HomeMy WebLinkAbout051214_ra02JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA REQUEST
TO:
Board of Commissioners
FROM:
Philip Morley, County Administrator
David Alvarez, Chief Civil DPA co"
DATE:
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
RE:
Termination Point Plat and Russell J. Trask
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
The Resolution's title states the issue most succinctly, i.e., that the Prosecutor, Public
Works and Community Development are recommending that certain lots within the Plat
known as Termination Point Plat be removed from any extant moratoria prohibiting the
development of those lots for residences. The proposed Resolution is Attachment One.
ANALYSIS:
Termination Point Plat ( "TPP ") is a plat recorded in 1961 with respect to real property
located south of SR 104 and south of Shine Road. See Attachment Two. In the most general
terms the TPP can be divided into two sections: one located at the top of the high bluff and
between Linda View Drive and Shine Road, also known as Lots 42 -56 of the TPP and the
second, which contains the bluff and the land at the toe of the bluff, near Ricky Beach Drive,
which is the remainder of the TPP.
The second portion of the TPP is in a landslide -prone area, what the GMA calls a
"geologically hazardous" area and has never been suitable for implementation of its underlying
zoning designation, rural residential, i.e., the construction of homes. In fact, because the
second portion of the TPP was mapped by the Coastal Zone Atlas as landslide prone the
County Commission prohibited in 1983 via Resolution 469 -83 any residential development
anywhere within the TPP. See Attachment Three.
Mr. Trask purchased the TPP sometime in the mid- 1990's. When Mr. Trask sought to
develop the TPP in 1995 via application SDP95 -0003 he was faced with the obstacle that the
landslide -prone aspect of the TPP was such that it could not be developed in a manner
consistent with the recorded 1961 Plat. The second or below the bluff portion of the TPP
would have required such manmade installations in the shoreline jurisdiction that obtaining the
necessary permits or authorizations was quite unlikely.
Consent Agenda
Geotechnical evaluations performed as part of Trask's application process indicated
that the portions of the TPP above the bluff were suitable for removal from application of the
1983 moratoria if drainage and setback recommendations listed in the December 1996
geotechnical report were implemented. That 1996 geotechnical report was peer reviewed in
1997 and its results were affirmed as accurate.
In order to provide a potential solution (presumably, the undersigned was not here
then) to Mr. Trask's dilemma and based, in part, on the two geotechnical reports, the County
Commission adopted Resolution #90 -97 in August 1997. See Attachment Four. That 1997
Resolution removed from the 1983 Moratorium Lots 1 -4, 22 -35 and 42 -56 of the TPP if
certain preconditions were met. The lots so released were those lots which did NOT
"extend(ing) south of or beyond the top of the fault scarp or slide area of the[TPP.]"
The preconditions were, briefly, A) an amended Plat, b) notice on the amended Plat
that the area "is subject to geologic instability" C) a restrictive covenant for all owners
indicating the presence of that geologic instability, D) an approved drainage and erosion
control plan to be installed to the satisfaction of the County Engineer and E) a letter from the
County Engineer confirming the partial repeal of the 1983 Moratorium based on the applicant
satisfaction of these preconditions.
It should be noted that these five preconditions all assumed the entire TPP, both the
high bluff and the lower region would be developed with a single unified plat and drainage and
erosion control plan. That never occurred, although homes were built along Harbor View
Drive at lots 1 -4 of the TPP. Those houses are occupied today.
The 1983 Moratorium with the 1997 "partial repeal" remain in effect today. The TPP
returned to the attention of the County planning department when a neighbor on Harbor View
Drive noticed Mr. Trask performing clearing and grading at the TPP in the summer of 2013.
The State Dept. of Natural Resources issued a Notice to Comply against Mr. Trask's actions in
May 2013, and those violations have been remedied to the satisfaction of DNR.
The County filed a civil lawsuit against Mr. Trask seeking and eventually obtaining a
Permanent Injunction prohibiting Mr. Trask from undertaking any land use development, for
example, clearing and grading or removing of timber, from the TPP. Mr. Trask, through his
lawyer, asserts the Permanent Injunction is overly broad and thus not lawful.
Mr. Trask counterclaimed against the County alleging that the Moratoria were and are
a "taking" of his property in violation of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. He
sought money damages in the millions of dollars. Mr. Trask now has a revived interest in
developing for homes at least that portion of the TPP that is on the high bluff.
Community Development and the undersigned met with Mr. Trask's attorney and his
representatives to discuss a possible "global" resolution of the various legal claims. As a
result of that session a complete resolution consisting of three documents /actions was arrived
FA
Consent Agenda
at. Public Works and Community Development both have stated in writing their
recommendation that lots 42 to 56 be no longer covered by the two Moratoria. See
Attachments Five and Six.
The three parts of the resolution of this lawsuit are as follows:
1. Adoption of this Resolution to make it express that Lots 42 -56 of the TPP, those lots
located between Linda View Drive and Shine Road are eligible for development
pursuant to and in compliance with the county's development regulations including,
but not limited to, the Critical Areas Ordinance or "CAO." Some of the lots in
question here are denoted as "intermediate" and "unstable" and thus may be
"geologically hazardous areas," a "critical area" as that term is defined in the GMA.
2. Recording with the Jefferson County Auditor a document entitled "Notice to Title" on
the remaining lots of the TPP, most of which are substantially more prone to landslides
than the lots being released by adoption of this Resolution. The Notice to Title would
include those lots in the TPP that were conditionally released by the 1997 "partial
release" because the preconditions for those lots were not satisfied.
3. Filing in Superior Court the voluntary dismissal of the County's lawsuit against Mr.
Trask and Trask's dismissal of his counterclaim against the County.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None, other than recording the Notice to Title ( <$75) with the County Auditor.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the Resolution and provide DPA Alvarez with a signed and sealed copy.
DEPARTMENT CONTACT:
Chief Civil DPA David Alvarez, Extension 219
REVIEWED BY:
Philip Morl ; ounty Administrat r Date
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF JEFFERSON
In the Matter of Revising the Eligibility } RESOLUTION No.
For Land Use and Development of certain }
Lots within a Plat known as Termination }
Point subject to earlier County Commission
Resolutions prohibiting their development
WHEREAS, certain real property located in Shine in unincorporated Jefferson County is the
location of a Plat known as Termination Point Plat ( "TPP ") recorded with the Jefferson County
Auditor in 1961; and
WHEREAS, many years before Ch. 36.70A RCW (the Growth Management Act) became
applicable to this County a portion of the TPP was mapped and determined to fall within zones
known as "Uos" or "Urs," meaning a portion of the TPP is known to be prone to the occurrence
of landslides because it contains land sitting on a high bluff and lower lying land below and thus
vulnerable to landslides; and
WHEREAS, the greater likelihood of landslides at the TPP caused the Board of County
Commissioners (°BOCC ") to adopt Resolution #69 -83 in July 1983, said Resolution serving to
impose a moratorium against all land use and development at any lot within the TPP that had
been mapped as falling within the "Uos" or "Urs" zone; and
WHEREAS, Russell J. Trask, Sr. purchased the TPP sometime in the mid- 1990's; and
WHEREAS, while Mr. Trask wished to develop the TPP for single - family homes, a large
portion of the TPP was and remains to this day unbuildable and not suitable for single family
residences, particularly the lots within the TPP below the high bluff, those parcels on either side
of Ricky Beach Road; and
WHEREAS, despite the topographical obstacles to development of the TPP for single family
residences Mr. Trask wished to develop a portion of the TPP (above the high bluff) for such
residences; and
WHEREAS, the County adopted in 1997 as Resolution #90 -97 a conditional release from the
1983 Moratorium for certain parcels located behind or above the high bluff if certain
preconditions (such as an amended TPP plat, installation of an erosion and drainage control
system to the satisfaction of the County and a confirming letter from the County Engineer) were
satisfied by Mr. Trask; and
WHEREAS, the 1997 partial release Moratorium served to release certain lots within the TPP
from the 1983 Moratorium, specifically Lots 1 -4, 42 -56 and those portions of 22 -35 not
extending south of or beyond the top of the faulty scarp area of the TPP; and
ATTACHMENT ONE
WHEREAS, that decision to release certain TPP lots from the 1983 Moratorium was based on
not one but two geotechnical reports, the second of which was a peer review of the first, which
concluded that the lots to be released from the 1983 moratorium were not at risk of landslides
provided certain drainage and erosion control measures were implemented; and
WHEREAS, the preconditions to the release of certain TPP lots were not met by Mr. Trask but
the geology and topography of those "eligible" TPP lots has not changed; and
WHEREAS, since adoption of the County's GMA- derived Comprehensive Plan in 1998, the
County has been planning under the GMA and the BoCC adopted in 2008 development
regulations known as the "Critical Areas Ordinance" codified at Ch. 18.22 of the County Code;
and
WHEREAS, landslide -prone areas are known in GMA terminology as "geologically hazardous
areas" and are a type of `critical area" as that term is defined in the GMA; and
WHEREAS, one method to determine if a given location is a geologically hazardous area is to
review the State Department of Ecology Coastal Zone Atlas Mapping; and
WHEREAS, that Atlas maps lots 42 -47 and 55 and 56 as "stable," Lots 48 -54 are mapped as
"intermediate" and Lots 49 -52 are primarily mapped as "unstable" because of a moderate slope
and proximity to recent slides, without proof of instability at those lots; and
WHEREAS, recent (2013) activity land use or land development was undertaken by Mr. Trask,
or his agents or representatives, at the TPP without permits and without authorization from either
the County or the State Department of Natural Resources; and
WHEREAS, the County filed a lawsuit against Mr. Trask and obtained a Permanent Injunction
prohibiting him from undertaking or implementing any land use development at the TPP and Mr.
Trask counterclaimed for money damages against the County; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Trask and his agents seek to lift the moratoria against land use development
with respect to Lots 42 through 56, which can also be described as the lots between Linda View
Drive and Shine Road; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Trask and his agents wish to use Lots 42 through 56 as collateral for a bank
loan; and
WHEREAS, all parties to the lawsuit are working towards a resolution that would allow Mr.
Trask to put up the eligible lots as collateral and terminate the lawsuit and counterclaim; and
WHEREAS, any land use or development at Lots 42 through 56 will be subject to and must
occur in compliance with any and all of the County's adopted development regulations,
including, but not limited to, the Critical Areas Ordinance; and
2
WHEREAS, Community Development and Public Works have both stated in writing that based
on the geotechnical reports from the 1990's and the protections provided to the environment at
the TPP and the County as a whole by the current GMA- derived development regulations there
is no reason to apply the moratoria (1983 and 1997) to Lots 42 through 56 within the TPP, as
recorded with the Auditor in 1961;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows:
1. The County Commission expressly states that neither Resolution #69 -83 nor Resolution
#90 -97 as adopted by prior County Commissions are applicable to Lots 42 through 56
(inclusive) (the lots between Shine Road and Linda View Drive) as reflected on the
recorded map for Termination Point Plat, a plat recorded with the Jefferson County
Auditor in 1961;
2. The County Commission concurs with Public Works and Community Development that
Lots 42 through 56 as reflected on the recorded map for Termination Point Plat, a plat
recorded with the Jefferson County Auditor in 1961, are eligible for land use and
development, said land use or development to be undertaken and completed in
compliance with the development regulations in place at the time when any land use
permit application regarding that real property is deemed "substantially complete" by the
Department of Community Development, said regulations including, but not limited, to
Ch. 18.22 of the County Code, the Critical Areas Ordinance as it exists now or as it may
hereafter be amended;
3. The lots no longer subject to or impacted by either Resolution #69 -83 or Resolution #90-
97 have the following Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 998600017 and 998600021 through
998600034 inclusive.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2014 in Port
Townsend, Washington.
Normal signatures setup.
0 0 0
L.P -Vol4 r�1u
roa
TERMINATION POINT
SITUATED IN GOVT. LOT 1, SEC. 2, TWP 27 N, R I E. W. M.
JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASH.
SORE: 1"- 100' JUNE. I %1 e6EW16E ROATNS r.M
SHEET I OF 2 SHEETS
UNPLATTF:L
pv[ cart uvaira.P �•' V t
Harbor
0
ATfACHMENi 40 TjN 0
0 0 0
LP -Vol 4 �gz5
2PQ
TERMINATION POINT
SITUATED IN GOVT. LOT I, SEC. 2. TWR 27 N. R I E, W.M.
JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASH.
JUNE, 661
SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS
LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTlnGATE
J Id hbw/A6p w m(tl {�1 dIv/ DJ� t EN rtyE N ) %1 1 b '/R 1 fA Ae /ro M !EW d , !0x � //fW1ml6e/. }m ' a M• O/ / Mr, /s M
,OvMM[ r/ erpAy fIm M ' , N n I V M mJ aMh - r !l .«Y/ Fi4 de'// /or/Or. ln 'w rTr;erry'iYhs n I4Tr M bd mJ W s ur AIySw 1)er9. bm
p! N am . ✓ bMAN
9 M
'
C.%fngrY�m! /LVa/�S wqy,..
YM4 foam R
P bM me me m
~ M, tar m~
=-=n=
/lira drn /u'rtw.
Oq' kY M hb M1//flF
f/JE � ,ryb/Vd
fdst4:
N, KA'M1lM'< Etrt
fmC arprd d N
/ves. ha mt, a.
di466d w>d.tetl, er
pa shen .JO h.
DED ICAT ION
by T 6 M46ENTi lAet aH4nbN6
y x ha xp+ Y esten, e4/m a A6 .
y s46 r, a4r rM fo rmxM
teen tM.M. /bd 6/ n4'1
da e/ W/ tM brtva, g0/ya � raY
b 6)wi> bi 6fnv nre- aN6ume
raltMW mwx ✓ts fM sbM
a4erN d Pord s4:Nety/ in
m�' /uwlen ter Po/.bpup !•tAyK.
+M// b me Mn ' mn ey ,qf/
n So I, ?. !6 me °'Yw drrN serete
e bf v irrrf d Nis ape sMN 4
M arvtMm s/wv/av,y.V
w 3X.v JM// M.YV t//e•. sf,N
naw.eelf /ere.
re .yu es Aa»6 ad_..pe..
Dsurrd A' � N+ r
p pM sAd/ f# sed
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
.• w.ne..w./ 1 n
Ihd ti b rxe Nwt rn (M r
"➢ • /+sfP')' vAN'p p 6M M UE JfPH N M6Eh/npNa
AuY canmiabnN ars swsrnr M'Ewr //r 6Arm'ed Es4/ubw /.wuy
Os.w A4bruY arnd DLx ✓ w MECtE � Ae Mp/ rM thus r.gvusw
and arerxr G McE4s6u, /w arAis b wr bwrrl p a [M br6)We4 6b-
aYhN h ef! Ee}s fhr p•gti>r hvVU sne' aot>arhaSV pp4
Mnt tMy J.SYNd O>/ srN' GL JOb b fhb' ! p.N /WCTKrr1. wfmA
Ct1,d M' Nf tYI mV prrOaH /nMr{b /MI NM %n.
A pilMb wriM1W/ !'Mf MYtb/r6 iet 1' /Wly e/Y uM/ [M dq
6/✓ JMl lHlf OLyH M /tfM.
Nef y vubM p s+d / fM Jfefr
M Mbsh. midag of K.ry��_
DESCRIPT ION
'1 RNwIT4W ME'T•m.Mb4r • arrtla> d Lbrt Lee /r Sm 1,
E. KM in ue'Y!fsw+ Cn, 1MN., Rev�t4d b .Y4ty:
KO'I JM IIFII Lul4 dYHS l vbinb.4/•.V'MOV brmpr
ro-/1'ZrE JZO.K'i Nr//ev .Ywrry. A/tmda Un N/•J9'AY
YLT. /l /L tr s /vin[ b s sxrb Ax4'y a nslly d /3AA> n and M•
%/9 J Jl•/J'X'E / fnf sn"1f 6Y ro//wi Nnw4 a4pyy xh/ eers
p Ns b/f sn erc rNebur d EEJt S.i fMw� N26 O/'Id'E 1JJ.lJ
h. i Netb T JJ'N'l /'E ISO. L9 Q. G6 N6 E w'Z Aye/ qup, (rf li
3�% 3Yt0'M• JAaO mr NA EE d wM/ Oa M. Gx ! N
N bs•ro'l!•N Is/an /r. m eM M4 d Degvmmv. r66.TN.4 .,,,.
>4rnx4 r aIN6E.
CORPORATE ACKNOWLEDGMf*�s,
e6¢rry a enTSU � t n
Ih44b6r'tZy tl afmW�Md AC/A.A
4AV. mr, fM /OnMJ� Natur RM(v N � m tM Jfeu d
!V h //M<6n , � rgy1yvbrol r/r1 mn>r irnrM6 //y 6/6ar-
N AE+v <✓ N. Ne46G46 sN M. JOHN SG /Kw.> re ny Gxm p M
LM O44 /nENT by JE C4E >A4V IY!{IgLiM/y p/ {/6E b(DeKr
GM /lRmb Gs pvmfinf JM etrS+e/etipl Ne! arey/ fM /.bby/ I .
Pw`H Duuve//wk raN +r4'/xr � [M Emn m b Nr hw aiy rvu>dy
aY rrr erty d vY ravyr -Np•1, pr !M u1r m✓ Rayons NN/vp s1b
sn/m tvN sereM fha fhrl' won s6NrleM m rmae said .1uey-
/r/tr4 fy .wn1NM d N• hu'b d b Yer� d mN roprvRUi ay Net
Ns bu• r///bN d fM t'6')v"tf6 .rra• d sd �.
p .a'tw4 M,v✓ / .fvv /1rsrOtll .srt % .vra bt/ >d Ne stY adlw
fix .aw. mrem.. ) q
APPROVALS
AMrv/ b 4r E+rJ d '/4 C6veYVbws
ATr�ar:,�jy�,
M/N.MLIYr ra wmmre (y
TREASURER'S CERT /F /GATE
eve A
/raHl, l
d.R L'h
RECORDING CERT IFICATE
fNV /F- rvemi d r I ry P
KYl 4. a. d wry. pw(.w+l P epp,t uy
rr[trA/ A IfiL�d Apo PSP.�. •0im•�'Y,N //liven I1L1D.
Ls:wry Auaroe
284661
RESOLUTION NO. 69 -83
TERMINATION POINT SLIDE AREA
RESTRICTION ON DEVELrPME " +T ACTIVITY
WHEREAS, certain soil and geological conditions exist within
portions of Sections 2 and 3, Township 27 North, Range 1 East, W.M.,
and Section 35, Township 28 North, Range 1 East, W.M.; and
WHEREAS, such conditions have caused property damage and impose
a chreat to future property improvements; and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 36 -77, signed by the Jefferson County
Board of Commissioners regards only that portion of the geologic hazard
within Killapie Beach Plat; and
WHEREAS, the Coastal Zone Atlas of Washington identifies this
area along the shoreline as having critically unstable slope
characteristics; and
WHEREAS, future activities and improvements within this area
may further aggravate the existing situation; now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED, that no further development activity be per-
mitted or authorized within this area of slope instability in the above
referenced sections; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the boundaries of said soil con-
dition shall include the area identified by the Coastal Zone Atlas of
4ashington slope stability map as "Urs" and "Uos "; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that specific sites within this area
may be excluded from the terms of this resolution upon assurance and
demonstration, under the direction of a licensed civil engineer or
geologist knowledgeable in the practice of soils and /or geological
engineering, that slope stability can be accomplished.
APPROVED this i)fhday of July, 1983.
I __-
ATTACHMENTF
`'., 1
M v/
JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF C014MISSIONERS
-1-77 A.A.40
von VOL 0 6 ,2214
U.
O
iN
O
-1-77 A.A.40
von VOL 0 6 ,2214
U.
O
iN
JEFFERSON COUNTY
State of Washington
Termination Point Slide Area
Development Activity Restriction
Termination Point Plat
PARTIAL REPEAL OF MORATORIUM
From
Jefferson County Resolution No. 69 -83
A RESOLUTION ALLOWING DEVELOPMENT)
ACTIVITY TO COMMENCE WITHIN AND ON) 90 -97
LOTS 1 -4, 42 -56, and portions of 22 -35, OF THE) RESOLUTION NO. _
TERMINATION POINT PLAT AS RECORDED )
IN VOLUME 4 PAGE 25 OF PLATS )
WHEREAS, the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners adopted Resolution No.
69 -83, placing a development moratorium on certain landslide -prone properties located
in Sections 2 and 3, Township 27 North, Range 1 East, WM and Section 35, Township
28 North, Range 1 East, WM; and
WHEREAS, such conditions have caused property damage and impose a threat to
future property improvements; and
WHEREAS, the Coastal Zone Atlas of Washington identifies this area along the
shoreline as having critically unstable slope characteristics; and
WHEREAS, future activities and improvements within the subdivision plat area may
further aggravate the existing situation; and
WHEREAS, specific areas within the development activity restriction area may be
excluded from the terms of Jefferson County Resolution No. 69 -83, provided that
demonstration and assurance of slope stability is presented by a qualified licensed
professional civil engineer or geologist knowledgeable in the practice of soils and /or
geological engineering; and
WHEREAS, a geotechnical evaluation of the subject plat area dated December 1996
addressing slope stability has been prepared by a licensed engineering firm with
experience in the field of geotechnical engineering; and
PageA ACHMENT FD UK
VOL 2 3 541
WHEREAS, the geotechnical evaluation analyzes the geologic and engineering
characteristics of the subject site; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Public Works recommended and the applicant's
engineer proposed peer review of the December 1996 geotechnical evaluation. Said
peer review was conducted in April 1997 by another geotechnical engineering firm; and
WHEREAS, the peer review recommended that the development restrictions on
currently platted lots 1 -4, and lots 22 -56 be removed, subject to implementation of the
drainage and setback recommendations of the December 1996 geotechnical evaluation;
and
WHEREAS, the December 1996 Geotechnical Evaluation and the April 1997 Peer
Review are hereby adopted by reference and are on file with the Jefferson County
Department of Community Development;
NOW, THEREFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF JEFFERSON
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS that the following shall be the action of the Board of
County Commissioners related to repealing the restriction on development activity
within and on lots 1 -4, 22 -35, and 42 -56 of the Termination Point Plat:
BASED on findings, conclusions and recommendations prepared by a geotechnical
engineering firm, and as recommended by the Director of Public Works and County
Engineer, we hereby:
EXEMPT from the moratorium on development imposed through Resolution No. 69-
83, lots 1 -4, 42 -56, and those portions of 22 -35 not extending south of or beyond the
top of the fault scarp or slide area of the Termination Point Plat, Subject to the
following conditions:
1. The proposed drainage system including the erosion control system for the upper and
lower areas of the Termination Point plat may be installed, subject to prior review and
approval of said construction plans by the Jefferson County Engineer.
2. Prior to approval and recording of the amended Termination Point plat mylar, notice to
potential lot purchasers shall be placed on the face of the mylar stating the following:
Ike lots within this subdivision plat are within an area subject to geologic instability.
Prior to any land disturbing activity on these lots, the lot owner or authorized agent
shall acknowledge such by consulting with a licensed geotechnical engineer, a
professional geologist, or a licensed professional engineer knowledgeable in regional
geologic conditions with professional experience in landslide, erosion or seismic
hazard evaluation. At a minimum, the professional recommendations on appropriate
protection measures to prevent degradation of the landslide hazard area(s) and for
assurance of public safety shall be implemented.
Page 2 of 4
Partial Repeal of Moratorium - Termination Point Plat
VOL 23 'v--542
3. A running /equitable covenant shall be prepared at the direction of the project proponent
and signed by all owners in interest. This covenant shall provide constructive notice of
the geologic condition found in this area and shall indemnify and hold Jefferson County
harmless against any and all claims arising out of this condition. Said covenant shall be
binding to all assigns, successors, heirs or subsequent purchasers; and shall be filed
with the Jefferson County Auditor and referenced on the replat of Termination Point.
Prior to the filing of this document, the covenant shall be reviewed and approved, as to
form, by the Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney. This covenant shall contain the
following language:
I/We owner of Lot (s)_ in the replat of Termination
Point, do hereby acknowledge the area in and around Termination Point has
been and is subject to landsliding and geologic instability. 11we, having full
knowledge of this condition, do hereby agree and shall indemnify, defend and
hold harmless the County of Jefferson, its officers, agents, and employees, from
and against any and all claims, losses, and liabilities, or any portion thereof,
including attorney fees and costs, arising from injury or death to persons or
damage to property, as a result of this condition.
4. Prior to any land disturbing activity within the Termination Point Plat, the Jefferson
County Engineer shall submit a letter to the Board of County Commissioners re-
affirming the partial repeal of the development moratorium for lots 1 -4, 42 -56, and 22-
35 above the bluff.
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that environmental review under provisions of Chapter
43.21C RCW State Environmental Policy; the petition to amend the Termination Point
Plat; and revision to pending substantial shoreline development permit # SDP95 -0003,
proceed through the established review process of Jefferson County upon exclusion
from the terms of Resolution No. 69 -83.
Page 3 of 4
Partial Repeal of Moratorium - Termination Point Plat
VOL 23 w- 543
APPROVAL
APPROVED BY THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS this
day of August, 1997
c7„
Richard E. W. hairman
Attest:
C a
Lorna Laney
ClerVfff thl
Board
Development
Approved as to form only:
Paul Mcllrath, Chief Deputy
Prosecuting Attorney
Page 4 of 4
Daniel Harpole, a ber
David Goldsmith, Risk Manager
Partial Repeal of Moratorium n Termination Point Plat
VOL 23 .ir.544
Jefferson County
Department of Public Works
623 Sheridan St.
Pont Townsend, WA 98368
(360) 385 -9160
Monte Reinder, P.E.
Public Works DirectorJCounty Engineer
To: David Alvarez, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
Stacie Hoskins, Department of Community Development
From: Monte Reinders, Public Works Dim for /County Engince A
Date: May 2, 2014
Re: Response to Termination Point Properties April 171' Request
As you are aware, I was sent a letter by Termination Point Properties, LLC on April 17`s
requesting removal of the Moratorium on lots 42 -56 of Termination Point [attached]. Thescare
the lots north of Linda View Drive.
As stated in the letter, the 1983 Moratorium did not include lots 42 -56 since they were not
mapped as "Uos" or "Urs ". Neither the 1996 Jones and Scott geotechnical report nor the 1997
AGI peer review of this report say anything about these lots. Both reports focus on remedial
measures necessary for the development of the lower bench (requiring a massive rock bulkhead,
drainage, and further study) and lots 22 -35 between Linda View Drive and the bluff (requiring
drainage and setbacks). A memorandum from the County Engineer (Klara Fabry) to the Board
dated May 1, 1997 contained a recommendation to lift the moratorium on lots 42 -56 (among
others), but as noted above lots 42 -56 do not appear to have been under the 1983 moratorium. A
"Partial Repeal of Moratorium from Jefferson County Resolution 69 -83" (the 1983 moratorium)
was signed on August 4, 1997, removing lots 1-4, 22 -35, and 42 -56 from the moratorium with
conditions including (1) installation of a drainage system as called for in the geotechnical reports
and as rcviewed/approved by the County Engineer, (2) a letter from the County Engineer
affirming the partial repeal and (3) notice to title and covenants. It should be noted that the
geotechnical reports appear to have assumed that lots 42 -56 were not in question, and the
drainage recommendations were aimed only at developing lots 22 -35 and the lower bench area,
The Jefferson County Code 18.22 Article V — "Geologically Hazardous Areas" lays out
requirements for development in landslide hazard areas which can be identified in a number of
ATTACHMENT S
ways including State Department of Ecology Coastal Zone Atlas mapping. The Atlas maps lots
42 -47 and 55 -56 as "stable ". Lots 48 -54 have areas mapped as "intermediate" and lots 49 -52 are
primarily mapped as "unstable because of a moderate slope and proximity to recent slides and
not because of any actual instability. The Code lays out requirements, including the requirement
for geotechnical reports, when development is proposed in a mapped "unstable" area. The Code
requirements and those of the moratoriums am very similar. Presumably, the Code did not exist
(in its current format, at least) in 1983 and perhaps not in 1997.
Although Termination Point Properties did not state it in the letter of April 17a', they told me that
their prime motivation for requesting a lifting of the moratorium on lots 42 -56 was so that the
lots could be used as collateral for a bank loan to fund the work needed for development. They
had not determined exactly how they would develop their lots, acknowledging that placement of
septic systems, drains, getting access to potable water, setbacks, etc, were all issues that could
affect the final layout.
Based on a review of the available documents, l see no reason why lots 42 -56 should be subject
to the conditions of the Partial Repeal Moratorium of 1997, The geotechnical reports did not
indicate that any specific measures were needed to develop these lots — again them seem to have
been an assumption that these lots were not in question. They are a minimum of 250 feet from
the bluff with most being on the order of 300 to 450 feet from the bluff where others are
commonly allowed to build. If the moratorium is lilted on these lots, it should be made clear to
the owners that this action should not be construed to mean the lots are developable in their
current configuration and furthermore that any lots mapped as "unstable" will still be subject to
the Code (18.22) requiring geotechnical analysis specifically addressing the development
proposal. In other words, lifting the moratorium on these lots does not exempt them from any
requirements of the Code.
The owners have not requested that the moratorium be lifted on other lots. Lou 22 -35 along the
bluff are subject to the drainage improvement requirements of the geotechnical reports, and until
adequate engineered plans for implementing these requirements are submitted, no development
can occur either with or without a moratorium on these lots. It should be noted that other lots
( #7, #20, and #2l) at the top of the bluff mapped as "U" (unstable) and "Ctrs" (unstable recent
slides) were developed between the late 1970s and early 1990s.
The current project proponents seem to better understand the difficulty associated with the
development of any of the lots on the lower bench, namely lots 9 -19 and lots 36 -41. Purely from
an economic standpoint, not to mention a permitting standpoint, the geotechnical requirements
for a 1,200long massive rock bulkhead, bringing in utilities, building drainage improvements,
loss of usable space due to required setbacks from slopes above and below the lots, and the
additional geotechnical study required would seem to diminish the cost/beriefit ratio to such a
degree that the lots could only be viewed as having some potential for passive recreation. I
would think their marketability would certainly be questionable as well. It will be interesting to
see what if anything is proposed down there, but in any case development on lots 42 -56 can be
separated from and is unrelated to the lower bench
s oh �oG JEFFERSON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
621 Sheridan Street. Port Townsend WA 98368 1 Web www.co.iefferson .wa.us /communitydevelopment
`ssy o� Tel 360,379.44501 Fax: 360.379.4451 1 Email dcd(d)colefferson.wa.us
SquareONE Resource CenterlBuilding Permits & inspections IDevelopment ReviewlLong Range Planning
MEMORANDUM
To: David Alvarez, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
Monte Reinders, Public Works Director /County Engineer
From: Stacie Hoskins, Department of Community Development Planning Manager
Date: May 2, 2014
Re: Response to Termination Point Properties April 17 Request
DCD agrees that the memorandum of May 2, 2014 from the Public Works Director /County
Engineer, Monte Reinders, provides sufficient rationale for lifting the 1997 "partial repeal"
moratorium with respect to Lots 42 -56 of the Termination Point Plat. Development or land use
upon those lots will be subject to all County development regulations, including but not limited
to the Critical Areas Ordinance, Ch. 18.22 JCC.
DCD notes that most of the original development review was based on a proposed re -plat
application, and conditions on the partial repeal addressed the property as a whole in the context
of said re -plat. The re -plat application is no longer proposed, and the county has adopted
sufficient critical area protection measures for these types of areas.
ATTACHMENT V C