M EETING N O . 4 Manastash Room, Kittitas Valley Event Center May 10, - PDF document

IWRMP T ARGETED W ATERSHED P ROTECTIONS & E NHANCEMENT L AND U SE AND E CONOMIC A NALYSIS P ROJECT K ITTITAS C OUNTY C ITIZENS A DVISORY C OMMITTEE M EETING N O . 4 Manastash Room, Kittitas Valley Event Center May 10, 2012 W ELCOME & I NTRODUCTIONS • We lc ome & T hank you! • Citize ns Advisory Committe e Me mbe rs (I ntro duc tio ns) • Kittitas County Partic ipants – Pa ul Je we ll, Co unty Co mmissio ne r, Distric t # 1 – K irk Ho lme s, Pub lic Wo rks Dire c to r (Pro je c t Ma nag e r) – Do c Ha nse n, Pla nning Offic ia l • Consultant Partic ipants – Jo hn K nutso n, PE , URS Co rpo ra tio n (Me e ting L e ade r) – Amy Da nb e rg , PRR I nc . (Me e ting F ac ilitato r) – Will Guyto n, URS Co rpo ra tio n – Julie Bla ke sle e , URS Co rpo ra tio n (L and Use Planne r) – Mic ha e l T a ylo r, Ca sc a de E c o no mic s (E c o no mist) 1

M EETING P URPOSE & A GENDA  We lc ome & Intr oduc tions • Pr e se nt Summar y of L and Use and E c onomic Analyse s Re sults • Oppor tunity for L and Owne r and L ands Subc ommitte e Input on Analysis • CAC Disc ussion and F e e dbac k on L and Use and E c onomic Analyse s Re sults • Disc uss Ne e d and T ools for Public Inve stme nts and Kittitas County E c onomic Mitigation • Ne xt Me e ting Date s & T opic s L AND U SE A NALYSIS R ESULTS S UMMARY I NT RODUCT ION • Dr aft Me mor andum Inc lude d Analysis of: – L a nd a c q uisitio ns (~110,000 a c re s), – Na tio na l Re c re a tio n Are a de sig na tio ns (~155,000 a c re s), – Wild a nd Sc e nic Rive r de sig na tio ns (~23,000 a c re s), a nd – Shrub -Ste ppe Ha b ita t a c q uisitio ns/ c o nse rva tio n e a se me nt (~14,000 a c re s). • Also inc lude d r e vie w of CAC c onc e r ns and be ne fits 2

L AND U SE A NALYSIS R ESULTS S UMMARY Anticipated Post-IWRMP Option Name Current Zoning Estimated Acreage Potential Use Considerations Change to Use Action Considerations Upper Yakima Commercial Forest Acquisition as a 40,179 acquired Public Access and Use ↑ River Basin High Consortium/ Recreation Access ↑ Elevation Community or as Environmental Protection ↑ Watershed State Ownership Logging/Timber NC Preferred Option Forest and Range 6,113 acquired NC Utility Access (Teanaway) Grazing Opportunities NC N/A Dams (when federally-funded) Rural-3 846 acquired Residential/Agricultural ↓ Development NC Solar Development Notes: ↑ = improves or increases ↓ = degrades or decreases NC = little to no change N/A = not applicable L AND U SE A NALYSIS R ESULTS S UMMARY Anticipated Post-IWRMP Option Name Current Zoning Estimated Acreage Potential Use Considerations Change to Use Action Considerations Upper Yakima Commercial Forest Acquisition for 63,005 acquired Public Access and Use ↑ River Basin Forest Public Land Recreation Access ↑ Habitat Preferred Environmental Protection ↑ Option (Taneum Logging/Timber NC and Manastash) Utility Access NC Grazing opportunities ↑ Dams (when federally-funded) N/A Residential/Agricultural ↓ Development Notes: ↑ = improves or increases ↓ = degrades or decreases NC = little to no change N/A = not applicable 3

L AND U SE A NALYSIS R ESULTS S UMMARY Anticipated Post-IWRMP Option Name Current Zoning Estimated Acreage Potential Use Considerations Change to Use Action Considerations Upper Yakima Unzoned Designation of 99,818 designated Public Access and Use ↑ NRA (public land) Public Land as as NRA Recreation Access ↑ NRA and Environmental Protection NC Wilderness Logging/Timber NC Utility Access NC Grazing Opportunities NC 19,964 designated Public Access and Use NC as Wilderness NC Recreation Access Environmental Protection ↑ Logging/Timber ↓ Utility Access ↓ Grazing Opportunities ↓ Notes: ↑ = improves or increases ↓ = degrades or decreases NC = little to no change N/A = not applicable L AND U SE A NALYSIS R ESULTS S UMMARY Anticipated Post-IWRMP Option Name Current Zoning Estimated Acreage Potential Use Considerations Change to Use Action Considerations Manastash- Unzoned Designation of 35,000 designated Public Access and Use ↑ Taneum NRA (public land) Public Land as as NRA Recreation Access ↑ NRA NC Environmental Protection NC Logging/Timber NC Grazing Opportunities Notes: ↑ = improves or increases ↓ = degrades or decreases NC = little to no change N/A = not applicable 4

L AND U SE A NALYSIS R ESULTS S UMMARY Anticipated Post-IWRMP Option Name Current Zoning Estimated Acreage Potential Use Considerations Change to Use Action Considerations Wild/Scenic River Unzoned Wild and Scenic 15,719 designated Public Access and Use ↑ Designations for (public land) River Designation as Wild and Scenic Recreation Access NC the Upper Cle on Public Land Environmental Protection ↑ Elum, Waptus, Dams (when federally-funded) ↓ and Cooper Rivers Residential/Agricultural NC Development Notes: ↑ = improves or increases ↓ = degrades or decreases NC = little to no change N/A = not applicable L AND U SE A NALYSIS R ESULTS S UMMARY Anticipated Post-IWRMP Option Name Current Zoning Estimated Acreage Potential Use Considerations Change to Use Action Considerations Wild/Scenic River Unzoned Wild and Scenic 7,632 designated Public Access and Use ↑ Designations for (public land) River Designation Recreation Access NC the North, Middle, on Public Land Environmental protection ↑ and West Forks of Dams (when federally-funded) ↓ the Teanaway Residential/Agricultural NC River Development Notes: ↑ = improves or increases ↓ = degrades or decreases NC = little to no change N/A = not applicable 5

L AND U SE A NALYSIS R ESULTS S UMMARY Anticipated Post-IWRMP Option Name Current Zoning Estimated Acreage Potential Use Considerations Change to Use Action Considerations Shrub-Steppe Forest and Range Land Acquisition 11,620 acquired Public Access and Use ↑ Habitat Preferred and/or Recreation Access ↑ Option (Eaton Conservation Environmental protection ↑ Ranch) Easement Utility Access ↓ Grazing Opportunities NC Agricultural 2,211 acquired Residential/Agricultural ↓ (AG-20) Development Wind Farms NC Notes: ↑ = improves or increases ↓ = degrades or decreases NC = little to no change N/A = not applicable L AND U SE A NALYSIS R ESULTS S UMMARY S UMMARY • F utur e r e side ntial de ve lopme nt c ould be r e duc e d with: – L a nd a c q uisitio n unde r the T e a na wa y o ptio n – L a nd a c q uisitio n unde r the T a ne um a nd Ma na sta sh o ptio n – Shrub -Ste ppe Ha b ita t Pre fe rre d Optio n • Public / Re c r e ation Ac c e ss and Use , and E nvir onme ntal Pr ote c tion would inc r e ase for most options • Wild and Sc e nic Rive r de signation would re sult in minimal land use c hange s • Wind F arm pote ntial would not c hange unde r the Shrub- Ste ppe Habitat Pr e fe r r e d Option 6

E CONOMIC I MPACT A NALYSIS R ESULTS S UMMARY O VE RVIE W • What do we me an by “E c onomic Impac ts?” – Cha ng e s to K ittita s Co unty c o mme rc e : sa le s a nd o utput, pe rso na l inc o me , e mplo yme nt – I mpa c ts to Co unty g o ve rnme nt: re ve nue s a nd o b lig a tio ns – Also urb a n a nd rura l impa c ts • Not me asur ing “fe asibility of the T WPE C,” as long- te r m be ne fits vs. c osts • Goal is to unde r stand who is affe c te d and by how muc h, and what mitigation would be ne c e ssar y to c ompe nsate for the e ffe c ts of the T WPE C E CONOMIC I MPACT A NALYSIS R ESULTS S UMMARY T S OF I S M E YPE MPACT ASURE D • Re c r e ation • Pr ope r ty De ve lopme nt / Constr uc tion • Agr ic ultur e • T our ist Ac c ommodations • County Re ve nue s and E xpe nditur e s A SSUMPT IONS AND S CE NARIOS C ONSIDE RE D • Impac ts of the F ull Re c omme ndation of the L and Subc ommitte e • “Public Inve stme nt” ve r sus “No Public Inve stme nt” in r e c r e ation fac ilitie s and infr astr uc tur e 7