HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-04-2020 PC Agenda PacketJefferson County Planning Commission
MEETING AGENDA
Virtual Meeting (no in-person attendance allowed per Gov. Inslee’s Proclamation 20-28)
Phone-in information located at the bottom of this agenda
November 4, 2020
P: 360-379-4450
621 Sheridan St. F: 360-379-4451
Port Townsend WA 98368 plancomm@co.jefferson.wa.us
Regular Meeting
5:30pm Welcome (chair) and Overview Presentation
Call to Order/Roll Call
Approval of Agenda
Approval of previous Meeting Minutes
Planning Commissioner Updates
Director’s Update
5:35pm Observer Comment
See Observer Comment Conduct, below.
Regular Meeting Business
Shoreline Master Program Periodic Update – Task Force Scoping Documents
Update/Review ......................................................................... David Wayne Johnson
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Cycle – 2020 Final Docket
Update/Review and Process Schedule ............. Linda Paralez, David Wayne Johnson
6:30pm Adjournment
Thank you for coming and participating in your government at work!
Observer Comment Conduct: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the observer comment period is …
1) 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;
2) Offered at the Chair’s discretion when there is time;
3) Not a public hearing – comments made during this time
will not be part of any hearing record;
4) May be structured with a three‐minute per person time
limit.
Virtual Meeting Phone-in Information: You can dial in using your phone by calling: +1 (646) 749‐3122;
Access Code: 883‐126‐605
Jefferson County Planning Commission
MEETING MINUTES Virtual Meeting (no in-person attendance allowed per Gov. Inslee’s Proclamation 20-28) September 16, 2020 P: 360-379-4450 621 Sheridan St. F: 360-379-4451 Port Townsend WA 98368 plancomm@co.jefferson.wa.us
Regular Business
5:30 pm Welcome (chair) and Overview Presentation
• Call to Order/Roll Call
District 1 District 2 District 3 Alen: Present Coker: Present Koan: Present Sircely: Present Smith: Present Vacant: Hull: Present Nilssen: Present Llewelyn: Present
• Approval of previous Meeting Minutes
Minutes for 09-02-2020 were approved. 8 yays; 0 nays; 0 abstentions. Observer Comment
The Chair opened the floor to public comment and no one spoke. Regular Business • Shoreline Master Program Periodic Update
Introduction/Kickoff David Wayne Johnson
• See Project Website:
https://www.jeffersoncountypublichealth.org/1481/Shoreline-Master-Program-
Periodic-Review.
See Public Participation Plan. 6:14 pm Adjournment
• The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for 10/07/2020 at 5:30 pm
virtually using gotomeeting.com.
These meeting minutes were approved this ____________ day of ___________________________, 2020. Richard Hull, Chair Nicole Allen, PC Secretary/DCD Office Coordinator
October 12, 2020
1
Shoreline Master Program Periodic
Review 2020
Jefferson County | Scoping Document
Table of Contents
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 2
Background ................................................................................................................................................................. 2
Scoping Document Framework ................................................................................................................................ 2
Public Engagement and Task Force ........................................................................................................................ 2
Required and Recommended SMP Periodic Review Topics .................................................................. 3
Task Force Review Elements ..................................................................................................................................... 3
SMP Periodic Checklist Evaluation .......................................................................................................................... 4
County SMP Docket ................................................................................................................................................... 7
Issues Not Recommended to Be Included in Scope ............................................................................... 7
Appendix A: Summary of Public Scoping Comments ........................................................................... 9
Appendix B: Task Force Membership .................................................................................................. 10
October 12, 2020 Jefferson County | Shoreline Master Program Periodic Review Scoping Document 2
Introduction
BACKGROUND
Jefferson County is undertaking a periodic review of its Shoreline Master Program (SMP) as required by
the Washington State Shoreline Management Act (SMA), RCW 90.58.080(4). The SMA requires each
SMP be reviewed and revised, if needed, on an eight-year schedule established by the Legislature.
Jefferson County jointly adopted its current SMP in 2014 with the Washington Department of Ecology
and is due to complete its periodic review by June 2021.
The SMP applies to all marine waters, lakes over 20 acres, and larger streams (over 20 cubic feet per
second) as well as associated wetlands and uplands at least 200 feet from the shoreline.
The periodic review ensures the SMP stays current with changes in laws and rules, remains consistent with
other Jefferson County plans and regulations, and is responsive to changed circumstances, new
information and improved data.
SCOPING DOCUMENT FRAMEWORK
This Scoping Document lays out the parameters of the SMP periodic review and revision, identifying
potential areas of review that are mandatory or supported by the community, including shoreline
environment topics and shoreline development policies and regulations that should be considered in the
SMP review. This document:
▪ Reviews amendments to Chapter 90.58 RCW and Ecology rules (WAC) that have occurred since
Jefferson County’s SMP was adopted in 2014.
▪ Identifies potential areas of review to address changing local circumstances, new information or
improved data.
▪ Considers potential changes to eliminate redundancies and improve clarity as well as address
revisions consistent with regulatory reform (Resolution 17-19).
▪ Considers various constraints such as the requirements of State Law, staffing capacity, and resource.
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND TASK FORCE
Jefferson County established a public participation plan and solicited the input of members of the public
including through a story map and survey. A summary of comments appears in Appendix A.
An appointed Task Force advised the Jefferson County Department of Community Development (DCD) on
the SMP Periodic Review. The meetings were open to the public, and comment opportunities were
provided. The Task Force met weekly in September and October 2020 to serve as a sounding board to
consider possible revisions to the current SMP through the lens of regulatory reform (Resolution 17-19).
The Task Force membership is listed in Appendix B: Task Force Membership.
October 12, 2020 Jefferson County | Shoreline Master Program Periodic Review Scoping Document 3
Required and Recommended SMP Periodic Review Topics
TASK FORCE REVIEW ELEMENTS
Following are topics that the Task Force identified as possible subjects for review in the SMP to reflect
local conditions, trends, and information.
Exhibit 1. Task Force: Potential SMP Periodic Review Proposals
Item Topic Description of SMP Review Element/Approach Rationale
Review Conditional Use
Permits and Variance
Permits for Proper Level
of Review
Maintain protective standards to achieve no-net-loss of
shoreline ecological function, but reduce unnecessary
CUPs/variances. Potentially adjust administrative versus
discretionary CUPs. Examples include but are not limited
to: existing single family home expansions and septic
systems.
Meet environmental
protection and
address regulatory
reform.
Mooring buoys Review permit type and standards for buoys compared to
other shoreline facilities for boating. Consider where
there are good locations for buoys. Review buoy
standards versus anchoring, and unintended consequences
of SMP regulations. Clarify permitting standards
surrounding eelgrass beds, including differences between
areas with eelgrass patches and full eelgrass coverage.
Consider appropriate number or density of buoys.
Clarify SMP. Allow
best practices that
minimize
environmental
impact. Address
regulatory reform.
Climate change and sea
level rise
Add in Comprehensive Plan climate policies like Option 1.
Plus, strive for consistency with Port Townsend’s SMP.
Ensure that policies and permit standards do not limit
projects that are proactively addressing projections in sea
level rise due to climate change. Consider elevation, not
just distance from the ordinary highwater mark, for
shoreline permitting.
Proactively address
climate change and
sea-level rise
particularly for
activities with long-
life.
Marine trades and
economic development
Ensure SMP permitting process does not unduly burden
marine trades.
Recognize important
sectors that support
economy and water
oriented uses.
Boat Launches Encourage development of new public boat launches and
improvement of existing boat launches in SMP.
Lack of boat
launches, condition
of existing.
October 12, 2020 Jefferson County | Shoreline Master Program Periodic Review Scoping Document 4
Item Topic Description of SMP Review Element/Approach Rationale
Shorelines of Statewide
Significance
Review how Shoreline Management Act purposes are
carried out with use allowances and permitting.
Clarify how SMP is
carried out on
shorelines identified
for optimal
implementation of
SMP.
SMP PERIODIC CHECKLIST EVALUATION
The following items appear to be required to address in the SMP Periodic Review following evaluation
with the Washington Department of Ecology Periodic Checklist that identifies recently amended state
laws applicable to SMPs.
Exhibit 2. Periodic Review Checklist Required Amendments
Item Topic Rationale
2017 d - Ecology amended rules clarifying permit
filing procedures consistent with a 2011 statute.
Match State rule.
The following items are under review for a consistency evaluation with the Washington Department of
Ecology Periodic Checklist; the items may move to other exhibits as required or as not necessary to carry
forward, accordingly. Ecology will review for consistency as well as Jefferson County, and some items
may require adjustment in SMP.
Exhibit 3. Periodic Review Checklist Items Under Review for Consistency
Item Topic Rationale
2016 b – Ecology updated wetlands critical areas
guidance including implementation guidance for the
2014 wetlands rating system.
SMP adopts critical areas regulations by
reference with some exceptions. Determine
if updated reference is needed. The new
critical areas ordinance does address 2014
wetlands rating system.
2011 a - Ecology adopted a rule requiring that
wetlands be delineated in accordance with the
approved federal wetland delineation manual.
SMP adopts critical areas regulations by
reference with some exceptions. Determine
if updated reference is needed. Reference
new critical areas ordinance which does
address manual.
2011 b - Ecology adopted rules for new commercial Currently double checking consistency.
October 12, 2020 Jefferson County | Shoreline Master Program Periodic Review Scoping Document 5
Item Topic Rationale
geoduck aquaculture. Given date of rules and date of SMP
adoption, likely in alignment.
2009 b - Ecology adopted a rule for certifying
wetland mitigation banks.
Allowance for mitigation bank in SMP.
Critical areas ordinance recently amended
addresses in lieu fee. SMP adopts critical
areas regulations by reference with some
exceptions.
2007 a The Legislature clarified options for defining
"floodway" as either the area that has been
established in FEMA maps, or the floodway criteria set
in the SMA.
It appears the adopted SMP definition is
similar to Ecology example language.
Consider reviewing for consistency with
CAO as well. Ecology indicates County can
choose the example definition option but a
change for further consistency would need
to be made in the SMP.
The following items are not required amendments, but are optional amendments identified as a result of
the SMP Periodic Review Checklist that could assist with SMP implementation or clarity. They could be
supportive of the County’s Regulatory Reform initiative.
Exhibit 4. Periodic Review Checklist Optional Amendments
Row Topic Rationale
2017 a - OFM adjusted the cost threshold for
substantial development to $7,047.
Optional since SMP references a threshold
“or as adjusted” by state legislature.
Would improve clarity. Ecology suggests
changing value or changing to citation;
approach up to County but Ecology would
require a change.
2017 b - Ecology permit rules clarified the definition
of “development” does not include dismantling or
removing structures.
Optional revision to add text for clarity &
document improvement.
2017 c - Ecology adopted rules clarifying exceptions
to local review under the SMA.
Optional text revision to add language for
clarity and to ensure consistent
implementation.
October 12, 2020 Jefferson County | Shoreline Master Program Periodic Review Scoping Document 6
Row Topic Rationale
2017 e - Ecology amended forestry use regulations
to clarify that forest practices that only involves timber
cutting are not SMA “developments” and do not
require shoreline substantial development permits.
Make optional text revision to incorporate
example language to ensure consistent
implementation.
2017 f - Ecology clarified the SMA does not apply to
lands under exclusive federal jurisdiction
Optional text revision for clarity. Per
Ecology: Olympic National Park is one of
two such locations established by statute
and County is encouraged to address this
issue, likely in JCC 18.25.020 Applicability.
2017 h - Ecology adopted rule amendments to clarify
the scope and process for conducting periodic
reviews.
The periodic review requirements apply
regardless of SMP inclusion. Optional text
revision to add example language for
clarity.
2016 a - The Legislature created a new shoreline
permit exemption for retrofitting existing structure to
comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Optional text revision for clarity to add
example language. Ecology suggests
including in full like other exemptions or
changing to citations. Jefferson County can
determine approach. Change of some kind
would likely be required.
2015 a - The Legislature adopted a 90-day target for
local review of Washington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT) projects.
The review timeline target applies
regardless of SMP inclusion. Optional text
revision to add example language.
2014 a - The Legislature created a new definition and
policy for floating on-water residences legally
established before 7/1/2014.
Optional text revision to sync up terms used
and Definitions with RCW 90.58.270. Per
Ecology, though none exist and the SMP
prohibits new residential in/over water,
County may want to revise the existing
term ‘floating house’ and definitions to
reflect these terms defined by
statute/WAC
2011 c - The Legislature created a new definition and
policy for floating homes permitted or legally
established prior to January 1, 2011.
Same as above.
2011 d - The Legislature authorizing a new option to Optional revision to add text implementing
October 12, 2020 Jefferson County | Shoreline Master Program Periodic Review Scoping Document 7
Row Topic Rationale
classify existing structures as conforming. WAC 173-26-241(3.j) at (6.A).
2009 a - The Legislature created new “relief”
procedures for instances in which a shoreline
restoration project within a UGA creates a shift in
Ordinary High Water Mark.
The process may be used regardless of
SMP inclusion. Optional text revision.
COUNTY SMP DOCKET
In addition to the optional text revisions above, County staff have developed a list of SMP Docket items
meant to address SMP inconsistencies or discrepancies found during the first five years of implementing
the SMP.
Issues Not Recommended to Be Included in Scope
The following items have been evaluated in the SMP Periodic Review Checklist and results showed no
action was required to address the subject in the SMP.
Exhibit 5. Issues Not Recommended to be Included in Scope
Row Topic Rationale
2019 a - OFM adjusted the cost threshold for
building freshwater docks
No action required
2019 b - The Legislature removed the requirement for
a shoreline permit for disposal of dredged materials
at Dredged Material Management Program sites
(applies to 9 jurisdictions)
No action required
2019 c - The Legislature added restoring native
kelp, eelgrass beds and native oysters as fish
habitat enhancement projects.
No action required. Per Ecology, consider
the expanded language at WAC 173-27-
040(2)(p) with the more explicit citation to
RCW 77.55.181.
2017 i - Ecology adopted a new rule creating an
optional SMP amendment process that allows for a
shared local/state public comment period.
No action required – the optional joint
review process per WAC 173-26-104
applies regardless of SMP inclusion.
2017 j - Submittal to Ecology of proposed SMP
amendments.
No action required – the submittal
requirements of WAC 173-26-110 and -
120 apply regardless of SMP inclusion.
October 12, 2020 Jefferson County | Shoreline Master Program Periodic Review Scoping Document 8
Row Topic Rationale
2017 g - Ecology clarified “default” provisions for
nonconforming uses and development.
No action required due to State rule. This
rule is a default rule that only applies if a
local government has no provisions in its
local SMP addressing nonconforming uses.
However, Jefferson County may clarify its
SMP with revised definition of
nonconforming in JCC Article II, 18.25.100.
2012 a - The Legislature amended the SMA to clarify
SMP appeal procedures.
No action required – the statutory & rule
requirements apply regardless of SMP
inclusion.
2010 a - The Legislature adopted Growth
Management Act – Shoreline Management Act
clarifications.
SMP adopted well after 2010 and no
known clarifications are needed.
2009 c - The Legislature added moratoria authority
and procedures to the SMA.
No action required – the statutory
provisions apply regardless of SMP
inclusion.
2007 b - Ecology amended rules to clarify that
comprehensively updated SMPs shall include a list
and map of streams and lakes that are in shoreline
jurisdiction.
No action required
2007 c - Ecology’s rule listing statutory exemptions
from the requirement for an SDP was amended to
include fish habitat enhancement projects that conform
to the provisions of RCW 77.55.181.
No action required
October 12, 2020 Jefferson County | Shoreline Master Program Periodic Review Scoping Document 9
Appendix A: Summary of Public Scoping Comments
[Insert survey summary here when complete.]
October 12, 2020 Jefferson County | Shoreline Master Program Periodic Review Scoping Document 10
Appendix B: Task Force Membership
Arlene Alen, Planning Commission Member, District 1
Lorna Smith, Planning Commission Member, District 2
Richard Hull, Planning Commission Member, District 3
Cliff O’Brien – Port Ludlow Associates, Residential/Commercial Construction & Development
Gordon King – Taylor Shellfish, Aquaculture
Amy Leitman – Marine Surveys & Assessments, Marine Biologist
Chris Kelley – Oceanographer, Aquaculture
Brent Vadopalas – Citizen at large District 1, Aquaculture
Phil Andrus – Citizen at large District 2, former County Planning Commissioner
David Wilkinson – Climate Action Committee, Atmospheric Science
Craig Durgan – Citizen at large District 3, PUD#1
Ron Rempel – Citizen at large District 2, Wildlife Biologist
October 12, 2020
1
Shoreline Master Program Docket/Code Interpretations
Jefferson County staff have identified a series of changes to improve interpretation and application of
the Shoreline Master Program (SMP). This list is preliminary and subject to change.
SMP Docket – Preliminary
Num Staff
Tracking
Docket Request JCC Section Proposed Action
1 Non-conforming
uses/development
clarification
18.25.660 Clarify with revised definition of
nonconforming in Article II,18.25.100.
2 SMP/Critical Area
clarification
18.25.270(4)(a)(i) This subsection was intended to mean that
critical area regulations in Chapter 18.22
are to be used, but where there are
discrepancies (such as those pertaining to
buffers, nonconforming development, etc.),
then the SMP prevails. Clarify how the SMP
subsections pertaining to critical areas
interact with critical area regulations in
Chapter 18.22.
3 Shoreline Designations
for State Parks
Review all shoreline designations for State
Parks considering designation (conservancy
or natural) and shoreline access for
conditions and revise where warranted.
4 References subsection
(3)(c), but reference for
interference should be
(4)(c).
18.25.440(4)(d) Change reference to (3)(c) to (4)(c)(i)
5 JCC 18.25.630(18) &
(19) should be in
18.25.620 as (7) and (8)
18.25.620 & .630 Move subsections (18) & (19) of 18.25.630
to 18.25.620 and re-number as subsections
(7) & (8)
6 Parcel #921000001 on
Indian Island is State
DNR Land, but does not
have a shoreline
designation. Appears to
have been lumped in
with N/A for Federal
Exempt Lands.
Review and revise where warranted.
Consider Periodic Review Checklist and laws
regarding federal lands to extent
applicable.
8 Clarify that west end
rivers are aquatic below
OHWM
18.25.210(3) Review and revise where warranted.
9 Definition of Shoreline of
Statewide Significance
JCC
18.25.100(19)(w)(i),(ii)
Delete subsection 18.25.100(w)(ii) and re-
number subsequent subsections. Delete
October 12, 2020 Jefferson County| SMP Code Docket - Preliminary 2
Num Staff
Tracking
Docket Request JCC Section Proposed Action
are duplicates in JCC
18.25.100(19)(w)(i) and
(ii). JC
18.25.100(19)(vii) refers
to both (i)and (ii), should
ensure the correct
subsections are reflected.
and (iv) and JCC
18.25.240
reference to (ii) in subsection (vii) (to be new
subsection (vi) after re-numbering).
Shorelines of statewide significance should
be verbatim from WAC
12 Aquaculture: clarify
when a SDP is needed.
18.25.440(4)(e): 'not'
is consistent with (4)(c)
and reference change
from (1)(b) to say
(4)(b)
Review in concert with SMP Periodic Review
Checklist. Consider deleting reference to (1)
from (4)e to just read (b). Delete text "or
conditional use permit (CUP)"
17 Revise nonconforming lot
definition from
"…minimum lot size…"
to "minimum lot
depth…", and check how
it is used relative to the
modest home provision
and the common line
buffer.
18.25.100(14)(h), and
possibly
18.25.270(5)(a) and
(b)
Clarify with revised definition of
nonconforming in Article II,18.25.100.
Change the text "size" to "depth."
Incorporate Code Interpretation regarding
non-conforming lot if warranted.
19 Clarify that the applicant
must demonstrate erosion
from wave energy to
approve soft shore
stabilization; also, revise
policies to include soft
shore stabilization. Add
soft shore stabilization
regulations.
18.25.410 Geotechnical report should suffice.
20 Revise watershed
restoration exemptions to
be consistent with state
law. Exemptions 15 and
17 are definitions, not
exemptions. Clarify that
exemption 16 has no
shoreline permitting fee,
per RCW 90.58.515.
18.25.560(15), (16),
and (17)
Revise 18.25.560 Exemptions to consolidate
subsections (15), (16) & (17).
21 Specify report
requirements for NNL;
consider referencing
requirements for CAO
report requirements in
18.22.
18.25.270 Approach is under review.
23 Clarify area included in
25% increase for both
18.25.440((4)(b)(i) Add text, "This applies to both in-water and
above OHWM development."
October 12, 2020 Jefferson County| SMP Code Docket - Preliminary 3
Num Staff
Tracking
Docket Request JCC Section Proposed Action
in-water and above
OHWM development.
24 JCC 18.25.410(5)(iii) has
wrong code reference to
flood regulations.
JCC 18.25.410(5)(iii) Change text reference in JCC
18.25.410(5)(c)(iii) from "JCC 18.30.070" to
"JCC 15.15."
25 Review if text should
reference fewer than 4
residential lots as it
would otherwise be
inconsistent.
JCC 18.25.410(6)(h) Change text reference in JCC
18.25.410(6)(h) from "more" to "less."
28 Provide guidance on
requirements and/or
evaluating aesthetic
reports.
Add text to 18.25.440(6)(b) "including what
views in the vicinity would be altered or
obstructed and propose measures to reduce
impacts," after "aesthetic qualities of the
shoreline."
31 Why is section is silent on
notices for Type II
permits, but spells out
process on Type I and III
permits?
JCC 18.25.650 Add text "II &" to 18.25.650(1)(b) "Type III
project permit…". Permit procedures should
reference other processes in UDC and not
duplicate or create new.
32 Side yard setback
language is confusing.
SMP does not establish
side yard setbacks, and
JCC 18.30 does not
identify side yard
setbacks based off of
zoning which makes it
confusing for in water.
JCC 18.25.300(2)(b) Replace text in 18.25.300(2)(b), "Five feet
of the total required side yard setbacks may
be provided on one side and the balance on
the other side," with, "The standard side
yard setback is five feet." Review for
consistency with zoning.
35 Unclear if C(a) permit
and SSDP requires a
Type III process. What is
the process for stand-
alone SSDP (yes use, but
SSDP required)?
JCC 18.25.620 JCC 18.25.620(3) & (4) are clear that C(a)
and C(d) are processed as Type IIs. Add new
subsection that SDPs shall be processed as a
Type I permit. Delete text "substantial
development permits and," from
18.25.620(2). Re-number existing
subsections to include new subsection.
41 Consider adding in
definitions in for
waterward and lateral
as associated with
implementing code
language.
JCC 18.25.100 Add definition under 18.25.100(12) for
"Lateral," to define expansion in relation to
the OHWM.
42 Provide clarification on
vegetation maintenance
requirements and how it
is applicable to clearing
JCC 18.25.310 Delete "new" from 18.25.310(2)(d).
October 12, 2020 Jefferson County| SMP Code Docket - Preliminary 4
Num Staff
Tracking
Docket Request JCC Section Proposed Action
for new development,
such as a single family
residence, or just for
views.
45 Revise CASP from a
Type III to a Type I
process and when it is
used in shoreline
jurisdiction - current
language is awkward.
JCC 18.25.270(4)(l) Replace text of last sentence in
18.25.270(4)(l) to read, "such buffer
modification shall require a Type I
Substantial Development Permit (SDP).”
Address consistency with CAO.
46 Clarify if non-conforming
lateral expansion is a
C(a) or a C(d)
JCC 18.25.660(9) Replace text in 18.25.660(9) that reads,
"with a Conditional Use Permit," to read,"
with a Type I Substantial Development
Permit (SDP)"
47 Non-conforming
expansion: change
foundation walls to roof
line to (8) and (10), and
consider adding similar
roof line language to (9).
JCC 18.25.660 Revise text in 18.25.660(8)(b) that reads,
"beyond the existing structures' foundation
walls," to read, " beyond the structures'
legally permitted development footprint."
Add revised text above to 18.25.660(9),
and revise same to 18.25.660(10)(a).
49 Clarify that expansions
to existing residential
development can use the
modest home provisions;
not just new SFR
development.
JCC 18.25.270(5) Delete the text "New" under
18.25.270(5)(a).
50 Clarify if an unclassified
conditional use is a C,
C(a), or C(d). If it is
determined to be a C
(i.e., Type III), then the
CUP definition in JCC
18.25.100(3)(q) needs
to be revised. If there is
no C (Type III) in the
shoreline regulations,
that should be clarified
in JCC 18.25.600.
JCC 18.25.600;
possibly, JCC
18.25.100(3)(q)
Revise text in 18.25.600 that reads, "may
be authorized as conditional uses…" to
read, "may be authorized as a Discretionary
Conditional Use "C(d)" permit, provided…"
51 Need to add a definition
for "active use" within the
shoreline buffer.
JCC 18.25.270(4)(i) Create definition for "active use" in
18.25.100(1)
52 Revise to say …common-
line buffer, if
applicable...
JCC
18.25.270(5)(a)(iii)
Addition text to 18.25.270(5)(a)(iii) to
read,"common-line buffer, if applicable;
and"
October 12, 2020 Jefferson County| SMP Code Docket - Preliminary 5
Num Staff
Tracking
Docket Request JCC Section Proposed Action
56 Change reference from
3(c) to 4(c) (page 18-
168.26)
JCC 18.25.440(4)(d) Replace "(3)" in 18.25.440(4)(d) to "(4)."
64 These two sections
contradict each other. If
new beach access is
prohibited in marine
feeder bluffs, why would
it be allowed if the
project is shown not to
adversely affect?
Possibly the intent is to
allow these structures on
feeder bluffs if geotech
says there is no adverse
impact. 340(2) is too
restrictive.
JCC 18.25.340(2) and
(4)(j)
Redefine "feeder bluff" under
18.25.100(6)(d). Delete subsections
18.25.340(2) and (4)(d)(ii). Revisit the
prohibitions for feeder bluffs.
65 Clarify if all streams
requires a 150-foot
buffer in all shoreline
environments or if it is
only those identified as
"shorelines" in 90.58
RCW (>20cfs)
JCC 18.25.270(4)e(iii) Shoreline buffers apply to S type streams
only. Add text to 18.25.270(4)(e)(iii) to read
"Stream/River (flows greater than20 cubic
feet per second) Shores."
67 Maintenance trimming
seems to only be
allowed for "new"
shoreline uses. Should
also extend to existing
uses.
JCC 18.25.310(2)(d) Delete the text "new" under
18.25.310(2)(d).
68 Exempt ADU's as
appurtenances.
JCC 18.25.560 and
Appurtenance
definitions
Add the text "Accessory Dwelling Units
(ADU)," to 18.25.100(1)(aa).
City of Bonney Lake is doing this for
example.
70 JCC 18.25.660(8)(9)
planting plan needs to
be more explicit re: if a
habitat management
plan by a biologist is
required.
JCC 18.25.660(8) &
(9)
Define what is needed in a "planting plan" in
subsections 18.25.660(8) & (9).Clarify
planting plan related to other SMP
standards and definitions with attention to
regulatory reform to address implementation
needs and avoid unnecessary paperwork
and expense.
Regular Agenda 10:30am
JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA REQUEST
TO: Board of County Commissioners (BoCC)
Philip Morley, County Administrator
FROM: Linda Paralez, Acting Director, Department of Community Development
David Wayne Johnson, Associate Planner, DCD
DATE: October 26, 2020
SUBJECT: Continued deliberations and final BoCC action to determine the Final
Docket of the 2020 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment Cycle.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Jefferson County Planning Commission’s Report and Recommendation for the 2020
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Final Docket
• Department of Community Development’s Review and Recommendation on the 2020
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Preliminary Docket
• Resolution 25-20
• Notice of Public Hearing
• Written Public Comments received to date
STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Pursuant to county code JCC 18.45.060(4), a duly noticed public
hearing was held on October 19, 2020 to take verbal and consider written public testimony on
whether the Board of County Commissioners will adopt the Jefferson County planning
commission' s recommended final docket of five suggested amendments to Jefferson County's
Comprehensive Plan, including consideration by the County Commissioners whether to add or
subtract suggested amendment items from the planning commission' s recommended final
docket. Though the public hearing portion was completed, the BoCC requires additional time
during this meeting to deliberate and take action to determine and adopt a final docket for the
2020 annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment cycle.
ANALYSIS: The Commissioners stated at the regular session Board of County
Commissioners meeting on September 28, 2020, and also during deliberations on October 19,
2020, that they will likely add to the recommended final docket the Brinnon Subarea
Wastewater Treatment Development Regulations which was part of the preliminary docket,
and also consider the Planning Commission recommendation of review and amendment of
JCC 18. 20. 295 Recreational Marijuana addressing community concerns regarding land use
issues experienced with recreational marijuana production in rural residential zones. The
Regular Agenda 10:30am
BoCC is also likely to remove from the recommended final docket MLA19-00018 to rescind
provisions of the Forest Transition Overlay zone, MLA 19-00020 new regulations using " Eco
ADU" for Accessory Dwelling Units, and MLA19-00023 adding a work item to the Housing
Element' s Action Plan.
Note that all deadlines under JCC 18.45 for adoption of the final docket were suspended by
adoption of Resolution No. 25-20 (attached), which also requires BoCC take final legislative
action on the final 2020 docket by February 26, 2021. DCD recommends that only one (1)
suggested Comp Plan Amendment (MLA20-00102) to update the Port Hadlock Sewer Capital
Facilities plan be included in the final docket, along with one (1) site specific amendment
(MLA20-00039), which is automatically included in the final docket per JCC 18.45.050(3).
DCD’s recommendation is based upon guidance from Resolution 25-20, staffing levels and
capacity, time lost due to the COVID19 pandemic, and time remaining to complete the
amendment cycle before BoCC final action in February 2021.
A potential scope for review and amendment of JCC 18.20.295 Recreational Marijuana is to
develop a focused workplan that looks at changing RR1:5 zone from conditional use to not
allowed.
With the Brinnon Subarea Wastewater Treatment Development Regulations the narrow focus
work would identify those properties that Environmental Health determines could/should hook
up to the Dosewallips State park’s wastewater treatment facility, addressing failing septic
systems. GMA does allow sanitary sewer infrastructure in rural areas if it is to abate an
environmental problem, does not induce sprawling development, and is affordable by the
community that it serves. This docket item would address requirements of GMA to allow
limited service by the Park system.
The most significant challenge to completion of these two additional docket items between
now and February is the ability to adequately conduct the required public process.
Fortunately, many of the technical issues for both docket items are well researched and
understood by staff, the planning commission and many citizens of Jefferson County.
However, we are still required to conduct the work in an open and transparent way. The
following graphic illustrates a ‘typical’ docket process for a site specific change that was
scheduled over seven months.
June July August Sept October November December
Workplan Staff report Planning
Commission
PC hearing
and public
comment
PC workshop
and
deliberations
PC
recommendations
to BoCC, BoCC
hearing and
public comment
(if needed) Direct
DCD to write
ordinance
Adopt
ordinance
A proposed timeline for both additional docket items (assumes no significant public concerns
or issues with these narrowly scoped docket items):
Regular Agenda 10:30am
November December January February
Scoping
Workplan
Consultant Hire(s)
Complete work
Staff Report Drafts
Coordinate with David
on other Docket items
Planning Commission
workshop(s), potential
hearings and comment
Final Staff Report
elements
Planning Commission
recommendations
BoCC adopt
recommendations for all
docket items
FISCAL IMPACT: Fiscal impacts differ by docket item, depending on how the work will be
accomplished. Each docket item will involve consulting support, additional administrative
staffing and/or additional planning staff time possibly needing additional financial support
from the general fund or other funds. Estimated costs for including each docket item are listed
below.
• Hadlock Sewer - $5,200 + ($65,000 prior cost – revised sewer plan) - Sewer Fund cost
• Marijuana - $15,000 ($7,500 consulting + $7,500 planning & admin staff)
• Forest Transition Overlay - $11,800
• Eco EDU - $42,600
• Housing Innovative Tech - $14,600
• Brinnon Sub-area - $12,500
To the extent these cost estimates involve general fund supported activities at a level that
exceeds the staffing and budget already supported by the General Fund, they will be legally
restrained from using staff and budget paid for by permit revenues. Because of the very tight
timeline for the work, additional overtime, administrative and meeting costs may be incurred.
Consequently, the Board may be asked to appropriate additional General Fund transfer dollars
to support that work.
RECOMMENDATION: Continue deliberations on the Planning Commission’s report and
recommendation of the 2020 final docket and previous deliberations, and make a motion to
adopt a final 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket based upon those deliberations.
If added, limit any additional docket items to be very narrowly scoped, focused around
analysis and work mostly completed by staff. To the extent possible, streamline the public
process through planning commission and Board of County Commissioners.
Draft Motion: Review and amendment of JCC 18.20.295 Recreational Marijuana develop a
focused workplan that looks at changing RR1:5 zone from conditional use to not allowed.
Review and amendment of the Brinnon Subarea Wastewater Treatment Development
Regulations to identify those properties that Environmental Health determines could/should
hook up to the Dosewallips State park’s wastewater treatment facility, addressing failing septic
systems. This docket item would address requirements of GMA to allow limited service by the
Park system.
Regular Agenda 10:30am
REVIEWED BY:
Philip Morley, County Administrator Date
1 of 3
JEFFERSON COUNTY
STATE OF WASHINGTON
IN THE MATTER OF ESTABLISHING }
REVISED DEADLINES FOR LEGISLATIVE } RESOLUTION NO.
ACTION ON THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE }
PLAN AMENDMENT DOCKET }
WHEREAS, on February 29, 2020, Governor Jay Inslee declared a State of Emergency in
all Counties in Washington State due to the public health emergency caused by the COVID-19
virus; and
WHEREAS, on March 10, 2020, the Jefferson County Health Officer issued a Public
Health Order to control and prevent the spread of the COVID-19 virus; and
WHEREAS, on March 16, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the outbreak of
COVID-19 to be a pandemic; and
WHEREAS, on March 16, 2020, the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners (“BoCC”)
approved a Declaration of Emergency due to the COVID-19 Pandemic; and
WHEREAS, on March 24, 2020, Governor Jay Inslee signed a proclamation (20-28)
which temporarily prohibits in-person public attendance at meetings subject to the Open Public
Meetings Act and directs public agencies to conduct open public meetings through: (1)
telephonic access or electronic/internet means of remote access; and (2) provides the ability for
all persons attending the meeting to hear each other at the same time.
WHEREAS, Jefferson County has transitioned to telephone or electronic/remote access
meetings to comply with Governor Inslee’s Proclamation 20-28 and the May 29, 2020 Jefferson
County Public Health Officer Order; and
WHEREAS, the Jefferson County Department of Community Development (“DCD”) is
experiencing staffing impacts due to COVID-19, including the temporary reassignment of the
DCD Director for COVID-19 activities; and
WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.130(2)(a) and WAC 365-196-640(6)(a) require Jefferson
County to allow interested persons to suggest amendments to the Jefferson County
Comprehensive Plan or its development regulations during annual amendment cycles; and
WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.130(2)(a) requires that local governments consider their annual
amendments, together, no more than one-time per year; and
WHEREAS, the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan’s Plan Foundation and Chapter
18.45 Jefferson County Code (“JCC”) incorporates the requirement to allow interested persons to
suggest amendments to the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan or its development regulations
during the annual amendment cycle; and
2 of 3
WHEREAS, Chapter 18.45 JCC establishes a preliminary and final docketing process for
the annual amendment cycle; and
WHEREAS, JCC 18.45.050 establishes a preliminary docket which requires the following
proposed amendments to be placed on the preliminary docket: (1) formal site-specific
amendments and (2) suggested text or site-specific amendments; and
WHEREAS, JCC 18.45.040 requires that suggested amendments be submitted to DCD no
later than March 1st of each year for consideration in the final docket; and
WHEREAS, adoption of the final docket does not constitute a decision or
recommendation that the substance of any docket item should be adopted by the BoCC; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the County, considering COVID-19 and its impacts
on residents, businesses and DCD staff to suspend all remaining deadlines regarding the review,
recommendation and final adoption of 2020 docket items for DCD staff, Planning Commission
and BoCC; and
WHEREAS, on April 27, 2020 the BoCC approved Resolution No. 25-20 establishing the
2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket and establishing deadlines for legislative action;
and
WHEREAS, on August 19, 2020 the Planning Commission held a public hearing to accept
testimony regarding the suggested text amendments on the preliminary docket; and
WHEREAS, On September 2, 2020, after deliberations on the hearing record, the
Planning Commission voted 7-1 to recommend five amendments be placed on the 2020 final
docket, along with one site-specific amendment application; and
WHEREAS, on September 28, 2020 the Planning Commission’s recommendations were
presented to the BoCC and a public hearing was scheduled and held to consider the Planning
Commission’s recommended final docket on October 19, 2020; and
WHEREAS, on October 26, 2020 the BoCC deliberated on the Planning Commission’s
recommendations on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Preliminary Docket and voted
to set the final docket to three amendments, along with one site-specific amendment application;
and
WHEREAS, the COVID-19 pandemic has caused DCD staffing limitations that have
resulted in workload and time constraints in meeting the deadline established by Resolution No.
25-20.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the BoCC that in response to the COVID-19
pandemic state of emergency, the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Cycle shall be revised
as follows:
3 of 3
1. All deadlines in Chapter 18.45 JCC for the processing and adoption of 2020 docket
items, which occur after the adoption of Resolution No. 25-20 on April 27, 2020,
continue to be suspended; and
2. The Planning Commission hearing, report and recommendation to the BoCC on all items
on the 2020 final docket shall be completed no later than February 26, 2021; and
3. The BoCC shall take final legislative action on 2020 docket items by April 30, 2021,
unless extended by the BoCC consistent with WAC 365-196-640(3)(a).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution repeals and replaces Resolution No.
25-20.
APPROVED this 2nd day of November, 2020.
JEFFERSON COUTNY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
SEAL:
Greg Brotherton, Chair
Kate Dean, Member
David Sullivan, Member
ATTEST:
Carolyn Gallaway, CMC
Deputy Clerk of the Board
JEFFERSON COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION
621 Sheridan Street | Port Townsend, WA 98368
360-379-4450 | email: PlanComm@co.jefferson.wa.us
http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/580/Planning-Commission
1
TO: Jefferson County Board of Commissioners
FROM: Jefferson County Planning Commission
DATE: September 15, 2020
SUBJECT: Jefferson County Planning Commission’s Report and Recommendation for the
2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Final Docket
The Jefferson County Planning Commission (PC) has conducted its review of the 2020 Preliminary Docket
(attached) and forwards this report and recommendation to the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners
(BoCC). This report identifies those suggested text amendments the Planning Commission is recommending for
consideration by the BoCC during the annual amendment process. We have based our recommendation on
need, urgency, and appropriateness of each suggested text amendment.
Additionally, the PC recommended four (4) suggested amendments for placement on the 2019 final docket. The
PC requests these items be placed on the 2020 Preliminary Docket for further consideration by the BoCC.
Due to the COVID pandemic, and the cancellation of ten (10) PC meetings from February thru July 2020, Staff
and the PC did not communicate regarding the March 1st deadline for inclusion on the preliminary docket and
those items were not initially included on the docket. After the August 5th PC meeting, and prior to the PC Public
Hearing of August 19th, Staff placed the subject amendments on the 2020 preliminary docket.
On August 19, 2020, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to accept testimony regarding
the suggested text amendments on the Preliminary Docket. Thirty-seven written comments were received from
the public during the hearing which ended at 4:30 p. m. August 21, 2020.
The Jefferson County Planning Commission, representing the expressed will of the citizens of Jefferson County,
respectfully requests the opportunity to revisit the current marijuana, and Forest Transition Overly regulations
in order to refine, revise, remove and improve current regulations, consistent with Regulatory Reform
Resolution No. 17-19.
Further, the Jefferson County Planning Commission is advocating that the time to address pressing issues of
affordable housing with ultra-low-impact and impact-positive development is now.
We depend upon the Department of Community Development (DCD) to assist with the cultivation and analysis
of new approaches and ideas, especially when those new proposals are of an urgent planning nature. The PC
relies on DCD to provide community-based planning and analysis, it is critical that we fund additional DCD work
in the public interest in ways that are unattached to permit fees and are compatible with the Department’s
everyday operations. We submit to you the following recommendations regarding which suggested text
amendments should be placed on the Final Docket:
Jefferson County Planning Commission Recommendations on Final Docket
2020 Comprehensive Plan & Unified Development Code Annual Amendment Cycle
2
2020 Suggested Text Amendments on Preliminary Docket
Through a motion and affirmative vote with seven (7) in favor and one (1) opposed, the Jefferson County
Planning Commission at their regular scheduled meeting of September 2, 2020, recommends the following
suggested amendments be placement on the 2020 Final Docket.
MLA20-00102 Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Reflect Revisions to the Port Hadlock Sewer Plan. The Jefferson
County Department of Public Works is revising the 2008 Port Hadlock Sewer Plan to plan a more cost-effective
sewer development approach within the Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area. It is expected that the revisions to the
2008 Port Hadlock Sewer Plan will be engineering and cost related. The revisions must be incorporated into the
Comprehensive Plan’s Capital Facilities Element.
MLA19-00018. Jefferson County Planning Commission suggests an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and
Unified Development Code (UDC) to rescind provisions of the Forest Transition Overlay (FTO).
MLA19-00019. Jefferson County Planning Commission, with a high priority advocates for an immediate review
and amendment of JCC 18.20.295, Recreational Marijuana, addressing community concerns regarding land use
issues experienced with recreational marijuana production in rural residential zones. This proposed Amendment
received a strong community voice as well as considerable written communications during the Planning
Commissions August 19, 2020, Public Hearing.
MLA19-00020. Jefferson County Planning Commission suggests development of new regulations using “Eco-
ADU” as a method for permitting multiple Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) per parcel. The suggestion would
allow the existing square footage of ADUs to be allotted over multiple ADUs per parcel when certain “eco”
performance standards are met.
MLA19-00023. Jefferson County Planning Commission suggests an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan
adding a priority work item to the Housing Element’s Action Plan to “convene a panel of citizens knowledgeable
in the innovative technologies listed in Policy HS-P-2.3 to research and recommend a set of performance
measures upon which to build a set of opt-in, very-low-impact and/or impact-positive standards for Jefferson
County.” One might consider the Eco ADU (MLA19-00020) and Housing Element’s Plan (MLA19-00023) being
coordinated with and inserted onto the Jefferson County / Port Townsend Housing Action Plan Network (HAPN).
Thank you for your consideration.
___________________________________ ________________
Michael Nilssen, Chair Date