HomeMy WebLinkAbout102819_ra02 Regular Agenda
JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA REQUEST
TO: Board of County Commissioners
Philip Morley, County Administrator
FROM: Patty Charnas, Department of Community Development Director
Joel Peterson, Associate Planner, DCD
DATE: October 28, 2019
SUBJECT: Recommendations on 2019 Site-Specific Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Proposal
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
On June 17, 2019, the Board of County Commissioners established the Final Docket of
amendment proposals for the 2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Cycle, consisting of one
site-specific amendment proposal: MLA19-00013 Andrew and Sarah Wilke, 240 Sand Road,
Parcel #001840004, to rezone a 10-acre Rural Residential 1:10 to Rural Residential 1:5 for the
purpose of subdivision. The Department of Community Development reviewed the proposal
pursuant to Jefferson County Code (JCC) 18.45.070 and issued an Integrated Growth
Management Act/State Environmental Policy Act Staff Report and SEPA Addendum on
September 4, 2019.
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendment pursuant to JCC 18.45.080(1)
and conducted a public hearing on September 18, 2019 to receive public testimony and written
comments during the comment period from September 4, 2019 through the close of the public
hearing. On October 22, 2019, the Planning Commission transmitted their October 16, 2019
letter of Review and Recommendation on the 2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Final
Docket. The Chair of the Planning Commission, Michael Nilssen, will be present to participate
in this agenda discussion.
With the record that has been developed from the reviews and recommendations of the
planning agency, including public testimony and comments, the Board of Commissioners now
considers the proposed amendment and the Planning Commission's recommendation pursuant
to JCC 18.45.080(2).
ANALYSIS:
The Department of Community Development's Staff Report analyzed the applicant's proposal
and SEPA Checklist, and recommended approval of the proposal. DCD's recommendation
found that provisions for Critical Areas protection in Jefferson County Code is adequate to
Regular Agenda
prevent significant adverse environmental impacts; that although the re-zone proposal does not
address a particular County need or policy for additional RR-5 parcels, the County's
Comprehensive Plan does allocate a share of future population growth to rural areas, and
provides for a variety of rural residential densities (5, 10, 20 du/ac) to accommodate the rural
allocation.
The Planning Commission process added additional site-specific information to the record
through public comments and testimony. The Planning Commission deliberated on the
appropriateness of the current RR-10 zoning, the need for the zoning change, the future effect
of this and potential future zoning changes on the environmental conditions of the immediate
area, and whether development regulations are sufficiently protective of the site under
consideration. The Planning Commission concluded that the current land designation of Rural
Residential 1:10 is correctly applied because of the predominance of critical areas, and
potential increase in stormwater and surface water impacts from additional up-zoning in the
area. The Planning Commission voted 4-3 to recommend the Board of County Commissioners
deny the proposal.
The project record can be accessed at the web link below, and includes the following:
• the application,
• Community Development Integrated GMA/SEPA Staff Report & SEPA Addendum,
• comment and hearing record, and
• Jefferson County Planning Commission's Review and Recommendation on the 2019
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Final Docket.
http://test.co.j efferson.wa.us/WebLinkExternal/0/fol/2103723/Rowl.aspx
Attachment: Jefferson County Planning Commission's Review and Recommendation on the
2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Final Docket
Pursuant to JCC 18.45.080(2)(b), if the Board of County Commissions deems a change is
needed to the Planning Commission's recommendation, the change shall not be incorporated
until the Board holds its own public hearing.
The Board of County Commissioners shall apply the same criteria as the Planning
Commission, as set forth in the required findings of Chapter 18.45 JCC, and may adopt or
incorporate the Planning Commission's findings. The Board's decision on the proposed
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan shall be adopted by ordinance.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Cost of work associated with the County's Comprehensive Plan and related activities under the
State Growth Management Act are largely supported by the county's general fund.
Regular Agenda
RECOMMENDATION:
Review the record on the 2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Cycle and either
1) consider a motion to accept the Planning Commission's recommendation and direct
Community Development to draft a resolution reflecting the Board's decision and
documenting the 2019 amendment cycle process that has taken place, or
2) consider a motion for the Board to hold a public hearing if the Board wishes to consider
making a change to the Planning Commission's recommendation, and direct Direct
Community Development to prepare a hearing notice for Board approval.
REVIEWED BY:
l'"tel
`" k72
Philip Morl y, Cq my Administrator Date
q.SON t10 JEFFERSON COUNTY
<� PLANNING COMMISSION
cri
621 Sheridan Street I Port Townsend,WA 98368
ys r+VC�CO 360-379-4450 email: PlanComm@co.jefferson.wa.us
http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/580/Planning-Commission
To: Board of County Commissioners: Chair Kate Dean,David Sullivan,Greg Brotherton;
Department of Community Development,Director Patty Charnas;and
Interested public of Jefferson County
From: Jefferson County Planning Commission
Date: October 16,2019
Subject: Jefferson County Planning Commission's Review and Recommendation on the
2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Final Docket
Overview: At the conclusion of the Board of County Commissioner's deliberations on June 17,2019,the Board
established that no suggested text amendments on the Preliminary Docket be placed on the 2019 Final Docket of
Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code amendment proposals in 2019. Pursuant to 18.45.050(3)
JCC,all formal site-specific amendment applications are placed on the Final Docket for consideration.Therefore,
the 2019 Final Docket contains one formal site-specific amendment proposal: MLA19-00013 Andrew and Sarah
Wilke,a proposal to re-zone a 10-acre Rural Residential 1:10 parcel to Rural Residential 1:5 for subdivision.
The Planning Commission has reviewed,and provides the following recommendation for the Board's action on
this Comprehensive Plan Amendment proposal for the 2019 planning cycle.
Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommends denial of the rezone proposal outlined in MLA19-
00013 (Wilke)to change zoning of Parcel#001184004 from RR1:10 to RR1:5.
In support of the Planning Commission's recommendation,the Planning Commission enters the following
findings and conclusions:
1. The Planning Commission met on February 27,2019 in a Special Meeting to discuss four suggested text
amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code(UDC),developed and brought
forth by the Planning Commission for docketing in the 2019 amendment cycle.
2. Four suggested text amendments(MLA19-00018, MLA19-00019,MLA19-00020,and MLA19-00023)
and one site-specific amendment(MLA19-00013)were placed on the Preliminary Docket through the
Comprehensive Plan amendment process specified at Jefferson County Code(JCC) 18.45.050(2).
3. All of the amendment proposals were timely filed by March 1,2019.
4. On March 27,2019,Community Development released the Department of Community Development's
Review and Recommendation on the 2019 Comprehensive Plan Preliminary Docket. Community
Development recommended against placing any suggested text amendment on the 2019 Final Docket in
consideration of need,urgency,appropriateness,DCD staff capacity to substantively review and manage
the suggested text amendments,and anticipated DCD cost and budget for processing the suggested
amendments.
5. On April 17,2019,the Planning Commission held a public hearing to accept public comment regarding
the four suggested text amendments to the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and Unified
Development Code on the 2019 Preliminary Docket.
6. On May 1,2019,the Planning Commission completed its review of the four suggested text amendments
on the Preliminary Docket in a Special Meeting,and transmitted the Planning Commission Report and
Recommendation on the 2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Final Docket to the Board of County
Commissioners,recommending all four proposals be placed on the Final Docket.
7. On May 13,2019,the Board of County Commissioners considered both the Community Development
recommendation and the Planning Commission recommendation during their Regular Agenda.
8. On June 10,2019,the Board of County Commissioners conducted a public hearing for the purpose of
taking oral and written testimony regarding whether all or any of the four text amendments should be
placed on the Final Docket.
9. On June 17,2019,the BoCC deliberated on the hearing records,Planning Commission recommendation
and Community Development recommendation,and established the Final Docket as including the one
site-specific amendment and no suggested text amendments.
10. On September 4,2019 Community Development issued an integrated Staff Report and State
Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)Addendum analyzing the one site-specific proposal on the Final
Docket and offering a recommendation for approval.
11. On September 18,2019,the Planning Commission held a duly-noticed public hearing to receive spoken
testimony related to proposed site-specific amendment,and written comments were accepted from
September 4,2019 through the close of the public hearing.
12. The Planning Commission began deliberations on the proposed amendment after the close of the hearing
on September 18,2019,and deliberations continued on October 16,2019.
13. Incorporated by reference in this recommendation report are the meeting minutes and audio recordings
from Planning Commission meetings held on September 18,2019,and on October 16,2019,during
which deliberations took place and the recommendations were formulated.
14. The Planning Commission recommendation differs the staff recommendation for the site-specific
proposal.
15. Pursuant to JCC Section 18.45.080,for all proposed amendments the Planning Commission shall develop
findings and conclusions and a recommendation which considers the growth management indicators set
forth in Section 18.45.050(4XbXi)through(vii),as well as in Section 18.45.080(1)(b)(i)through(iii).
For site-specific amendment proposals,the Planning Commission shall also develop additional required
findings and conclusions considering 18.45.080(1)(c)(i)through(viii).
16. Inquiry into the growth management indicators referenced in#15 above was begun for the 2019 Docket
through the September 4,2019 DCD integrated Staff Report and SEPA Addendum. Planning
Commission findings and conclusions with respect to the growth management indicators are augmented
by the September 4,2019 staff findings and conclusions,except when and as noted below.
17. Pursuant to Chapter 18.45 JCC,the Planning Commission enters the following findings and conclusions:
A) Growth Management Indicators 18.45.050(4)(b)(i)through(4Xb)(vii)
(I) Whether growth and development as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan is occurring faster or
slower than anticipated,or is failing to materialize.
Growth and development are occurring as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan.
(ii) Whether the capacity of the county to provide adequate services has diminished or increased.
The capacity of the county to provide adequate services has remained the same.
(iii) Whether sufficient urban land is designated and zoned to meet projected demand and need.
Sufficient urban land is designated and zoned to meet projected demand and need.
(iv) Whether any assumptions upon which the Comprehensive Plan is based are no longer found to be
valid.
No. The assumptions upon which the Comprehensive Plan is base are still valid.
(v) Whether changes in countywide attitudes necessitate amendments to the goals of the Plan and the
basic values embodied within the Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement.
No. The recommendation is consistent with countywide attitudes,goals of the plan,and values
embodied within the Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement.
(vi) Whether changes in circumstances dictate a need for amendments.
No.There are no change in circumstances dictating a need for the amendment.
(vii) Whether inconsistencies exist between the Comprehensive Plan and the Growth Management
Act or the Comprehensive Plan and the Countywide Planning Policy for Jefferson County.
There are no inconsistencies that exist.
B) Required Findings: 18.45.080(1)(bxi)through(iii)
(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 Comprehensive Plan
No. Circumstances relating to the proposed amendment or the area in which the amendment
proposal is located have not substantially changed since adoption of the Comprehensive Plan.
(ii) Whether the assumptions upon which the 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 to the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan
No. The assumptions upon which the Comprehensive Plan is based,and upon the goals and
policies which this recommendation is based,are still valid. There is no new information
suggesting assumptions in the Comprehensive Plan are not valid.
(iii) Whether the proposed amendment reflects current widely held values of the residents of
Jefferson County.
No.The proposed amendment does not reflect current widely held values of the residents of
Jefferson County,as articulated in the Comprehensive Plan.
C) Site-Specific Required Findings: 18.45.080(1)(c)(i)through(Viii)-Site Specific Findings
(i) The proposed site-specific amendment meets concurrency requirements for transportation and
does not adversely affect adopted level of service standards for other public facilities and
services.
The proposed site-specific amendment meets concurrency requirements for transportation.The
proposed site-specific amendment does not adversely affect adopted level of service standards
for other public facilities and services.
(ii) The proposed site-specific amendment is consistent with the goals,policies,and implementation
strategies of the various elements of the Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed site-specific amendment is not consistent with the goals,policies,and
implementation strategies of the various elements of the 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.
The Planning Commission finds that there is reasonable concern that the proposal will have
impacts to environmental features such as wetlands,and environmental processes such as surface
water attenuation and storage,that cannot be mitigated.
(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 access,provision of utilities and compatibility with
existing and planned surrounding land uses.
No.The Planning Commission finds that the current zoning of the parcel is the most appropriate,
and that the subject parcel is not physically suited for the proposed change in zoning,and not
compatible with the surrounding physical circumstances of the area such as surface water
drainage.
(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.
The Planning Commission finds that the site-specific amendment will create a pressure to change
the land use designation of other properties,and would not be in the long-term best interests of
the county.
(vi) The proposed site-specific amendment does not materially affect land use and population growth
projections that are the basis of the Comprehensive Plan.
Agree.The Planning Commission finds that this individual proposed zoning change will not
materially affect and growth projections and comprehensive land use plans.
(vii) If within an unincorporated urban growth area(UGA),the proposed site-specific amendment
does not affect the adequacy or availability of urban facilities and services to the immediate area
and the overall UGA.
The proposed site-specific amendment proposal is not within an urban growth area.
(viii) The proposed amendment is consistent with the Growth Management Act(RCW 36.70A),the
Countywide Planning Policies for Jefferson County,any other applicable inter jurisdictional
policies or agreements,and any other local, state or federal laws.
The Planning Commission finds that the zoning amendment proposal is not consistent with the
Growth Management Act and planning policies for Jefferson County.
C) Findings Regarding the Record
1. The Planning Commission's recommendation is based upon the record, including the guidance
provided by GMA,the County-Wide Planning Policies,the Jefferson County Comprehensive
Plan,Jefferson County Code,Comprehensive Plan, September 4,2019 Integrated Staff Report
and SEPA Addendum, and hearing records.The Planning Commission asks the Board of County
Commissioners to please make note of the public comments specific to this matter.
2. The Planning Commission finds that assertions in the record can be confirmed by information
from other sources.
3. The Planning Commission finds that the recommendation satisfies legal criteria.
4. The Planning Commission finds that the recommendation is limited to the specific amendment
proposal at hand.
Planning Commission Conclusions&Recommendation
The Planning Commission believes that the current land designation of Rural Residential 1:10 is correctly
applied because of the critical areas and potential increase in storm water and surface water impacts from
additional up-zoning in the area.
The Jefferson County Planning Commission submits this recommendation for consideration by the Board of
County Commissioners:
Based on these findings and conclusions,upon guidance from the Growth Management Act,the Jefferson County
Comprehensive Plan,submitted written material by the applicants and staff,written and oral public testimony,
and formal deliberation concerning the site-specific proposal on the 2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Final
Docket,the Jefferson County Planning Commission voted on October 16,2019,4-3 to deny the 2019
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Proposal MLA19-00013 and recommend that the BoCC deny the proposal
to amend the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map.
�� .1.
/%//,
Michael Nilsse Planning Commission Chair Date