Shelton council reviews draft comprehensive plan update, hears projections and timeline for adoption

Shelton City Council held a joint study session Aug. 12 to review a draft update to the city's comprehensive plan and heard an overview from consultant Kirsten Peterson of SCJ Alliance and city staff about population forecasts, state requirements and next steps toward adoption.

Peterson said the comprehensive plan is a 20-year blueprint for growth and that the draft packs updates required by state law, expanded economic-development analysis and merged material on the urban growth area into the land-use chapter. "A comprehensive plan is really a 20 year plan for growth," Peterson said while introducing the draft and the outreach the steering committee conducted.

The draft builds on work with Mason County and a subcontracted demographic analysis by FCS Group. The materials presented show a Shelton population of about 10,044 in 2022 and a planning-horizon estimate near 12,009 for 2044; staff and consultants reported a projected increase of roughly 7,401 residents in Shelton and its urban growth area over the next 20 years and an estimated need for about 2,872 housing units to accommodate that growth. Shelton and its UGA are projected to take about 41 percent of new countywide growth under the scenarios the city and county used.

Consultants and staff flagged several state-driven changes that the draft must reflect, including recent housing legislation that expands expectations for accommodating all income levels, new rules on accessory dwelling and middle housing, and strengthened tribal consultation. Peterson identified specific laws by number during the presentation as pieces of state guidance the update must address and said the plan will also add a required climate-change and resiliency chapter.

Economic development was the chapter with the most revision, the consultant said. The rewrite incorporates findings from Mason County's target-sector study, expands the workforce and land-readiness analysis, and adds policies intended to support both existing businesses and targeted industry recruitment. The draft explicitly references the Creative Arts District and partners such as Mason County, the Port, PUD 3, Mason Health, the Shelton School District and Olympic College.

Staff described how the capital-facilities and utilities element ties to grant eligibility and the six-year capital improvement plan. Peterson said including up-to-date CIP projects in the plan and appendices helps the city pursue funding sources such as the Transportation Improvement Board and other state and federal grants; she also noted that some projects can be developer-driven or change in priority if new development brings impacts that trigger mitigation.

The city is preparing a concurrent environmental impact statement (EIS). Peterson said the EIS draft is available internally but that the city will hold off on public release until the transportation element and a transportation-demand model are finalized. Shelton staff said Thurston Regional Planning Council agreed to perform the transportation-demand modeling the city needs to identify intersection and network improvements tied to projected growth.

On process and timing, Peterson and staff said the draft will be submitted to the Washington State Department of Commerce for a 60-day review once the city has a final draft. The EIS will be released for public comment simultaneously with that review. The project team is aiming for adoption by December 2025 but told council the state has granted an extension and that slipping into January would not create immediate legal harm to the city; nevertheless, the stated target remains December.

Council members asked about public participation during the Commerce and EIS review periods and about the city's options when large property owners hold extensive, undeveloped land within city limits. Staff and consultants explained the difference between site-specific rezones and area-wide rezones, noted that the comprehensive-plan future land-use map can signal preferred future zoning, and said zoning changes still require separate ordinance action.

Council discussion also raised constraints on growth tied to contamination and gaps in utilities. Peterson and staff acknowledged that historically polluted parcels and areas lacking water or sewer limit near-term residential or commercial development and said those constraints factor into land-readiness and infrastructure planning in the draft.

Next steps identified in the session include a likely joint study session in September to review the housing, land-use and transportation chapters in more detail, finalization of the transportation model, posting the EIS and Commerce review materials for public comment, and tracking any changes made after the Commerce review in a change log before public hearings and adoption.

The council did not take formal action at the Aug. 12 study session; the meeting was described as an informational review and a stepping stone toward public review and later hearings.