Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Agenda 02-03-2016Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETING AGENDA Tri-Area Community Center February 3, 2016 P: 360-379-4450 621 Sheridan St. F: 360-379-4451 Port Townsend WA 98368 plancomm@co.jefferson.wa.us 6:30 pm OPENING BUSINESS • Call to Order/Roll Call • Approval of Agenda • Staff Updates • Commissioner Announcements • Approval of Minutes Aug. 5th, Sept. 2nd, Oct. 7th 6:45 pm DISCUSSION Topic Speakers Pleasant Harbor Master Plan Resort • Deliberations on making recommendations to the board on Development Regulations. • Planning Commission • David Wayne Johnson, Associate Planner, Department of Community Development 8:00 pm OBSERVER COMMENT When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name and address. Please be aware that the observer comment period is … i An optional time period dedicated to listening to the public, not a question and answer session. The Planning Commission is not required to provide response; ii Offered at the Chair’s discretion when there is time; iii Not a public hearing – comments made during this time will not be part of any hearing record; iv May be structured with a three-minute per person time limit. 8:15 pm CLOSING BUSINESS • Summary of today’s meeting • Follow-up action items • Agenda Items for February 17th meeting at 6:30 pm at the Tri-Area Community Center 8:30 pm ADJOURNMENT • Thank you for coming and participating in your government at work! 621 Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 P: 360-379-4450 F: 360-379-4451 plancomm@co.jefferson.wa.us Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETING MINUTES Tri-Area Community Center August 5, 2015 Page 1 of 2 Call to Order at 6:30 pm ROLL CALL District 1 District 2 District 3 Staff Present Coker: Present Smith: Present Brotherton: Present Carl Smith, DCD Director Felder: Present Sircely: U-Absence Giske: Present Joel Peterson, DCD Assoc. Planner Koan: Present [Vacant] Hull: E-Absence Public in Attendance: 3 Approval of Agenda: Kevin Coker approved the agenda. Approval of Minutes: Kevin Coker moved to approve the minutes for 04/15/2015, 05/20/2015 & 06/03/2015 all were approved with none opposed. STAFF UPDATES Carl Smith: Mark Jochems has interview for Commissioner this Friday to fill Patricia’s seat. Chair & Vice Chair Nominations: Elections will wait until next month with more member’s present. Nominations for Chair: Cynthia Koan and Kevin Coker. Vice Chair: Lorna Smith, Matt Sircely & Richard Hull. COMMISSIONER ANNOUNCEMENTS Comp Plan work: Brinnon Master Plan, Development Agreement & Zoning & finalization of FEIS to go to board for Approval. David W Johnson asked for a special meeting on 10/21/15 in Brinnon for that. We need a September overview meeting beforehand to address issues. Kevin attended the Joint Land Use Study Meeting: I have additional information for you and they want additional information. It was very informative with a total of nine boards reviewing, all very well versed, all input from their countless resources. Public Comment is open till 08/28/2015. Website is: kiijlus.com. Will bring numbers from Joint Growth Management Steering Committee to you. Navy Joint Land Use Study: Joel Peterson spoke. Recommendations are: It’s a community plan, NOT the Navy’s Plan. We’ve come up with a tool set of recommendations on how to avoid conflicts. See table on Page 9, it shows implementation phases. Funded by OEA, and they have needs assessment, identified tools, have a report. Have a resolution that will be useful. Phase 2 could say there could be projects or studies for additional OEA funding. Jefferson County doesn’t have issues for a new study. We may not pursue additional funding, we may in the future. Will finalize a report in September and accept comments till 08/28/15 will approach the BOCC for a resolution. Planning Commission is also welcome to provide a letter. 621 Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 P: 360-379-4450 F: 360-379-4451 plancomm@co.jefferson.wa.us Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETING MINUTES Tri-Area Community Center August 5, 2015 Page 2 of 2 OBSERVER COMMENTS: We need to know what power or authority the Navy has over our planning/building. Do they have full power? Do we have a definition of what the Navy’s mission is? You mentioned Tribes, what was discussed? You mentioned REPI Funding. Why can’t it support compliance activity by the County? Freight Overlays? Bookmark for future, I’m worried about the single access to the Indian Island. You didn’t include the Planning Commission on your announcement of a tour. We need more notice. We’re meeting Tuesday in Paulsbo, and Bremerton on 08/11/15. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE Referring to July packet: Broad Overview of Comprehensive Plan – including letter from BoCC regarding the new GMA deadline, with a calendar, flowchart & 2016 Mandatory & Potential Updates and need for discussion of overview & updates of Chapters. Carl would like us to review this Plan. Be ready to tackle first two Chapters for next month’s meeting. OBSERVER COMMENTS: If deadline is extended, can we consider making a recommendation sooner for the more urgent issue(s) of ecological housing & jobs, etc., we need to change that sooner. This will be brought up next meeting, and other more urgent things as well. Simultaneously Code Amendments will occur before our CPA. Is there thought of increasing our meeting schedule? Instead, follow this process: ONE and ONLY ONE Chapter subject for each meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT None FOLLOW-UP ITEMS First two Chapters of Comp Plan Development & Updates, keeping in mind the community priorities & any specific code issues. Next Planning Commission meeting scheduled for 09/02/2015 at 6:30 pm at the Tri-Area Community Center Adjourned at 8:28 pm These meeting minutes were approved this ____________ day of ___________________________, 2015. ________________________________________ _________ ______________________________________________________________ Kevin Coker, Chair Teresa A Smith, PC Secretary/DCD 621 Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 P: 360-379-4450 F: 360-379-4451 plancomm@co.jefferson.wa.us Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETING MINUTES Tri-Area Community Center September 2, 2015 Page 1 of 2 Call to Order at 6:30 pm ROLL CALL District 1 District 2 District 3 Staff Present Coker: Present Smith: Present Brotherton: U-Absence Carl Smith, DCD Director Felder: Present Sircely: Present Giske: E-Absence David W. Johnson, Assoc. Planner Koan: Present Jochems: Present Hull: Present Public in Attendance: 2 Approval of Agenda: Kevin Coker approved the agenda. Approval of Minutes: Kevin Coker moved to approve the minutes for 08/05/2015, all were approved with none opposed. STAFF UPDATES Carl Smith: Welcome our new Commissioner Mark Jochems. Carl Smith announced his retirement, last day is 09/25/15. David Goldsmith will be the interim DCD Director. Everyone is invited & encouraged to get involved in the new selection process. Elizabeth Williams the planning clerk is leaving. Recruiting for that position closes next week. Haylie Clement, our part time clerk, is applying for the position & will do the minutes. It’s time for a Planning Manager again as well. Chair & Vice Chair Elections: Tom Giske & Tom Brotherton are not here tonight. Nominations for Chair: Cynthia Koan and Kevin Coker. Cynthia won with 5 (five) votes. Nominations for Vice Chair: Lorna Smith, Matt Sircely & Richard Hull. Lorna won with 6 (six) votes. COMMISSIONER ANNOUNCEMENTS Comp Plan work: Brinnon Master Plan Resort & Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement we reviewed last fall, David Johnson believes the final SEIS & Development Agreement will be ready for your review. David Johnson requests that you all commit to a special meeting (a public hearing) on 11/18/15 for that presentation in Brinnon at either the Community Center or School. 621 Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 P: 360-379-4450 F: 360-379-4451 plancomm@co.jefferson.wa.us Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETING MINUTES Tri-Area Community Center September 2, 2015 Page 2 of 2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE Tonight we’re looking at Chapters 1 & 2. Cynthia advised us to look at the schedule & matrix again. Element 1 & 2 are for tonight. David Wayne Johnson will be here on October 7th with an overview of Element 4. Know that the appropriate Staff Leads will be here for their overviews. Introduction: The Comprehensive Plan is online. As we have no budget to advertise these public meetings, we could: distribute fliers or interview on local radio for public input. Email is discouraged. It’s on our website. To trim Chapter 1, staff needs to come back with recommendations i.e. move things to the appendix. The Urban Growth Element is very important. We can move a lot into the traffic section. The sewer section needs updated language. The Health element needs to move as well. Population Growth can be updated (Page 2-9), someone here needs to attend the Joint Growth Management Steering Committee. Countywide Planning Policies are on our website & you need to look at them. The septic issue in Glen Cove needs to be worked out as soon as possible. The County & City need to agree on the revenue sharing issue first. New documents for Brinnon will show updated traffic documents. The UGA population numbers are urban like, adding growth for Brinnon & Port Ludlow needs to be mentioned (population growth). Element 2: Unfunded & unfinished traffic projects, some are done, it mentioned SR 19 (some are 3 & 4 lanes) is out of date & needs to be moved to the Traffic Section. The 13 Elements and additional goals need to be moved to right up top. Public Comment: Emailed meetings in a private board setting I sit on are allowed but we’re not allowed to vote by phone so please check your bi-laws. FOLLOW-UP ITEMS Due to the anticipated amount of paperwork involved, everyone agreed to use three ring binders. Everyone needs to think up sub-committees please. Next Planning Commission meeting scheduled for 10/07/2015 at 6:30 pm at the Tri-Area Community Center Adjourned at 8:30 pm These meeting minutes were approved this ____________ day of ___________________________, 2015. ________________________________________ _________ ______________________________________________________________ Kevin Coker, Chair Teresa A Smith, PC Secretary/DCD 621 Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 P: 360-379-4450 F: 360-379-4451 plancomm@co.jefferson.wa.us Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETING MINUTES Tri-Area Community Center October 07, 2015 Page 1 of 3 Call to Order at 6:31 pm ROLL CALL District 1 District 2 District 3 Staff Present Coker: Present Smith: Present Brotherton: Present Jean Baldwin, Director, JCPHD Felder: Present Sircely: Present Giske: Present Karen Obermeyer, JCPHD Koan: Present Jochems: Present Hull: Present David W. Johnson, Associate Planner Joel Peterson, Associate Planner Public in Attendance: None in attendance Approval of Agenda: Approved the agenda by acclamation. Approval of Minutes: STAFF UPDATES Carl Smith: Pleasant Harbor Master Plan Resort: we’re close to finalizing the SEIS, however the applicant has come up with a new alternative (#3) which is a reduction in the number of holes from 18 to 12. The technical team is in the process of analyzing those changes. It pushes us back even further, also the contract is going to have to be extended for a second time. Special meeting 10/21/15 is not going to work. We’re looking at Wednesday, 11/18/15 now in Brinnon @ Community Center. Joint Growth Management Steering Committee Meeting is 1:00 on October 16th, at Pope Marine Bldg. will be looking at population projections for the Comp Plan Updates for Jefferson County & Port Townsend. ANNOUNCMENTS At last meeting I brought up the bi-laws about the number of terms for Chair & Vice Chair. I looked them up: A member shall serve no more than four consecutive years as Chair or Vice Chair. In today’s meeting with the Architecture Group for the redesign of Grant St. School. Has a long way to go. Has lofty goals of what we’d like to see happen. Current School Levy to be complete within 3 months. This Friday at JFK Bldg. at Fort Warden the collective impact group is having their Fall Community Mtg. Topic is housing. COMMISSIONER ANNOUNCEMENTS I have a meeting on 10/12/15 with David Goldsmith about: Our November 4th meeting, our Comp Plan Amendment Process, Organizing ourselves with sub-committees, planning commission member’s different strengths and interests, listing our own focuses. I’d like a sub-committee about proposing sub-committees and what we want addressed. Who will work with me before the 11/04/15 meeting? Tom, Kevin & Tom have volunteered. 621 Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 P: 360-379-4450 F: 360-379-4451 plancomm@co.jefferson.wa.us Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETING MINUTES Tri-Area Community Center October 07, 2015 Page 2 of 3 Comp Plan work: Brinnon Master Plan Resort & Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement we reviewed last fall, David Johnson believes the final SEIS & Development Agreement will be ready for your review. David Johnson requests that you all commit to a special meeting (a public hearing) on 11/18/15 for that presentation in Brinnon at either the Community Center or School. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE PRESENTATIONS: Health Element: Jean Baldwin & Karen Obermeyer from Jefferson County Public Health: The Health Department keeps demographics. We welcome you to go through this data. In 2014 – 2015 a group of community health leaders led by Jefferson Health Care & the Health Department started reviewing the Community Health Assessment Data for the last three years. When you look at health indicators, many things contribute to healthcare. We came up with four (4) things that healthcare providers could use to make a difference on:  Access to Mental Health & Substance Abuse Treatment  Healthy eating/active living/chronic disease prevention  Access to health care (senior issues, prenatal care)  Immunizations (For 25 years, Jefferson County has the most unimmunized population in the state.) Natural Resources Element: David W Johnson: Last updated in 1998. Propose updates to text, references & maps. Goals, policies & strategies need to be made compatible. NRP 4.1 Prohibits subdivisions of designated forest lands for residential purposes, allowing only one dwelling per each legal lot of record. In 2006 NRP 4.8 was written and it allows subdivisions of more than one dwelling per lot as long as they’re protected by a buffer. NRP 4.8 is law now so I’d like to strike NRP 4.1 Al Latham’s proposed changes: It appears he wants comp plan changes to reflect UDC: Pages 25 – 27 of your packet: Table 4.2 Guidelines for classification of Agricultural Resource Lands: #1 looking at criteria to designate agricultural he wants the addition of and/or soils of statewide significance (Agree). #2 historic uses for agriculture; lands which have not been used for a number of years (five)can be re-designated agricultural even though they haven’t been used for such for 5 yrs. (UDC change item, (he can speak to county commissioners & let them know the issue)) #3 existing & ongoing agriculture, table 4. 2a; agriculture uses & single family should include farm worker housing (Agreed) #4 the ability to petition & be included in the agriculture 20, the land located outside master plan resort or urban growth area (he wants this removed stating Spring Rain Farm is outside the UGA. (Not accurate) Chapter 4 (All required actions) Remove all references to mineral forest & mineral agriculture ordnances, rewrite to show connection to UDC, instead of individual ordinances, consolidate them into the UDC. Update & add section to view the latest legal guidance & legislative actions. Rewrite strategies & action items, specifically, which ones? Conduct economic study to determine what’s economically viable in the natural resource industry. (Possible strategy, action item) go to economic development council to see if any of this has already been done. David will continue work on this. 621 Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 P: 360-379-4450 F: 360-379-4451 plancomm@co.jefferson.wa.us Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETING MINUTES Tri-Area Community Center October 07, 2015 Page 3 of 3 UDC AMMENDMENT: Joel Peterson: UDC amendment & proposal: There’s a signed permit for Jefferson Transit Authority issued in 2014: They developed a 10 acre project outside the blue zone (bus barn & facilities). The question is are they invested under to old sign code or do they need to bump up to new code. JTA wants a reader board or electronic sign, which isn’t allowed. They’ve already purchased sign, before they got the permit. The new sign code broadens their ability, commercially. The contractor would like his bond released. Our sign code says they can’t have it there. A Public hearing on this is mandatory, it will be during our 11/04/15 meeting. Public Comment: FOLLOW-UP ITEMS 11/04/15 UDC Amendment/Proposal for Sign Code for JTA. Everyone please review the two packets given to you for the 11/04/15 agenda meeting Next Planning Commission meeting scheduled for 11/04/2015 at 6:30 pm at the Tri-Area Community Center Adjourned at 8:55 pm These meeting minutes were approved this ____________ day of ___________________________, 2015. ________________________________________ _________ ______________________________________________________________ Cynthia Koan, Chair Teresa A Smith, PC Secretary/DCD Pleasant Harbor Phase II Planning Commission Actions January 2016 Summary of Planning Commission actions: 1. Hold a Public Hearing and take testimony – (held January 6, 2016). Record held open until February 3, 2016. 2. Accept Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe’s request for 60 days to complete consultation with County – (accepted January 20, 2016). Tribe will advise the County on how to proceed after Tribal Council meeting on February 8, 2016. 3. Close Public Hearing record (February 3, 2016) 4. Begin deliberations (February 3, 2016) 5. Develop findings under JCC 18.45.080(b) - see below 6. Develop a recommendation to the BoCC for denial, approval, or approval with conditions for Title 17 Article II (development regulations) and sections of Title 18 on Master Planned Resorts (Highlighted sections apply) 18.45.090 Amendments to GMA implementing regulations. (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. 18.45.080 Final docket – Planning commission and board of county commissioners review. (b) Required Findings – Generally. For all proposed amendments, the planning commission shall develop findings 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 findings 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: (Not applicable – not an amendment to the Comp Plan) (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 adverse 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 findings 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. 18.45.050 Compilation of preliminary docket. (Not applicable – the proposal is not part of a period assessment or change to the Comp Plan – consistency with the Comp Plan will be determined under the findings required under JCC 18.45.080(b)) (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] -1- PLEASANT HARBOR MASTER PLANNED RESORT Title 17 MASTER PLANNED RESORTS Title 17, Article I, Port Ludlow MPR Chapters 17.05-17.50 No change Title 17, Article II, Pleasant Harbor MPR (17.60-17.80) Chapter 17.60, General Provisions 17.60.010 Authority. This title is adopted pursuant to Chapters 36.70 and 36.70A RCW, and Title 18 JCC. 17.60.020 Title. The regulations set forth in this title shall be known as the “Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort Code” or by the short title “Pleasant Harbor MPR Code.” Citations to these regulations shall be made using the applicable JCC section number. 17.60.030 Purpose and intent. The purpose and intent of the Pleasant Harbor MPR code is to set forth development regulations that comply with and are consistent with the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan for future development within the boundaries of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort Master Planned Resort. 17.60.040 Additional requirements. Title 15 and Title 18 of the Jefferson County may supplement the regulations presented in this Article in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement entered into between Jefferson County and Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, LLP. 17.60.050 Applicability. The provisions of this title shall apply to all land, all associated water areas and all uses and structures within the boundary of the Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort as depicted on the official land use map for Jefferson County, Washington. 17.60 060 Exemptions. The following structures and uses shall be exempt from the regulations of this title, but are subject to all other applicable local, state and federal regulations including, but not limited to, the county building ordinance, interim critical areas ordinance, the shoreline management master program, and the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). -2- (1) Wires, cables, conduits, vaults, pipes, mains, valves, tanks, or other similar equipment for the distribution to consumers of telephone or other communications, electricity, gas, or water or the collection of sewage, or surface or subsurface water operated or maintained by a governmental entity or a public or private utility or other county franchised utilities including customary meter pedestals, telephone pedestals, distribution transformers and temporary utility facilities required during building construction, whether any such facility is located underground, or above-ground; but only when such facilities are located in a street right-of-way or in an easement. This exemption shall not include above-ground electrical substations, sewage pump stations or treatment plants, or potable water storage tanks or facilities, which shall require conditional use approval in any zone where permitted; (2) Underground utility equipment, mailboxes, bus shelters, informational kiosks, public bicycle shelters, or similar structure or device which is found by the director of community development to be appropriately located in the public interest; (3) Minor construction activities, as defined by the IBC, Section 106.2 and structures exempt under Chapter 15.05 JCC, as amended; (4) Stormwater detention facilities associated with and accessory to new development are permitted in all zones. Any above-ground detention facility or pond shall be screened from the public right-of-way or appropriately landscaped to ensure compatibility with the surrounding area. (5) Development consistent with a Binding Site Plan approved by the County prior to adoption of this chapter. 17.60.110 Preexisting uses and structures. Existing legal residential and non residential land uses and structures in all zones of the Master Planned Resort are lawful uses and may be continued in a manner consistent with state law, Titles 15 and 18 of the Jefferson County Code and any other applicable regulations or Ordinances. 17.60.120 Provisions binding on the land. The provisions of this section shall apply to any subsequent owners, lessees, tenants or others with an interest in the property subject to the master planned resort (or any portion or parcel thereof), including but not limited to successors in interest, holders of any recorded interest recorded subsequent to the MPR approval, community associations, facility providers and special service districts operating within the MPR area. 17.60.130 Enforcement The enforcement provisions codified in Chapter 18.50 Enforcement of Title 18 of the Jefferson County Code as currently enacted or as hereafter amended shall apply to any alleged violation of Title 17, Article II, more commonly known as the “Pleasant Harbor MPR Code.” Chapter 17.65, Golf Resort (MPR-GR) 17.65.010 Purpose. The MPR-GR zone provides residential and recreational facilities, as well as commercial amenities and services associated with the resort and surrounding community. It provides the central resort and conference facilities. -3- 17.65.020 Permitted Uses. (1) Residential uses including single-family and multifamily structures, condominiums, townhouses, apartments, lofts, villas, time-share and fractionally owned accommodations of all kinds. (2) Short-term visitor accommodations, constituting not less than 65% of the total residential units authorized by Ordinance #01-0128-08, including, but not limited to hotels, motels, lodges, and any residential uses allowed under subsection 1 of this section that is made available for short-term rental. (3) Visitor oriented amenities, including, but not limited to (a) conference and meeting facilities; (b) restaurants, cafes, delicatessens, pubs, taverns and entertainment associate with such uses; (c) on-site retail services and businesses typically found in destination resorts and designed to serve the convenience needs of users and employees of master planned resort; and (d) recreation business and facilities; (4) Cultural and educational facilities of all kinds including, but not limited to, art galleries, and indoor or outdoor theaters; (5) Indoor and outdoor resort-related recreational facilities, including but not limited to golf courses (including accessory structures and facilities, such as clubhouses, practice facilities, and maintenance facilities), tennis courts, swimming pools, spa services, hiking trails, bicycle paths, ropes courses, amphitheater, and other recreational uses consistent with the nature of master planned resort; (6) Waste water treatment facilities, including treatment plants, capture, storage and transmission facilities to serve a reuse/recycle program for on-site treatment and use/reuse of waste water and stormwater; (7) Public water supply and related facilities; (8) Public facilities and services as defined in JCC 18.10.160; (9) Utilities supporting the resort; (10) Emergency services (fire, police, EMS); (11) Medical services; and (12) Other similar uses consistent with the purpose of this zone and MPR as determined by the Department of Community Development. 17.65.030 Height restrictions. No buildings within the MPR-GR zone shall be erected, enlarged or structurally modified to exceed 80 feet in height as measured by IBC standards. Underground or imbedded parking shall not be included in any height calculations. 17.65.040 Bulk and density requirements. There are no yard or setback provisions internal to the MPR-GR zone. All structures shall be set back at least 20 feet from Master Planned Resort boundary lines and adjacent MPR zones. Minimum building setback from State Route 101 is 50 feet. Chapter 17.70, Open Space Reserve (MPR-OSR ) 17.70.010 Purpose. -4- The purpose of the MPR-OSR zone is to provide a natural buffer between the resort activities and the waters of Hood Canal. The MPR-OSR zones shall extend landward 200 feet from OMHW of Hood Canal as measured under the Shoreline Management Act (Chapter 90.58 RCW) or 25 feet from the top of the bank as measured under Chapter 18.22 JCC, whichever is greater. 17.70.020 Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in the MPR-OSR zone: (1) Restoration of existing development intrusions (roads, campsites) to theit natural pre-development state; and (2) Passive recreation that does not reduce the forest canopy, increase stormwater discharge or bluff erosion. (3) Those uses consistent with the Shoreline Master Program JCC 18.25 Chapter 17.75, Marina Village (MPR-MV) 17.75.010 Purpose. The MPR-MV zone provides mixed use amenities and services associated with the marina portion of the resort and surrounding community, and provides the central support to the marina operations. 17.75.020 Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in the MPR-MV: (1) Marina and overwater structures as approved through the Jefferson County Shoreline Master Program and associated regulations Chapter 18.25 JCC; (2) Residential uses including single-family and multifamily structures, condominiums, time- share and fractionally owned accommodations of all kinds; (3) Marina Village related upland mixed use, commercial and service facilities, including open parking lots, restaurants and shops, as well as marine service facilities, marina office, yacht club and recreation facilities serving the resort and the Marina; (4) Accessory uses and structures, such as garages, carports, storage buildings and similar structures supporting marina and maritime village uses, fuel service and parking; (5) Indoor and outdoor resort-related recreational facilities, including but not limited to tennis courts, swimming pools, marinas, hiking trails, bicycle paths, ropes courses, game center and other recreational uses consistent with the nature of master planned resort.; (6) Utilities supporting the resort; (7) Infrastructure and buildings, both above and below ground, for the utilities; (8) Emergency services (fire, police, EMS); (9) Public facilities, and services serving the MPR-MV zone; (10) Medical services; and (10) Other similar uses consistent with the purpose of the this zone and MPR as determined by the Department of Community Development. 17.75.030 Height restrictions. -5- No buildings within the MPR-MV zone shall be erected, enlarged or structurally modified to exceed 35 feet in height as measured by IBC standards. Underground or imbedded parking shall not be included in any height calculations. 17.75.040 Bulk and density requirements. There are no yard or setback provisions internal to the MPR-MV zone. All new structures located within shoreline jurisdiction shall comply with the setback requirements of the County’s Shoreline Master Program as codified at Ch. 18.27 JCC Chapter 17.80, Pleasant Harbor Resort Development 17.80.010 Resort development. This section describes the “Resort Plan” for facilities to be located in the resort MPR, sets out a required environmental review process for any future resort development, and provides processes for reviewing major or minor revisions to the Resort Plan. These provisions apply to all resort and associated development within the Pleasant Harbor MPR. 17.80.020 Development cap. The Pleasant Harbor MPR in total shall have a development cap of 890 residential units provided, however, short term visitor accommodation units shall constitute not less than than 65 percent of the total units. The Pleasant Harbor MPR in total shall have a development cap of 70,000 square feet of resort commercial, retail, restaurant and conference space, not including lobbies and internal open space. 17.80.030 Resort Plan The Resort Plan for future development of properties in the Pleasant Harbor MPR means the regulations, requirements, densities and uses established in the Development Agreement between the County and Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, LLP dated [] and approved by Ordinance No. [] and as reviewed includes up to 890 residential units, approximately 70,000 square feet of commercial space, as well as infrastructure necessary to service the development. 17.80.040 Permit process for resort development. (1) A project-level supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) analyzing development under the Resort Plan is required prior to issuance of building permits for any new resort development. The applicant may choose to develop a new environmental impact statement rather than a supplement. (2) Notice of application for environmental review of the Resort Plan shall be provided to all persons or agencies entitled to notice pursuant to the land use procedures of JCC Title 18. (3) Actual building permit plans or construction drawings are not required during the SEIS process. Architectural drawings including a detailed site plan, and architectural sketches or drawings showing approximate elevations, sections, and floor plans are required, however, to ensure that the SEIS considers project-level details. (4) The department of community development may impose mitigating conditions or issue a denial of some or all of the Resort Plan based on the environmental review and using authority -6- provided pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW. Article X of Chapter 18.40 JCC shall be applicable to the permit process for resort development. (5) Following completion of the SEIS building permits may be issued, following appropriate plan review, for projects analyzed in the SEIS. (6) Actual resort development may be undertaken in phases, but only following completion of review and approval of a full resort buildout plan through the SEIS process. A phasing schedule may be proposed as part of the environmental review or may be developed at a later date. 17.80.050 Environmental review for Resort Plan development. (1) All project level applications will be given an automatic SEPA threshold Determination of Significance except where the SEPA-responsible official determines that the application results in only minor construction. A EIS or SEIS is not required if existing environmental documents adequately address environmental conditions as set forth in RCW 43.21C.034. (2) The scope of an SEIS prepared under this section shall address environmental issues identified in the Programmatic FEIS issued November 2007, together with such additional requirements as a project specific application may raise. The scope shall not change the standards of approval, however, as set forth in the development agreement and these development regulations. (3) The utility element of any subsequent phase environmental review pertaining to the Pleasant Harbor MPR shall review information on all affected utility systems, including sewer and water systems and the results of required monitoring. The effectiveness of such monitoring shall be evaluated. Supplements or changes to the monitoring and reporting systems shall be considered if necessary to ensure that water quality and water supply are adequately protected and impacts to natural resources minimized. (4) Any preliminary scope for future development within the Pleasant Harbor MPR is based on the described Resort Plan. Other elements, issues, and specific levels of detail may be included based on information available at the time the Resort Plan development application is submitted. Elements noted above may be combined in the EIS analysis to reduce duplication and narrow the focus on potentially significant adverse environmental impacts. 17.80.060 Revisions to Resort Plan. (1) Any proposed enlargement to the Pleasant Harbor MPR boundary or zone changes within the MPR shall require a Comprehensive Plan amendment and related zoning action. Such changes are outside the scope of the revision processes described below and in JCC 17.80.070 and 17.80.080. The County may approve an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan only if all requirements of the Growth Management Act (Chapter 36.70A RCW) are fulfilled. (2) The County shall accept building permits only for projects included in and consistent with the Resort Plan. A revision to the existing Resort Plan shall be submitted to the county for approval prior to the acceptance of any proposal that is inconsistent with the Resort Plans set forth in this title. Upon approval of a revision, all subsequent development proposals shall be consistent with the revised Resort Plan and development regulations. (3) Proposed revisions to the Resort Plan shall be submitted to the department of community development and the DCD director will determine whether the proposal constitutes a major or -7- minor revision. Upon making a determination, the proposed revision shall follow the appropriate process for plan revisions as outlined in JCC 17.80 060 and 17.80.070. 17.80.070 Minor revisions. (1) Minor Revisions. The county recognizes that the Resort Plan may require minor changes to facilities and services in response to changing conditions or market demand and that some degree of flexibility for the resort is needed. Minor revisions are those that do not result in a substantial change to the intent or purpose of the Resort Plan in effect. A change that satisfies the following criteria shall be deemed a minor revision for purposes of this chapter: (a) Involve no more than a ten (10) percent increase in the overall gross square footage of the Resort Plan; (b) Will not have a significantly greater impact on the environment and/or facilities than that addressed in the development plan; (c) Do not alter the boundaries of the approved plan; (d) Do not propose new uses or uses that modify the recreational nature and intent of the resort. A change to the Resort Plan may still qualify as a minor revision under this section despite its failure to satisfy one or more of the conditions (a) through (d) of this section. (2) Minor Revision Process. Applications for minor revisions shall be submitted to, and reviewed by the Jefferson County department of community development to determine if the revisions are consistent with the existing Resort Plan and Resort Plan SEIS, the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and other pertinent documents. Those proposals that satisfy the above- referenced criteria shall be deemed a minor plan revision and may be administratively approved (as a Type II decision under the land use procedures of JCC Title 18, Unified Development Code) by the director of the department of community development. Public notice of the application, the written decision, and appeal opportunities shall be provided to all persons or agencies as required by the land use procedures of JCC Title 18, Unified Development Code. Those revisions that do not comply with the provisions contained within this section shall be deemed a major revision, subject to the provisions outlined in JCC 17.80.080. 17.80.80 Major revisions. Revisions to the Resort Plan that will result in a substantial change to the resort including: changes in use, increase in the intensity of use, or in the size, scale, or density of development; or changes which may have a substantial impact on the environment beyond those reviewed in previous environmental documents, are considered to be major revisions and will require application for a revised Resort Plan. (1) Application for a Major Revision to the Resort Plan. An application shall be prepared describing the proposed revision in relation to the approved Resort Plan and providing a framework for review, analysis and mitigation of the revised development activity proposed. The Resort Plan revision proposal shall include the following information: (a) A description of how the revised Resort Plan would further the goals and policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan; (b) A description of how the Resort Plan revision complements the existing resort facilities of the MPR; -8- (c) A description of the design and functional features of the Resort Plan revision, setting out how the revision provides for unified development, integrated site design and protection of natural amenities; (d) A listing of proposed additional uses and/or proposed changes to density and intensity of uses within the resort, and a discussion of how these changes meet the needs of residents of the Pleasant Harbor MPR and patrons of the resort; (e) A description and analysis of the environmental impacts associated with the proposed revision, including an analysis of the cumulative impacts of both the proposed revision and the approved Resort Plan, and their effects on surrounding properties and/or public facilities; (f) A description of how the proposed Resort Plan revision is integrated with the overall Pleasant Harbor MPR and any features, such as connections to trail systems, natural systems or greenbelts, that have been established to retain and enhance the character of the resort and the overall MPR; (g) A description of the intended phasing of development projects; (h) Maps, drawings, illustrations, or other materials necessary to assist in understanding and visualizing the design and use of the completed proposed development, its facilities and services, and the protection of critical areas; (i) A calculation of estimated new demands on capital facilities and services and their relationship to the existing resort and MPR demands, including but not limited to transportation, water, sewer and stormwater facilities; and a demonstration that sufficient facilities and services to support the development are available or will be available at the time development permits are applied for. (2) Major Revision Process. Major revisions shall be processed as a hearing examiner decision (Type III), with a required public hearing prior to the decision. Public notice of the application, the written decision, and appeal opportunities shall be provided to all persons on the Pleasant Harbor MPR roster (see JCC 17.60.070) and such other persons or agencies as required by the land use procedures of JCC Title 18, Unified Development Code. Any proposed major revision involving a change to the boundaries of the MPR zone shall require a Comprehensive Plan amendment (a Type V county commissioners decision) prior to any decision on the Resort Plan amendment. (3) Decision Criteria. The hearing examiner may approve a major revision to the Resort Plan only if all the following criteria are met: (a) The proposed revision would further the goals and policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan; (b) No unmitigated probable significant adverse environmental impacts would be created by the proposed revision; (c) The revision is consistent with all applicable development regulations, including those established for critical areas; (d) On-site and off-site infrastructure (including but not limited to water, sewer, storm water and transportation facilities) impacts have been fully considered and mitigated; (e) The proposed revision complements the existing resort facilities, meets the needs of residents and patrons, and provides for unified development, integrated site design, and protection of natural amenities. -9- Title 18 UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE Chapter 18.15 Land Use Districts 18.15.025 Master planned resort. Per RCW 36.70A.360, a new master planned resort means a self-contained and fully integrated development with primary focus on resort destination facilities that includes short-term visitor accommodations associated with a range of indoor and outdoor recreational facilities within the property boundaries in a setting of significant natural amenities. A resort may include other residential uses, but only if the residential uses are integrated into and support the on-site recreational nature of the resort. (1) Port Ludlow. Port Ludlow Master Planned Resort (MPR). The first only existing officially designated master planned resort in the county is the Port Ludlow MPR, which is designated in accordance with RCW 36.70A.362 as an existing master planned resort and is subject to the provisions of JCC Title 17. The master planned resort of Port Ludlow is characterized by both single-family and multifamily residential units with attendant recreational facilities including a marina, resort and convention center. The master planned resort of Port Ludlow also includes a large residential community. The entire resort is served by a village commercial center, which accommodates uses limited to serving the resort and local population. The master planned resort's internal regulations and planning restrictions such as codes, covenants and restrictions may be more restrictive than the requirements in JCC Title 17. However, Jefferson County does not enforce private codes, covenants and restrictions. (2) Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort. Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort is the second officially designated master planned resort in the County. The Pleasant Harbor MPR is designated in accordance with RCW 36.70A.360 as a new master planned resort and is subject to the provisions of JCC Title 17. The Pleasant Harbor MPRis characterized by a golf course resort facility south of Black Point Road and a marina/Maritime Village and associated housing north of Black Point Road. The resort is predominately designed to serve resort and recreation uses and has only limited full-time occupancy. The resort is served by the Brinnon Rural Center, which accommodates LAMIRD-scale commercial uses serving the resort and local population. The master planned resort's internal regulations and planning restrictions such as codes, covenants and restrictions may be more restrictive than the requirements in JCC Title 17. However, Jefferson County does not enforce private codes, covenants and restrictions. 18.15.115 Designation. "Master planned resort" (MPR) is a land use designation established under the Comprehensive Plan. The only existing officially designated master planned resorts in the county areis the Port Ludlow MPR and the Pleasant Harbor MPR, provisions for which are codified in JCC Title 17. The Port Ludlow MPR is adopted pursuant to RCW 36.70A.362 regarding designation of existing master planned resorts. Pleasant Harbor MPR is adopted pursuant to RCW 36.70A.360 pertaining to new Master Planned Resorts. Designation of any new master planned resorts pursuant to RCW 36.70A.360 requires compliance with the provisions of this article and a formal site-specific amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map subject to the findings required by JCC 18.45.080. -10- 18.15.120 Purpose and intent. Jefferson County has a wide range of natural features, including climate, vegetation, water, natural resources, scenic qualities, cultural, and geological features, which are desirable for a wide range of recreational users to enjoy. New master planned resorts authorized by RCW 36.70A.360 offer an opportunity to utilize these special features for enjoyment and recreational use, while bringing significant economic diversification and benefits to rural communities. The purpose of this article is to establish a master planned resort land use district to be applied to those properties the board of county commissioners determines are appropriate for development as a master planned resort consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies and RCW 36.70A.360. 18.15.123 Allowable uses. The following uses may be allowed within a master planned resort classification authorized in compliance with RCW 36.70A.360: (1) All residential uses including single-family and multifamily structures, condominiums, time-share and fractionally owned accommodations; provided, such uses are integrated into and support the on-site recreational nature of the master planned resort. (2) Short-term visitor accommodations, including, but not limited to, hotels, motels, lodges, and other residential uses, that are made available for short-term rental; provided, that short-term visitor accommodations shall constitute no less than 65 percent of the total resort accommodation units. 3) Indoor and outdoor recreational facilities and uses, including, but not limited to, golf courses (including accessory structures and facilities, such as clubhouses, practice facilities, and maintenance facilities), tennis courts, swimming pools, marinas, hiking and nature trails, bicycle paths, equestrian facilities, sports complexes, and other recreational uses deemed to be consistent with the on-site recreational nature of the master planned resort. (4) Campgrounds and recreational vehicle (RV) sites. (5) Visitor-oriented amenities, including, but not limited to: (a) Eating and drinking establishments; (b) Meeting facilities; (c) On-site retail businesses and services which are designed to serve the needs of the users such as gas stations, espresso stands, beauty salons and spas, gift shops, art galleries, food stores, real estate/property management offices; and (d) Recreation-oriented businesses and facilities such as sporting goods and outdoor equipment rental and sales. (6) Cultural and educational facilities, including, but not limited to, interpretative centers and exhibits, indoor and outdoor theaters, and museums. (7) Capital facilities, utilities and services to the extent necessary to maintain and operate the master planned resort. (8) Temporary and/or permanent structures to serve as sales offices. (9) Any other similar uses deemed by the administrator to be consistent with the purpose and intent of this section, the Comprehensive Plan policies regarding master planned resorts, and RCW 36.70A.360. 18.15.126 Requirements for master planned resorts. -11- An applicant for an MPR project must meet the following requirements: (1) Master Plan. A master plan shall be prepared for the MPR to describe the project and provide a framework for project development and operation. This shall include: (a) A description of the setting and natural amenities that the MPR is being situated to use and enjoy, and the particular natural and recreational features that will attract people to the area and resort. (b) A description of the destination resort facilities of the MPR, including short-term visitor accommodations, on-site outdoor and indoor recreational facilities, off-site recreational opportunities offered or provided as part of the resort's services, and commercial and supportive services provided. (c) A listing of the proposed allowable uses and maximum densities and intensities of use of the MPR and a discussion of how these uses and their distribution meet the needs of the resort and its users. (d) A land use map or maps that depict the completed MPR development, showing the full extent and ultimate development of the MPR or resort and its facilities and services, including residential and nonresidential development types and location. (e) A description, with supportive information and maps, of the design and functional features that provide for a unified development, superior site design and protection of natural amenities, and which further the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. This shall address how landscaping, screening, and open space, recreational facilities, road and parking design, capital facilities, and other components are integrated into the project site. (f) A description of the environmentally sensitive areas of the project and the measures that will be employed for their protection. For an MPR adjacent to the water and subject to the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act, a description and supportive materials or maps indicating proposed public access to the shoreline area pursuant to the Shoreline Master Program. (g) A description of how the MPR relates to surrounding properties, and how its design and arrangement minimize adverse impacts and promote compatibility among land uses within the development and adjacent to the development. (h) A demonstration that sufficient facilities and service which may be necessary, appropriate, or desirable for the support of the development will be available, and that concurrency requirements of the Comprehensive Plan will be met. (i) A description of the intended phasing of development of the project, if any. The initial application for an MPR shall provide sufficient detail for the phases such that the full intended scope and intensity of the development can be evaluated. This shall also discuss how the project will function at interim stages prior to completion of all phases of the project, and how the project may operate successfully and meet its environmental protection, concurrency, and other commitments should development cease before all phases are completed. (2) Development Agreement. A master planned resort shall require approval of a development agreement as authorized by Article XI of Chapter 18.40 JCC (Development Agreements), and RCW 36.70B.170 through 36.70B.210. Consistent with JCC 18.40.830(3) and RCW 36.70B.170, the development agreements shall be prepared by the applicant and must set forth the development standards applicable to the development of a specific master planned resort, which may include, but are not limited to: -12- (a) Permitted uses, densities and intensities of uses, and building sizes; (b) Phasing of development, if requested by the applicant; (c) Procedures for review of site-specific development plans; (d) Provisions for required open space, public access to shorelines (if applicable), visitor-oriented accommodations, short-term visitor accommodations, on-site recreational facilities, and on-site retail/commercial services; (e) Mitigation measures imposed pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW, and other development conditions; and (f) Other development standards including those identified in JCC 18.40.840 and RCW 36.70B.170(3). (3) Formal Site-Specific Comprehensive Plan Amendment. A master planned resort shall require a site-specific amendment of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to a master planned resort land use designation, pursuant to the requirements of JCC 18.45.040; provided, that the subarea planning process authorized under Article VII of Chapter 18.15 JCC (Subarea Plans) and JCC 18.45.030 may be used if deemed appropriate by both the applicant and the county. The Comprehensive Plan amendment or subarea plan may be processed by the county concurrent with the review of the resort master plan and development agreement required for approval of a master planned resort. (4) Planned Actions. If deemed appropriate by the applicant and the county, a master planned resort project may be designated by the county as a planned action pursuant to the provisions of RCW 43.21C.031 and WAC 197-11-164 and 197-11-168. (5) Self-Contained Development. All necessary supportive and accessory on-site urban-level commercial and other services should be contained within the boundaries of the MPR, and such services shall be oriented to serve the MPR. New urban or suburban development and land uses are prohibited outside the boundaries of a master planned resort, except in areas otherwise designated as urban growth areas in compliance with RCW 36.70A.110. 18.15.129 Application requirements and approval process. New MPR applications shall be processed as Type V permits under this UDC, requiring legislative approval by the board of county commissioners and the following: (1) A draft of the master plan shall be prepared to meet the requirements of JCC 18.15.126(1). (2) A request for authorization of a development agreement, pursuant to the requirements of JCC 18.15.126(2) and Article XI of Chapter 18.40 JCC (Development Agreements). (3) A request for a site-specific Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map amendment necessary to meet the requirement of JCC 18.15.126(3) and 18.45.040. [Ord. 8-06 § 1] 18.15.132 Decision-making authority. (1) The planning commission, pursuant to its authority specified under JCC 18.40.040 and 18.45.080, shall hear and make recommendations on master plans and site-specific applications for MPR land use designations on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. (2) The board of county commissioners, pursuant to its authority specified under JCC 18.40.040, 18.40.850(5) and 18.45.080, shall designate new master planned resort land use districts on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, approve the uses, densities, conditions and standards authorized for site-specific MPRs in a development agreement, and approve master plans. -13- 18.15.135 Criteria for approval. An application to develop any parcel or parcels of land as an MPR may be approved, or approved with modifications, if it meets all of the criteria below. If no reasonable conditions or modifications can be imposed to ensure that the application meets these criteria, then the application shall be denied. (1) The master plan is consistent with the requirements of this article and Article VI-D of this chapter (Environmentally Sensitive Areas District (ESA)). (2) The MPR is consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, the requirements of the Shoreline Master Program, and complies with all other applicable sections of this code and all other codes and policies of the county. (3) If an MPR will be phased, each phase contains adequate infrastructure, open space, recreational facilities, landscaping and all other conditions of the MPR sufficient to stand alone if no subsequent phases are developed. (4) The MPR will provide active recreational uses, adequate open space, and sufficient services such as transportation access, public safety, and social and health services, to adequately meet the needs of the guests and residents of the MPR. (5) The MPR will contain within the development all necessary supportive and accessory on- site urban-level commercial and other services, and such services shall be oriented to serve the MPR. (6) Environmental considerations are employed in the design, placement and screening of facilities and amenities so that all uses within the MPR are harmonious with each other, and in order to incorporate and retain, as much as feasible, the preservation of natural features, historic sites, and public views. (7) All on-site and off-site infrastructure and service impacts have been fully considered and mitigated. (8) Improvements and activities are located and designed in such a manner as to avoid or minimize adverse effects of the MPR on surrounding lands and property. (9) The master plan establishes location-specific standards to retain and enhance the character of the resort. (10) The land proposed for a master planned resort is better suited and has more long-term importance for the MPR than for the commercial harvesting of timber or production of agricultural products, and the MPR will not adversely affect adjacent agricultural or forest resource land production. [Ord. 8-06 § 1] 18.15.138 Port Ludlow Master Planned Resort. The Port Ludlow Master Planned Resort Code (JCC Title 17), as may be amended to be consistent with the provisions of this UDC, is hereby adopted by reference and made a part of this UDC.