Planning commission reviews proposed capital facilities, utilities goals; staff to clarify levels of service and return in February

The Anacortes Planning Commission on Jan. 22 reviewed proposed amendments to the Capital Facilities and Utilities elements of the 2025 Comprehensive Plan and directed staff to clarify several policies, gather additional technical input from public safety chiefs and return with edits at a February meeting.

The revisions presented by Libby Grage, planning manager in the Planning, Community and Economic Development Department, and Andy Rayum, public works director, are aimed at clarifying outdated language, adding limited new policies and articulating measurable targets — including proposed levels of service — for water, sewer, stormwater, transportation and public safety functions. "I'm Libby Grage, planning manager, in the planning community and economic development department," Grage said when she opened the presentation. "And I'm Andy Rayum. I'm the public works director," Rayum added.

Why it matters: The Capital Facilities and Utilities elements set long-range expectations for the city's physical infrastructure and help identify financing and prioritization needs that affect development, utility rates and public safety response. Commissioners flagged several items that need more detail before any formal recommendation: how levels of service will be defined and measured; what will move to separate system master plans; and whether specific climate-related policies should remain in each element or be consolidated in the climate subheading included in the drafts.

Most significant details and discussion

- Scope and process: Grage said these changes are an early-phase review of preliminary goal and policy revisions; staff will incorporate commission feedback, written comments and public hearing input into an integrated draft expected later in the process. Rayum described related technical work already underway, including the water system plan, a general sewer plan, a stormwater master plan and the transportation master plan. Rayum said the master plans will contain the detailed analysis and schedules that the comprehensive plan references.

- Levels of service: Staff proposed adding clearer, measurable targets for service areas (water, sewer, stormwater, transportation and police). Rayum said the list is intended to help the city decide "what level of service we want to live with as a community for each of the services we provide." Multiple commissioners requested more detail on how those levels would be defined and applied; Grage and Rayum said that detail will be provided in follow-up materials and in referenced system plans.

- Fire and police response language: Commissioners noted the draft retains numerical response expectations for certain fire responses but removes time-based elements from the police language. A commissioner asked whether the revised fire policy's focus on structure fires would leave other fire types (vessel or grass fires) without specified timing. John Coleman (identified in the meeting as planning director) and Rayum said they would seek clarification from Fire Chief Harris and the police chief and provide either a written reply or have the chiefs attend the next commission review. Rayum told the commission he would ask the chiefs to email clarifications or appear at the Feb. 12 meeting.

- Financial prioritization and funding approaches: Rayum and commissioners discussed adding a goal to adopt a funding prioritization process so the city balances competing needs (streets, police, water, stormwater). Commissioners also discussed language that suggests exploring funding approaches that do not place the full burden for capital facilities supporting future growth on current taxpayers and ratepayers, noting connection fees, designated area surcharge fees and impact fees as potential examples.

- Utilities not owned by the city: The Utilities element is short and focuses on services not owned by the city (electrical, telecom, Puget Sound Energy, natural gas). Rayum said those providers have shown more interest recently because of links to the climate element, but staff has not yet received formal comments from external utilities.

- Solid waste and fiber: Staff noted council-directed language adding solid waste as a utility (the city contracts with Waste Management for recycling and yard waste; the city handles garbage in house) and recognized the emerging Anacortes fiber/optic initiative in the draft.

Staff direction and next steps

- Commissioners asked staff to: (1) add clarifying language about applicability (for example, specifying that frontage/adjacent improvements refer to rights-of-way), (2) provide the technical definitions or a glossary for "system plans," (3) obtain and share written clarifications from the fire and police chiefs about response-time language, and (4) refine language about aspirational versus regulatory wording in the master-plan references. Grage said staff will make recommended edits and return with clarifications at the Feb. 12 Planning Commission meeting and will advertise a public hearing for the draft (staff said the hearing is tentatively scheduled for Feb. 26 and that staff would confirm advertising and final hearing date in follow-up materials).

Commissioners appreciated that staff is preparing separate system master plans (water, sewer, stormwater, transportation and a facilities assessment) that will supply technical detail the comprehensive plan will reference.

Ending

No formal action was taken on the Capital Facilities or Utilities elements at the Jan. 22 meeting; commissioners provided direction to staff and requested specific clarifications. Staff said it will revise the draft goals and policies based on the commission's feedback, secure written input from the fire and police chiefs on response-time policy language, and return to the commission on Feb. 12 with revisions and additional information.