Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Conservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel recommends $1.4 million for North Olympic Land Trust’s 'Big Red Barn' conservation project
Summary
A county advisory panel recommended awarding $1.4 million to the North Olympic Land Trust to conserve the "Big Red Barn" property, citing prime soils, a large contiguous parcel and long-term stewardship; members noted a concern about future well reliability but were reassured by applicant information obtained during a site visit.
A county advisory panel voted to recommend $1.4 million in funding for the North Olympic Land Trust’s “Big Red Barn” conservation project after reviewing the application, conducting a site visit and scoring the proposal on the panel’s rubric.
The Chair introduced the request, saying, “We have in front of us a request from the North Olympic Land Trust for an amount of 1,400,000 for the project called the Big Red Barn,” and led members through rubric scoring that covered water access, soil quality, size, infrastructure and community fit. The motion to recommend the full amount was moved by the Chair and seconded by Pat; it was approved by voice vote.
Panel members highlighted why they supported the recommendation: the property contains USDA prime soils and is substantially larger than typical local farms, the existing 14,000-square-foot barn is in good condition, and a long line of family stewardship suggested continuity of farming. One member said the site “is a perfect fit for our county's comprehensive plan,” noting the plan’s goals to retain agricultural land and rural character.
Members also discussed water access. One committee member said they gave a reduced score initially because of concern about well supply in Sequim, but Pat reported having been reassured during the site visit: “the current well is so strong and flowing so well that they don't anticipate any problems,” and some members adjusted their scores upward after that information.
On finances, the land trust reported it had already secured significant outside funding; the packet and discussion referenced $2,700,000 from FPLA and other floodplain-related funds, and the land trust planned to apply to WRP by the end of the month. The panel chair reviewed the county’s available balance and projections before making the funding motion; the meeting record lists several fund-balance figures and a projected local contribution but not all line items were fully specified during discussion.
The land trust described a stewardship plan that would allow the property to be divided into up to three working farms with clearly defined building envelopes and separate conservation easements that would protect prime soils while permitting houses and necessary infrastructure within the envelopes. The applicant and panel clarified that temporary, non-permanent structures such as hoop houses would generally be allowed outside permanent building envelopes so long as they do not create impervious surfaces.
After the voice vote, members congratulated the land trust on a thorough application and said they looked forward to the project’s implementation. The panel confirmed scheduling details for its next meeting and adjourned.
The panel’s recommendation will be transmitted according to the county’s normal approval process; the meeting record did not show a final county-level appropriation vote during this session.
