HomeMy WebLinkAbout068 PedersenComment on ZON18-00036
To the Jefferson County Planning Commission:
Having attended the Planning Commission’s Wednesday, November 7, 2018, hearing at the
Chimacum High School Auditorium and watched staff’s presentation, I became concerned about the
terms in our current Title 18 JCC that were pointed out as not adequately defined.
Staff’s draft ordinance amending Title 18 JCC relating to shooting facilities provides a number of
amendments that improve Title 18 by better defining some important terms and concepts; however, I
would like to see additional specificity that regulates outdoor commercial shooting facilities and
hopefully implements a few of the “guardrails” recently mentioned by County Commissioner Kate
Dean. I hope that Title 18 is the appropriate place to place them.
The use table should specifically note that outdoor shooting facilities require a C(d), or discretionary
conditional use permit.
Title 18 sets forth our adopted land use policies about the shooting facilities. Most importantly,
they are only allowed as “small-scale recreation and tourist uses.” If and when a staff member
or a hearings examiner reviews a conditional use permit application for a shooting facility,
he/she can rely on this language. If the terms “small-scale” and “recreation and tourist” uses are
not well enough defined, then the definitions should be improved, but they should not be
redefined in a way that violates their obvious meaning.
Shooting ranges are at the extreme end of the noise and danger spectrum of uses. Title 8.70 Noise
Control needs to be “harmonized” with Title 18, both limiting the number of hours per day and the
number of days per week during which shooting may occur. Seven days a week and 15 hours a day, all
year round, are far too much to allow for a use as noisy as shooting. Uses on forest land are to be small-
scale, defined as having minimal impact on neighbors. Constant, year-round loud noise cannot be
construed as having a minimal impact. Please set specific limits on days per week and hours per day.
It appears that a commercial shooting range must obtain an operating permit which includes a noise
abatement plan. Unless standards have already been set governing the degree to which noise must be
abated, the UCC must provide those limits.
While off-duty training by members of law enforcement and the military could certainly be
justified at a recreational facility, it defies all logic to include on-duty professional training under
the same umbrella. Allowing such training is contrary to adopted public policy as found in our
Deborah Pedersen <deborahgpedersen@yahoo.com>
Fri 11/16/2018 1:06 PM
To:Planning Commission Desk <PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us>;
Page 1 of 2Comment on ZON18-00036 -Planning Commission Desk
11/16/2018https://owa.co.jefferson.wa.us/owa/
comprehensive plan and JCC and is certainly contrary to the vast majority of public sentiment
and as expressed publicly recently. It should be specifically excluded in Chapter 18 and in the
Performance and Use-Specific Standards.
For safety purposes, specific setbacks should be set. Can staff provide helpful language about
what constitutes “minimal impact” on neighbors, perhaps from other regulations, such as those
for marijuana businesses? Surely, this wheel has already been invented and has been used to
make sure that development meets the clearly expressed goals for our county and our adopted
plans and code.
Although the new category of commercial shooting facility is based on a public process and its
report, that public process does not begin to have the weight of years of county-wide public
process in the development and adoption of our comprehensive plan. Commercial shooting
facilities in our forest lands should be carefully restricted in order to ensure that they are small-
scale recreational or tourist uses and that their impacts on neighbors can be minimized.
Thank you for your consideration of my testimony.
Page 2 of 2Comment on ZON18-00036 -Planning Commission Desk
11/16/2018https://owa.co.jefferson.wa.us/owa/