Anacortes planning commission reviews draft climate element; commissioners debate electrification, battery storage and shoreline links

Anacortes — The Anacortes Planning Commission on April 9 reviewed a draft climate element that city consultants say would set the city on a “good path” toward meeting state greenhouse‑gas and resilience requirements while leaving additional work for later implementation.

Consultants from MAKERS and Parametrics presented the draft goals and policies and explained how the proposals map to state guidance. John Coleman, director of the city’s Planning, Community and Economic Development Department, introduced Katie Saunders of MAKERS and Beth Miller of Parametrics, who led the technical overview and the draft list of goals and policies.

“This effort can do is set some initial ideas of targets,” Saunders said, describing the draft as the goals and policies portion of a two‑volume submission that will include analysis and recommended next steps. Parametrics’ Miller summarized statutory requirements and the two largest local levers she and the consultants identified: building fuel switching and reduced vehicle miles traveled. “First reduction is you have to have a plan that will result in reduction of overall greenhouse gas emissions, especially from transportation and land use,” Miller said.

Why it matters: the state requires a greenhouse‑gas emissions reduction subelement and resilience measures as part of the comprehensive plan update. The commission was shown a high‑level inventory and a draft implementation list that the consultants say would not, by itself, achieve the state’s full targets but would capture most locally actionable reductions.

What the draft would do: The consultants said the draft climate element contains 15 goals and 59 policies, of which they flagged 35 as “high priority” measures from Department of Commerce guidance. Key topics in the draft include: building energy (electrification and efficiency), reducing per‑capita vehicle miles traveled through land‑use and multimodal policies, local renewables and distributed solar, EV charging infrastructure, shoreline and coastal ecosystem restoration, urban forestry and wildfire risk management, and water and wastewater system resilience.

Major points raised by presenters and commissioners

- Levers and limits: Miller emphasized that local actions can move the needle but may not close the entire gap to net‑zero without statewide action. As an example of scale, she walked commissioners through modeled outcomes for widespread residential electrification and a 20% per‑capita reduction in vehicle miles traveled by 2050, noting those steps yield sizable but incomplete reductions.

- State requirements and timing: Saunders said the city is not required to set interim statewide targets but that staff and the consultant team plan to propose some interim, topic‑specific targets (for example, for city fleet electrification or EV charging planning) as guidance for implementation.

- Co‑benefits and environmental justice: The consultants said they tracked potential co‑benefits — public‑health, economic and ecosystem gains — and incorporated an environmental‑justice lens, emphasizing protections for seniors, low‑income households and other sensitive populations identified in the vulnerability assessment (downtown and eastern Anacortes showed higher vulnerability in the analysis).

- Shoreline Master Program (SMP) nexus: Commissioners and staff discussed overlap between the climate element and the shoreline master program. City staff said the SMP update work is largely completed in draft form but was paused for appeals and will be returned to the public process after the comp plan work; Department of Ecology guidance for SMPs is still being finalized.

- Urban trees and wildfire tension: Several commissioners raised the tradeoff between protecting urban forest canopy and reducing wildfire risk near structures. Saunders and commissioners agreed the language should acknowledge both objectives and that implementation detail or sub‑policies will be needed to reconcile them.

Contested issues highlighted by commissioners

- Building electrification and housing affordability: Several commissioners expressed concern that policies promoting building electrification and higher energy performance could increase upfront costs for homeowners or builders and might conflict with affordability goals. Saunders and staff said the draft emphasizes voluntary programs and incentives and proposes that the city explore financing, rebates or other support programs to help lower‑income households move toward heat pumps and more efficient systems; the consultants said they were not proposing a local ordinance that would mandate fuel switching.

- Appliance and fuel political context: Commissioners noted local and statewide political controversy over restrictions on gas appliances. Staff said the draft language was deliberately cautious and framed around supporting transitions and incentives rather than local mandates.

- Battery storage and siting: Multiple commissioners raised concerns about the term “storage” in energy resilience policies. Presenters and staff explained “storage” can range from small building‑scale batteries paired with rooftop solar (microgrids) to much larger grid‑scale battery projects; the consultants said Puget Sound Energy (PSE) and state entities have been encouraging storage to improve grid resilience. Commissioners asked for explicit policy language and zoning guidance to distinguish small‑scale distributed storage from large utility facilities and to address local siting concerns.

Items of technical and programmatic detail

- The draft tracks Commerce guidance: Saunders said the team used the Department of Commerce “Climate Policy Explorer” and the Commerce minimum‑requirement checklist to shape the goals and to ensure each locally identified hazard or sector is covered by at least one measurable goal or policy.

- Implementation and prioritization: Commissioners and staff agreed the city needs a clearer prioritization process and a set of near‑term actionable items (for example, an EV transition plan, a sea‑level‑rise vulnerability assessment for critical facilities, and targeted workforce or incentive programs) because the full list of potential policies is large. Saunders said some near‑term targets and next steps would be included in the full climate element package.

- Public outreach: The consultants summarized feedback from an open house that favored ecosystem protection and urban forestry, energy efficiency and small‑scale renewables. All priority boards received at least some public support at the event, she said.

Environment and conservation element changes: staff presentation

After the climate discussion, staff presented proposed edits to the existing environment and conservation element. City staff said many policies previously grouped under environment or conservation have been moved into the new climate element and that the Shoreline Master Program update will also re‑locate some shoreline policies into the comprehensive plan while moving regulatory text into the municipal code.

Next steps and public process

The commission did not take a final vote on the climate text at the April 9 meeting. Staff said the commission will hold a public hearing on the draft climate goals and associated environment and conservation edits at the next planning‑commission meeting, then incorporate feedback and present a full climate element package (analysis, vulnerability maps, goals, policies and proposed near‑term actions) as volume 2 of the element.

Votes at a glance

- Approval of minutes (10/30/2024): Motion to approve minutes was moved and seconded; minutes were approved by voice vote. (Transcript: "I move that we approve the minutes as written." — motion; subsequent "Aye" and chair confirmation that minutes were approved.)

- Excusal of Commissioners: Motion (by Mr. Stoneman, seconded by Mr. Dretske) to excuse two absent commissioners was approved by voice vote. (Transcript: "The motion, by Mr. Stoneman, seconded by Mr. Dretske to excuse, Mr. Courier and Mr. McCombs." Chair: "Opposed? Okay. They are excused.")

Ending: Staff and the consultant team will refine the draft language, tighten cross‑references to the land use and transportation elements, clarify terms where commissioners requested a glossary, and return to the commission for a public hearing at the next meeting. Saunders said target examples and implementation guidance will be included in the full climate element package to support staff work on implementation.

Quotes used in this report come verbatim from the April 9, 2025 Anacortes Planning Commission transcript and are attributed to the speakers who made them at the meeting.