Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Kitsap County holds public hearing on request to extend Arborwood development agreement
Summary
Kitsap County commissioners heard more than three hours of testimony Feb. 3 in Poulsbo on a request from developers Taylor Morrison and Pulte to extend and amend the 2010 Arborwood development agreement, a 751-unit master-planned project that includes a 104-acre conservation greenway and a network of multiuse trails.
Kitsap County commissioners heard more than three hours of testimony Feb. 3 in Poulsbo on a request from developers Taylor Morrison and Pulte to extend and amend the 2010 Arborwood development agreement, a 751-unit master-planned project that includes a 104-acre conservation greenway and a network of multiuse trails.
Darren Gurney, planning supervisor at the Kitsap County Department of Community Development (DCD), opened the staff presentation by saying, "This is a public hearing to consider the Arborwood Development Agreement extension." He outlined options for the board: extend the agreement with only name/date updates; grant the five-year extension requested by the applicant (including protections for appeals and a modified 51% milestone tied to final plat approval); require compliance with current county code as a condition of extension; or deny the extension.
The developers — represented in Poulsbo by Pete Lemberas, president of Taylor Morrison's Pacific Northwest division, and Ryan Stokes, division president for Pulte Group — urged a five-year uninterrupted extension. Lemberas said the project "was a public-private effort and decades in the making" and noted prior delays. Stokes described site features tied to the agreement, including a 104-acre Greenway to be conveyed to the county, "8,000 feet of recreational trails and paved regional bike and pedestrian trails," neighborhood pocket parks and traffic improvements such as a roundabout and turn-lane work at State Route 104.
Ray Liow, an attorney with Van Ness Feldman representing the applicants, asked the commissioners to observe the appearance of fairness doctrine, saying, "we do reserve the right to challenge any decision made in violation of this doctrine," and argued staff and applicants had not had the full opportunity to negotiate potential alternatives before the…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
