HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Agenda 10-01-2014 Jefferson County
Planning C0mmission
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 AGENDA
Tri-Area Community Center
October 1, 2014
6:30 PM A. OPENING BUSINESS:
•Call to Order – Richard Hull, Vice Chair
•Roll Call & Quorum of Members
•Approval of Agenda
•Approval of 08/06 Meeting Minutes
•Staff Updates
•Commissioner Announcements
6:45 PM Observer Comment
7:00 PM B. CONTINUED BUSINESS:
1.Comprehensive Plan Update
a.FEMA Biological Opinion……………………..pages 4-9
b.Navy Joint Land Use Study (JLUS)……..…pages 10-11
c.Population Projections………………………..pages 12-19
d.Afforable Housing……………………………….pages 20-21
e.Transportation Plan…………………………….pages 22-24
f.Capital Facilities…………………………………..page 24
g.Essential Public Facilities………………….….page 24
h.Climate Change……………………………………pages 25-35
i.County-Wide Planning Policies (CWPP).page 36
2.Unified Development Code (UDC) Amendments
a.Agriculture in Critical Areas………………...verbal
b.Affordable Housing………………………….…...pages 20-21
c.In-Lieu Fee…………………………………….….…..pages 37-39
8:15 PM C. CLOSING BUSINESS:
•Summary of today’s meeting –
Follow-up action items
•Agenda items for next meeting –
November 5, 2014 at 6:30 pm at Tri-Area Community Center
8:30 PM D. ADJOURNMENT
OBSERVER COMMENT
We encourage public participation and
welcome comments submitted anytime in
writing or by email at the address shown
above. We want to hear your ideas or
concerns.
The Observer Comment Period on the
agenda is:
•An optional time period dedicated to
listening to the public – Planning
Commission is not required to provide
response;
•Offered at the Chair’s discretion when
there’s time;
•Not a public hearing – comments made
during this time will not be part of any
hearing record;
•May be structured with a three-minute
per person time limit.
When the Chair recognizes you to speak,
please begin by stating your name and
address.
Audience members are asked to avoid
disrupting the business being conducted
and are welcome to interact informally
with Planning Commissioners before or
after the meeting and during the break.
Please silence cell phones
and other devices
j.Agriculture in Critical Areas………………...verbal
2016 Mandatory Updates
Proposed Update Staff
Lead
Strategy to Accomplish Initial Discussion
at PC Meeting (estimate)
Comp Plan Updates
1.Existing and on-going agriculturein critical areas Carl /Donna Work with stakeholder groups and individuals to craft potential solutions to bring to the Planning Commission for comp plan goals and policies as
well as UDC text amendments.
August
2.Compliance with the FEMA
Biological Opinion
Stacie/
Donna
Prepare UDC text amendment in Title 15 to articulate this new
requirement to document mitigation requirements in FEMA floodplains.
September
October
3.Navy Joint Land Use Study –Planning adjacent to MilitaryBases
Joel Prepare comp plan policy supporting any BOCC supported recommendations from the JLUS. Note: the study may not be complete in time for any specific recommendations for the 2016 comp plan
update.
September October
4.Consistency updates
4.1 Population projections & land
use consistency
Carl Use OFM population projections to confirm growth split between City of
PT and County. Assess available land use to accommodate pop. projections
September
October
4.2 Housing: incorporate Housing Action Plan Stacie/ Anna Review goals and strategies not yet accomplished and incorporate October
4.3 Capital Facilities Plan Stacie/
Tim/ Zoe
Ann
Work with Public Works to update November
October
5.Transportation Plan (motorizedand non-motorized plans)Stacie/ Tim/ Zoe Ann
Work with Public Works to update and include all relevant plans as appropriate including Quimper Peninsula Transportation Study and Model, Travel Demand Model Documentation, 6-Year TIP, County
Transportation projects and Active Transportation (2010 Non-Motorized Transportation & Recreational Trails Plan
November October
6.Essential public facilities list Stacie/ Tim/ Zoe
Ann
Work with Public Works to update November October
7.Confirm consistency of County
Wide Polices with Jeffco andGMA
Stacie/
Carl Present CWPP to PC. Need to confirm the update is not inconsistent
with policies.
October
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 1 of 39
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan & Development Regulation Updates
Planning Commission Meeting of 10/1/14
8.Confirm consistency with comp
plan elements with each other.
Carl Ongoing confirmation as we discuss each proposed change/update. October
9.Confirm consistency of our comp
plan with those of neighboringjurisdictions
Elizabeth Provide opportunity to neighboring jurisdictions to review our comp plan
and comment.
October
10.Incorporate new subdivision
approval time periods from State
Stacie/
Tim
Review state law and draft line-in/line-out for inclusion in update October
11.Strengthen policy on adequatefacilities for LAMIRDS Carl Review existing comp plan policies and consider additional policies supporting economic opportunity, community development and
environmental protection for LAMIRDS in ways that meet GMA
requirements.
September October
UDC Updates
12.CAO/ag Carl/
Donna/
Stacie
Prepare code amendments to protect critical areas in agricultural areas
while also supporting the vitality of agriculture.
September
October
13.Time limits on land useapplications Stacie/ Tim Draft line-in/line-out for inclusion in update October
14.New sign code regs (when
adopted)
Carl Development Code update can be considered independent of the
annual cycle.
TBD
15.Pleasant Harbor MPR
development regs (when
adopted)
David Pursue public process through Planning Commission outside of the CP
& DR update – Changes to the development regulations are not required
to be reviewed during the annual cycle.
October
16.“In lieu fee” program regs Donna Line-in/Line-out draft prepared as part of the ILF grant – will present to PC September October
17.Housekeeping items Stacie/ Tim Review docket of staff items noted over the years to correct and prepare line-in-line out to address them. November
Community Supported Ideas
18.Affordable housing- HousingAction Plan Stacie/ Anna DCD to craft policies to address community expressed concerns. October
19.Climate Change Stacie/
Anna
DCD to draft policies to address community expressed concerns. October
20.Food Resiliency Stacie/
David
DCD to draft policies to address community expressed concerns. Talk to
Laura Lewis and others w/Food sustainability initiative.
November
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 2 of 39
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan & Development Regulation Updates
Planning Commission Meeting of 10/1/14
21.Economic Development Carl DCD to draft policies to address community expressed concerns. Talk to
Team Jefferson.
November
22.Bike/pedestrian trails Stacie/
Zoe Ann/ Tim
DCD to draft policies to address community expressed concerns. November
Procedural Steps
County’s annual amendment cycle for comp plan Carl Stay in compliance with required steps for public notification and PC and BOCC review process. On-going
Dept of Commerce grant compliance Carl DCD has a grant from Commerce to assist with comp plan update. Regular reports and deliverables are required. N/A
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 3 of 39
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan & Development Regulation Updates
Planning Commission Meeting of 10/1/14
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
1
0
/
0
1
/
2
0
1
4
P
a
g
e
4
o
f
3
9
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
1
0
/
0
1
/
2
0
1
4
P
a
g
e
5
o
f
3
9
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
1
0
/
0
1
/
2
0
1
4
P
a
g
e
6
o
f
3
9
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
1
0
/
0
1
/
2
0
1
4
P
a
g
e
7
o
f
3
9
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
1
0
/
0
1
/
2
0
1
4
P
a
g
e
8
o
f
3
9
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
1
0
/
0
1
/
2
0
1
4
P
a
g
e
9
o
f
3
9
3.Comprehensive Plan Update – Joint Land Use Study (JLUS)Joel Peterson v.9/23/2014
Purpose
The Growth Management Act prohibits land use and development that is incompatible with military
installations (RCW 36.70A.530). The Joint Land Use Study is a collaborative public planning process
between area Navy installations and effected local jurisdictions whose purpose is to ensure
compatibility between land use planning and navy missions. The study includes areas in proximity to
Indian Island Naval Magazine, Naval Base Kitsap, Bangor, Manchester fuel depot, Keyport submarine
base. Planning jurisdictions include the Navy; Jefferson, Mason, and Kitsap counties; and Cities of
Bremerton, Poulsbo, Port Orchard and Port Townsend.
Current Status of the Study and Comprehensive Plan Update
JLUS Public Outreach Meeting #1 has been held to identify and review planning issues of concern.
Approximately three additional outreach meetings will be held through the next six months. The
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan is silent on specific planning strategies with the Navy.
Currently, the project will have only draft planning strategies at the time that comprehensive plan
amendments are due. Goals and Policies statements, and some specific Strategies and Action Items, can
be implemented in this 2016 Comprehensive Plan update.
Study Timeline
•Jun-Aug 2014: Issues Identification
•Nov-Dec 2014: Conflict / Compatibility Analysis
•Feb-Mar 2015: Draft Resolution Strategies & Plan
•Apr-Jun 2015: Review and finalize Plan
Work Product
The Joint Land Use Study will conclude in with a strategic plan containing recommendations and
implementation metrics for short—mid—and long range priorities.
Chapters Affected by Proposed Changes
Many of the Study outcomes will be applicable to the interrelated chapters of the Comprehensive Plan,
including:
Chapter 2 – Urban Growth Area Element
Chapter 3 – Land Use and Rural Element (Rural Commercial Areas – Chimacum Corners)
Chapter 4 – Natural Resource Conservation Element
Chapter 6 – Open Space, Parks and Recreation, and Historic Preservation Element
Chapter 7 – Economic Development Element
Chapter 10 – Transportation Element
Chapter 12 – Capital Facilities Element
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 10 of 39
Examples Indicating Direction We’re Going
Goal:
•Provide for the orderly development of urban and rural land uses that do not conflict with
military installations.
Policies:
•Provide Level of Service commensurate with safety needs along transportation corridors.
•Recognize and assist with resource protection and open space opportunities which will help to
conserve managed forest resources and lessen potential land use incompatibility.
Action
•Include the Navy in agency comment referrals for specific types of projects.
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 11 of 39
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Carl Smith, Director
RE: Population projections for the Comp Plan Update
DATE: Oct. 1, 2014
______________________________________________________________________________________
One important thing to update in the comp plan are population projections for the next 20 year planning
period; from 2015 to 2035. Population growth affects many other aspects of the comp plan, for
instance the need for infrastructure, housing, and transportation.
Attachment A shows the current population estimates from the comp plan (Table 3-1).
Attachment B shows draft population estimates, developed by staff based on official projections from
the State Office of Financial Management (OFM).
Comparing the two projections, it is clear that the draft new projections predict less growth by 2035 than
the current comp plan predicts by 2024.
Attachments C and D respectively, show population projections produced annually by OFM and the
special long term projections by OFM done specifically for comp plan updates.
Staff looks forward to discussing this topic with the Planning Commission at the October 1 meeting.
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 12 of 39
JEFFERSON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
621 Sheridan Street | Port Townsend, WA 98368 | Web: www.co.jefferson.wa.us/communitydevelopment
Tel: 360.379.4450 | Fax: 360.379.4451 | Email: dcd@co.jefferson.wa.us
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Building Permits & Inspections | Development Consistency Review | Long Range Planning | Watershed Stewardship Resource Center
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 13 of 39
A B C D E F G
2010 Pop
Total
unicorpo
rated
County
% of total
2010 Pop
2015 Pop
projections
2025 Pop
projections
2035 pop
projections
2015-2035
Total
growth
by area
Port Townsend UGA**9,113 30.5 9,578 10,580 11,687 2,109
Irondale/Hadlock UGA*3,580 3,580 12 3,656 4,041 4,550 894
Port Ludlow MPR*2,603 2,603 8.7 2,651 2,930 3,299 648
Unincorporated County 14,576 14,576 47.8 14,564 16,098 18,123 3,559
County-wide totals
estimated by percent
of sub-area totals 29,872 100 30,449 33,649 37,659 7,210
***Source: OFM 29,872 20,759 30,468 33,678 37,914 7,445
*Source: 2010 U.S. Census
** Source: City of Port
Townsend
Attachment B
Jefferson County and City of Port Townsend 20-Year Population Projection and Distribution: 2015-2035
Draft 9-5-14
C:\Users\elizabethw\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\H3AZL4SN\2035 pop estimate (9-5-14)
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 14 of 39
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 15 of 39
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 16 of 39
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 17 of 39
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 18 of 39
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 19 of 39
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan: With the GMA Periodic Update, we’ll need to update
the housing data, demographics and population projections. See Chapter 5, Housing, of the
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. These goals and policies strongly support the goal of
providing affordable housing.
The Port Hadlock/Irondale Urban Growth Area (UGA) remains the #1 priority for the county
planning to provide affordable housing. The Growth Management Act directs growth to UGAs,
and the city of Port Townsend is the only UGA in Jefferson County so far able to build at urban
densities. The Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA will be able to develop at urban densities once sewer
is available.
Housing providers such as Habitat For Humanity are building single family residences in
unincorporated Jefferson County on smaller legal nonconforming lots.
Housing Action Plan: Jefferson County worked with the City and others to develop the Housing
Action Plan. Status of tasks identified for county lead:
•Hadlock Sewer – HAPN task 23 Develop public sewer systems – The project has been
designed and permitting is going through DCD for the Conditional Use Permit. The county
would like to obtain funding to construct the system within the next five years.
o Irondale/Port Hadlock UGA zoning map HAPN task 8 – have minimum density
zoning req w/UGA per JCC 18.18
o Sewer Service area with Phase I
•Waiver process, Resolution 74-95 – HAPN task 18 Establish progressive building/permit
fees. County would need to find a funding source to compensate department reviews per
resolution to provide waivers.
•County owned lands – staff created a map of Port Townsend, Port Hadlock/Irondale county
owned lands. The RCW allows cities to give property to affordable housing but not
counties. Some counties have given property to the respective city who may then give it to
an affordable housing provider. Affordable housing providers may approach the county with
proposals to purchase land. The county is not in a position to gift properties and would
need compensation.
•Economic Development – HAPN task 3 – The County worked with the City & Port –
designated the ADO (Team Jefferson) and created an economic development strategy.
•Bonus density allowed for affordable housing – HAPN task 19 – This already exists in the JCC
for Planned Rural Residential Developments JCC 18.15 Article VI-M –
o 20% bonus density for Affordable housing w/additional 20% if have critical areas
in the reserve tract.
•Minimum density zoning - HAPN 8 – This already exist in the JCC 18.18.050 Table 3A-2
Density and Dimensional Standards for residentially zoned areas in the UGA
Addressing the UDC:
•Address Farm Worker Housing – Permanent and Seasonal
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 20 of 39
Jefferson County Housing Information
September 24, 2014
•Update Multifamily Housing in JCC 18.15.040 Use Table 3-1
o Residential care facilities with up to 5 persons would be changed to up to 6
persons. The current “yes” use for Rural Residential, Rural Village Center zones
and General Crossroad stay the same.
o Residential care facilities with 6 to 20 person would be changed to 7 to 20
persons. The current “conditional” use in rural residential zones and a “yes” in
Rural Village Center zones would stay the same.
o This would observe the definition for “adult family home,” in RCW 70.128.010,
“a residential home in which a person or persons provide personal care, special
care, room, and board to more than one but not more than six adults who are
not related by blood or marriage to the person or persons providing the
services.”
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 21 of 39
Jefferson County Housing Information
September 24, 2014
www.co.jefferson.wa.us
Helpful resources to review, incorporate and reference when updating the Transportation Element of the Jefferson
County Comprehensive Plan:
Jefferson County Public Works Transportation Planning Mission Statement
To imagine, plan and create together with the community an integrated, sustainable transportation system that
effectively and efficiently moves people and goods, shapes urban and rural form, and contributes to economic
vitality and quality of life.
Transportation Element: Chapter 10
Jefferson County Public Works Transportation Planning webpage contains
helpful information and links to become familiar with Transportation Plan-
ning.
Travel Demand Model (October 2008) was created for Jefferson County to
assist in the analysis of future transportation system needs and alternatives
on the Quimper Peninsula.
Quimper Transportation Study (January 2012)
The study evaluates the existing and future transportation conditions on the
Quimper Peninsula, specifically focusing on the Irondale and Port Hadlock
UGA. The evaluation focuses on the street system, traffic controls, traffic
volumes, and traffic operations of the major roadways and intersections in
the study area. The recommended improvements were sorted into three
categories:
Intersection which include construction of left-turn lanes, right-turn lanes,
refuge/merge lanes, roundabouts, and traffic signals.
Roadway which include construction of new roadways, extending and/or re
constructing existing roadways, adding truck climbing/passing lanes,
and realigning roadways.
Access Management Improvements include circulation road improvements,
driveway consolidations, median treatments, restricted turn
movements, improved pedestrian crossing, and targeted intersection
improvements.
SR 19/SR20 Corridor Plan: SR 104 to Port Townsend Ferry Terminal (February 2011)
Washington State Department of Transportation prepared this plan in coop-
eration with Jefferson County Public Works, City of Port Townsend, and other users of the route to identify ways
to reduce congestion and increase safety. The final recommendations are broken down into four categories:
Tier1 recommendations focus on low-cost projects that may deliver a high return on capital investment.
(examples: SR 19/Prospect Avenue, SR 19/Chimacum-Center)
Jefferson County, WA Public Works
September 19, 2014
623 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368
Comprehensive Plan Update: Transportation Element
360.385.9160
Planning Commission Meeting
October 1, 2014
Transportation
Improvement
Program
2015—2020
The Six‐Year Transportation Improvement
Program 2015‐2020 prioritizes projects iden‐
tified on this map. For project specifics, visit
the Transportation Planning webpage at
http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/publicworks/
trans_planning.asp
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 22 of 39
www.co.jefferson.wa.us
Planning Commission Meeting
October 1, 2014
Tier 2 recommendations focus on moderate to higher cost improvements that reduce congestion on both highways
and local roads. (example: SR20/Port Townsend Entryway Discovery-Mill/Jacob Miller Vicinity, SR 19/
SR116
Tier 3 recommendations focus on the highest-cost projects that can deliver corridor-wide benefits. (example: SR
20/SR 19 to Discovery-Mill Widening to Divided 4-Lanes)
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) and Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) is an umbrella term
for strategies that reduce vehicle trips or shift use of the roadway to off peak periods. (example: ITS Highway
Advisory Radio signs and transmitter in vicinity of Chimacum-Center)
Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP): The 2015-2020 Six-Year TIP was adopted by the Board
of County Commissioners after a public hearing on September 15, 2014.
Washington State law requires the annual adoption of a six-year transportation improvement program (6-yr TIP)
after a public hearing. The purpose of the law is to "assure that each county shall perpetually have available ad-
vanced plans looking to the future for not less than six years as a guide in carrying out a coordinated transporta-
tion program" (RCW 36.81.121(1)).
Jefferson County Non-Motorized Transportation & Recreational Trails Plan (2010): The Plan guides the
County’s development of non-motorized transportation facilities and multi-purpose trails, including:
Larry Scott Trail and the Rick Tollefson Trail
Safe routes for walking to school
Sidewalks in commercial areas, roadway shoulders, and community trails
Pedestrian and bicycle connections to transit routes
Bicycle commuting routes
Regional facilities such as the Olympic Discovery Trail
Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization (PRTPO): After adoption the PRTPO will re-
view the Transportation Element for consistency with the Regional Transportation Plan.
623 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368
Comprehensive Plan Update: Transportation Element
360.385.9160
Contact:
Zoe Ann Lamp, AICP – Transportation Planner
email: zlamp@co.jefferson.wa.us
phone: 360-385-9162
The Queets Bridge on Clearwater Road in West Jefferson
County with a new coat of paint, a project completed in
January, 2014.
September 19, 2014
Jefferson County, WA Public Works
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 23 of 39
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
•Update page 10-1 to reflect amendment dates.
•Update sewer facility status.
•Amend the “Introduction” to reflect current dates, maintain substance.
•Verify figures for “Vehicular Traffic-Level of Service”
•Revise “Transit Level of Service” to reflect current numbers. Maintain substance.
•Amend existing conditions, LOS, and recommendations to reflect the findings and
recommendations of the Quimper Peninsula Transportation Study (QPTS), 2012.
•Update Traffic Safety Tables to current year.
•Update Transit Ridership Tables for reflect current statistics.
•Update Airport section to reflect current numbers and amend to reflect the 2014 Airport Master
Plan.
•Amend Non Motorized to reflect the 2010 Plan. Recommend dropping “Active Transportation”
and use standard “Non-Motorized”.
•Update capacity analysis using QPTS, 2012.
•Revise Goals and Policies to reflect actions that have been taken with the verbiage that covers
monitoring and updating as appropriate. -
ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES
•Incorporate any changes necessitated by the 2014 Airport Master Plan.
•Amend Goals and Policies to reflect actions that have been taken with verbiage that covers
monitoring and updating as appropriate.
CAPITAL FACILITIES
•Update Purpose to reflect status to date.
•Update growth projections.
•Update population growth assumptions to reflect YTD numbers.
•Update Revenue source summary figures through 2014.
•Update all tables to reflect YTD numbers.
•Update Sewage Collection/Treatment to reflect the current status of sewer planning.
•Update Capital Facilities Projections: 2005 – 2024 tables to reflect current numbers.
•Revisit and verify Capital Facilities LOS standards for Category A, B, and C facilities.
•Amend Goals and Policies to reflect actions that have been taken with verbiage that covers
monitoring and updating as appropriate.
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 24 of 39
September 22, 2014
The Local 2020 Climate Action and T-Lab volunteer groups have prepared a set of proposed
changes to the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. Suggested modifications were made
on all chapters except:
•06 Open Space
•09 Essential Public Facilities (there may be elements of the comments on the Capital
Facilities that also apply here)•11 Utilities (comments on water supplies, storm water, and energy efficiency arecovered in other chapters, and so were not added here, but may also apply here)
The 10 Transportation Chapter was commented on by both the Local 2020 Climate Action
Group (CAG) and the Local 2020 Transportation Lab (T-Lab) Group. The other chapters
were commented on by the L2020 CAG.
Introduction:
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLANNING
The Comprehensive Plan includes assessments of existing conditions containing baseline data
for key areas. The data provide a “snapshot” of Jefferson County including:
•Existing land use patterns;
•Population projections and distribution trends;•Inventories of historical and cultural resources;
•Greenhouse gas emissions and the potential impacts of climate change on the natural andman-made environment;
•Housing supply, conditions and affordability; and
•Critical areas located within the unincorporated portions of the County.
Planning Objective VI - Compliance with the Requirements of the Growth Management Act
Consistency with the thirteen goals of the Growth Management Act, the decisions of the
Growth Management Hearings Boards, and the County-wide Planning Policy were used as a
framework to develop a comprehensive compliance strategy.
Planning Objective VII – Addressing the Impacts of Climate Change
Being adjacent to the Strait of San Juan de Fuca, Hood Canal, and the Pacific Ocean, Jefferson
County is vulnerable to sea level rise and other impacts of climate change. Already, ocean
acidification linked to the increase in greenhouse gas emissions is creating challenges for the
local shellfish industry. Other impacts that could affect Jefferson County are changes in
precipitation, temperature, and extreme events, which can impact forests, agriculture, water
supplies, aquaculture, etc.
Moreover, the Northwest may become a destination for people leaving other parts of the US
where the effects of climate change (e.g. severe weather, flooding, droughts) are more
significant. If that happens, the community needs to plan for more residents and how that
trend will affect housing, infrastructure, and the local economy.
Commented [c1]: •This would include the existing
Jefferson County/Port Townsend Climate Action Plan
which has emissions data, and a placeholder for the
Climate Change Preparation Plan in process via the
preparing for climate change grant project
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 25 of 39
Urban Growth Area Elements:
URBAN GROWTH AREA
GOAL:
UGA-G 1.2 Within designated UGAs, encourage increased urban density through code
revisions for items such as setbacks, height restrictions, cluster and mixed use development.
Natural Resource Conservation Element:
GOAL:
NRG 3.0 Conserve and protect Forest Resource Lands for long-term economic
use.
POLICIES:
NRP 3.6 Consider climate change trends and projections as part of the sustainable
management process for forest, agriculture, aquaculture, and mineral
resources of Jefferson County.
NRP 3.7 Consider climate change impacts on forestry and take steps to improve forest
health and resiliency through technical assistance, management of county
owned lands, and support of neighborhood-based efforts to reduce risk of
wildfire.
NRP 3.8 Consider collaborations with NOPRCD, WSU, Jefferson County Conservation
District, and Olympic Nation Forest to assess likely impacts of climate change
on agriculture, and to develop mitigation and adaptation strategies suited to
Jefferson County soils and farm economy. Recommend that this information be made available through technical assistance and farm planning programs.
NRP 3.9 Research and report on the role of resource lands in supporting carbon
sequestration.
GOAL:
NRG 5.0 Encourage the continuation of forestry on lands which are not designated as commercial forest resource lands.
POLICIES:
NRP 5.1 Evaluate proposals for conversion of forest land through a public process to
assess the long-term economic impact of decreasing the amount of land
available for sustainable forest production and harvest, also considering long-
term environmental stressors such as climate change.
Commented [c2]: From Jefferson County/Port Townsend Climate Action Plan
recommendation for Land Use/Urban Form
Commented [C3]: These are from King County
Sample Climate Change-Related Amendments and
were modified slightly to reflect Jefferson County
organizations and clarify language. Note that these same
proposed additions are also in Chapter 3 - Land Use.
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 26 of 39
Economic Development:
GOAL:
EDG 6.0 Encourage and support economic development for rural and urban lands.
POLICIES:
EDP 6.7 Conserve and enhance existing agriculture and encourage future innovative
agriculture ventures and technologies while managing and sustaining the water
and soil resources upon which they depend.
EDP 6.10 Manage streams, rivers, and riparian and shoreline habitat to maintain and
sustain
Transportation Element:
Relationship with Other Comprehensive Plan Elements
Transportation is highly dependent on many factors that are expected to change with a
changing climate. Transportation strategies can contribute to the community’s ability to adapt
to a changing environment and to help minimize anthropogenic causes of climate change.
Because the scientific knowledge and understanding of climate change is rapidly developing,
the best available science, including trends and projections of important design criteria, will
be used to implement this Transportation Element.
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT STRATEGY
Jefferson County's strategy for managing its transportation network is to encourage efficient
multi-modal transportation through implementation of the policies of the Transportation
Element which address: the County's highways and arterials; public transportation needs and
services; non-motorized transportation facilities; land development standards associated with
the County's transportation network; state, regional, and local intergovernmental
coordination; promotion of transportation demand management programs; protection of the
environment and conservation of energy in transportation activities; projected changes in
climate as they effect on all aspects of transportation; and development of a transportation
improvement program that will identify and rank projects for funding.
Weather-Related Traffic Hazards Inclement weather affects driving conditions, contributes to accidents, and can damage
roadways. Higher elevation areas of some roads, such as Dosewallips and Duckabush Roads,
are subject to freezing conditions. During periods of thawing, the Public Works Department
installs signs informing travelers of load-limit restrictions, because heavy loads can damage
the road structure. Some roadway segments require sanding during winter conditions,
including Irondale Road, Flagler Road/Oak Bay Road intersection, SR 19 Beaver Valley
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 27 of 39
Road/Center Road/Chimacum Road intersection, Walker Mountain above 700 feet elevation,
Dosewallips and Duckabush River Roads, and several roads in the Brinnon area. In addition,
some roads are subject to flooding and washouts during storm events. These include the Oil
City Road, Quinault-South Shore Road, and Upper Hoh Road. In the past few years, the
Upper Hoh Road has experienced severe flooding and washout damage and has been totally
closed on several occasions. Changes in climate may cause weather related hazards to change
in frequency and intensity as well as affect roadways that have had little impacts historically.
NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION
GOAL
TRG 3.0 Provide safe, accessible and convenient routes, trails, parking facilities, trail heads, and other amenities that promote the use of non-
motorized travel and increase the number of trips made by walking and bicycling in a manner that is integrated with other forms of transportation. POLICIES
TRP 3.2 Develop Encourage development of a non-motorized transportation network between all major activity centers in Jefferson County in accordance with the Non-motorized Transportation and Recreational Trails Plan.
TRP 3.3 Develop Encourage development of new trails and linkages between trails in
accordance with the Non-motorized Transportation and Recreational Trails Plan and in coordination with Federal, State, and regional agencies, utilities, and citizen groups
TRP 3.5 Develop Promote coordinated bicycle, equestrian, and pedestrian way
improvements in accordance with the Non-motorized Transportation and Recreational Trails Plan, emphasizing access to schools, parks, employment and service centers, and mass transit facilities (ferry, bus, etc.).
TRP 3.11 Evaluate safety issues associated with pedestrian and bicycle travel near
school sites, identify potential improvements and implement improvements
for pedestrian and bicycle safety.
TRP 3.12 Encourage walking and bicycling to school by providing pedestrian and bicycle
improvements and educational programs to promote walking and bicycling to
school.
TRP 3.13 In developments in UGA’s promote walking, bicycling and transit as an
alternative to single occupancy automobile transport, by providing transit
oriented development with safe pedestrian and bicycle improvements.
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 28 of 39
GOAL: TRG 9.0 Promote Transportation Demand Management programs as a means of reducing traffic, minimizing environmental impacts including climate change, and optimizing existing transportation investments.
POLICIES: TRP 9.1 Participate with state government, other government entities and transit
agencies in developing, promoting, and facilitating a regional Transportation
Demand Management program designed to reduce the number of vehicle
miles travelled by commuters, residents and visitors that includes at a
minimum the following:
a. Encourage employers to reduce single-occupancy commuting; to offer flexible work schedules that reduce peak period travel and lessen the need
for roadway capacity. . b. Assistance for visitors using publicity and assistive technologies for travel
alternatives that reduce traffic; c. Assistance and incentives for residents to encourage alternatives to single-
occupancy driving; d. Determination of targets for reduction in vehicle miles travelled and measurement of outcomes.
TRP 9.4 Incorporate the goal of reducing traffic into development and land use plans by
encouraging densities and mixed uses together with multi-modal transportation options. Participate with state government and transit agencies in developing, promoting, and facilitating regional ridesharing through such programs as
parking management, and ride match services and preferential parking for carpools and vanpools.
TRP 9.5 Collaborate in opportunities to invest in short and long range technological
solutions, and integrate those solutions into County transportation projects for
managing demand.
TRP 9.6 Coordinate transportation technologies for managing demand among Peninsula jurisdictions, RTPOs and MPOs.
ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY GOAL
TRG 10.0 Provide transportation facilities and services that are energy efficient, protect and enhance the environment, and preserve the existing residential quality of life.
Commented [C4]: This is integrated into proposed new TRP 9.1
Commented [C5R4]:
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 29 of 39
POLICIES:
TRP 10.8 Evaluate all transportation projects for opportunities to adapt and mitigate the effects of climate change. TRP 10.9 The county shall use coordinated land use and transit policies to work toward a goal of reducing fossil fuel-consumption resulting from vehicle miles traveled
and encouraging transportation alternatives such biking and walking, as intermediate measures of climate change mitigation
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
GOAL
TRG 11.0 Develop a transportation improvement program that is consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan. POLICIES
TRP 11.4 The transportation improvement program shall incorporate climate change impacts information into construction, operations, and maintenance of infrastructure projects
STRATEGIES
Action Items
35.Identify culverts that impede fish passage and develop a schedule for replacement ofthese passageways as funding permits. (Corresponding Goal: TRG 10)
Review and revise design standards for stormwater management, slope stability,vegetation management, and other issues to incorporate data likely to be affected by
climate change. (For example, a 25 yr – 24 hr storm event is likely to produce moreprecipitation and runoff requiring larger ditches and culverts associated with roadways.)
Land Use and Rural Element:
REVIEW OF SURFACE WATER CONDITIONS & EXISTING POLLUTED DISCHARGES
The County’s review and analysis of drainage, flooding, stormwater runoff and water quality
conditions and regulations revealed the following concerns warranting policy guidance within
this element:
9.Though Jefferson County has adopted a Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance which
largely prohibits development within floodways and requires flood-proofing of
structures in floodplains, the County could take additional steps to reduce flood
Commented [c6]: This is from the King County Sample Climate Change-Related Amendments.
Italics indicate minor tweaking of King County
language.
Commented [c7]: This is from the King County
Sample Climate Change-Related Amendments, with
minor tweaks in italics.
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 30 of 39
losses, facilitate more accurate insurance ratings, take into account climate change
trends and projections regarding flooding, and promote the awareness of flood
insurance (i.e., through the Community Rating System or “CRS” discussed in LNG
26.0). The County adopted a Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan in 2004; one of the
hazards addressed is flooding.
NATURAL RESOURCE LANDS
GOAL:
LNG 13.0 Conserve and manage the forest, agriculture, aquaculture, and mineral
resources of Jefferson County for sustainable natural resource-based
economic activities that are compatible with surrounding land uses.
POLICIES:
LNP 13.5 Consider climate change trends and projections as part of the sustainable
management process for forest, agriculture, aquaculture, and mineral
resources of Jefferson County.
LNP 13.6 Consider climate change impacts on forestry and take steps to improve forest
health and resiliency through technical assistance, management of county
owned lands, and support of neighborhood-based efforts to reduce risk of
wildfire.
LNP 13.7 Consider collaborations with NOPRCD, WSU, Jefferson County Conservation
District, and Olympic Nation Forest to assess likely impacts of climate change
on agriculture, and to develop mitigation and adaptation strategies suited to
Jefferson County soils and farm economy. Recommend that this information be
made available through technical assistance and farm planning programs.
LNP 13.8 Research and report on the role of resource lands in supporting carbon
sequestration.
ENVIRONMENT
GOAL:
LNG 14.0 Preserve the functions and values of critical environmental areas and
protect development from the risks of environmental hazards.
POLICIES:
LNP 14.6 Develop land use ordinances based on comprehensive watershed plans, climate
change trends and projections, and salmon recovery plans for the conservation,
protection, and management of surface and ground waters, in order to maintain
water quality and quantity, provide potable water, and to restore and protect
fish habitat.
Commented [C8]: These are from King County
Sample Climate Change-Related Amendments and
were modified slightly to reflect Jefferson County
organizations and clarify language. Note that these same
proposed additions are also in Chapter 3 - Land Use.
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 31 of 39
GOAL:
LNG 21.0 Encourage residential land use and development intensities that protect the character of rural areas, avoid interference with resource land uses, and minimize impacts upon environmentally sensitive areas.
POLICIES:
LNP 21.3 Increase tree planting requirements or incentives for all public and private
projects, including transportation projects that incorporate the use of trees.
Tree lined corridors provide a carbon sponge and increase the attractiveness
of the area.
GOAL:
LNG 22.0 Foster sustainable natural resource-based industry in rural areas
through the conservation of forest lands, agricultural lands, mineral
lands, and aquaculture lands in order to provide economic and
employment opportunities that are consistent with rural character.
POLICIES:
LNP 22.4 Increase investment in local wood manufacturing businesses that are able to
supply local products for wood markets.
LNP 22.5 Increase the amount of local wood products grown and manufactured locally
and purchased by government and private sectors. Thus encouraging the
economic viability of forest land in our area.
Housing Element:
GOAL:
HSG 2.0 Promote a variety of affordable housing choices throughout the County through the use of innovative land use practices, development standards, design techniques, and building permit requirements.
POLICIES:
HSP 2.10 Encourage the use of new housing technologies that help conserve resources
and minimize the generation of greenhouse gas emissions.
HSP 2.10 Encourage the development of residential generation of electricity through
renewable resources such as solar.
HSP 2.10 Encourage energy efficiency in both new and existing houses, and the
development of “zero net energy” housing.
HSP 2.10 Encourage residential water conservation technology, including rain barrels,
gray water systems for non-potable uses, and low-water use appliances.
Commented [c9]: This is a recommendation from
the Jefferson County/Port Townsend Climate Action
Plan for Land Use
Commented [C10]: This is a recommendation from
the Jefferson County/Port Townsend Climate Action
Plan for Land Use
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 32 of 39
HSP 2.11 Direct staff to research the benefits of implementing a city and county energy
code for commercial and residential construction that exceeds current WA state
code (e.g. greater insulation, passive solar, Passive House and small footprints)
and for new buildings, site development and substantial remodels consider
establishing a minimum compliance target (e.g., meet at least a LEED Silver or
similar level for Built Green or another green building standard).
Environmental Element:
WATER RESOURCES
GOAL:
ENG 1.0 Manage, protect, enhance, and conserve water resources through a
comprehensive watershed management program that is integrated
with recovery plans for fish species proposed for listing under the ESA.
POLICIES:
ENP 1.3 Manage water resources using the best available scientific information and
participate in collaborative processes to develop new information. Recognize
that scientific knowledge and information is rapidly developing in natural
resource areas affected by climate change. Periodic and frequent evaluation of
this information may be necessary to achieve water resource management
goals.
GOAL:
ENG 3.0 Ensure a sustainable and safe water supply as a critical necessity for
residential, economic, and environmental needs.
POLICIES:
ENP 3.1 Work with the Water Utilities Coordinating Committee to revise the Coordinated
Water System Plan for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, in order to
provide a safe and adequate water supply for County residents and other uses
in balance with the protection of environmental functions of water resources,
and under changing climate conditions.
GOAL:
ENG 5.0 Allow development along shorelines which is compatible with the protection of natural processes, natural conditions, and natural functions of the shoreline environment.
POLICIES:
ENG 5.0 The County has used best available information to devise and implement a sea
level rise strategy.
Commented [c11]: This is from Jefferson
County/Port Townsend Climate Action Plan
recommendation for Land Use/Urban Form
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 33 of 39
ENP 5.1 Evaluate all options, including retreat, to deal with the impacts of sea level rise in Jefferson County.
ENP 5.2 Consider different scenarios for varying amounts of sea level rise and storm surge, and the accompanying adaptation response options for each scenario.
ENP 5.3 Perform a cost-benefit analysis for each adaptation strategy. Consider the
physical, environmental and social factors, and timing, as well as costs in the analysis.
ENP 5.4 Evaluate different financing options for adaptation strategies.
ENP 5.5 Use the best available science and the experiences of other municipalities in
formulating future plans for sea level rise.
ENP 5.6 Engage the community in a discussion of the different adaptation strategies and response and cost.
GOAL:
ENG 11.0 Protect flood hazard areas from development and uses that
compromise the flow, storage and buffering of flood waters, normal
channel functions, and fish and wildlife habitat and to minimize flood
and river process risk to life and property.
POLICIES:
ENP 11.7 Storm water management plans should minimize adverse effects of floods on
existing and future development and protect the natural conditions and
functions of the flood plain. Anticipate the need to expand areas managed as
flood plain with increases in precipitation intensity, streamflow, and other hydrologic characteristics consistent with climate change expectations.
STRATEGIES
A. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT AND HABITAT RECOVERY STRATEGY
Jefferson County’s strategy for management of environmental resources will be conducted in
the context of a collaborative watershed management approach to the interrelated functions
of the resources, in order that land use activities are consistent with plans for the recovery of
fish species listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act. The
strategy will consider the effects of a changing climate on watershed functions to ensure that
water resource and habitat goals are achieved.
6.Work with the City/County Climate Action Committee to identify the most current andrelevant information on the aspects of climate change affecting land use activities andwatershed resources.
C. CRITICAL AREAS STRATEGY
10.Recognize that the scientific data supporting critical area planning and managementis changing with a changing climate and incorporate the most recent information whenreviewing critical area management plans and regulations.
Commented [C12]: These are from the City of
Olympia Comprehensive Plan (draft), italicizes are
minor recommended tweaks to Olympia language
Commented [c13]: This has not yet been reviewed
with the CAC, but can be considered there in a future
meeting.
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 34 of 39
GOAL:
CFG 2.0 Implement a Six-Year Capital Facilities Concept Plan that ensures that
County-owned public facilities meet the established Levels of Service.
POLICIES:
CFP 2.11 Update the expected frequency and severity of flooding events (storm, tidal,
sea level rise) due to climate change on a regular basis.
CFP 2.12 Update stormwater plans to reflect the impacts of climate change.
CFP 2.12 Update information on potential climate change impacts on capital facilities as
part of the Six Year Plan, and use that information to (1) validate the function
and useful life of existing facilities and (2) plan appropriately for new facilities.
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 35 of 39
County Wide Planning Policies (CWPPs)
http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/commdevelopment/JGMSC%20&%20CPP.htm
The County Wide Planning Policies were approved and adopted by the City of Port
Townsend and Jefferson County by resolution in 1992 and 1994. The CWPPs
represent a composite framework, not a series of individual, standalone
concepts. The intent of the CWPPs is to create an overall direction for the
development of individual comprehensive plans, while ensuring coordination and
consistency of plans with each other and with the Growth Management Act. The
CWPPs are discussed with reference to individual elements in Appendix B of the
Comprehensive Plan.
We at DCD will consult with the City of Port Townsend on any updates needed to
the County Wide Planning Policies and will consider the CWPPs as we develop and
review each of the proposed updates to our Comprehensive Plan to ensure we
don’t create any inconsistencies. We’ll update Appendix B as appropriate.
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 36 of 39
Hood Canal In-Lieu Fee Program
In July 2012, the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Washington Department of Ecology approved the
Hood Canal In-Lieu Fee (ILF) Mitigation Program. These two agencies are co-chairs of the ILF Program
and the Hood Canal Coordinating Council is the “Sponsor”. Jefferson County DCD is part of an
Interagency Review Team (IRT) that consists of federal, state, local, and tribal representatives with
jurisdiction in the Hood Canal watershed.
The ILF Program is intended primarily to serve applicants in the Hood Canal drainages of Jefferson
County, Kitsap County, and Mason County, and is used as compensatory mitigation for unavoidable
impacts to aquatic resources (waters of the United States and/or waters of the State of Washington
and/or waters of tribal nations) and their buffers, including:
Freshwater aquatic habitats, such as wetlands, lakes, and streams; and
Marine/nearshore aquatic habitats, such as sub-tidal, tidal, intertidal, and riparian habitats.
An applicant may enter into the ILF program once the project impacts have been documented by all
regulatory agencies with jurisdiction and if the Sponsor agrees to accept responsibility for the mitigation
project. Once the Sponsor accepts the mitigation responsibilities and the sales transaction is complete,
the applicant is no longer required to submit a mitigation plan to the County (or any other regulatory
agencies). Once an applicant provides the mitigation funds to the Sponsor, the money from the
applicant is directed toward conservation and restoration priorities in the Hood Canal watershed.
The Sponsor is also responsible for providing the IRT with the following:
Proposing mitigation sites and project concepts, along with a draft Spending Agreement;
Developing draft and final mitigation plan(s) and site protection instrument(s), which are
then approved by the Corps and Ecology with IRT consultation;
Implementing the mitigation project(s); and
Providing for subsequent steps such as site maintenance, monitoring/reporting,
adaptive management, and site protection.
The ILF Program is intended to be another option that an applicant can use to meet existing mitigation
requirements in the Jefferson County Code. Jefferson County DCD cannot require an applicant to enter
into the ILF Program, and the Sponsor will only accept a project into the ILF Program if mitigation
opportunities exist. Development plans recently proposed by the Navy and WSDOT (in Kitsap County)
will be mitigated through the ILF Program, and the Sponsor is coordinating with the IRT as they work to
identify mitigation sites and prepare mitigation plans.
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 37 of 39
The applicant may be required to place
a site protection mechanism (e.g.,
conservation easement or notice to title)
over that portion of the property where
the mitigation project occurs
If impacts cannot be fully avoided, the
applicant submits a permit application to
permitting agencies (Corps of Engineers,
Ecology, and WDFW). The applicant
selects a mitigation option (in this case:
ILF program or permittee-responsible) in
consultation with the permitting agencies
Overview of In-Lieu Fee Program Versus Permittee-Responsible Mitigation Process in Jefferson County
Actions undertaken by the applicant, County, ILF program, or permitting agencies are in bold.
The County reviews development
application to determine if the project
could impact critical areas, shorelines,
or their associated buffers
If critical area or shoreline
resources are present and may be
impacted, the applicant explores
avoidance and minimization
measures
If critical area or shoreline
resources are absent or will
not be impacted, the County
processes the development
application
If impacts to critical area or
shoreline resources have been
completely avoided, the County
processes the development
application
If the applicant selects ILF
mitigation, the applicant contacts
the ILF sponsor to determine
if ILF mitigation is suitable
If the applicant selects permittee-
responsible mitigation, the applicant
submits a report to permitting
agencies that complies with federal,
state, and/or local regulations
The ILF sponsor works with the
applicant to develop an ILF Use Plan
The ILF use plan is submitted to the
permitting agencies for approval of the
credit calculation within the plan and
use of the ILF program. For buffer only
impacts, the ILF use plan is submitted
to the County for approval
If the ILF program does NOT
accept the mitigation request or
if credits are not available, the
applicant seeks another form
of mitigation
The applicant is responsible for
the design and implementation
of the required mitigation project
The applicant may be required
to post a bond with the County
equal to the full cost of the
mitigation plus a contingency
The applicant must monitor and
maintain the mitigation project—usually
for five (and in come cases up to 10)
years—to evaluate site performance
and submit annual reports
The applicant must take any
necessary corrective actions to
ensure mitigation project success
Permitting agencies approve use
of the ILF program and condition a
permit on the purchase of credits
Permitting agencies do NOT
approve use of the ILF program;
the applicant seeks another
form of mitigation
Applicant purchases the required
number of credits from the ILF
program and submits the receipt
of sale to the permitting agencies,
documenting the purchase of credits
from the ILF program
The mitigation permit terms and
conditions have been met and the
applicant’s mitigation requirements
have been satisfied
Applicant submits proposed
development application to the County
Planning Commission 10/01/2014 Page 38 of 39
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
1
0
/
0
1
/
2
0
1
4
Pa
g
e
3
9
o
f
3
9
15 August 2014
Jefferson County
Department of Community Development
621 Sheridan Street
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Mr. Carl Smith, Director
Dear Carl,
With much regret I am sending you my letter of resignation as a District 1 representative of the
Jefferson County Planning Commission effective today.
I have enjoyed participating since May 2005 but have come to recognize that I can no longer
maintain my previous level of involvement and wouldnot be a positive contributor.
It has been a satisfying and challenging experience. I have continued respect for all of the
people who served with me on the Planning Commission, in the DCD office and the involved
citizens who attended our meetings.
Respectfully,
William Miller
cc; Phil Johnson, District 1 County Commissioner
David Sullivan, District 2 County Commissioner
vJohnAustin, District 3 County Commissioner
Philip Morley, County Administrator
1820 Jefferson Street
PO Box 1220
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Phil Johnson, District 1 David W. Sullivan, District 2 John Austin, District 3
August 25, 2014
William Miller
2023 E. Sims Way #360
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Dear Bill,
We wish to offer our heartfelt thanks to you for your valuable years of service on the
Jefferson County Planning Commission as well as your numerous contributions to the
community. Your participation on the Planning Commission was important both to the
Board of County Commissioners and to the community at large. Your thoughtful, gentle,
and ever diplomatic participation in complex deliberations has earned you the respect of
virtually all who have worked with you or observed you in action.
As County Commissioners, we clearly understand that our boards, committees, and
councils play a vital role in our community. We also recognize that the success of such
groups is dependent on the efforts of members such as yourself who give their time to
serve their community.
On behalf of all of the citizens of Jefferson County we thank you for your past service
and wish you the best in your future endeavors.
Sincerely, C/PIL Phil JohnsoJ~mber
Phone (360)385-9100 Fax (360) 385-9382 jeffbocc(~:co.jefferson.wa.us
Jefferson County
Planning C0mmission
621 Sheridan St.
Port Townsend WA 98368
P: 360-379-4450
F: 360-379-4451
plancomm@co.jefferson.wa.us
Jefferson County Planning Commission
REGULAR MEETING
Tri-Area Community Center
August 6, 2014
Page 1 of 3
Call to Order at 6:37 pm
ROLL CALL
District 1 District 2 District 3 Staff Present
Coker: Arrived at 6:52 Smith: E-Absence Brotherton: Present Carl Smith, DCD Director
Felder: E-Absence Farmer: Present Giske: Present Stacie Hoskins, Planning Manager
Miller: U-Absence Sircely: Present Hull: Present Elizabeth Williams, Administrative Clerk
Public in Attendance: 2
Approval of Agenda: Richard Hull approved the agenda.
Approval of Minutes: Tom Brotherton moved to approve meeting minutes for 07/16/14.
Patricia Farmer seconded. 5 in favor, 0 against, 0 abstained.
STAFF UPDATES
Critical Areas/Agriculture
Carl Smith: The CAO/Agricultural public workshop held on 07/17 was a success. The next workshop
will be held on 08/18 at the Chimacum Grange from 6pm – 8pm. The subject of Critical
Area buffers in Agricultural land is required to be addressed for the 2015 Comp Plan
Update.
Marijuana Regulations
Carl Smith: A meeting regarding marijuana regulations was attended by the WSLCB, Dept. of Ecology,
ORCAA, the office of regulatory assistance, and the County’s Departments of Community
Development, Health, and Sheriff’s.
Brinnon Master Planned Resort
Stacie Hoskins: The Brinnon MPR still needs to provide another study but is expected to meet the timeline
schedule.
Joint Land Use Study (JLUS)
Stacie Hoskins: DCD has been working on a Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) with the City of Bremerton, Kitsap
County, Mason County, and the Navy which is funded by grant by the US Dept. of Defense.
Joel Peterson has been the lead planner in the process. A public outreach meeting has
been tentatively scheduled on Sept. 9th at the Tri-Area Community Center from 6 – 8 pm.
Patricia Farmer: Mr. Peter Bahles at the Northwest Watershed Institute would have a lot of information
about the Dabob Bay area.
Matt Sircely: Has there been discussion of the adverse impacts of having a testing range?
Stacie Hoskins: An environmental impact study was conducted when the testing range was created and
during Kitsap’s Bangor Base expansion.
Kevin Coker joined the meeting at 6:52 pm
Thorndyke “Pit-to-Pier” Open House
Stacie Hoskins: The open house for Thorndyke Resources (T-ROC) “pit-to-pier” project at the Bay Club
took place on August 4th. Consultants for the EIS were present. There was a court
reporter who took approx 28 comments. Sold 8 discs of draft EIS. Mostly explained the
process. No presentation or meeting. Scoping meeting occurred years ago, also with a
court reporter. The hearing examiner will view all the public comments, the EIS, and
make a decision. The Shoreline Conditional Use Permit for the pier tends to be a more
visible issue than the zoning CUP outside of shoreline jurisdiction, and they each have
different appeal processes. For the shoreline CUP, Ecology makes the final decision AFTER
the hearing examiner decision. TROC has spoken with DNR. The Navy created and
purchased a lease from DNR and conflicts with the pit-to-pier project. They filed two
Jefferson County
Planning C0mmission
621 Sheridan St.
Port Townsend WA 98368
P: 360-379-4450
F: 360-379-4451
plancomm@co.jefferson.wa.us
Jefferson County Planning Commission
REGULAR MEETING
Tri-Area Community Center
August 6, 2014
Page 2 of 3
lawsuits, state and federal court re: the aquatic easements and do not name the County in
the suits. T-ROC alleges DNR exceeded its authority and Fred Hill materials (T-ROC) were
“grandfathered in”.
Shoreline Master Program Appeal
Stacie Hoskins: The SMP appeal includes Hood Canal Sand and Gravel and DCD has been providing
documents for the records requests. One reason for the HCS&G appeal is they claim the
SMP “prohibits industrial piers from where the resources are”. The other two parties are
Olympic Stewardship Foundation, a property rights group and CAPR, Citizens Alliance for
Property Rights.
Tom Giske: Any permits submitted for variances?
Stacie Hoskins: Not yet. The County is working on guidance on how to navigate the allowances. What
constitutes water ward, lateral, landward expansion or development.
Comp Plan Surveys
Elizabeth Williams: The surveys regarding the Comp Plan update will be in a spreadsheet provided at the
following planning commission meeting.
Sign Code
Carl Smith: Monte Reinders, County Engineer for JC Public Works, was concerned about proliferation
of signs in the ROW. If temporary signs are redefined, Philip Morley and Monte Reinders
will be satisfied.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Frank Hoffman: Admires Al Latham. In regards to the Joint Land Use study, Frank hopes that there will be a
discussion about emergency plans if there is ever a fire or explosion.
COMMISSIONER ANNOUNCEMENTS
Affordable Housing
Kevin Coker: The subcommittee meeting is coming up. The subcommittee has a lot of work but nothing
concrete.
Quilcene Road Grant
Tom Brotherton: The County received a grant to improve Quilcene’s roadways.
Thorndyke “Pit-to-Pier” Open House
Tom Giske: After attending the open house, Tom left with greater concern for the Hood Canal Bridge.
As our lifeline, the bridge accommodates tourists, emergency personnel, etc. and is fragile.
As an increase in boats go through/under bridge, a small accident could easily happen.
Why isn’t DOT involved?
Stacie Hoskins: Marine traffic is under the authority of the coast guard. The applicant needs to go through
NEPA. DCD is not sure how are the applicant is coordinating that review.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
Carl Smith: We are providing a matrix showing the strategy, topics that will be and the staff lead on
that particular project.
Stacie Hoskins: Different planners will be working on different components. We will have speakers
coming to speak with you about the different areas.
Tom Giske: Can we set a date to provide specific changes.
Kevin Coker: Even to provide what regulations are restricting them from
Carl Smith: Need to have regulations prepared to submit by March 2015.
Tom Brotherton: We need to consider marijuana as a subject to review.
Tom Giske: Will aquaculture be a topic of discussion during the Comp Plan update?
Jefferson County
Planning C0mmission
621 Sheridan St.
Port Townsend WA 98368
P: 360-379-4450
F: 360-379-4451
plancomm@co.jefferson.wa.us
Jefferson County Planning Commission
REGULAR MEETING
Tri-Area Community Center
August 6, 2014
Page 3 of 3
Stacie Hoskins: The SMP sufficiently covers the topic of aquaculture and we will not be considering
changes regarding aquaculture in the Comp Plan.
Carl Smith: We’re hoping to take a tour of Finn River at the next meeting. At the August 18th meeting,
we will meet at Chimacum Grange and then tour the Finn River farm.
Matt Sircely: Toured the Finn River farm and was impressed.
Stacie Hoskins: Finn River Farm has come up with a way to use the buffers as an asset for the agri-
tourism. Tourists enjoy seeing it and helps the business owner consider it a restoration
and instead of seeing it as a loss to their agricultural production. WSU Extension obtained
a grant to look at types of crops that can be done a buffer that can be harvested that can be
economically helpful.
Matt Sircely: Perhaps there could be agricultural production in the buffers without soil compaction or
contamination.
Carl Smith: We are trying to get examples of farm plans and also reviewing court cases regarding this
subject.
Next Planning Commission meeting scheduled for 9/3/14 at 6:30 pm at the Tri-Area Community Center.
Adjourned at 7:55 pm
These meeting minutes were approved this ____________ day of ___________________________, 2014.
________________________________________ _________ ______________________________________________________________
Richard Hull, Vice Chair Elizabeth Williams, PC Secretary/Administrative Clerk