Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZON2007-00027 UDC CONSISTENCY REVIEW Project Planner: Master#MLA07-00102 Review Type Project Description ZbN07-00027 V Suggested Comprehensive Plan Amendment-The proposed UDC amendment to JCC 18.20.240(1)would prohibit mining activities in the RR 1:5 zoning designation. Primary: HOOD CANAL COALITION Site Address: WA, REP MICHAEL GENDLER GENDLER & MANN, LLP 1424 FOURTH AVE STE 1015 SEATTLE WA 98101 Project Location: Parcel Number: 000000260 S-T-R:-- Total Acreage: Legal Description UNDEFINED Land Use: 4590 Flood District: Fire District: Planning Area: Flood Map(FIRM)Panel No: District: Zoning: COMP PLAN DESIGNATION: COMMUNITY PLAN: UGA: MPR: WATER SUPPLY UTILITY: Service Area PUD: [ ] Plot plan states "property line" [ ] Assessor's Map(Property lines on submitted plot plan must match the property lines as identified on the Assessor's 1/4 map) [ ] Legal Access to Property YES NO [ ] Parcel Tags or Scanned Documents YES NO [ ] ESA's: Special Reports Nearby YESNO [ ] Designated Ag [ ] Shoreline Designation: YES NO [ ] Shoreline Slope Stability: YES NO Stream Type:YES NO Fish& Wildlife:YESNO Wetlands: YES NO Rare Plants:YES NO Seismic: YES NO Landslide: YESNO Flood: YESNO Erosion: YESNO Aquifer Recharge Area:YES NO SIPZ: none At Risk High Risk Coastal Stormwater site plan submitted: Yes No [ ] Forest Lands: YESNO Adjoining Forest Lands: Commercial/ Rural/ Inholding [ ] Stormwater:New Impervious Surface Land Disturbing Activity ESA's Stormwater Req's: Min Req#2 Min Req#1 thru#5 Min Req#1 thru#10 Engineering [ ] Notice Provisions/Disclosure: Airport YES NO MRL YES NO Forest Lands YES NO [ ] Landscaping Required: Yes No [ ] Parking Spaces Required NO 2 Other [ I Building Height: 35' UBC Standard [ ] Impervious Surface coverage percentage: Resource Lands&Public: 10% Rural Residential: 25% Rural Industrial: Per UDC Sec 6.7 Rural Commercial: 60% Area of Building Coverage:60%in Rural Industrial Lands only [ ] Total Building(s) Size: RVC:20,000 SF CC:5,000 SF NC:7,500 SF GC: 10,000 SF All others:subject to septic&water constraints/None specified [ ] Setbacks: Front: Left Side: Right Side: Rear: Shoreline Setback: LSHA Setback: [ ] Road Classification: Road Approach:EXISTING NOT REQ'D RAP [ ] SEPA Required:YES EXEMPT [ ] Flood Certificate: [ ] Existing Case(s)& Condition(s): Violations: Yes No [ ] Recorded Date of Subdivision: AFN Over 5yrs=UDC Plat Conditions: <5yrs=Plat Conditions on plat or Old Ordinance Lots/Require Declaration of Restrictive Covenant YES NO, submitted: YES NO [ ] Site Visit conducted YESNO [ ] Require Final Zoning Approval YES NO [ ] ADMIN: Setbacks entered in Permit Plan case N/A YES New Parcel Tags entered in Permit Plan N/A YES Special Reports Scanned N/A YES No parcel tags found for parcel 1 Associated CASES status issued finaled description 000000260 MLA07-00066 ZON07-00014 P Suggested Comp Plan Amendment-Side by side comparison between UDC and Comprehensive Plan. MLA07-00067 ZON07-00015 P Suggested Comprehensive Plan Amendment-"to propose a change to the comp plan necessary to improve the consistency of intergovernmental planning. MLA07-00102 ZON07-00027 P Suggested Comprehensive Plan Amendment-The proposed UDC amendment to JCC 18.20.240(1)would prohibit mining activities in the RR 1:5 zoning designation. MLA07-00104 ZON07-00025 P Suggested Comprehensive Plan Amendment-Execute the provisions of the Growth Management Act under RCW 36.70.A.367. This will provide additional employment opportunities for citizens. MLA07-00464 BLD07-00444 RDY Stormwater Management for the Railroad Connector portion of Segment 3 of the Larry Scott Memorial Trail. ST 0 . GENDLER & MANN, LLP ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW (206)621-8868 Michael W.Gendler* Fax(206)621-0512 David S. Mann 1424 FOURTH AVENUE,SUITE 1015 Lauren P. Rasmussen SEATTLE WA 98101 gendler @gendlermann.com Katherine A. George www.gendlermann.com *Also admitted in Oregon '‘EIVE1) \R% February 27, 2007 2007 Al Scalf, Director SOall' Jefferson County Department of Community Development k.) 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 RE: Proposed Amendment to the Unified Development Code, JCC 18.20.240(1) Dear Mr. Scalf: . On behalf of the Hood Canal Coalition (Coalition), I submit this letter and attached application materials in support of a proposed amendment to the Unified Development Code of Jefferson County. The proposed amendment targets JCC 18.20.240(1), related to certain mining extraction and processing activities in Rural Residential 1:5 Zoning Designations. The specific language we are proposing is detailed in Attachment B to the amendment proposal form. The current code provisions allow mining extraction and processing activities in all Rural Residential zones by conditional use permit. JCC 18.20.240(1)(a). Our proposed amendment would prohibit mining activities in the RR 1:5 rural zone. The Coalition submits this proposal pursuant to the annual amendment cycle to the Comprehensive Plan/UDC, as described in JCC 18.45.040(1)(b). Such general amendments to the Comprehensive Plan/UDC may be submitted by "anyone," and there is no fee required for such an amendment. The deadline for such proposed amendments is March 1. Please note that this is a proposed amendment to the UDC and not to the Comprehensive Plan. In addition to this cover letter, the Coalition has included the following required elements: 1) SEPA checklist, including supplemental sheet for non- project applications; 2) Master Permit Application Form; and 3) Application for suggested Comprehensive Plan/UDC amendment, including the three "Exhibits" (A-C) specified in that Application form. The Coalition believes that the provision in JCC 18.20.240(1) allowing mineral extraction and processing activities in Rural Residential 1:5 zones as a conditional use is inconsistent with the goals of Rural Residential zones generally. The Board of County 1 V IFY EIVED Al Scalf, Director FEB 2 8 2001 February 27, 2007 Page 2 6 1I :f(1NTYOCO Commissioners has suggested that it agrees with our assessment. In addressing whether Fred Hill Materials might obtain conditional use permits for a proposed conveyor system through RR 1:5 zoned land, the BOCC stated that "a pier facility proposal [related to mining extraction and processing] . . . may not meet all twelve (12) approval criteria" for a conditional use permit. Ordinance No. 08-0706-04 at ¶ 143 (adopted July 6, 2004). While the Coalition is confident that applications such as that submitted by Fred Hill Materials for a mineral conveyor through the RR 1:5 zone cannot be approved under the current UDC, we believe that it will benefit the County and its citizens to confirm that mining activities should be prohibited outright within the RR 1:5 zone, as they already are in all four of the County's rural commercial classifications. The SEPA checklist we have completed indicates that there are no adverse environmental impacts associated with our proposal. Because the proposed amendment is limited to RR 1:5 zones, it still allows mining activity as a conditional use in the other Rural Residential zones, which feature less intensive residential development. The Coalition represents over 2,000 Jefferson County citizens who wish to preserve and protect rural residential environments as well as conservancy shorelines from the impacts of mining activities. This sentiment is consistent with the purpose of the RR 1:5 zoning designation "to allow for continued residential development in areas of Jefferson County consisting of relatively high density pre-existing patterns of development." JCC 18.15.015(1)(a). Moreover, this zoning designation is to "support and foster Jefferson County's existing rural residential landscape and character by restricting new land divisions to a base density of one unit per five acres." Id. Mining extraction and processing activities, including conveyors within Rural Residential 1:5 zones, are incompatible with the aims of this zoning designation. The Coalition looks forward to working with the County to see this amendment through to successful adoption. The Coalition stands ready to assist your Department and the County in reviewing this request. Please do not hesitate to contact us to discuss this proposal. Thank you for you attention to this matter. Very truly yours, G NDLER & MANN, LLP 1 '1 Michael W. Gendler Al Scalf, Director February 27, 2007 Page 3 Cc: Brent Butler, DCDEk Board of County Commissioners Hood Canal Coalition VIE-11 �, 8 2S1 Otskit i"5ohr c°° JEFFERSON COUNTY TED< ,-, ' DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ED x" e0 621 Sheridan Street• Port Townsend •Washington 96368 FEB 2 8 2007 'ISiI'N �S 360/378-4450 . 3601379-4451 Fax www.ca.jeffersan.wa.us/commdevetopment ,1tRHSUN6UUNI I UbO Application for Suggested Comprehensive Plan / UDC Amendment1 MLA if N//t PROJECT/APPLICANT NAME: /4061:1 Co04000440. C,,, 41..rrt..N For Comprehensive Plan amendments, applications must be completed and submitted to the Department of Community Development by March 1 of the current calendar year in order to be considered during the annual amendment process. Completed applications that are received after March 1 will be placed on the preliminary docket for the following calendar year. Applications for suggested UDC amendments may be considered on a wiling basis. Applications that are incomplete(i.e., that do not include all of the information required below) will be returned to the applicant. Submittal Requirements 1. A completed Master Permit Application. Representative authorization is required if application is not signed by applicant. 2. A completed and signed State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)checklist. • 3, Any additional information reasonably deemed necessary by the Administrator to evaluate the proposed amendment. 4. Please prepare and label as"Exhibit A,"a description of the proposed Plan/UDC amendment and any associated development proposal(s) if applicable. Applications for projected-related amendments must include plans and information or studies accurately depicting existing and proposed uses and improvements. Applications for such amendments that do not specify proposed uses and potential impacts are assumed to have maximum Impact to the environment and public facilities and services. 5. Please provide an explanation of why the amendment is being proposed.(Attach additional sheets,if necessary.) Sag" AlTh .K LE rz. 6. Please prepare and label as"Exhibit 8,"proposed amendatory language(i.e.,to affected text of both the Comprehensive Plan and UDC) shown in "bill" format, with text to be added indicated with underlining (e.g., underline), and text to be deleted indicated with strikeouts(e.g.,strikeouts). 7. Please prepare and label as "Exhibit C,"a thorough explanation of how the proposed amendment, meets, conflicts with, or relates to the following inquiries(NOTE:Simple"yes"or"no"responses are unacceptable.) a. Have the circumstances related to the proposed amendment and/or the area in which it is located substantially changed since the adoption of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan? b. Are the assumptions that form the basis for the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan no longer valid, or has new information become available that was not considered during the process of adoption of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan or any subsequent amendment? c, Does the proposed amendment reflect current widely held values of the residents of Jefferson County? 8. The applicant hereby certifies that the statements contained in this application are true and provide an accurate representation of the proposed amendment;and the applicant(s) hereby acknowledges that any approval issued on this application may be revoked if any such statement Is found to be false. c„:".)01,...\._ ...c.e3,4„ 1...) f&b 23 Z©C 7 APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE r 'See JCC Chapter 18.45, COMP PLAN AMEND APP.DOC REV,7113/2006 Page 1 A4ock,0014 JEFFERsal R ' , AL DEPART OF UN LENT RE('EIVIRii) 621 Maiden en Strom"Port Townsend. � �7 • ��1 Fax FEB 2 8 2007 leliirs .tom. nt Master Permit Application MLA: Eff �JUiv ,�UIVI t���,I Project Description(include separate sheets as necessary): Proposed Amendment to die Jefferson County UDC Bache i te. t !(1l b mate mind ocean in RR 1S Zoning tit see cower letter attached Tax Pl Propeity Nupiar: NIA szc N/A (acrealequans feet) She Address and/or Medians to Property. ' Properly Denier(*)of Record: '! Telephone: Fero email: Mauling Addle= Applicant/Agent(f different front owner/: Hood Came Coafter eta WRNS W.Gender.OVWX0&Macs LIP Telephone:Van 6214866 Fax(208) 1- 12 rat ��rttttsr�€t matting Address: 1424 rowel Pa%.7 tete ids„WAsem 1 What kind of Permit?(Check each box that appts) C. .rude ing (3 Variance(Aenor,Major or Reasonable Economic Use) 0 Demolition Permit (3 Contlitkeal is 10(a).C(4 or CI" o Garage 1�� I 0 "D''or med Use C on 0 Wired Home C � MRamma 0 Modular 0 Short Plat 0 conunt sal' ®eking SO isiaat** ❑ Ghat of Use a hest}Mt * 0 Address 0 Propane .m_ .0 Road Approach Residential Devebernent(PRROYAmendments•* 0 tat VecatkinfAketation]Mowed"Yee"Use Consistency Analysis Q ShoteMe Water Prolpten ExerilcidatiPerridt Revisions l** 0 Storm ter Management 0 Shoreilne Management SetertareM Development** 0 Site Pt i Approval Advance Deters enatuxt(SPAAD)` 0 Shoreline Mattagement' Li Temporary Use CI C,ottmit tenthve PleniUDC/Uvid Use Diebict Pulse Amendment I]Wireless Telecommunication' 0 Jefferson Comte Shoreline Woe Program Amendment 0 Forest Practices ActfRelease of Six-Year Moratorium 0 Tree Vegetaion Request " May require a Pre-Appikation Con a w"RequIres a P i capon hence Please identify any other local,state or federal permits required for this proposal,If kno tnt 3 t Le*l +f "1" f e AfPefIVAP- DEalef/ATION OF AGENT I hereby designate hiligloa, -handier.gander A ftda ok UP to act as my agent in matters relating to ads application flor perm s). —greignIng thf= ..- form, l' ` ens attests that eis thkrinnetiori provitard herein and In any anaemia. his,her�it`s Is true and �the bast of Vie. Any , I falsehood or any ontt ion of fact made by Ow ormerhatent with reams to this may result In this prams . packet t further agrees to save,Indemnify and hold hermit=Jefferson County/against all liebillies,Judgments saran oast&reasonable attorneys fees and expenses which may In any way acme against Jefferson County as a nista of or in consequence of the marrag of this panne I further agree to provide access and right of easy to Jetkirson County and Ile.emplo , review arstt.any.required later *regents� ads purpose of ap � , Staffs and riyhtt of entry be awned unless the applicant awns the County in writing at the IOW of ere . . t he . s e r * ' ' o ( Vt Signature: , , / •• The action or actions Applicant undertake es a result of Issuance of this permit may negatively tact upon one or more threatened or endangered species and could toad to* , 'felts'elan endangered to those team we*tared in the federal �as the "Endangered Spades Ad*or'ESA*Jefferson County makes two assurances to the that the actions that Of be underarm because as permit has teen issued will not violate the ESA. My Individual.grouper agency can ISe a!BMW oh Walt of an ands ep ienp ragaiding your actions)even If you are In comp ass with the Jefferson County development code.The Affeicent t#sa that he,she or It holds Individual and non4t , ,r at#al • • ,...:1) ,. to and vettt SBA. The has reed this and��� p�, lure: __.,._ • i.4'�� iati: , ....-....-._...,.,_-a c:;\nociimmus And Sn Vilest/(cod SettirgetTunparary Imam FileskOLKUNttitater Meth A s stun 12.19.20tl&.d0c RECa1VEi[) FEB 2 8 2 007 WAC 197-11-960 Environmental checklist. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST JEEft(3SUNIMINtYUCO Purpose of checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW,requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement(EIS)must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal(and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done)and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly,with the most precise information known,or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully,to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer,or if a question does not apply to your proposal,write"do not know"or"does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems,the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION,complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS(part D). For nonproject actions,the references in the checklist to the words"project," "applicant," and"property or site" should be read as"proposal," "proposer,"and"affected geographic area,"respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project,if applicable: Proposed Amendment to Jefferson County's Uniform Development Code,JCC 18.20.204(1) 2. Name of applicant: Hood Canal Coalition 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Hood Canal Coalition do Michael W.Gendler Gendler&Mann,LLP 1424 Fourth Avenue,Suite 1015 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)621-8868 (206)621-0512(fax) gendler @gendlermann.com 4. Date checklist prepared: February 27,2007 5. Agency requesting checklist: Jefferson County Community Development Commission 6. Proposed timing or schedule(including phasing,if applicable): FEB 2 8 2007 Submitted for annual amendment cycle to the Comprehensive Plan and UDC of Jefferson CoudifffilS tJft 11111IBI l JO 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? IIf yes, explain. No. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. None, as this is a proposal to amend the Jefferson County Code generally,unrelated to any project(s). Jefferson County has published SEPA documents for adoption and amendment of its Code from time to time. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes,explain. Yes. Fred Hill Materials has applied for a conditional use permit to construct and operate a conveyor of sand and gravel from its Shine pit to Hood Canal, across rural residential zoned lands. The Hood Canal Coalition ("Coalition") is not aware of other pending proposals for mining activity in rural residential zones. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal,if known. Master Application Permit from Jefferson County,form is required although it does not appear to be directly applicable to this proposal to amend a provision in the UDC. The proposal will require approval by the Board of County Commissioners. 1 1. Give brief,complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) This is a suggested amendment to the Jefferson County Code,§ 18.20.240(1)to add provisions prohibiting certain mining- related activity within Jefferson County's rural residential district RR 1:5. This is not a site-specific project. The proposal is to add the following language to the existing provision of JCC§ 18.20.240(1): Provided, however, that new mineral extraction and mineral processing activities, including mineral processing accessory to extraction facilities such as conveyors,in the RR 1:5 rural residential district are prohibited. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. 2 1fl Tie\ITrdsri. Rural residential(RR 1:5)zones in Jefferson County. This is not a site specific proposal. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site(circle one): Flat,rolling,hilly,steep slopes,mountainous, other This is not applicable,as proposal applies to all rural residential(RR 1:5)zones of Jefferson County. b. What is the steepest slope on the site(approximate percent slope)? This is not applicable,as proposal applies to all rural residential(RR 1:5)zones of Jefferson County. RECEIVED FEB 2 8 2007 iFfF f5�1 s WINI�'II:�! 3 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY c. What general types of soils are found on the site(for example,clay,sand,gravel,peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils,specify them and note any prime farmland. Does not apply. IR ECEINIED d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, p 2 describe. 1 3 2 8 2007 Does not apply. 1.-1fliNURI),110NIVICH e. Describe the purpose,type,and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. None proposed. Does not apply. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing,construction,or use? If so,generally describe. No. The proposed amendment would lessen the potential for erosion in RR 1:5 zones. g.About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction(for example,asphalt or buildings)? Does not apply. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion,or other impacts to the earth,if any: Does not apply. This amendment would help protect against any erosion or impacts to earth. a. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal(i.e.,dust,automobile, odors,industrial wood smoke)during construction and when the project is completed? If any,generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. None. h. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. 4 Does not apply. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air,if any: None 1RECEIVED FEB 282007 IERHINUIVARINCO 5 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site(including year-round and seasonal streams,saltwater,lakes,ponds,wetlands)? If yes,describe type d<i iEl 1 and provide names. If appropriate,state what stream or river it flows into. 1A Does not apply. FEB 2 8 2007 2)Will the project require any work over,in,or adjacent to(within 200 feet)the described tHISUk "III(N 1I1f 1 waters? If yes,please describe and attach available plans. Does not apply. 3)Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Does not apply. 4)Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description,purpose,and approximate quantities if known. Does not apply. 5)Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so,note location on the site plan. Does not apply. 6)Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. Does not apply. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn,or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description,purpose,and approximate quantities if known. Does not apply. 6 2)Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources,if any(for example: Domestic sewage;industrial,containing the following chemicals. . . ;agricultural;etc.). Describe the general size of the system,the number of such systems,the number of houses to be served(if applicable),or the number of animals or humans the system(s)are expected to serve. Does not apply. c E "Al FEB 2 $ 2007 omenUCD TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY c. Water runoff(including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff(including storm water)and method of collection and disposal,if any(include quantities,if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so,describe. Does not apply. way F 2)Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so,generally describe. FEB 2 8 2007 Does not apply. jEffaistiNflueNtlfacti d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface,ground,and runoff water impacts,if any: Does not apply. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: Does not apply. deciduous tree: alder,maple,aspen,other evergreen tree: fir,cedar,pine,other shrubs grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail,buttercup,bullrush,skunk cabbage,other water plants: water lily,eelgrass,milfoil,other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Does not apply. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Does not apply. d. Proposed landscaping,use of native plants,or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site,if any: Does not apply. 8 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Does not apply. birds: hawk,heron,eagle,songbirds,other: mammals: deer,bear,elk,beaver,other: fish: bass,salmon,trout,herring,shellfish,other: R �� &(T.' b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. \ Does not apply. FEB 2 Cl 24J7 JEfFtUSUI\jilOIV I IJil l 9 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so,explain. Does not apply. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife,if any: Yes, this proposal would help preserve wildlife by limiting construction of mining-related activities within the County's rural residential(RR 1:5)zone,preserving wildlife habitat. 6. Energy and natural resources �� a. What kinds of energy(electric,natural gas,oil,wood stove,solar)will be used to meet �U the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, 2 8 manufacturing,etc. FEB 2 8 2027 Does not apply. FFFFHSII ,(1f1Nivifip b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so,generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts,if any: Does not apply. 7. Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards,including exposure to toxic chemicals,risk of fire and explosion,spill,or hazardous waste,that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so,describe. No. I)Describe special emergency services that might be required. Does not apply. 2)Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards,if any: II 10 Does not apply. b. Noise 1)What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project(for example: traffic,equipment,operation,other)? The rural residential (RR 1:5) zones experience the type and quantity of noise typical of rural residential areas. This proposal would help limit future noise from mining-related activities and to limit noise conflicts between mining and rural residential uses. 2)What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis(for example: traffic,construction,operation,other)?Indi- cate what hours noise would come from the site. None. FEB 282007 S FFthiU +;UUNIVOCU 11 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 3)Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts,if any: Yes, the proposed UDC amendment would ensure that no new noise would be generated by certain mining-related activities in designated areas of Jefferson County. 8. Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Does not apply. The dominant use in the County's rural residential districts is residential use. (RECEWEH) b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so,describe. FEB 2 8 2007 Does not apply. i FI H UN (1UNIY(JCti c. Describe any structures on the site. Does not apply. Presumably the dominant structures in the County's rural residential districts are houses and accessory structures. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so,what? No. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The proposed amendment would apply throughout the County's RR 1:5 rural residential district. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Does not apply. g. If applicable,what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Does not apply. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an"environmentally sensitive"area? If so,specify. 12 Does not apply. The Coalition assumes that some RR 1:5 areas have been so designated. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Does not apply. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts,if any: (TwEl- None needed,as no persons will be displaced. E F Z8 2 8 2007 !ffffilsom NIVUuw • 13 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans,if any: The proposal enhances compatibility of uses with the zoning designation, by precluding mining uses which are not compatible with residential uses in the RR 1:5 rural residential district. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided,if any? Indicate whether high,mid- dle,or low-income housing. None. KiDIEWB1 ) b. Approximately how many units,if any,would be eliminated?Indicate whether high, middle,or low-income housing. FEB F B 2 8 2007 None. IFifills alliniou c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts,if any: Does not apply. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s),not including antennas;what is the principal exterior building material(s)proposed? Does not apply. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts,if any: None needed, because proposal would not cause any aesthetic impacts. The proposal would reduce aesthetic impacts attributable to mining activities in RR 1:5 rural residential districts. 11. Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? 14 None. It would prevent light and glare that would be associated with certain mining facilities in RR 1:5 rural residential districts. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Does not apply. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts,if any: Does not apply. ,AN �E '_1111) FEB 28Z[1O7 ARON�yOCD 15 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Does not apply. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so,describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation,including recreation op- portunities to be provided by the project or applicant,if any: REcEivE4 ) Does not apply. 23 13. Historic and cultural preservation IEFFthSUMUN1YD1[N a. Are there any places or objects listed on,or proposed for,national,state,or local preser- vation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so,generally describe. Does not apply. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic,archaeological,scientific,or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Does not apply. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts,if any: None needed. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site,and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans,if any. Does not apply. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not,what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Does not apply. 16 c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Does not apply. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets,or improvements to existing roads or streets,not including driveways? If so,generally describe(indicate whether public or private). No. _ C ) S 257 ANSI§ 17 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY e. Will the project use(or occur in the immediate vicinity of)water,rail,or air transporta- tion? If so,generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project?If known,indicate when peak volumes would occur. Does not apply. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts,if any: -"kT[d`�(V - Does not apply. 1 n?'� 15. Public services u1�11�"������ rr' a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services(for example:fire pro- tection,police protection,health care,schools,other)? If so,generally describe. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services,if any. None needed. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity,natural gas,water,refuse serv- ice,telephone,sanitary sewer,septic system,other. Does not apply. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project,the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Does not apply. - C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying/own them t"WU".o make its decision. Signature: l 440 Date Submitted: QuAl...a?.?..400?. 18 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general,it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions,be aware of the extent the proposal,or the types of IR lid g4' py) activities likely to result from the proposal,would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general f `sB 2 8 2 O7 terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water;emissions to air;pro �F�Q\'� duction,storage,or release of toxic or hazardous substances;or production of noise? This project will not increase discharge of water, emissions to air, production, storage or release of toxic or hazardous substances,or production of noise. This is a proposal to prohibit certain mining-related activities within the RR 1:5 rural residential zoning designation in Jefferson County. As such, the prohibition on construction will help reduce the possibility of any of the harms listed in the question from arising. Limitations on the types of mining-related activities are aimed to increase environmental protections in RR 1:5 Rural Residential zones. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: The proposed amendment is intended to avoid the impacts of mining-related activities,which could increase discharge to water,create airborne emissions,produce hazardous waste,and generate noise,in the RR 1:5 rural residential district. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants,animals,fish,or marine life? Any effect would be beneficial. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants,animals,fish,or marine life are: None needed. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? It would not. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: None needed. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated(or eligible or under study)for governmental protection;such as parks, wilderness,wild and scenic rivers,threatened or endangered species habitat,historic or cultural sites,wetlands,floodplains,or prime farmlands? 19 The proposal is likely to help protect environmentally sensitive areas in the RR 1:5 rural residential district from certain mining-related activities. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: None needed. itt V41) g 251 fa q0011014\ 20 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use,including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? The proposal would help ensure that uses within the RR 1:5 rural residential district are compatible with the shoreline and inland areas. The prohibitions will limit mining-related activities in the RR 1:5 rural residential zones which are not suited to such uses and which could have a negative impact. The proposed UDC amendment would not allow or encourage land or shoreline uses which are incompatible with existing plans. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: The proposal is intended to avoid and reduce shoreline and land use impacts by prohibiting certain types of mining- related activities, such as conveyor belts, in the RR 1:5 rural residential zoning designation of Jefferson County. Such mining uses will continue to be permitted, or permitted by conditional use permit, in other designations such as Commercial Forestry,RR 1:10 and RR 1:20,and in mineral overlays. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public ;(� services and utilities? .� A�������1 �j Elk The proposal should have no impact on transport or public services or utilities. R. yr g 2007 Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s)are: RR`e� None 7. Identify,if possible,whether the proposal may conflict with local,state,or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. No conflicts have been identified with local,state and federal laws. 21 EXHIBIT A Description of the Proposed UDC Amendment Mining activities currently are permitted as conditional uses in all three rural residential zoning districts. The proposed UDC amendment to JCC 18.20.240(1) would prohibit mining activities in the RR 1:5 zoning designation. Such activities would continue to be allowed in the other two rural residential zoning designations, RR 1:10 and RR 1:20. The specific language of our proposed amendment is set forth in Exhibit B to this application. Our cover letter and Exhibit C state the reasons why this amendment should be adopted. 'CON-VA%) V\kA . 9. t-1) AO 31% 004 EXHIBIT B Proposed Amendatory Language to JCC 18.25.240 Current text in"bill" format with additional language in"underline" and changes to original text in" eeut" formatting. JCC 18.25.240(1): (1) In addition to meeting all other applicable requirements of this code, including this section, all new mineral extraction and mineral processing activities located outside of an approved mineral resource land (MRL) overlay district designation (as specified in Article VI-C of Chapter 18.15 JCC) shall be subject to the following standards: (a) New mineral extraction and mineral processing activities in rural residential districts shall require a conditional use permit subject to a Type III permit approval process- ; Provided, however, that new mineral extraction and mineral processing activities, including mineral processing accessory to extraction facilities such as conveyors, in the RR 1:5 rural residential district are prohibited. .c1V.0%.‘ 141 ‘k0 ON** RfBWEU EXHIBIT C FEB 2 S Mg num mil Explanation of Proposal's Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan igrUMUMUUMin The proposed amendment to the UDC is intended to clarify the scope of permitted mining activities within those areas designated Rural Resident 1:5 within Jefferson County. The current purpose of this zoning designation is "to allow for continued residential development in areas of Jefferson County consisting of relatively high density pre-existing patterns of development." JCC 18.15.015(1)(a). Moreover, this zoning designation is to "support and foster Jefferson County's existing rural residential landscape and character by restricting new land divisions to a base density of one unit per five acres." Id. Mining extraction and processing activities, including conveyors within Rural Residential 1:5 zones are incompatible with the aims of this zoning designation. Thus, Hood Canal Coalition's proposal will bring overall consistency to the UDC. The County should note that Rural Commercial areas currently prohibit such mining-related uses outright. See JCC 18.15.040 (Table 3.1). Questions 7 a and b address changed circumstances in the context of a proposed comprehensive plan amendment. This proposal is for a UDC amendment, not a comprehensive plan amendment. The circumstances related to this proposal have not substantially changed. Nonetheless, there have been conflicts in uses between mining activities and residential use which emphasizes the need to protect existing rural residential development in the RR 1:5 district from intrusive uses that may be incompatible with existing patterns of residential development. In response to Question 7b, the applicant is not aware of the information that the County considered during the process of adopting the Comprehensive Plan related to RR 1:5 zoning, and specifically to the relationship between residential use and mining activity in that zone. The Coalition is confident that this proposal reflects currently widely held values of the residents of Jefferson County, in response to Question 7c. The Hood Canal Coalition represents over 2,000 members who have expressed strong support for protecting existing residential areas from the intrusion and impacts of mining extraction and processing activities, including conveyors, into the Rural Residential 1:5 zones. Note that in adopting Ordinance 14-1213-02 (Mineral Resource Overlay with Conditions, approved Dec. 13, 2002) the Board of County Commissioners stated that "The County Commissioners and the planning staff received hundreds of e-mails and signed petitions representing literally thousands of signatures urging the County Commissioners to reject" the proposed amendment. Ord. 14-1214-02, at ¶ 34 (emphasis added). According to the Commissioners, "[o]pposition to this amendment [MRL overlay] was expressed fervently" and that "[a] smaller and less vocal portion of this County's citizenry expressed their support" for the amendment. Ord. 14-1214-02, at ¶¶ 35, 36. Popular sentiment that such mining activities are not appropriate within RR 1:5 zones has not diminished. This proposal will enjoy strong public support. t Document Page 1 of 1 18.45.090 Amendments to GMA implementing regulations. (1) Initiation. The text of the county's adopted Comprehensive Plan implementing regulations(also referred to within this code as "development regulations") may be amended at any time, provided the amendment is consistent with the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and land use map. When inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and land use map, the amendment shall be processed concurrent with any necessary plan amendments using the process and timelines for plan amendments set forth in this chapter. "Implementing regulations"means the controls placed on development or land use activities by the county,including,but not limited to,this Unified Development Code,the Jefferson County Shoreline Master Program,or any other official controls required to implement the plan(see RCW 36.70A.030).Proposed amendments,changes,or modifications may be initiated as follows: (a) When consistent with the plan, at any time at the direction of the board of county commissioners or by the planning commission pursuant to RCW 36.70.550; (b) When inconsistent with the plan, under the process and time lines for Comprehensive Plan amendments by any interested person consistent with this chapter;or (c) Immediately following or concurrent with an amendment or amendments to the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan,the implementing regulations shall be amended to be consistent with the plan and land use map. (2) Notice. (a) Proposed amendments to the implementing regulations pursuant to subsection (1) of this section which must be processed concurrently with an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and land use map shall be processed and noticed in the same manner as plan amendments consistent with this chapter. (b) Notice of any hearing on amendments to the implementing regulations generated by DCD staff,the board of county commissioners or the planning commission outside of the annual Comprehensive Plan amendment process shall be given by one publication in the official newspaper of the county at least 10 days prior to the date of the hearing and by posting a copy of the notice of hearing in the Jefferson County Courthouse. (c) Any additional notice required by state or local law (e.g., statutory notice requirements for amendments to the Shoreline Master Program),or deemed appropriate by the administrator,shall be paid for by the applicant. (3) Planning Commission Review. The planning commission shall hold a public hearing on any amendment(s) to the implementing regulations and shall make a recommendation to the board of county commissioners using the site-specific criteria set forth in JCC 18.45.080(1)(b)and(1)(c),as applicable. (4) Board of County Commissioners Review. The board of county commissioners shall consider the proposed amendments at a regularly scheduled meeting. (a) If after applying the criteria set forth in JCC 18.45.080(1)(b) and (1)(c), as applicable, the board of county commissioners concludes that no change in the recommendation of the planning commission is necessary, the board may make a final determination on the proposed amendment(s) and adopt the amendments as recommended by the planning commission. (b) If after applying the criteria set forth in JCC 1$.45,.080(1)(b) and (1)(c), as applicable, the board of county commissioners concludes that a change in the recommendation of the planning commission is necessary,the change shall not be incorporated until the board conducts its own public hearing using the procedures set forth under JCC 18.40.310. The hearing shall be noticed by one publication in the official newspaper of the county at least 10 days prior to the date of the hearing,and by posting copies of the notice of hearing in the Jefferson County Courthouse.The notice and public hearing for proposed amendments to implementing regulations may be combined with any notice or public hearing for proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan or for other actions of the board of county commissioners. (5) Transmittal to State. The administrator shall transmit a copy of any proposed amendment(s)to the implementing regulations at least 60 days prior to the expected date of final action by the board of county commissioners, as consistent with Chapter 36.70A RCW. The administrator shall transmit a copy of any adopted amendment(s)to the implementing regulations to OCD within 10 days after adoption by the board. (6) Appeals. All appeals to the adoption of any amendment(s)to the implementing regulations shall be filed with and processed by the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 36.70A RCW. [Ord. 2-06 § 1] http://nt5.scbbs.com/cgi-bin/om isapi.dll?clientID=322344758&infobase jeffco1.nfo&record={5... 7/24/2007 18.45.080 Final docket—Planning commission and board of county commissioners review. (1) Planning Commission Review.All proposed amendments on the final docket shall be reviewed and assessed by the planning commission,which shall make a recommendation to the board of county commissioners after holding at least one open record public hearing. (a) Notice.The hearing before the planning commission shall be noticed by one publication in the official newspaper of the county at least 10 days prior to the date of the hearing and by posting a copy of the notice of hearing in the Jefferson County Courthouse.This notice shall include the following: (i) The purpose(s)of amending and/or updating the Comprehensive Plan; (ii) The deadline for submitting comments on the amendments;and (iii) A tentative hearing schedule;continued hearings may be held by the planning commission but no additional notices need be published. (b) Required Findings—Generally.For all proposed amendments,the planning commission shall develop fmdings and conclusions and a recommendation which consider the growth management indicators set forth in JCC 18.45.050(4)(b)(i) through(4)(b)(vii),as well as the following: (i) Whether circumstances related to the proposed amendment and/or the area in which it is located have substantially changed since the adoption of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan; (ii) Whether the assumptions upon which the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan is based are no longer valid,or whether new information is available which was not considered during the adoption process or any annual amendments of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan;and (iii) Whether the proposed amendment reflects current widely held values of the residents of Jefferson County. (c) Additional Required Findings—Formal Site-Specific Amendments.In addition to the required fmdings set forth in subsection(1)(b)of this section,in order to recommend approval of a formal site-specific proposal to amend the Comprehensive Plan,the planning commission must also make the following findings: (i) The proposed site-specific amendment meets concurrency requirements for transportation and does not adversely affect adopted level of service standards for other public facilities and services(e.g.,sheriff,fire and emergency medical services,parks,fire flow,and general governmental services); (ii) The proposed site-specific amendment is consistent with the goals,policies and implementation strategies of the various elements of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan; (iii) The proposed site specific amendment will not result in probable significant ad verse impacts to the county's transportation network,capital facilities,utilities,parks,and environmental features that cannot be mitigated,and will not place uncompensated burdens upon existing or planned service capabilities; (iv) In the case of a site-specific amendment to the land use map,that the subject parcels are physically suitable for the requested land use designation and the anticipated land use development,including,but not limited to,the following: (A) Access; (B) Provision of utilities;and (C) Compatibility with existing and planned surrounding land uses; (v) The proposed site-specific amendment will not create a pressure to change the land use designation of other properties,unless the change of land use designation for other properties is in the long-term best interests of the county as a whole; (vi) The proposed site-specific amendment does not materially affect the land use and population growth projections that are the bases of the Comprehensive Plan; (vii) If within an unincorporated urban growth area(UGA),the proposed site-specific amendment does not materially affect the adequacy or availability of urban facilities and services to the immediate area and the overall UGA; (viii) The proposed amendment is consistent with the Growth Management Act(Chapter 36.70A RCW),the County-Wide Planning Policy for Jefferson County,any other applicable inter jurisdictional policies or agreements, and any other local,state or federal laws. (d) Recommendation.The planning commission's fmdings and conclusions shall include a recommendation to the board of county commissioners that the proposed amendment(s)be denied,approved,or approved with conditions or modifications. (2) Board of County Commissioners Review—Appeals. (a) Board of County Commissioners Workshop.The board of county commissioners may first review the recommendation of the planning commission in a workshop meeting(s). (b) Board of County Commissioners Review.The board of county commissioners shall consider the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan at a regularly scheduled meeting.If after considering the matter at the regularly scheduled public meeting the board of county commissioners deems a change in the recommendation of the planning commission to be necessary,the change shall not be incorporated until the board conducts its own public hearing using the procedures set forth under JCC 18.40.310.The hearing shall be noticed by one publication in the official newspaper of the county at least 10 days prior to the date of the hearing,and by posting copies of the notice of hearing in the Jefferson County Courthouse.The notice and public hearing for proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments may be combined with any notice or public hearing for proposed amendments to the county's Comprehensive Plan implementing regulations(e.g.,this code), or for other actions of the board of county commissioners. (c) Criteria for Evaluation of Proposed Plan Amendments.The board of county commissioners shall apply the same criteria as the planning commission as set forth in subsections(1)(b)and(1)(c)of this section,as applicable. (d) Adoption by Ordinance.The board of county commissioners shall adopt any amendments to the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan by ordinance.This final action on the docket must be taken by the second regular board meeting in December of each year. (e) Transmittal to State.The administrator shall transmit a copy of any proposed amendment of the Comprehensive Plan to the Washington State Office of Community Development(OCD)at least 60 days prior to the expected date of final action by the board of county commissioners,as consistent with Chapter 36.70A RCW.The administrator shall transmit a copy of any adopted Comprehensive Plan amendment to OCD within 10 days after adoption by the board. (f) Appeals.All appeals to the adoption of an amendment to the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan shall be filed with and processed by the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 36.70A RCW. [Ord.2-06 § 1] 18.45.050 Compilation of preliminary docket. (1) Preliminary Docket—Contents.The preliminary docket described more fully in subsections(2)through(4)of this section shall consist of the following: (a) All proposals for formal site-specific amendments; (b) All proposals for suggested amendments;and (c) When applicable,all amendments recommended by the planning commission during its periodic assessment of the Comprehensive Plan. (2) List of Suggested Amendments.Each year,the administrator shall maintain for public review the annual list of suggested amendments made by citizens,the board of county commissioners or members of the board of county commissioners,county staff, county departments or other agencies.By the end of the second full business week of March of each year,this list of suggested amendments shall be compiled into a preliminary docket.JCC 18.45.060 sets forth the process for selecting which suggested amendments will be placed on the final docket to be formally reviewed during the annual review process. (3) Formal Site-Specific Amendments.The preliminary docket shall also include all formal site-specific applications for Comprehensive Plan amendments.Formal site-specific applications for amendments that are properly and timely filed under JCC 18.45.040(2)(a)shall be placed on the final docket for consideration during the current annual amendment process. (4) Planning Commission Periodic Assessment—Recommendations. (a) Periodic Assessment—Timelines.The planning commission shall review,and if necessary,recommend revisions to the Comprehensive Plan during the periodic assessment in accordance with RCW 36.70A.130.The planning commission shall complete its assessment of the Comprehensive Plan by November 1st of the year prior to the assessment.Any amendments recommended by a majority vote of the planning commission shall be forwarded to the administrator by March 1st of the year in which the periodic assessment is conducted.The administrator shall place all such recommended amendments on the preliminary docket to be considered during the final docket selection process set forth in JCC 18.45.060. (b) Criteria Governing Planning Commission Assessment.The planning commission's periodic assessment and recommendation shall be based upon,but shall not be limited to,an inquiry into the following growth management indicators: (i) Whether growth and development as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan is occurring faster or slower than anticipated,or is failing to materialize; (ii) Whether the capacity of the county to provide adequate services has diminished or increased; (iii) Whether sufficient urban land is designated and zoned to meet projected demand and need; (iv) Whether any of the assumptions upon which the plan is based are no longer found to be valid; (v) Whether changes in county-wide attitudes necessitate amendments to the goals of the plan and the basic values embodied within the Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement; (vi) Whether changes in circumstances dictate a need for amendments; (vii) Whether inconsistencies exist between the Comprehensive Plan and the GMA or the Comprehensive Plan and the County- wide Planning Policy for Jefferson County. [Ord.2-06 § 1] Y'` A GENDLER & MANN, LLP ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW Michael W.Gendler* David S. Mann 1424 FOURTH AVENUE,SUITE 1015 (206)621-8868 Lauren P. Rasmussen SEATTLE WA 98101 Fax(206)621-0512 Katherine A.George gendler®gendlermann.com www.gendlermann.com *Also admitted in Oregon March 6, 2007 SI ECEIVE0 Rose Ann Carroll rtrtrl Jefferson County Department of Community Development 001/1;1 11 621 Sheridan Street 101 Port Townsend, WA 98368 RE: Hood Canal Coalition proposed amendment to UDC.§ 18.20.240(1) Dear Ms. Carroll: Pursuant to your fax to us of March 1, 2007, enclosed please find our check for $357.00. It is our understanding pursuant to your conversation with our law.clerk Ian Mensher that the County will now proceed to process our application and that it will be regarded as received last week. It is now our understanding that a new fee schedule went into effect on January 1, 2007 and that this information was not yet available online in either the Code or on the County's web pages pertinent to citizen requests for UDC amendments. Please let us know promptly if our stated understandings regarding the fee application are not the same as those of the County. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, GENDLER&M h LLP / Michael W. Gendler MWG:den Enclosure cc: Flood Canal Coalition 7�r � U rage t or t 60go 9-J Jeanie Orr ffi From: Jeanie Orr Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 12:25 PM To: David Sullivan; John Austin; Phil Johnson; John Fischbach; Julie Matthes; David Alvarez Subject: 2007 Comp Plan Amendment Binder Importance: High Hi, in the 2007 CPA binder that each of you received, please remove and throw away the MLA 07-102 because it is a UDC amendment NOT a Comp Plan Amendment and will be handled differently. Thanks for you attention to this matter. Jeanie Planning Clerk 3/20/2007 Michelle McConnell From: Michelle McConnell Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 12:55 PM To: Al Scalf Cc: Joel Peterson; Karen Barrows; Jeanie Orr; Stacie Hoskins Subject: Gendler Mann UDC amend request Hi AI, As per our discussion during LRP staff meeting today, the following has been determined: • Gendler& Mann (GM) UDC amendment proposal was received February 28, 2007 • Proposal to prohibit mining activities in RR 1:5 zoning • MLA#07-102 was assigned • March 6, 2007 letter from GM and $357 application fee was received March 7, 2007 • Letter indicates they believe 1)they officially met the March 1 deadline by having their submittal received Feb 28 and 2) that County will proceed with processing their application. • March 20, 2007 email from Jeanie alerted the Planning Commission to remove MLA 07-102 from their Comp Plan Amendment binder since it's a UDC amendment. JCC 18.45.090 states that UDC amendments consistent with the Comp Plan can be made at any time. I'm not clear how to determine if the proposal is consistent or inconsistent. It seems we should determine when this proposal will be processed and then alert the applicant as to the timeline. Do we make a recommendation to the PC/UDC Committee and look for their response? Do we need to notify the applicant that UDC amendments follow a separate process from the CPA cycle? This may be another item of Brent's to figure out if/how to re-assign. Please advise if you'd like me to further research or take action. Thanks, Michelle Michelle McConnell,Associate Planner Shoreline Master Program Update PH 360.379.4484 Jefferson County Department of Community Development Long Range Planning Division 621 Sheridan St.,Port Townsend, WA 98368 FAX 360.379.4451 www.co.iefferson.wa.uslcommdevelopment/ShorelinePlanning.htm NOTE:All e-mail sent to/from the Jefferson County e-mail system may be subject to Public Disclosure under Chapter 42.56 RCW 1