Draft environmental impact statement for the City of McCleary Comprehensive plan

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

FOR

THE TOWN OF MCCLEARY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

DATE ISSUED:

JANUARY 10, 1979

The preparation of this report was financially aided through a grant
from the Washington State Department of Ecology with funds obtained
from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and
appropriated for Section 308 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.

1. DRAFT ENVIRONXe4TAL UIPACT STATEMENT FOR THE TOWN OF MCCLEARY COMPREHENSIVE

PLAN.*

2. INTRODUCTION
a) The proposed action is the ad option of a comprehensive plan by the Town
Council of the Town of McCleary. Pursuant to SEPA guidelines, this environmental
analysis will consider not only the action of adoption but also the subsequent
actions of implementing the plan in so far as such implementation can be foreseen
and can be related to the init ial action of 'adoption. The- detailed provisions. of
the proposal are contained in the publication The Town of McCleary Comprehensive
Plan: Part Two The Comprehensive Plan, as revised to the latest date. This plan
relies on a publication entitled the Town of McCleary Comprehensive Plan: 'Part On.
Inventory and Analysis, (September, 1978) and this statement for its analytical

base.

The plan covers the incorporated area of McCleary and.thp inmediate vicinity
as describe4 in the plan.

b) The lead aoency is the Town and the Superintendent of Public Works is the
responsible official.

c) The Statement has been prepared by the staff of the Grays Harbor Regional
Planning Commission.

d) While the proposal itself consists of o nly the action of the Town Council
in the adoption of the plan, it is envisioned that this statement may be applicab3
to all further implementing steps and procedures of the Town. Since it is hoped
that the plan will also be considered by the County and the Regional Planning
Commissions, this statement may be applicable to those deliberations, and any
resulting implementing measures.

I e)f) All information regarding this statement can be obtained from the officeL
of the authors, the Grays Harbor Regional Planning Commission office, 20731 E.
Itarket, Aberdeen, WA. Copies of the EIS may be obtained for the cost of $2.50.

This EIS is issued on January 10, 1979.

All comments regarding the EIS shall be submitted to the Town by February
14, 1979.

3. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

Introduction 1

Table of Contents 2

Distribution LIst 2

Summary of the Environmental Impact Statement 2
Description of the proposal 4
Existing Environmental Conditions 6
Impact of the Proposal on the Environment 10
Physical Environment 10

Human Environment 14

Relationship Between Short-Term Uses and
Long-Term Losses 16

Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments
of Resources 17

Adverse Environmental Impacts Which May
be Mitigated 18
Alternatives to the Proposal 18
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 22

4. DISTRIBUTION LIST

A. Grays Harbor County
B. Grays Harbor Regional Planning Commission
C. Department of Ecology
D. Grays Harbor Public Utility District #1
E. McCleary School District
F. Department of Commerce and Economic Development
G. Department of Fisheries
H. Department of Natural Resources
I. Office of Community Development
J. Department of Transportation
K. Washington Public Power Supply System

5. SUMMARY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

This EIS considers the action of adopting and implementing a proposed compre-

hensive plan by the Town of McCleary and the coordinated actions of the county
related to that action. In order to conduct this analysis, the plan in all detail
is assumed to be implemented and the conditions that would then be created are
compared to existing conditions to identify the impacts that would result.

This statement notes that the proposed plan is a range of policies which seek
to balance competing environmental, social, and economic needs in the community in
the face of a rapidly rising growth pressure, pressure which could significantly
change the character of the Town. This balancing, thus, creates environmental
costs to satisfy economic and social needs, while attempting to keep those costs
at minimum. Basically, these impacts may be related to the following features of
the plan.

A. The plan permits moderate growth primarily in the incorporated limits.
Such growth would result in increased traffic, noise, glare, consumption,
and waste over existing conditions. Expected increases, however, should
not be to levels inconsistent with the area's small-town character.

B. The plan Commits particular area to particular uses, thereby foreclosing
the employment of these areas for other uses. By providing the space for
these uses, however, the plan is, expected to divert development from
other areas end preserve present natural resources and small-town
character, thereby, reserving them for the future.

C. By permitting development, residential and industrial construction may be
anticipated.

Such impacts are less significant or pose less severity in their cosequencios
than the potential impacts of the other identified alternatives of action. Alter-
natives considered include 1) no action, 2) directing growth to incorporated
boundaries (a major portion of the plan); 3) directing growth to temporary housing
areas (also part of the plan), 4) directing growth to concentrated service areas;
and 5) dispersing growth in a broad, even. pattern around the Town.

The statement notes that the mitigation of specific impacts arising from
anticipated construction cannot be mitigated completely at this planning stage, and
the statement recognizes that such mitigating measures can, be better evaluated
under the terms of SEPA at the time of implementation.

6. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL
A. Name and Sponsor of Proposal; Town of McCleary: The Town of McCleary
Comprehensive Plan.

B. Location of Project: The incorporated limits and immediate area of the
Town of McCleary.

C. Related File Numbers: Unknown

D. Phasing of Construction: The proposed plan will be gradually implemented.

as development proceeds under the policy framework of the plan. Each

construction project will be subject to the requirements of SEPA to the

extent that aspects of such projects are not included under this statement

E. Major Features of the Proposal: The proposal includes the following major
features:

1. Policies encouraging economic growth to a level which will not exceed
the capacity of planned water and sewer facilities.

2. An increased rate as a bedroom Town serving workers in Olympia or the
Harbor Area (Aberdeen, Hoquiam).

3. Policies encouraging growth, first, within Town boundaries, and,
second, upon lands around the Town when areas in Town cannot
effectively accommodate additional growth or when such growth is
considered without negative impact upon the Town's development and
facility services.

4. Allowing provision of temporary housing areas designed to house nuclear
power plant construction workers provided a) such areas have adequate

- 4 -

means of waste disposal and b) a means of renovation of the, area is'.
assured once it has served its purpose.

5. Policies preventing major development on steep slopes.

6. Policies directing development upon soils with strongest capacities
to support building foundations and to handle septic fields where

sewer do not exist.

7. Policies encouraging continued commercial growth near the Towns cents
and discouraging it along the Town's outer arterials.

8. Policies encouraging commercial activities which are land extensive 01
serve travelers' needs to establish in the areas along Simpson Street

west of 10th Street.

9. Policies cautiously encouraging industrial developement within the
municipal boundaries in ares adequately served by water, sewer, and
transportation facilities-each project subject to sepa requirements.

10. Policies preserving low-density residential character, uniform
throughout the Town at 9 units per acre or 10 uit per block as
determined by Town Council.

11. Policies allowing multi-family structures provided a) they occur
near the Town's center and b) their existence does not exceed the
desired low-density character of the Town.

12. Policies directing residential development to primarily the incor-
porated areas.

13. Developing housing, for elderly residents so they can remain Town

residents.

14. Encouraging building renovation where needed.

15. Policies insuring provision of public services and facilities to Town
residents prior to areawide residents.

16. Policies encouraging provision of as much as 44% more housing units by

1990.

F. Related to other Plans: This'proposal seeks to establish a comprehensive
plan for the Town and its envirors. The plan represents a refinement of
regional and county plans and conforms in intent to the policies of those
plans. The urban developement objectives of the plan tend to promote
regional policies intended to conserve natural resources, while meeting
regional housing, commercial and employment needs.

7. EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
The existing environmental cconditions in the planning area are described in
numerous existing works., the most siqnificant of which are the Part I document of
the plan itself, the Washington Nuclear Power Plants 3 and 5 Environmental Impact
Statement (WNP 3/5 EIS), Grays Harbor Erosion Control Plan, the Grays Harbor Water
Quality Plan, and other works on file with the Regional Planning Commission at 207 1/2
E. Market, Aberdeen. Specifically, the elements elements of the environment are found in the
references identified below, if not summarized here.

A. Elements of the Physical Environment

1. Earth:
a) Geology: Discussed on pages 3 through 5, Part I of the Plan
Document.

b) Soils: Pages 6 through 14 of Part I
c) Unique Physical Features: none
d) Erosion: Discussed in detail in the Grays Harbor Erosion Control
Plan
e) Accretion: none

2. Air.
a) Air Quality: Quality very good with no major point source of
pollution. Air quality is discussed in detail in the WNP 3/5 EIS

b) Odor: No major unpleasant odors in McCleary.
c) Climate: Pages 1 of Part I of the Comprehensive Plan and the WNP
3/5 EIS.

3. Water;
a) Surface Water Movement, Pages 14 and 15, Part I of the Comprehen-
sive Plan.

b) Runoff /Absorption: Discussed in some detail in McCleary Comprehensive
Sewer Study, Volume 1, pate IV-18.
c) Flooding: Heavy rains and water runoff during winter months along with Chehalis River flooding,
has created flooding problems in McCleary along Wildcat Creek. The Town has received monies to
construct flood prevention structures and is in the process of
doing so.
d) Surface Water. Pages 14 and 15, Part I of Comprehensive Plan.
e) Surface Water Quality: See the Grays Harbor Water Quality Management Plan on file with the
Grays Harbor Regional Planning Commission at 207 1/2 E Market, Aberdeen.
f), g), h), Groundwater: Page 5, Part I of Comprehensive Plan.
i) Public Water Supply: Pages 66, 68, and 69, Part I Comprehensive Plan.

4. Flora: The area presently , as in past periods, is covered with dense
forest of varying species of trees, particularly conifers. Douglas
Fir, Western Hemlock, Western Red Cedar, and Sitka Spruce are all
common. Farmland vegetation is less prevalent in the McCleary area
than in other areas near Chehalis River. Open Lands around the Town
are few and interspersed along roads.

Detailed inventories of the vegetation of the Chehalis Valley may
be found in the environmental reports prepared for the nuclear power
plants of Satsop.

5. Fauna. Pages 14 through 17 of the Comprehensive Plan briefly provides
inventory of the area's fauna. A more dctailed inventory can be found
in the WNP 3/5 environmental impact statements.

6. Noise: Noise from industry is concentrated around the door factory
and the one shakemill in the northern part of Town., This noise is
considered significant. Vehicular sounds along Simpson and Summit
Roads constitute major noise intrusion.

7. Light and Glare: While Simpson Lumber operates strong night lights
along Simpson Avenue, levels of light and glare have been noted as
insignificant.

8. Existing Land Use: Page 19 through 31 of Part I. The Comprehensive

plan.

9. Use of Natural Resources: The uses of natural resources in the

planning area consists primarily of:
a) Use cf space for development (commercial, residential, and
industrial).
b) Harvest of forest products.
c) Limited agricultural use.
d) Treated sewage discharge into Wildcat Creek.
All uses except (a) are renewable.

10. Risk of Explosion or Hazardous Emission: Noone that are known.

Elements of the Human Environment
1 Population. Discussed in Part I, pages 32 through 53 and pages 94
through 107 (for projections) of the Comprehensive Plan.

2. Housing: See Part I, Chapter IV of the Comprehensive Plan.

3. Transportation/Circulation: Pages 70 through 72 of part I.

4. Public Services: All are discussed within Part I of the Comprehensive

Plan on;
a) Fire - pages 76 through 79
b) Police - page 78
c) Schools - pages 72 through 76
d) Parks - pages 80 and 81
e) Maintenance - Sewer, page 65; Water, page 69, Streets, page 70
f) Other - pages 78 through 82.

5. Energy: Regional energy issues are discussed in detail in the WNP 3/5
EIS.

6. Utilities;
a) Energy: Electrical energy is purchased from the Bonneville Power
Administration by its own public utility company, the McCleary
Public Utility District.
b) Communications: Telephone service is provided by the Timberland
Telephone Company, a small private company. It is interconnected
with Pacific Northwest Bell. The Elma Chronicle and Daily
Olympian provide news coverage of the Town's events. Being located
near the Puget Sound area, McCleary receives radio boradcasts from
most of the Sound's cities including Seattle and Tacoma. Televisio
cable service is provided by a private company out of Montesano.
c) Water: See pages 66 through 69, Part I of the plan.
d) and e) Sewer: See pages 65 through 67 of the Plan.
f) Solid Waste: Disposal service is provided by a small, private
company located along Summit Road.

7. Human Health: Discussed on Pages 78 through 80 in Part I of the

Comprehensive Plan.

8. Aesthetics: The Town enjoys the characteristics of a small-town
environment. Aesthetic pleasures according to residents are discussed
in Chapter IX of Part I of the Comprehensive Plan.

- 9 -

9. Recreation: Pages 80 and 81 of Part I, The Comprehensive Plan.

10. Archeological/Historical: There are no known sites of archeological
significance. The first original school in McCleary, built in 1890
north of Town, is now used as part of the McCleary Grange Hall.

8. IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL
The complete inplementation of the plan would affect the elements of the
Human and Physical Environment in the following ways:

A. Elements of the Physical Enrivonment
1. Earth
(a) Geology: The proposed plan would permit minor earth movement in
excavation and filling incidental to the various types of uses
permitted in the plan.
(b) Soils. The plan would involve substantial disruption of soils as
the uses permitted are developed. Disruption would vary from
substantial and complete disruption in industrial and commercial
areas, to much less in the low density residential areas.
(c) Topography; The general topography of the area would not be
substantially altered, although earth movements related to the
various types of development permitted may make very minor
alterations in the topography of the area.
(d) Unique Features: N/A
(e) Erosion: Removal of vegetation during the construction of various
uses would increase overland erosion. Drainage and stream courses
would be largely unaffected by the plan, however, and individual
projects would be subject to SEPA guidelines.
(f) Accretion/Avulsion: N/A

2. Air:
(a) Air Quality: Change in air quality will be relatively minor
consisting of increased emissions from increased traffic resulting
from moderate growth. The Plan also permits the development of
industrial uses. These uses could involve air discharges, but this

- 10 -

is expected also to be minor since such activities are now heavily
regulated. All possible omissions of contaminents resulting from this
plan would be negligible and perhaps not even measurable.
(b) Odor; Increased traffic would increase associated odors (though in
negligible amounts) and industrial uses may involve odors though this
cannot now be predicted.
(c) Climate: N/A

3. Water:
(a) Surface Water Movement: Major streams (Wildcat Creek and Sand Creek)
and the river would not be modified. Small drainage courses would
generally be left in their natural configuration and could only be
modified with a showing that the changes would not restrict water flow
(b) Runoff/Absorption: By permitting greater development and thereby
more pavement and other forms of impervious ground cover, absorption
of rainfall into the soils would be reduced and runoff would increase.
However, the general small-town densities suggested within the plan
would not substantially change the character of the area drainage.
Localized problems could result, where large areas may be paved in
commercial development, but this should be evaluated at the time of
development under the procedures of SEPA.
(c) Floods: The Town will be subject to the requirements of the HUD flood
insurance program. The flood area of the Town is also subject to
permit authority of the Department of Ecology Flood Plains Program.
All development then will have to comply with the regulations of these
programs which generally require either adequate elevating or flood
proofing of facilities. Also they would prevent development which
would hinder the discharge of flood waters. Nothing in the plan
would change these factors and controls.
(d) Surface Water Quantity: The plan would not have any effect on surface
water quantity other than that discussed under runoff above.

- 11 -

(e) Surface Water Qulality@ Increased development of all types would
increase potential waste discharges. However, the current plans
for construction of secondary treatmc-int facilities would improvc
water quality.
(f), (S), and (h) Groundwater. No known impact will be created on
groundwater supplies (exc.,@pt as identified next).
M Public Water Supplies: Increased development will lead to increns;@.
demand for water. Study of the current system, a wall system,
indicate sufficient quantity for develop=--nt projected here.

4. Flora: The proposed plan wculd nDt significantly alter the vegetation
of the prcscntly developed areas. However, vegetation may be signifi-
cantly alt--red L'i the southeastern area of th@@ Town. Low density
dcvelopm--z@nt would also be pzrmitted to intrude into the north and
west of the Toxrn if the plan were implemented.

Allowine. for possible residential dev@@!L)pment upcu the hill in the
southeast corner of Town would replace much of the fir vegetation
with domestic landscaping plants associated with residential use.
The same is true in the north and west areas of Town although the
degree of forestation in these areas is less than on the southeast hill-
On these areas, landscaping vegetation would replace me-,ldow grasses
and species of trees other than fir. In some areas to the north of
Town, where industrial development is encouraged, flora may be
replaced altogether by pavement or graveled lots.

The proposed plan is not expected to have impact upon any known
unique or endangered species, nor do any significant vegetative
corridors appear to be affected by the plan. One of basic purposes
of the plan is to cluster development next to the Town in order to
reduce urban sprawl which would result in the less or conversion of
much more vegetation.

5. Fauna; The impact of the plan of fauna in the area is similar to that
on vegetation. Agricultural animals (predominately cows and horses)
would be displaced on agricultural lands to the north and west of Town
by development.

Again, by encouraging cluster development near or in Town, the
plan is expected to reduce development sprawl which could extensively
disrupt wildlife habitats. The plan is not expected to significantly
affect fish habitat.

6. Noise.- Noises associated with residential uses would generally
increase throughout the area, although this would be negligible.
Traffic noise would increase along those roads designed as arterials
but this would not generally be significant. Traffic noise would also
increase in the commercial area, although continued use of the central
business district for future commercial uses as proposed in the plan
will help keep the adverse effects of this to a minimum.

The impact of industrial uses on noise levels would depend on the
type of industry. However, since the plan limits industrial uses to
areas to the north of major commercial and residential areas, potential
problems would be minimized.

By restricting commercial and industrial activities from residen-
tial areas, the residential area would be protected from undue noise.

7. Light and Glare: The impact of the plan on levels of light and glare
are largely the same as the impact on noise. Some increases in levels
would be related to planned uses but not to significant problem
levels. The separation of uses as provided in this plan would keep
problems of light and glare from some uses from adversely affecting
other uses.

8. Land Use: The plan does not significantly alter land use patterns
and no provision of the plan would be a dramatic change from the

- 13 -

existing pattern. In fact, the proposed plan represents an orderly

extension of the present pattern. Signifigant features would include:

a) Future industrial development occurring north of Simpson and west

of Summit adjacent to the Simpson Door Factory.

b) Low density residential development in the northern, southern, and

western areas of Town. Future residential development would be

directed towards undeveloped lots and areas within Town and limited

within areas around Town. Residential development outside Town

would be encouraged westward primarily along the Old Olympic

Highway.

c) Commercial activity concentrated at the Town's center. Area would

be reserved here for slight expansion of commercial activity.

d) Multi-family structures to occur near the Town's center and major

transportation routes.

9. Use of Natural Resouces: The plan provides for development and,

thereby, the use of natural resouces which produce construction

materials. This. however, is not expected to make any difference in

overall consumption of resources which otherwise would have occurred.

The plan would commit land (a non-renewable resource) to develope

ment. However, the overall effects of this commitment is expected to

be substantially less thin what would occur from urban sprawl which

the plan sacks to avoid.

10. Risk of Explosion or Hazardous Emission: The plan would have no known

effect on these concerns.

B. Elements of the Human Environment

1. Population: The plan seeks to respond to population growth pressure

while at the same time seeking to influence the amount and location of

that growth. The plan anticipates a moderate rate of growth (between

5% and 12% per decade).

- 14 -

2. Housing. One of the major concerns of the plan is how to respond to

growing pressures for new housing starts without substantially changing

the character of Town and without sprawl. The plan directs housing

starts of all types to specific areas in order to take the pressure

off other locations. The plan also encourages housing developement in

the area immediately west of Town, focuses mutliples near arterials

and the center and adds controlled flexibility tc present zones. It

should also lead to an increase in housing units in the area.

3. Transportation: One of the expected results of the plan is an increase

in traffic concurrent with the planned development. One of the basic

purposes of the plan is to guide development to areas where they might

be most effectively served by existing or planned street-systems.

Such uses are directed to areas where higher quality streets and/or

major intersections are located. The plan, then prevents haphazard

development pattern which would create traffic circulation problems.

4. Public Services: The growth envisioned by the plan would create new
demand for all governmental services. However, the plan seeks a land
use pattern along with a consideration of the siting of public services
which will make the provision of public services more efficient. Added
growth without this plan could produce land use patterns which would be
difficult to serve efficiently.

The plan suggests servicinp in-Town public needs prior to outside
needs in order to 1) serve current tax-paying residents 2) prevent
sprawl development around the Town's boundaries. In tangible terms,
the plan has very little effect upon the rest of the Town's public

services.

5. Energy: The plan has little direct impact on the consumption of energy

or on the source and avalability of energy. It is hoped that the

general land use pattern promoted by the plan will result in conserva-
tion of energy.

-15-

6. Utilities: One of the main purposes of the plan is to promote a future
land use pattern which will accommodate anticipated growth pressure in
a manner which can be most efficiently served by public utilities.

7. Human Health: The impact of the plan on human health concern is quite
general in nature. By responding to anticipated growth in an orderly
and efficient manner it is expected that a healthful environment will
be produced.

Because the plan promotes the development of sewage and water
facilities in-Town, development along roads outside Town will be sparse
and will rely priarily upon septic systems, pottentially creating
health problems relating to water supplies. Existing County ordinances
related to the implenentation of septic systems seems appropriate to
prevent such problems in this area, however.

8. Aesthatics: One of the major concerns of the plan has been to conserve
the high aesthetic quality of the Town while responding to mounting
growth pressure and changes in housing and other construction.
Generally, this is accomplished by directing and limiting higher
intensity uses (industrial and commercial), to specific areas in pattern
which promote aesthetic potential.

9. Recreation: No impacts upon existing recreation is expected through
implementation of the plan.

10. Archeological/Historicanl: There are no known effects of the plan upon
any archeological or historical resources in McCleary.

9 THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE PLANN BETWEEN L0CAL SHORT-TERM USES AND THE

MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY

A. Identifieation of Trade-offs between Short-term Gains and Long-Term Losses.
By far the most significant long-term "loss" envisioned in the plan is the
conversion of farmland north and west of McCleary to non-farm uses. This
occurs since agricultural use potential in the McCleary area does not

- 16 -

~outw~ci~r~,h the ~c.-~.~,.p~ected need for oth~,~:~@~r d~o~_v~_~-l~0D~qM~-~.~It ~S~qp~,~1~1~C~4~-~: the arc;.-. By
An
~c~-ll~owin~qg conversion of agricultural lands to non~-~n~qaricultural u~3~c~s in thi~.~?~!
ar~a~,~t, th~@~_~, plan reduces potential loss of more farmland i~n ~oth~o~r of
East County that would result from continued low density spr~.~7~-~N~,7~q1~.

A low density pattern ~c~in~cour~a~qg~ed by the plan might be vi~ew~c~ld as ~n
"loss" to some who are in favor of high density d~eve~ql~o~qp~qm~-~a~nt. H~o~qw~L~@v~-~_~-~.r, i~-~,~-~.
the l~on~qg-ru~qn~, the ~qb~e~qn~L~@f~qit~s include. ~q1) maintaining the ~s~-~i~-~a~n,~"~L~ql~-~qt~o~T~o~qm
characteristics of McCl~cary~q@ 2~q) insuring that d~ev~el~opm~(~-~,nt does not ~cxc~e~ed
capability of facilities (water, streets, sewer) to sup~q?ort it; ~i~i~id 3)
visual qualities of the Tow~-~u ~ar~t~e ~qm~ain~qt~iined.

I~qn~ipl~om~e~n~qt~ati~on o~qf this plan, as with any plan, Wi~q2l ~qi~-~f~I~qV~O~qI~qV~L the c~um~qm~-~qit-
ment of S~qp~e~C~;f4C ~ar~e~aS t~C C~e~rt~ji~*
I Uses, th~er~c~-~Dy f~c~@~r~eclcsin~qg ~qth~e lc~qa~qg-t~e~r~qm
opportunity to use such ~ar~e~L~s for other uses. Th~a~s~c~; c~o~q=_~.~qitm~i~L~@~nts~. however,
do -not generally c~c~i.~-~asist of a s~-~qi~qg~qnific~cnt ~i~4q1~z~@~qp~ar~qtur~c ~q(~@~@~xc~e~qpt ~rh~os~e id~entifi,~qe
from ~e~xi~st~qi~n~,~q,~qY ~qp~attL~r~qn~s and uses,

B~. Benefits ~a~nd Di~s~adv~a~qnt~a~p~@~:~.~-~@ of ~4qR-~c~o~urv~qin~qg
_~:~:~q@i~c a ~c Future Ti~qm~e~z
Since the area is ~e~x~qp~uri~@~an~ci~@~i~i~qg c~o~n~si~qd~--ra~qbl~e growth ~qpr~e~ssur~,~@s now as a result
of many factors, p~ot~e~nti~nl~ ~qpr~6qO~bl~ems exist with th~,~_~@ in~a~qppr~opri~a~it~e c~o~qm~aitm~ant
of various areas to various uses. If the plan is nGt impl~em~o~r~it~c~d~-~3 soon, ~qL~qb~L~-
effect would largely be the same as a "no plan~l~@ alternative..

While it may be possible to implement 3~o~qm~e parts of the plan ~-~aow~, while
postponing other provisions, this would -actually tend to u~0qw~b~a~ql~a~qnc~i~@ the plan~'~S
attempt to accommodate comp~e~qLi~qn~qg needs (such as housing d~cv~ei~o~l~qp~qm~@~_~,nt vs. con-
s~qzrvatio~qr~qt ~qcf f~qor~q@~q_~q-st lands or Town character), thereby frustrating most plan
objectives.

10. IRREVERSIBLE AND ~6q!RRETRIEVAB~12qL~2qE C~24q%~6qL~qN~2qI~16qM~qI~16qENTS OF RESOURCES

As noted a~0qbov~qc~q@ the major irreversible ~qand irretrievable commitments of

resources consist of:

- 17

A. The possible commitment of agricultural and forested areas to urban use.

B. The commitment of undeveloped areas to urban uses.

C. The general committment of a land use pattern which also involves the forclosing of opportunity to employ
these areas for other uses.

11. ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WHICH MAY BE MITIGATED

As in the case of any comprehensive plan, this plan calls for or permits a wide range of activities, projects,

and programs. The particular potential adverse impacts of these activities may range from minimal to severe, depending

upon the design of manner in which each specific action is done. For this reason the most appropirate place to consider

or carry out mitigation is at the stage of implementation. Since each project to the requirements of SEPA, such

mitigation may be addressed at that time.

12. ALTERNATIVE TO THE PROPOSAL

The proposed plan is the result of a detailed planning process which has considered alternatives at each step of the

process. While virtually every policy in the plan was developed with a consideration of alternatives, the plan formally

considered (complete with a public hearing) four overall alternative policy frameworks, two of which are embodied in this plan.

Added to these other alternatives is "no action." All alternatives assume the same population size and examine possible

land use patterns.

A. No Action: No action would continue the piece-meal decision-making process which is now occurring with each

decision considering the immediate problem without major consideration of the overall impacts of these incremental

decisions. A particular feature of this alternative is a continuation of planning and zoning decisions by the County

and Town made independent of one another. In some situations this occurs on a single project.

Continuation of this situation will result in the following:

1. Extension of public facilities on a case-by-case basis resulting in possible haphazard patterns.

-18-

2. Po~ss~4qP~ol~e inc~onsis~-~-~ent zoning decisions r~esultin~q3 from the absence of
a policy fra~qm~cwork.
3. Possible premature commitment of resources without ~co~n~si~qd~c~@r~atiun of

alternatives.
4. C~e~ntinu~ed a~qb~s~unc~e of an overall purpose to the land use ~qp~c~-~licy.
5. Probable c~entin~L~I~ed f~rustr~nt~qion in meeting ~em~c~:r~qgin~qg housing ~qpr~essur~e~q6
and problems r~t~qi~~.ated thereto.

B. Directin~qp Anticip~it~c~w~q@ Growth to Incorporated Boundaries: This alternative~,

th~z~_~- pattern pr~op~i~se~@~qj within the plan, poses some problems including:
1) An increase in existing development density c~o a maximum level. (While.
the density wi.~q3~q3 ~not overburden the T~cwn's ~qIlan~qned facility, the
d~evelopm~en~qs ~qd~e~r~4qo~qity may appear high.)
2) Change in the To~u~n~qi's physical character. (Related to the first impact,
the incr~qqas~c~@~qd ~o~qtensity will affect the sm~all-~Low~n character of McCleary
thou~,~-~,~,h not ~qio a significant d~e~r~-ree.)
3) P~o~ssibl~,~.~a ~qincr~qo~-~-~n~s~e in housing demand and pr~a~i~-~,~sur~e~s~. (By limiting the
amount of~'~qla~-~id available for develop~qm~c~-nt within the area, lands
avail;ible fc~j~qo~- housing development could b~ec~om~.~-~i scarce and increase
hous~.~'~-n~qg va~ql~f~l~e~s a~nd costs.)
However, t~qj~.~'~ie alte~i~:~native may also solve many land use pro~l~bl~em~s or prevent
them from arising. 'These attributes include:
1) P~qreservin~qi environmental conditions around the T~c~qwn thereby, pr~e~s~ervi~n~t~z

Its ~ov~er~s~8qt~ql small-town character.
2) Prev~enti~l~qt~qg rampant escalation of water delivery and ~s~e~qw~ar collection
costs incurred by servicing large areas around the Town.
~q.~q1~2q) Keeping traffic patterns confined to smal~4qi~q@~q_r areas resulting in l~qa~qss~qcr
l~qen~0qSth~qe of street faciliti~qcs to maintain.
4) Cond~qen~qain~4qg commercial activities in the more densely s~qattl~qed areas,
ther~qob~2qj, encouraging their use by local residents.
5) Minimizing Land consumption for urban use.

C. Directing Anticipated Growth to Temporary Housing Areas: This alternative.
also incorporated within the plan under certain conditions suggests
allowing the establishment of temporary housing areas designed especially
to accommodate mob4 le living units often associated with construction
activity. The major attributes and drawbacks of such a proposal are

outlined below:
1) The establishment of a temporary housing area is positive if it is
desired to preserve existing conditions and character of the area. By
establishing such an area, other lands may be less subject to
temporary housing development. These areas can also relieve. the
residential density in Town that can be associated with fast-growing
growth development.
2) Depending upon its location, capital facility costs would be minimized
by establishing a temporary housing area since temporary services can
be concentrated rather than dispersed.
3) Land consumed by temporary housing structures may be reduced by
allowing for the sot-up of mobile structures on spaces smaller than
what is required on single lots.
4) Depending upon where the temporary housing, area is located, the impact
upon the existing traffic volumes and patterns is and upon commercial
activities could be positive or negative. If located along a road
used to its capacity, the increased traffic could generate significant
traffic problems by overcrowding that road. The housing area, if set
far enough away from commercial activities, could create need for
retail services within close proximity of the homes, thereby
de-centralizing commercial activity.
5) Adopting only this alternative would provide no permanent solution to
housing shortages. While housing would be provided primarily for
construction workers, no policies under this alternative would address
the need for increased housing which would shelter the growing popula-
tion and which would replace dilapidated units.
6) Because long-term housinh need is expected to exceed housing need to
populations associated with nuclear power plant construction, there is
actually no need to adopt only this alternative. Development of
permanent housing meeting construction worker needs will be used once

- 20 -

the nuclear power plant is completed, therefore eliminating probability
of excess housing.

D. Directing Anticipated Growth to Concentrated Service Areas: This elternative
suggests allowing new housing development and associated services to establish
in areas around Town, not necessarily adjacent to imcorporate boundaries. Residents
living in such areas would be responsible to County ordinances and would themselves provide
one or all of the necessary physical services, such as water distribution, sewer collection,
or street construction and maintenance. They most likely would do this by establishing
a special "impovement district" as defined in the Revised Code of Washington (RCW)

The major impacts of such an alternative include:
1) Increasing the risk of environmental change and growth deterioration
as the number of septic tanks increase, (at least in water and street
improvement districts.)
2) Change in surrounding character of the area to reflect a "sub-urban"
or bedroom community.
3) Relieving the pressures for higher cost housing (as housing in such areas
would probably be designed for upper-middle income groups) thereby,
stabilizing housing costs within the Town.
4) Potentially effecting capital facility costs to the Town positively
or negatively. (Establishment of an improvement district near developing
areas adjacent the Town may necessitate eventual annexetion forcing the
Town to accept responsibility for servicing such areas. On the positive side,
should the service districts remain isolated from Town services, facility costs of
growth to the Town may be minimized.)
5) Lessening the potential development density within the Town's unicorporated boundaries.
6) Increasing land consumption by future development outside the Town's incorporated
boundaries.

-21-

7) Potentially overloading, existing roads and changing areawide patterns
depending upon where such service areas are located.
8) Creating demands f or commercial services away the central commer-
cial are in Town.

E. EncouraDispersed Development in a Broad, Even Pattern Around Town:
Most of the impacts associated with this alternative are negative including
1) Increasing land consumption to a high degree thereby affecting the
small-town character of McCleary and degrading environmental quality.
2) Greatly increasing costs of water distribution and sewer collection to

the Town residents.
3) Possibly sprawling commercial services over a broad area thereby,
limiting the effectiveness of a centralized business area.
4) Producing an unpredictable traffic pattern since particular areas are
not designated for receiving development.

On a positive note, this would conserve a low development
density of the Town and relieve housing pressure within the incorporated
, limits.

Further details of these various alternatives -- including conceptual
mapping-- may be obtained from the Grays Harbor Regional Planning Commissior
at 207 1/2 E. Market, Aberdeen.

13. UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS:

The adverse impacts which would occur over present conditions if this plan
were implemented may be classified into three groups:

A. The plan commits the Town to a moderate level of growth. This growth

would produce:

1. Increased traffic.
2. Slightly increased noise, light and glare, mainly derived from increase
traffic.
3. Slightly increased fumes and odors, again arising largely from increase
traffic.
4. Increased demand for all public services.

-22-

5. Increased consumption of water, energy other forms of resources.
6. Increased waste generation.

B. The plan commits areas to particular commercial, industrial, and residental
uses, thereby foreclosing the use of each area for another use. The most
significant of these include:
1. Conversion of agricultural lands around the Town.
2. Conversion of undeveloped area within Town.
3. Expansion of industrial area.
4. Expansion of the commercial area.
5. Increased area committed to development would reduce absorption capacity
of the soils.
6. The commitment of larger area development would produce some
displacement of wildlife.

C. The plan would permit new uses to be established thus creating various
impacts related to construction activity including:
1. Earth movement.
2. Disruption of soils.
3. Removal of vegetation.
4. Erosion of disrupted soils.
5. Increased noise, glare and fumes related to construction activity.
6. Increased consumption of fuels, and building materials.

The plan commits future growth to a combination of alternatives B and C
mentioned in section 12 above. It is essential to note that all discussions in
this statement have compared conditions that would result from the implementation
of the plan from present conditions only. If comparison is with the individiual
alternative courses of action which illustrate various possible futures, all of
the impacts identified above which would be less under this than under
any of the other alternatives except the no growth option. While no growth would
avoid almost all of the adverse impacts above, it would lead to other impacts of
a highly significant nature, such as urban sprawl, increased property values,
displacement of segments of the population, and severe housing problems.

- 43 -

'I, . et
NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY

I
3 6668 14112752 4