The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02 1104 136C STATE OF WASHINGTON County of Jefferson AN ORDINANCE APPROVING TWO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS, FILE NUMBERS: MLA12 -00274 McLuen MLA13 -00045 Boulton } Ordinance No.. 02- 1104 -13 } } } } } WHEREAS, the Board of Jefferson County Commissioners ( "the Board ") has, as required by the Growth Management Act ( "the GMA "), as codified at RCW 36.70A.010 et seq., set in motion and now properly completed professional review and public notice and comment with respect to any and all proposed amendments to the County's Comprehensive Plan originally adopted by Resolution No. 72 -98 on August 28, 1998 and as subsequently amended, and; WHEREAS, as mandated by the GMA, the Board has reviewed and voted upon the proposed amendments to the County's Comprehensive Plan ( "CP ") that composed the 2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket ( "the Docket "), and; WHEREAS, of the two (2) proposals that compose the Final Docket, both (2) were approved or approved, and; WHEREAS, an adopting Ordinance is required to formalize the Board's legislative action, and; WHEREAS, the Board makes the following Findings of Fact with respect to the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Cycle and these four amendments: The County adopted its Comprehensive Plan in August 1998 and its development regulations or Unified Development Code (UDC), Title 18 in the Jefferson County Code (JCC) in December 2000. The CP was reviewed and updated in 2004. The GMA, which mandates that Jefferson County generate and adopt a CP requires that there be in place a process to amend the CP. 3. The amendment process for the CP must be available to the citizens of this County [including corporations and other business entities] on a regular basis. In accordance with RCW 36.70A.130, CP amendments can generally be considered "no more frequently than once per year." 4. This particular amendment cycle began on or before March 1, 2013, the deadline for submission of a proposed CP amendment. 5. All of the amendment proposals were timely filed by March 1, 2013. 6. Two formal site - specific amendments and one suggested amendments (for a total of three) were placed on the Preliminary Docket through the CP amendment process referenced at JCC Section 18.45.050. 7. MLA12 -00274 for APN 901 - 054 -003 is submitted by Gary McLuen with William Marlow, agent. The parcel is located at mile post 5 of SR 20 on the east side of SR 20, approximately 1.5 miles south of the Four Corners Rd/Discovery Rd/SR 210 intersection. The proposal requests a rezone of land (approx 37 acres) designated 1:20 (RR 1:20) to become Rural Residential 1 :10 (RR 1:10). 8. MLA13 -00045 for APN 802 -141 -005 is submitted by John Boulton with Doug Mason, agent. The parcel is located at 780 Boulton Rd, Quilcene, WA 98376, approximately 0.7 miles south west of the northern Boulton Rd/US 101 intersection and 0.4 miles northwest of the southern Boulton Rd/US 101 intersection. The proposal requests a rezone of 12.7 acres of land designated Rural Forest 1:40 (RF 1:40) to become Prime Agricultural 1:20 (AP 1:20). 9. The Planning Commission submitted a suggested amendment, MLA 13-42 West End Zoning, prior to the March 1, 2013 deadline requesting rezone of lands designated Rural Residential in Jefferson County's West End (RR 1:10 and RR 1:20) to RR 1:5. Approximately 1,907 acres of land are zoned RR 1:10 and 23, 983 acres are zoned RR 1:20. 10. No other suggested amendments were submitted to the Department of Community Development ( "DCD ") by the March 1, 2013 deadline. 11. The Planning Manager prepared her report on the Suggested Amendment for the 2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Cycle, issued March 12, 2013 recommending the suggested amendment not be included in the final docket. 12. Upon consideration of that report at their regularly scheduled meeting on May 1, 2013, the Planning Commission deliberated and subsequently unanimously decided to put the suggested amendment on hold to allow for an action plan in advance of consideration in 2014. 13. DCD Staff and each applicant provided presentations on the two site - specific applications to the Planning Commission at the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting on May 1, 2103. 14. With effective withdrawal of the suggested amendment for 2013, only two (2) site - specific amendment proposals remained for consideration. 15. All site - specific Comprehensive Plan amendments are automatically included in the Final Docket in accordance with JCC 18.45.060 (4)(b)(i). 16. Because the only proposals during this CP amendment cycle are site - specific, a public hearing and recommendation by the Planning Commission on the preliminary docket was not required this year. 17. On June 3, 2013, the DCD Staff presented to the BoCC the Planning Manager's report as well as the Planning Commission discussion regarding the (withdrawn) suggested amendment and a recommendation for the final docket to the BoCC. 18. At that meeting, the BoCC unanimously adopted the 2013 Final Docket of two (2) proposals for review, both of which are site - specific. 19. The Department of Community Development published the 2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket, Staff Report and SEPA Addendum, an integrated Growth Management Act and State Environmental Policy Act document on September 4, 2013. The report analyzes the proposals on the Final Docket and offers preliminary recommendations for each amendment proposed. 20. All of these amendments have been subject to a SEPA- derived analysis through the Staff Report and SEPA Addendum dated September 4, 2013. The entire amendment cycle has been considered cumulatively with respect to a county -wide environmental review of the associated impacts, if any, of these proposals. 21. One conclusion of that report was there would be no probable significant adverse environmental impacts if these two site - specific Comprehensive Plan amendments were adopted by the Board. 22. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed open public hearing on September 18, 2013. Oral public comment relating to the two proposed amendments was taken during the public hearing, and written comments were accepted through the close of public hearing. There were two oral comments by representatives of each application made during the public hearing expressing agreement with the staff report. No additional citizens commented at the public hearing, and DCD received no written comments relating to these proposed amendments. 23. The small number of written and oral comments by citizens suggests the proposed amendments are neither controversial nor contrary to the goals and policies reflected in the County's CP. 24. The Planning Commission deliberated on the proposed amendments following the public hearing at a regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting on September 18, 2013. 25. The above statements indicate that the proposed CP amendments were and are the subject of "early and continuous" public participation as is required by GMA. 26. The Planning Commission entered a specific finding for MLA12 -00274 (McLuen): The County has and will maintain 26,893 acres designated rural residential. RR 1:20 is reduced by less than one -tenth of one percent, and the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan will, with passage of this amendment, still have the "variety of RR densities" that is required by the GMA. 27. The Planning Commission entered a specific finding for MLA13 -00045 ( Boulton): The Boulton farm is historical, continuously productive, and owned by the same landowner as the adjacent forest lands. Given the common ownership, Mr. Boulton has been able to manage the lands jointly. 28. While historically beneficial, the applicant pointed out it is not financially viable for a new farmer to purchase both the farm and the large forest land tracts. It is common practice for farmers to live on the land they farm. It is not always typical for foresters to live on the land they manage for timber. 29. This historical benefit should not preclude the future division of the forest land from the home and farm as not separating the farm from the forest lands might cause the end of farming at this farm. 30. Further, the unique nature of this farm, i.e., that forest lands are commonly owned with it, ensures this action is not likely to set a precedent for future rezones of portions of forest land adjacent to agriculture. This action matches the Comprehensive Plan to the actual use of the property on the ground and continues natural resource activities on all affected land. 31. A conservation easement is under development to ensure perpetual use of the property in agricultural use. The potential for more low density sprawl will be averted by adoption of this Comprehensive Plan amendment. 32. On September 18, 2013 the Planning Commission voted on the two site - specific Comprehensive Plan amendments and unanimously recommended approval of both of them. 33. The Planning Commission voted on these proposed amendments only after considering the 18 Growth Management Indicators ( "GMI ") made applicable by County code to any site - specific CP amendment, specifically seven listed in JCC 18.45.050(4)(b)(i) through (vii), three listed at JCC 18.45.080(1)(b)(i) through (iii) and the eight found at JCC 18,45.080(1)(c)(i) through (viii). 34. In summary, when applying the GMI to the proposed CP amendments, the Planning Commission concluded it was able to make affirmative findings that these amendments are not at variance with the goals and policies of the CP, reflect the values of the County's citizenry, will not adversely impact the county's ability to manage growth or provide services, do not create cumulative negative impacts and will, if adopted, create circumstances in the County where the county has the proper balance of rural residential, commercial and natural resource lands, thereby remaining consistent with both the CP and the Countywide planning policies. 35. The Planning Commission memorialized their findings and recommendations in the Planning Commission Recommendation for 2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Final Docket dated September 18, 2013. 36. Because the DCD staff recommendations remained unchanged from the September 4, 2013 Staff Report throughout the process that Staff Report of September 4, 2013 and the Planning Commission document dated September 18, 2013 were transmitted to the Board through formal agenda request dated October 7, 2013. 37. Both documents are part of the record upon which this legislative decision is reached. 38. In accordance with Ch. 36.70, the Planning Enabling Act, DCD planning staff and the Planning Commission comprise the Planning Agency. 39. For the 2013 CP amendment cycle DCD and the Planning Commission agreed on the recommendation to approve both amendments, thus the Planning Agency recommendation reflects concurrence between the Planning Commission and DCD for the 2013 Final Docket. 40. The SEPA Responsible Official issued a Final Determination of Non - Significance and Adoption of Existing Environmental Documents on October 2, 2013 based on the earlier conclusion that adoption of these CP amendments would not give rise to any probable significant adverse environmental impacts. 41. The Board considered the Planning Agency recommendation on October 7, 2013 including the DCD Integrated Staff Report and SEPA Addendum dated September 4, 2013, the Memorandum from the Planning Commission re: Recommendation on the 2013 Docket, and the signed maps (signed by the Planning Commission Chair and the Planning Manager) for which the Planning Commission recommends approval. 42. On October 7, 2013 the Board voted unanimously to accept the Planning Agency recommendation without any changes and thus, in accordance with JCC 18.45.080(2)(b) the Board was not required to conduct its own public hearing. 43. Pursuant to JCC 18.45.080(2)(c) the Board was required to consider the same 18 GMI considered by the Planning Commission. 44. Inquiry into the GMI referenced above was begun for the 2013 Docket through the DCD integrated Staff Report and SEPA Addendum of September 4, 2013. 45. Specifically, the board adopts the staff Cumulative Impact Analysis in the staff report, including the Growth Management Indicators, beginning on Page 2 -1. 46. Furthermore, the Board incorporates here by reference Table 2 found in the DCD Staff Report and SEPA Addendum of September 4, 2013 at p. 1 -10, particularly that part of Table 2 containing information on the amount of acreage in each of the three Rural Residential designations, RR 1:5, RR 1:10 and RR 1:20. 47. A review of that portion of Table 2 indicates that about 1/3 of the County's Rural Residential land has a designation of RR 1:5, about 1/101' of the County's Rural Residential land has a designation of RR 1:10 and the remainder, approximately 58% of the County's Rural Residential land holds the zoning designation of RR 1:20. 48. Those rough proportions were not changed in any significant manner by the board's approval of MLA 12-274 and thus the County continues to have, even after the adoption of these two Comprehensive Plan amendments, the variety of rural residential densities required by the GMA. 49. The Board adopts the Planning Commission's written findings regarding the GMI as detailed in the Planning Commission "Recommendation ...." dated September 18, 2013. 50. That document from the Planning Commission dated September 18, 2013 is incorporated here by reference as if stated in full here. 51. Those written findings are also augmented by audio recordings from the Planning Commission meeting of September 18, 2013, during which deliberations took place and the recommendations were formulated. Meeting minutes will conform to these findings. 52. Per JCC 18.45.080(2)(b) the Board voted unanimously to accept the Planning Agency recommendation without a change in the recommendation on October 7, 2013 and thus was not required to conduct its own public hearing. 53. On October 7, 2013, the Board unanimously approved a motion to direct staff to write an ordinance to memorialize their actions. 54. All procedural and substantive requirements of the GMA, through the JCC (Title 18) and the Planning and Enabling Act (RCW 36.70), have been satisfied. 55. The Board adopts the map for MLA12 -274 in Attachment "A" dated September 18, 2013 and signed by the Planning Commission chair and Planning Manager. 56. The Board adopts the map for MLA13 -45 in Attachment "A" dated September 18, 2013 and signed by the Planning Commission chair and Planning Manager. 57. Adoption of these two site - specific CP amendments promotes and supports the general health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Jefferson County and furthers the goals and policies of the County's adopted CP. 58. The Board adopts these two site - specific CP amendments under the general "police power" provided to it as the legislature for a local government by the Constitution of the State of Washington. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED as follows: Section One: Under MLA12 -274 [Gary McLuen; William Marlow, agent], located at mile post 5 of SR 20 on the east side of SR 20, approximately 1.5 miles south of the Four Corners Rd/Discovery Rd /SR 210 intersection, approximately 37 acres identified as APN 901 - 054 -003 shall be given in its entirety an underlying land use designation of Rural Residential 1:10 (RR1:10) depicted on the corresponding map in "Attachment A ". Section Two: Under MLA13 -00045 [John Boulton; Doug Mason, agent], located at 780 Boulton Rd, Quilcene, WA 98376, approximately 0.7 miles south west of the northern Boulton Rd/US 101 intersection and 0.4 miles northwest of the southern Boulton Rd/US 101 intersection, approximately 12.7 acres portion of a parcel identified as APN 802 -141- 005 that portion being consistent with the portion depicted on the corresponding map in "Attachment A" as Prime Agricultural 1:20 (AP 1:20). Section Three: The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map is amended to reflect for the parcels impacted by these amendments the underlying land use designations shown and reflected on the two maps made Attachment "A" to this Ordinance. Section Four: If any section of this Ordinance is deemed either non - compliant or invalid pursuant to the Growth Management Act, then the development regulations and/or underlying zoning designations applicable to that parcel or parcels prior to adoption of the non - compliant or invalid section of this Ordinance shall be applicable to that parcel or parcels. Section Five: If any section of this Ordinance is deemed either non - compliant or invalid pursuant to the Growth Management Act, such a finding of non - compliance or invalidity shall not nullify or invalidate any other section of this Ordinance. Section Six: This Ordinance becomes effective on the date it is executed. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of JEFFERSON COUNTY • i BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS LLSEAL -4 4 F John stin, Chairman ?,TTY David Sullivan l_, 1 Ni`L Carolyn A ery Deputy Clerk of the Board ciclu -o A651MC- Phil Johnson Approved as to form dw� � � 112.6.3 (0'j ow David Alvarez, Chief Civil D 10 Appendix "A" Maps for: MLA12 -00274 McLuen MLA13 -00045 Boulton ii 5 F �3JfJJJ !! YE og F F +ySy o! u gs s� b� c <° E e E� <x N< G5 'Etl V \�. 5 !! �� \�� ., ! # s.• -- ® � \ . ` \ � ! / \ } \\ IT G Consent Agenda JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REQUEST TO: Board of County Commissioners Philip Morley, County Administrator FROM: Carl Smith, Director, Dept. of Community Development Stacie Hoskins, Planning Manager DATE: November 4, 2013 SUBJECT: Approval of 2013 CPA Adopting Ordinance reflecting the changes to the Comprehensive Plan on two amendments regarding zoning changes STATEMENT OF ISSUE: On October 7, 2013, the Board of County Commissioners unanimously approved a motion to instruct DCD staff to draft an adopting ordinance that reflected their decisions on the 2013 Comprehensive Plan amendment proposals. The attached documents include: 1. Adopting Ordinance 2. Attachment A —maps ANALYSIS /STRATEGIC GOALS /PROS and CONS: Approval of the adopting ordinance codifies the Board's decisions. FISCAL IMPACT /COST- BENEFIT ANALYSIS: None. RECOMMENDATION: Approve adopting ordinance and Notice of Adoption. REVIEWED BY: i Philip Morle C my Administrator Date