The County Planning Commission voted to suspend the Transfer‑of‑Development‑Rights (TDR) program until the county completes an analysis — targeted for a two‑year timeframe — to determine whether economic conditions would support reactivating the program.

Staff and consultants told the commission the TDR mechanism has not resulted in any transfers since adoption and now functions as an economic barrier to meeting the county’s housing density targets in urban growth areas. Planning staff said converting specific parcels within unincorporated urban growth areas from SR‑2 to SR‑3 zoning (about 31.1 acres in total) is necessary to demonstrate sufficient capacity for very low‑income and low‑income housing. Planning staff recommended suspending the TDR program, not eliminating it, while the county analyzes conditions under which the program could work in the future.

Why it matters: The Growth Management Act requires counties to demonstrate adequate capacity to accommodate projected population and housing need within urban growth areas. Planning staff said the TDR program, as currently structured and under present market conditions, prevents some higher‑density residential development that the county’s housing analysis shows will be necessary to meet statutory targets.

What the commission decided: After discussion and an amendment to set a schedule for the analysis, the Planning Commission approved a motion to suspend the TDR program for two years while staff undertake the economic analysis. The commission instructed staff to return findings from the analysis and to consider reimplementation if conditions change.

Key discussion points and related policy topics addressed during the work session:
- Agricultural analysis and advisory support: Staff reviewed draft updates to the agriculture resource inventory prepared by an extension agent and recommended changes to the comprehensive plan’s agricultural retention language. Commissioners discussed the value of maintaining and expanding support for an agricultural advisory body; several commissioners asked that the plan express county support for close coordination with the Clallam County Agricultural Commission (or equivalent) and remain open to “innovative ideas” that help diversify farm income. The commission suggested policy wording be broadened to support general agricultural operations and opportunities, not only accessory‑use programs.
- Rural character definition and design: Commissioners reviewed proposed language defining “rural character” and suggested clarifications to ensure the definition protects rural identity without unintentionally encouraging urban‑scale development. The commission accepted a definition that emphasizes local identity, gathering spaces and development patterns that support community interaction.
- Short‑term rentals (STRs): Commissioners discussed establishing a county registry to monitor the number and locations of short‑term rentals and to require life‑safety inspections for registered units. Staff framed the registry as an information tool to measure STR impacts on housing availability and to inform potential regulatory changes; some commissioners suggested the county set a timeline to move from a registry toward specific STR policy decisions if the registry data show adverse housing impacts.
- Alternative rural road design and traffic calming: Commissioners discussed including language in the comprehensive plan that encourages (staff and county road department recommended wording change from “may” to “should”) use of alternative design features in rural roads where local circumstances support them (for example, raised crosswalks, narrower travel lanes, separated paths, or shoulder widening) while observing minimum safety or grant standards for collectors and arterials.
- Implementation caveats and resources: Commissioners repeatedly raised that many of the policies recommended — for an agricultural advisory body, STR monitoring, or a TDR analysis — will require staff time and resources. Commissioners requested that any commitment to an analysis include a timeline (the motion was amended to require analysis within two years, contingent on available resources).

Next steps: Staff will draft the TDR suspension language for inclusion in the comprehensive plan update and will undertake the two‑year analysis on market conditions and thresholds under which TDRs could function. The commission will continue reviewing the comprehensive plan in upcoming work sessions, and staff said remaining transportation‑element work (a separate consultant deliverable) will likely delay final plan adoption into the winter months.

Direct quotations used in this summary are drawn from the public meeting transcript and were attributed only to speakers who appeared in the meeting record.