Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Space topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission unanimously recommends Roper parcels for open‑space tax classification amid mapping dispute
Summary
Kitsap County planning commissioners voted unanimously to recommend that three Roper parcels be reclassified for the current‑use open‑space tax program, approving a staff finding that the properties qualify under state and county open‑space criteria despite a neighbor's dispute over the mapped course of Burley Creek.
Kitsap County planning commissioners on Aug. 19 recommended that three parcels owned by members of the Roper family be reclassified under the state's current‑use open‑space tax program, a decision the commission made unanimously after public comment and staff site visits.
The Ropers sought reclassification for 16.72 acres across three parcels to receive a 50% reduction in land value for tax purposes; the designation does not change zoning or create a public access requirement, staff said.
Jason Robert Walsh, a planner with the Kitsap County Department of Community Development, told the commission the request is being processed under the Revised Code of Washington chapter 84.34 and Kitsap County Code chapter 18.12. "The reclassification is for tax purposes only and does not change the zoning of the property," Walsh said. He said the nomination met the county's eligibility criteria because multiple priority resources are present, including wetlands and a fish‑bearing stream.
The two public comments on the record reflected opposing concerns. Alicia Roper, a co‑owner and applicant, described the land and the family's intent: "It's beautiful. And it's wetlands. ... We don't wanna log it. We wanna preserve it," she said, and added that she is in early conversations with "Peninsula Conservation" about a possible future donation. Gary Schreier, a nearby property owner, said the application mislocates Burley Creek and warned that an incorrect map could affect his ability to pursue restoration grants or other uses for his parcel. "The stream is misrepresented in its location on the application. It is on my parcel," Schreier said.
Staff said two written comments were received but not included in the original staff report; Walsh said the staff report will be amended to incorporate them. Walsh and a colleague told the commission that department staff and three colleagues made a site visit and observed the presence of a creek on each of the subject parcels, but that the course shown in county GIS layers does not precisely align with field observations. Jenny Kreifels of the Department of Community Development explained that landowners may pursue a formal stream‑typing modification through the Washington Department of Natural Resources and tribal and state reviewers if they believe mapped features are incorrect.
Commission discussion focused on the mapping discrepancy and on whether the open‑space nomination requires a separate, formal stream determination. Commissioners and staff noted that a stream determination or a biological assessment is required for development permits but is not required for an open‑space current‑use nomination. The commission also asked staff to ensure the record reflects the public comments and the amended staff report.
After deliberation, a motion to recommend approval of the Roper open‑space application passed unanimously. The commission forwarded draft findings of fact and its recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners, which holds final authority to approve the tax reclassification.
Key details recorded by staff include the combined acreage of 16.72 acres across three parcels (parcel numbers provided in the staff presentation), a determination that the site contains at least two high‑priority resources (wetlands/ponds and streams/watersheds), and that the applicant did not opt to provide public access (which would have made them eligible for an additional 10% tax reduction). The property is also shown to include FEMA 100‑year floodplain areas on county mapping.
The commission's recommendation does not itself change property zoning or create public‑access obligations; it forwards a recommendation and findings to the Board of County Commissioners for final action.
For the record: The commission received two public comments on this nomination during the meeting and will amend the staff report to include the written submissions referenced by staff. The department advised landowners who dispute mapped stream locations about the state stream‑typing modification process.
The Board of County Commissioners will consider the planning commission's recommendation at a later date; staff said the resolution attached to the staff packet is informational for the commission's deliberations and is not required for tonight's action.
