Policy Review Tool

PSE places high priority on providing safe, reliable and resilient energy. Tree retention, canopy restoration and other vegetation management policies can affect PSE’s ability to provide safe, reliable electricity and increase costs. Goals, objectives and policies should support PSE’s need to remove vegetation in efforts to fulfill wildfire prevention strategies.

Some of the goal language in this section may preclude PSE from performing necessary vegetation management. While we strive to work collaboratively with the City, we should recognize that PSE is a regulated utility by the Washington Utilities Transportation Commission, and as such, cannot be required to implement goals and polices which are in conflict with the Tariffs and Rules established with the WUTC or embodied with the state’s Revised Code of Washington or Washington Administrative Code.

PSE supports a strong focus on policies to address tree protections. PSE encourages the City to analyze their vegetation management policies through the lens of safety, reliability and resiliency as it pertains to electrical infrastructure. Tree protection policies need to support the operation and maintenance of electrical facilities in rights-of-way and utility corridors and not affect PSE’s need to provide reliable, resilient, safe, and cost-effective electric service to the community.

We offer the following goal language for the City’s consideration:

1. “Encourage directional pruning of trees and phased replacement of improperly located vegetation in the right-of-way. Perform pruning and trimming of trees in accordance with professional arboricultural specifications and standards in recognition of utility clearing standards.”

From link
"One major advantage of septic systems is that they are environmentally friendly when properly maintained. Septic systems require far less infrastructure than city sewers. Plus, they use less energy than municipal treatment plants and rarely rely on chemicals to remove wastewater pollutants.

Septic systems are also important tools to conserve your local water supply. They return treated effluent to your property, which replenishes groundwater and nourishes trees and other plants."

I'm writing to begin a conversation. There's more to the story than I'll touch on here.
I live in the Lacey Historic Neighborhood (LHN) and have on site sewer (OSS). I believe most of the homes in the neighborhood have OSS. I'm required to have my system inspected and recertified every 3 years as I believe everyone with OSS in the Henderson watershed is required to do. Minimum lot size in LHN is currently 17,424 square feet (2 1/2 houses per acre). I believe that as long as that housing density remains, there is no reason to compell owners of property in LHN to connect to sewer and ask that, with the new Comp Plan and subsequent developement standards created by city staff, the various current requirements to connect to sewer depending on the situation be waived/removed for properties within LHN.

In some cities there are lines for non-potable water (purple lines). The last 5% in treatment to make water drinkable is expensive and unnecessary for water that is used in toilets and gardens. Separate the waterlines in new construction, if feasible.

Remove impediments to removing lawns. Some HOAs require lawns. Create a city ban on entities disallowing a lawn free home. Native plants and rocks do not consume the water a lawn does. Fertilizers increase nitrogen loading in our waterways. Reducing lawns not only saves water but is better for the environment.

Please bring sewer to the Alder Glen neighborhood in SE Lacey. Please, all these homes are on failing septic tanks and we have city sewer on both ends that is just too far for us to get it. This would help a large amount of homes in the city and significantly curb the downsides of the failing septics in this area. Most are 50 years old now.

General Comment From Olympia Master Builders:
The Utilities Element effectively integrates long-term planning and environmental stewardship. To better support housing production and affordability, we recommend:

Aligning utility infrastructure upgrades with areas targeted for infill and annexation;

Ensuring trenching, buffering, and vegetation standards are scalable to project size and cost;

Maintaining transparency in siting while avoiding delays to critical infrastructure for housing;

Publishing infrastructure readiness data to support predictable housing approvals.

These actions will help utilities serve as a platform—not a barrier—for Lacey’s residential growth.

From Olympia Master Builders:
GOALS U-10 & U-11: Infrastructure Efficiency and Land Set-Asides
Homebuilder Response:
These goals align with long-term growth and resiliency.

Policy U-11A – Land for substations in development
Caution: Ensure this is not applied as a blanket condition—use case-by-case evaluation with clear nexus and proportionality to the project scale.

From Olympia Master Builders:
GOAL U-9: Vegetation Management
Homebuilder Response:
Tree preservation should not override safety or utility functionality.

Recommendation: Clarify that vegetation management rules allow flexibility near utility corridors to avoid conflict between urban forestry goals and utility operations.

From Olympia Master Builders:
GOAL U-8: Public Participation
Homebuilder Response:
Public involvement is important, but siting of essential utility infrastructure (e.g., pump stations) should not be delayed or derailed due to neighborhood opposition.

Recommendation: Emphasize transparency while ensuring infrastructure siting remains timely and aligned with adopted growth areas.

From Olympia Master Builders:
GOAL U-7: Compatibility with Land Use
Homebuilder Response:
Buffering and aesthetics are reasonable, but implementation should not slow or complicate housing permits.

Policy U-7A–B – Screening and wireless facility siting
Recommendation: Use objective design standards and permit such uses through administrative processes rather than discretionary design review.

From Olympia Master Builders:
GOALS U-5 & U-6: Utility Corridors and Trenching
Homebuilder Response:
Coordination on trenching and right-of-way access is sensible, but requirements must be proportionate.

Policy U-6A – Joint trenching coordination
Caution: For small or phased residential projects, recommend providing flexible trenching compliance options, including off-site improvements or fee-in-lieu programs.

From Olympia Master Builders:
GOAL U-4: Cost & Resource Conservation
Homebuilder Response:
Encouraging efficiency is beneficial, but cost containment is critical to housing feasibility.

Policy U-4A – Review utility contracts and reduce costs
Support: Expand this to include periodic rate impact analysis for new residential development to prevent utility hookup fees from becoming an affordability barrier.

From Olympia Master Builders:
GOAL U-3: Land Use Coordination
Homebuilder Response:
This section is essential. Utility planning must closely track land use and zoning decisions to avoid delays in housing production.

Policy U-3A–D – Early planning and multi-jurisdictional coordination
Strongly Support: Recommend the City publish infrastructure readiness maps and align utility upgrades with growth areas identified in the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and subarea plans.

From Olympia Master Builders:
GOALS U-1 & U-2: Utility Availability and Water Protection
Homebuilder Response:
These policies emphasize planning and environmental safeguards, which are necessary—but they must also ensure infrastructure is delivered predictably and equitably.

Policy U-1A – Analyze proposed development for utility impact
Support with Clarification: Ensure this analysis process is timely, standardized, and not used to defer or deny infill development where infrastructure extensions are feasible.

Policy U-2B–C – Sewer expansion and septic conversion
Support: Recommend pairing sewer extension requirements with grant funding or fee relief for builders who connect infill or low/moderate-income housing.

From Olympia Master Builders:
Homebuilder Perspective Overview
Utility availability, coordination, and cost are foundational to any housing project. This Utilities Element appropriately emphasizes sustainability, growth alignment, and system efficiency. However, to avoid infrastructure becoming a constraint or delay factor in new residential development, this element should:

Emphasize service readiness in infill and annexation areas

Keep developer obligations clear, fair, and proportionate

Support regional utility coordination that reduces permit complexity and review times