option F-2 Amend the land use and associated zoning of any of the seven parcels (± 0 to 173.52 acres) from Long-Term Forestry to Rural Residential Resource 1/5, and respectively remove from the Long-Term Forestry designation.

**There is no longer a Decision Point B. Decision Point B and associated options were removed through the Mineral Lands Stakeholder

Group and Planning Commission process in March-May, 2020. It is not omitted from this table by error.

Attachment 2

History of Recent Board and Planning Commission Decisions on Mineral Lands


COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

John Hutchings District One

Gary Edwards District Two

Tye Menser

District Three

COMMUNITY PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

Creating Solutions for Our Future Joshua Cummings, Director

2000 Lakeridge Drive SW, Olympia, Washington 98502 (360) 786-5490/FAX (360) 754-2939

TTY/TDD call 711 or 1-800-833-6388 Website: www.co.thurston.wa.us/permitting

ATTACHMENT 2 TO: Thurston County Board of County Commissioners

FROM: Maya Teeple, Senior Planner

DATE: October 15, 2020

SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Update - Mineral Lands Update

History and Recent Decisions

This memorandum was first provided to the Board of County Commissioners at the January 8, 2020

briefing. Memorandum has been updated to reflect anything that has occurred since that date.

Summary of Thurston County Mineral Lands History, 1993 to 2013 Below is a summary of history related to the Thurston County Mineral Lands Designation Criteria.

• August 16, 1993 – Thurston County established designation criteria for mineral resource lands

of long-term significance in the Comprehensive Plan and 20.30B of the Thurston County Code.

Ord. 10398 and Res. 10400

• October 17, 2003 – Based on concerns raised during a review of designated mineral lands as

part of the Comprehensive Plan Update, the County adopted interim regulations prohibiting

new designation of mineral lands, citing concern that the existing criteria did not include

sufficient environmental factors or location criteria, and noting public concern about

environmental impacts of mineral extraction. Ord. 13030

• November 24, 2003 – County re-affirmed moratorium and establishes a citizen task force to

review Mineral Lands Regulations. Res. 13061-A

• 2003-2004 – Mineral Lands Task Force met 11 times and developed recommendations on on

designation criteria for mineral lands

• 2004-2010 – County renewed interim moratorium 14 times, while addressing challenges to the

2004 Comprehensive Plan Update and reviewing amendments to the Critical Areas Ordinance.

http://www.co.thurston.wa.us/permitting

Board of County Commissioners Brief – Oct. 15, 2020

Thurston County 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update - Mineral Lands Update: A Recent History

• September 7, 2010 – County adopted revised criteria for mineral resource lands. Res. 14401

and Ord. 14402.

o Prohibited co-designation of mineral lands and forest lands, and most critical areas

• November 23, 2010 – Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB) challenge Case No. 10-

2-0020c by Weyerhaeuser Co., Washington Aggregates and Concrete Assoc., Inc., Alpine Sand

and Gravel, Inc., Glacier Northwest, Inc., dba CALPORTLAND, Granite Construction Co.,

Miles Sand and Gravel Co., Quality Rock Products, Inc., and Segale Properties, LLC.

• June 17, 2011 – GMHB Amended Final Decision and Order

o Of the 23 issues brought by the challenge, the GMHB held that Thurston County must

reconsider seven.

• April 17, 2012 – County adopted amended designation criteria. Res. 14739 and Ord. 14740.

o Cited Best Available Science (BAS) to support refined exclusions

o Maintained exclusion of forest lands

o Excluded Category 1 and 2 wetlands, Zone 1 and 2 Time of Travel boundaries for Class

A Public Water Systems, habitats for species listed under the Endangered Species Act,

marine bluffs, including the Nisqually Hillside Overlay

• July 18, 2012 – Compliance Order issued

o GMHB found the County generally met the previous Compliance Order requirements.

However, the court found that Thurston County must reconsider dual designation of

mineral lands where long-term forestlands and critical areas are also present.

• January 8, 2013 – additional amendments adopted. Res. 14847 and Ord. 14848.

o Removed all criteria creating exclusions for forest lands or critical areas

o Added provision that all mineral lands designated in the Comprehensive Plan must also

be designated under Chapter 20.30B TCC.

• March 15, 2013 – GMHB found that Thurston County had achieved compliance with RCW

36.70A.170 (1) and (2), WAC 365-190-020 and 365-190-040 with the additional amendments

adopted in January and closed the case.

Summary of Recent Decisions Related to the Mineral Lands Update, 2016 to current Below is a summary of recent history related to the 2016-2020 Thurston County Mineral Lands

Update.

• July 26, 2016 – BoCC approves for RFP to solicit proposals for professional services to

develop Thurston County Mineral Lands Inventory map.

• October 2016 – RFP selection of professional services with Associated Earth and Sciences,

Inc. (AESI).

• November 8, 2016 – BoCC approval of AESI, Inc. Contract for Mineral Lands Inventory

study.

ATTACHMENT 2 – HISTORY OF MRL



• February 14, 2017 – Adoption of the Scope of Work for the Comprehensive Plan Update by

the BOCC under Resolution 15436.

o The Scope of Work States “update map of designated mineral lands, based on adopted

criteria”.

• April 19, 2017 – Mineral Lands Stakeholder Group convened. This group met for a total of 9

meetings between April 19, 2017 and October 24, 2018.

• May 1, 2017 – Draft Inventory Map developed. County issued notification letters to all

property owners affected (i.e., overlapped or adjacent to) by the draft inventory, and invited

property owners to submit public comment if they have technical information to better inform

the inventory or have information that their property should be included or excluded. From

May 1 – June 6, 2017, the county received 228 comments on the inventory, and also handled

142 phone calls and 20 walk-in questions.

• May 17, 2017 – First Planning Commission Work Session on Mineral Lands. The Planning

Commission held 7 work sessions on mineral lands between May 17, 2017 and January 17,

2018.

• August 4, 2017 – AESI, Inc. finalizes Mineral Lands Inventory Map.

• March 7, 2018 – Planning Commission Public Hearing on scope of mineral lands designation

map update.

• March 21, 2018 – Planning Commission produces a recommendation on scope of mineral

lands. Recommendation states to proceed with option 1A, which maps the current designation

criteria but also considers co-designation of mineral lands with agricultural lands of long-term

commercial significance.

• May 16, 2018 – Board Briefing on Mineral Lands Scope of Designation and PC

Recommendation. Follow up discussions were held on May 22, May 31, and June 5.

• July 24, 2018 – Board approves staff to move forward with Option 2, as stated: “Move

forward with the Planning Commission recommendation, unchanged, but amend policies to

address parcels that are partially designated.”

o Based on this decision, the following maps are retained for further consideration: A(1)

which is the current designation criteria. Option A(2) which is the current designation

criteria, except for co-designation of mineral resource lands with long term agricultural

lands.

• October 24, 2018 – Last Mineral Lands Stakeholder Meeting (9 of 9), to review proposed code

changes and parks policy options.




• November 1, 2018 – Board Briefing on Parks Policy Options to determine how to interpret the

parks clause of the current designation criteria in Chapter 3 for the purposes of the Mineral

Lands designation map. Follow up discussion held on November 6, 2018.

• November 20, 2018 – Board directs staff to proceed with option 1 (more parks) for the mineral

lands update.

o This does not effectively change any designation criteria in the comprehensive plan. It

is mapping implementation of existing designation criteria.

o This policy option is reflected in the updated Mineral Lands Designation Map options

(Map N-2).

• January 16, 2019 – Planning Commission work session on mineral lands update, including:

Chapter 3 policy language, detailed review of major code changes and code options, and

review of Designated Mineral Lands Map N-2 options. Planning Commission requested

additional work sessions to review code language.

• May 9, 2019 – Management decides to split the scope of work of the Comprehensive Plan

Update, and places mineral lands as a continuing item.

• January 8, 2020 – Board Briefing on the Mineral Lands Update, a component of the 2020

Comprehensive Plan Update. This briefing provided a high-level update on the status. At this

briefing, the Board requested an overview on the GMHB case at a later date.

• September 2, 2020 – Planning Commission produces a recommendation of approval for the

2020 Comprehensive Plan Update, and recommends the following options related to mineral

lands:

o Option A-2: Co-designate mineral lands and agricultural lands of long-term commercial

significance.

o Option C-1: Maintain current plat resource use notice of 1,000-feet.

o Option D-3 (amended): Allow expansion of existing mines onto undesignated areas,

including in the 1,000-foot separation distance from UGA and parks; and allow for new

mines within the 1,000-foot distance from parks up to an existing barrier, or when the

park was donated by the same an operator.

o Option E-2: If any amount is designated, the whole parcel is eligible to apply for a

permit.

o Option F-2 (forestry related).

Current status of the mineral lands review update: The mineral lands review update is being considered as part of the continuing items of the

Comprehensive Plan Update (Item #1 on the 2020/2021 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket).

The Planning Commission produced a recommendation on September 2, 2020.


Attachment 3

GMA Requirements for Mineral Resource Lands and Current County Designation Criteria


COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

John Hutchings District One

Gary Edwards District Two

Tye Menser

District Three

COMMUNITY PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

Creating Solutions for Our Future Joshua Cummings, Director

2000 Lakeridge Drive SW, Olympia, Washington 98502 (360) 786-5490/FAX (360) 754-2939

TTY/TDD call 711 or 1-800-833-6388 Website: www.co.thurston.wa.us/permitting

ATTACHMENT 3 TO: Thurston County Board of County Commissioners

FROM: Maya Teeple, Senior Planner

DATE: October 15, 2020

SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Update - Mineral Lands Update

GMA Requirements for Mineral Resource Lands and Current County Designation

Criteria

Current State Guidelines Regarding Designation of Mineral Resource Lands Counties must designate mineral resource lands in order to achieve the Natural resource industries goal

of the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.020(8)).

Maintain and enhance natural resource-based industries, including productive timber,

agricultural, and fisheries industries. Encourage the conservation of productive forestlands

and productive agricultural lands, and discourage incompatible uses.

State guidelines include that counties:

• Must approach designation as a countywide process, and not review mineral lands solely on a

parcel-by-parcel basis (WAC 365-190-070(1));

• May consider a longer planning period than the typical 20 years, to assure the availability of

minerals for future uses and not preclude their access due to incompatible development (WAC

365-190-070(2));

• Should base their classification of mineral lands on underlying geology and distance to market

(WAC 365-190-070(3d)), and should use information from the Department of Natural

Resources (DNR), the United States Geological Service, and relevant information from

property owners (WAC 365-190-070(3c));

• Should determine if adequate mineral resources are available for projected needs from

designated mineral lands (WAC 365-190-070(4b));

• Must consider mining a temporary use at any given location, that could be followed by another

land use after mining is completed (WAC 365-190-070(4d));

• Should designate mineral lands as close as possible to their likely end use area (WAC 365-190-

040(5e));

http://www.co.thurston.wa.us/permitting


Thurston County 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update - Mineral Lands Update: GMA Requirements for Mineral Resource

Lands & Current County Designation Criteria

In classifying mineral resource lands, counties should consider the following minimum guidelines

(WAC 365-190-070):

• Geology: depth and quality of resource and characteristics of resource site

• Projected life of the resource

• Resource availability and needs in the region

• Accessibility and proximity to point of use or market

• Energy costs of transporting materials

• Proximity to population areas

o General land use patterns

o Availability of utilities, including water supply

o Surrounding parcel sizes and uses

o Availability of public roads and public services

o Subdivision and zoning of small lots

When potential mineral lands overlap critical areas or other natural resource areas:

• If a critical area designation overlies a natural resource land designation, both designations

apply, and the multiple designations are to be reconciled through local development

regulations. (WAC 365-190-040(7a))

• If two or more natural resource land designations apply, counties and cities must determine if

these designations are incompatible. If they are incompatible, counties and cities should

examine the criteria to determine which use has the greatest long-term commercial

significance, and that resource use should be assigned to the lands being designated. (WAC

365-190-040(7b))

Overall, state guidelines direct that:

“Successful achievement of the natural resource industries goal set forth in

RCW 36.70A.020 requires the conservation of land base sufficient in size and quality to

maintain and enhance those industries, and the development and use of land use techniques that

discourage uses incompatible to the management of designated lands.”

WAC 365-190-040(5d)

Project Steps for Mineral Resource Lands Update in Thurston County The process of planning for Mineral Resource Lands consists of the following steps: (1) Identify and

classify, (2) Designate, (3) Conserve, and (4) Permit. Steps 1, 2, and 3 are part of the Comprehensive

Plan Update, and include comprehensive plan amendments and development code amendments. Step 4

is the permitting stage – even after a site is designated as mineral resource lands, an operator must still

apply for a permit.

Inventory and Classification – Step 1 In order to meet state guidelines, Thurston County contracted with Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.

(AESI) to identify and classify mineral resources in the County and create a base inventory map

showing the location of mineral resources. AESI developed a draft inventory and classification system

largely based on data from DNR and USGS, with some supplementary information from Washington

Department of Transportation and private studies. This draft was released for public review on May 1,

ATTACHMENT 3 – GMA REQUIREMENTS & COUNTY DESIGNATION

http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=36.70A.020




2017, and a public comment period was open from May 1 to 24. All properties potentially affected by

the draft inventory were notified by mail of the comment period, and staff held an Open House on May

17, 2017. A revised inventory and classification study was completed in August 2017. This map was

adopted with the Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update on November 12, 2019 as Map N-3.

The inventory identifies both aggregate (sand and gravel) and quarry rock resources in Thurston

County and classifies various resource areas based on their potential quality (ability to meet market

needs with minimal processing, A-C) and quantity (thickness of resource, 1-3)1. Type D prospects

were those considered unfeasible as economic resources and were excluded from designation. The

study also considers economic factors, including market value and demand, and identifies minimal

additional resources in the county for coal, iron ore, and copper ore.

Sand and gravel are the major mineral resources in Thurston County, and AESI’s inventory study

estimates 6.1 billion tons of sand and gravel resources countywide. The vast majority of this resource

(88%) is classified as Type 3 with average depths of less than 50 feet thick, while thick resources

(Type 1) are relatively rare. One consequence of the dominance of these thinner deposits is that a

broader area of surface disturbance is required to obtain the same volume of aggregate.

Bedrock resources in the county are more limited, but Thurston County is a source of specialty rock

products, including Tenino sandstone and claystone, and a type of quarry rock in high demand for

revetments along marine shorelines.

Designation Criteria – Step 2 The goal of this mineral lands designation process is to identify lands in Thurston County that are most

appropriate to conserve for future resource use given the geology, economic value, location, and

surrounding land uses. Thurston County has established criteria for designation of mineral lands in

Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan, as a result of the review and updates completed in 2013 in response

to the GMHB case. However, those criteria were not mapped in 2013 – this work was scheduled to be

done as part of the periodic Comprehensive Plan Update.

This mineral lands update will change designation from a site-specific approach, based on parcels with

existing mining operations, to a countywide process, based on geology and landscape factors. In response

to consultant recommendations, stakeholder and public comments, staff also considered in 2017-2018 a

variety of additional criteria that could be used to screen inventoried mineral lands, including

jurisdictional, land use, and environmental factors. Criteria are used to include or exclude categories of

land from the mineral lands designation, based on the presence of characteristics that enhance or limit

compatibility of mineral extraction with surrounding uses, or characteristics that enhance or limit the

economic feasibility of mining.

Not all considerations can be addressed through the designation mapping stage of mineral resource lands.

Some criteria may not have corresponding available, reliable, spatial data; other issues may be better

suited for an individual case-by-case evaluation and should be addressed at the permitting stage.

Designation means that the presence of mineral resources and analysis of land use compatibility has been

1 Depth of bedrock was not calculable within the scope of this study, so quarry rock resources are only classified by quality.





completed at a broad, landscape scale, and designated sites are eligible to apply for the permits needed

for extraction and/or processing of minerals. Designation does not mean that any specific site within the

designation will be approved for an active mine. Every proposal for mineral extraction must complete

additional environmental review at the project level and obtain the required permits (see step 4).

At the direction of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioner’s in 2018, two

options for designation criteria and the mineral lands map (N-2) were moved forward for consideration

– one map that depicts the current designation criteria in Chapter 3, and a second map that depicts the

current designation criteria in Chapter 3 with one amendment to co-designate mineral lands and long-

term agriculture.

Conserve – Step 3 With the change from a site-specific approach to a countywide approach, policy language within the

Thurston County Comprehensive Plan and language in the Thurston County Code must be updated to

implement the new map.

Through consultant recommendations, stakeholder group work, and public comments, several

amendments have been proposed to existing policy and code language. Because the proposed Designated

Mineral Lands Map (N-2) does not conform to parcel lines and instead is based on geology, several

options exist in the proposed amendments to the Thurston County Code that would influence how the

map is implemented at the permit scale.

Permit – Step 4 This step is not part of the Comprehensive Plan Update, but a step already in place that comes

afterwards. Even if a site is designated as Mineral Resource Lands of Long-Term Commercial

Significance, an operator must still apply for a permit in order to conduct mineral extraction. Operators

must go through all required review and permitting prior to beginning a mining activity, and must

abide by all relevant federal, state and local regulations, including environmental rules. Not all areas

that are designated on the mineral lands map will be approved for an active mine.


Natural Resource

Lands THURSTON COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

Adopted November 2019 Sept. 2, 2020 - PC Recommendation Draft

3-26

To determine the location of mineral resource lands of long-term commercial significance, the

County applies state minimum guidelines provided by the Washington State Department of

Commerce under WAC 365-190-070 (see sidebar). Based on those guidelines and additional

considerations to protect public health, safety, and the environment, the County has developed the

following criteria to designate mineral resource lands of long-term commercial significance.

OPTION A

OPTION A-1

MINIMUM DESIGNATION CRITERIA

1. Mineral Deposits. Designated mineral resource lands should contain deposits consisting of

sand and gravel, coal, sandstone, basalt, or other igneous rock, based on U.S. Geological

Survey maps or site-specific information prepared by a geologist, or as indicated by State

Department of Natural Resources (DNR) mining permit data.

2. Location. Designated mineral resource lands shall be separated by a distance of at least

1,000 feet from public preserves, which include parks, national wildlife refuges, state

conservation areas, wild life areas, and other government owned preserves, but excluding

hunting areas. In addition, designated mineral resource lands shall be at least 1,000 feet

from urban growth areas and rural residential areas with existing densities predominantly

one dwelling unit per five acres or higher, in order to minimize land use conflicts during the

long-term operation of the mine.

To qualify for a mineral resource designation, at least 60% of the area within 1,000 feet of a

proposed site must be made up of parcels 5 acres in size or larger, excluding parcels owned

by the applicant.

3. Minimum Site Size. An area proposed for the mineral resource lands designation should be

at least 5 acres in size.

4. Marketability. Mineral resource lands shall contain non-strategic minerals which are

minable, recoverable and marketable in the present or foreseeable future as determined by

a licensed professional geologist.

5. Mineral resource lands shall not include agriculture lands of long-term commercial

significance, or historical/cultural preservation sites.

6. Mineral resource lands may include lands designated for long-term forestry.

OPTION A

OPTION A-2

MINIMUM DESIGNATION CRITERIA

1. Mineral Deposits. Designated mineral resource lands should contain deposits consisting of

sand and gravel, coal, sandstone, basalt, or other igneous rock, based on U.S. Geological


Excerpt from Chapter 3 - Current County Designation Criteria for Mineral Lands and Proposed Amendment (Option A-2)

Natural Resource

Lands THURSTON COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

Adopted November 2019 Sept. 2, 2020 - PC Recommendation Draft

3-27

Survey maps or site-specific information prepared by a geologist, or as indicated by State

Department of Natural Resources (DNR) mining permit data.

2. Location. Designated mineral resource lands shall be separated by a distance of at least

1,000 feet from public preserves, which include parks, national wildlife refuges, state

conservation areas, wild life areas, and other government owned preserves, but excluding

hunting areas. In addition, designated mineral resource lands shall be at least 1,000 feet

from urban growth areas and rural residential areas with existing densities predominantly

one dwelling unit per five acres or higher, in order to minimize land use conflicts during the

long-term operation of the mine.

To qualify for a mineral resource designation, at least 60% of the area within 1,000 feet of a

proposed site must be made up of parcels 5 acres in size or larger, excluding parcels owned

by the applicant.

3. Minimum Site Size. An area proposed for the mineral resource lands designation should be

at least 5 acres in size.

4. Marketability. Mineral resource lands shall contain non-strategic minerals which are

minable, recoverable and marketable in the present or foreseeable future as determined by

a licensed professional geologist.

5. Mineral resource lands shall not include agriculture lands of long-term commercial

significance, or historical/cultural preservation sites.

6. Mineral resource lands may include lands designated for long-term forestry. Commented [MT6]: Two options proposed for designation criteria and Map N-2: Option A-1 and A-2.

Both options are currently reflected in the Draft of Map N-2. •Option A-1 is the current designation criteria with no changes. •Option A-2 would co-designation mineral lands and agricultural lands on long-term commercial significance.

State law WAC 365-190-040 (7)(b) states that overlapping designations should not necessarily be considered inconsistent and that, “If two or more natural resource land designations apply, counties and cities must determine if these designations are incompatible. If they are incompatible, counties and cities should examine the criteria to determine which use has the greatest long-term commercial significance, and that resource use should be assigned to the lands being designated.”


https://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=365-190-040

Documents

Attachment 1 Summary of Options · Two options proposed for designation criteria and Map N-2: Option A-1 and A-2. Both options are currently reflected in the Draft of Map N-2. •Option