Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kitsap County adopts 63-day limited extension for Arborwood development agreement
Summary
The Kitsap County Board of Commissioners on March 10 approved a 63-day limited extension to the Arborwood development agreement to allow staff and the applicant additional time to negotiate outstanding conditions.
The Kitsap County Board of Commissioners on March 10 approved a 63-day limited extension to the Arborwood development agreement to allow staff and the applicant additional time to negotiate outstanding conditions.
County Director of Development and Environmental Services Rafe Weisham told the board, "What we are proposing is a 63-day extension to the current agreement," saying the period would take the matter through the board's May 12 meeting and provide time to complete negotiations. He added the extra three days were included to allow scheduling margin for hearings and meetings.
The extension was presented after several members of the public urged stricter limits during the negotiation. Joe Lubisher, identifying himself from Indianola, asked the board to ensure the interim extension be “neutral in impact” and suggested that "no development, there be no permit activity or permit approvals during this period of time." April Ryan of Kingston urged the board to amend the resolution so that "no advancement of permit related approvals occur during this 63-day negotiation period."
Weisham responded that permits already applied for would continue to be processed and remain vested to their submission date. He told the board that only two final plats for phases 3 and 6 were being tracked as possibly close during the 63-day window and that those plats have minor amendments currently under appeal. On the question of a multi-year optional extension included in the development agreement, he said county staff would discuss with the applicant whether five years would be sufficient or whether additional years should be considered during negotiation.
Commissioners discussed the timing and fairness of the extension. One commissioner said staff and the applicant should be given more time than a short window because the county’s own calendar had delayed earlier conversations. The motion to adopt the limited extension was moved, seconded and approved by voice vote.
The board’s action allows county staff and the applicant to continue negotiations through the extension period; it does not cancel already-submitted permits.
Votes at a glance: motion to adopt a limited 63-day extension — adopted (voice vote).
