The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-10-2021 PC Agenda Packet621 Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 Jefferson County Planning Commission HEARING AGENDA Virtual Meeting (no in-person attendance allowed per Gov. Inslee’s Proclamation 20-28) February 10, 2021 P: 360-379-4450 F: 360-379-4451 plancomm@co.jefferson.wa.us To view this meeting live go to www.co.jefferson.wa.us Follow the links under “Quick Links: Videos of Meetings-Streaming Live” To call in comments or for those without internet dial: (872) 240-3212 and enter Access Code: 233-149-405# Public Hearing REGARDING PROPOSED 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROPOSALS 5:30pm Welcome (chair) and Overview Presentation  Call to Order/Roll Call  Approval of Agenda  Staff Report Presentation ............. David Wayne Johnson, Associate Planner DCD; Austin Watkins, Consultant; Bob Wheeler, Public Works Department 6:00pm Public Testimony  Opening Remarks .................................. Richard Hull, Chair, Planning Commission Closing Remarks (Chair)  Thank you for coming and participating in your government at work! Although the verbal record closes tonight, written testimony may be accepted after the close of the public hearing at the discretion of the Planning Commission. All written testimony should be directed to dwjohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us or to the Jefferson County DCD, 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368. Please include “Department of Community Development – PC Public Hearing Comments” in the subject line of all email comments submitted on this topic. Page 1 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT DOCKET February 3, 2021 David Wayne Johnson, Associate Planner – Lead, Department of Community Development Austin Watkins, Consultant, Department of Community Development Page 2 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Table of Contents I. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 3 A. Overview of 2020 Docket and Docketing Process. ......................................... 3 B. Hearing Dates, DCD Staff Contact, and Other Introductory Information. ..... 5 C. Growth Management Indicators ...................................................................... 6 II. Staff Analysis and Recommendations on 2020 Docket Items ............................ 9 A. MLA19-00019 – Text Amendments to Marijuana Related Development Regulations. ............................................................................................................ 9 B. Text Amendments to Support Sewering the Brinnon Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development. ..............................................................................30 C. MLA20-00102 – Text Amendments to Support the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update. .................................................................................47 D. MLA20-00039 – Seton Site-specific Rezone from RR1:10 to RR1:5, Parcel ID No. 001281002, Located at Airport Cutoff Road (SR 19) and Romans Road. 49 III. State Environment Policy Act Compliance ...................................................61 Page 3 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket I. Introduction A. Overview of 2020 Docket and Docketing Process. Jefferson County is considering three text amendments to its Comprehensive Plan and development regulations, in addition to one site-specific amendment (rezone) pursuant to the Washington Growth Management Act’s (“GMA”) annual comprehensive plan amendment process. Under GMA and Jefferson County regulations, the Comprehensive Plan may only be amended once per year using a docketing system. Text amendments are suggested by the public, Planning Commission, Board of County Commissioners (“BoCC”), and Department of Community Development (“DCD”) staff. These are generally limited to proposals that broadly appeal to the na rrative, goals, policies, and implementation strategies of the Comprehensive Plan. There are three suggested text amendments on the 2020 Docket. Site-specific amendments are proposals submitted by property owners requesting a change in their Comprehensive Plan land use designation (rezoning). There is one site- specific amendment on the 2020 Docket. Jefferson County accepts applications for suggested text amendments and site- specific rezones to the Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code (“UDC”) until March 1st of each year. Timely applications are placed onto a preliminary docket, along with suggested amendments from the Planning Commission, BoCC, and DCD. After March 1st, DCD staff analyzes the preliminary docket and makes recommendations to the Planning Commission on which docket items should be included in the final docket. Next the Planning Commission reviews the preliminary docket, holds a public hearing on the preliminary docket, and makes recommendations to the BoCC on which preliminary docket items should be included in the final docket. The BoCC then reviews the Planning Commission and DCD staff recommendations, typically holds a public hearing, and then adopts a final docket. Site-specific rezones are automatically included in the final docket. Inclusion in the final docket directs DCD staff to further analyze the particulars of the docket item, including recommendations for the docket item. This Staff Report represents DCD staff analysis of the final docket items, including a DCD staff recommendation on each item. The 2020 Docket Cycle is delayed due to the on-going COVID-19 pandemic. Typically, the final docket is adopted in or around July, with final action on the docket items by the end of the year. However, the 2020 final docket was not adopted by the BoCC until October 26, 2020. On August 19, 2020, the Planning Commission held a public Page 4 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket hearing on the preliminary docket and on September 28, 2020, the Planning Commission recommended that five text amendment applications, along with one site-specific be placed on the final docket. On October 19, 2020, the BoCC held a public hearing on the preliminary docket and on October 26, 2020 adopted the final docket, which included three text amendment applications and one site-specific application. On November 9, 2020, the BoCC approved Resolution No. 69-20, giving the Planning Commission until February 26, 2021 to transmit their recommendations on the final docket items to the BoCC. Under Resolution No. 69-20, the BoCC has until April 26, 2021 to take final action on the docket items, unless extended. The 2020 Docket includes the following items: 1. MLA19-00019 – Text Amendments to Marijuana Related Development Regulations; 2. MLA20-00116 – Text Amendments to Support Sewering the Brinnon Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development; 3. MLA20-00102 – Text Amendments to Support the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update; and, 4. MLA20-00039 – Seton Site-specific Rezone from RR1:10 to RR1:5, Parcel ID No. 001281002, Located at Airport Cutoff Road (SR19) and Romans Road. On January 20, 2021, DCD staff held an informational session with the Planning Commission to provide an overview of each docket item. This Staff Report represents DCD’s formal analysis of each docket item, including recommendations on each docket item. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the 2020 Docket items on Wednesday, February 10, 2021. After the Public Hearing, the Planning Commission will deliberate, likely on February 17th and 24th, providing recommendations to the BoCC no later than February 26, 2021. Once the Planning Commission transmits their recommendations to the BoCC, the BoCC will consider the Planning Commission’s recommendation and may hold an additional public hearing if changes are considered to the Planning Commission’s recommendation. If the BoCC holds a public hearing, the BoCC will then deliberate and take final action on the 2020 Docket items. The public is invited to participate throughout the process, including comments at the public hearings. Page 5 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket B. Hearing Dates, DCD Staff Contact, and Other Introductory Information. Proponent: Jefferson County BoCC for text amendments and on behalf of the applicant for the site-specific rezone amendment. Planning Commission Wednesday, February 10, 2021 at 5:30pm. The Planning Hearing Date: Commission hearing will be remote, via GoToMeeting due to the on-going COVID-19 pandemic. Instructions for attending the Public Hearing may be found at in the Planning Commission Agenda http://test.co.jefferson.wa.us/weblinkexternal/Browse.aspx?startid= 1218841&row=1&dbid=0. Location of Staff Report The Staff Report and all supporting material may be found and Supporting Material: online in the Planning Commission Meeting Agenda at http://test.co.jefferson.wa.us/weblinkexternal/Browse.aspx?startid= 1218841&row=1&dbid=0. Date Public Hearing Oral comments are welcome at the Public Hearing on Wednesday, February 10, 2021. Comments are Due: February 10, 2021 at 5:30pm via remote interface through the end of the Public Hearing. Written comments will be accepted by DCD on behalf of the Planning Commission electronically at dcd@co.jefferson.wa.us. Please use subject line “2020 Comprehensive Plan Public Hearing Comment”. Comments may also be mailed to DCD at 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 and will be accepted if timely received prior to the Public Hearing. DCD Staff Contact: David Wayne Johnson, Associate Planner – Lead djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us (360) 379-4450 Notice and Posting: Notice of the upcoming public hearing was published in the Peninsula Daily News on January 29, and 31, 2021. The site- Page 6 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket specific rezone property was posted with a placard on February 1, 2021. Tentative Adoption April 26, 2021. Date: C. Growth Management Indicators Jefferson County Code (“JCC”) 18.45.080(1)(b) requires that all Comprehensive Plan amendments include an inquiry into the seven growth management indicators (“GMIs”) listed in JCC 18.45.050(4)(b). The GMI address the following: • Growth and development rates; • Ability to provide services; • Availability of urban land; • Whether assumptions upon which the Comprehensive Plan is based are still valid; • Community-wide attitudes towards land use; • Whether changes in circumstances dictate a need for amendment; and, • Consistency between state law and the Comprehensive Plan, or the Comprehensive Plan and local agreements. The GMIs are not necessarily amendment-specific, but rather are designed to provide a snapshot of Jefferson County’s status during this 2020 Docket cycle. This section serves to promote consideration and inquiry into these GMIs and is intended to be a starting point for broader community consideration before the Planning Commission and BoCC. Growth Management Indicators – JCC 18.45.050(4)(b) (1) Whether growth and development as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan is occurring faster or slower than anticipated, or is failing to materialize. Discussion: The Office of Financial Management (“OFM”) is the State agency responsible for compiling population projections under the GMA. The April 1, 2020 population for Jefferson County was 32,190. The official population on April 1, 2019 was 31,900, with an estimated growth of 290 persons. This is a 0.90% growth rate. In 2019, it was estimated that the growth rate was 0.98%. The Comprehensive Plan estimates a 0.98% growth rate over the 2018-2038 planning horizon. The majority of the estimated 2020 population growth occurred in the unincorporated areas. Unincorporated areas grew by 235 persons from 22,290 to 22,525 or Page 7 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket a 1.05% growth rate between 2019 and 2020. The City of Port Townsend grew by 55 persons from 9,610 to 9,665 or a 0.57% growth rate. Overall, Jefferson County appears to be growing consistent with the growth population projects in the Comprehensive Plan. Site-specific amendments require that the local area be analyzed. In 2018, the Quimper Planning Area, defined by the unincorporated Jefferson County west of Port Townsend and State Route 20 to Discovery Bay, and bounded to the south at Adelma Beach had a total of 571 vacant RR1:5 parcels, 31 vacant RR1:10 parcels, and 111 vacant RR1:20 parcels. In addition, some of these parcels are larger than the minimum lot size. Based upon the parcels that may, in theory, be subdivided, it is estimated that another 87-127 single- family residences could be obtained through subdivision. (2) Whether the capacity of the County to provide adequate services has diminished or increased. Discussion: The number of service providers in the County has not decreased and the County continues to be equipped to provide the same levels of service specified in the Comprehensive Plan. (3) Whether sufficient urban land us designated and zoned to meet projected demand and need. Discussion: Planning analysis of the Port Hadlock/Irondale Urban Growth Area (“Port Hadlock UGA”) demonstrates that there is sufficient urban land designated and zoned to meet projected demand of 1,814 additional persons by 2039, under the assumption that there will be future growth at urban densities. Development of a sanitary sewer facility for the Port Hadlock UGA will enable additional urban level growth and urban population densities. The GMA specifies that urban growth shall be encouraged within a UGA and growth outside of a UGA can only occur if it is not urban in nature. The Port Hadlock UGA Land Capacity Analysis, Comprehensive Plan, Appendix E demonstrates that the current 20-year population can be accommodated. With the current urban zoning an additional 2,103-25,29 dwelling units can be accommodated in the Port Hadlock UGA. However, the County has a transitional (rural) zoning applied to the Port Hadlock UGA until its sanitary sewer becomes available. Development under the transitional zoning can accommodate approximately 567 additional dwellings; however, transitional zoning cannot support the projected 2018-2038 population growth targets. Page 8 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket (4) Whether any assumption upon which the Comprehensive Plan is based are no longer found to be valid. Discussion: In 2018, the Comprehensive Plan recently went through a Periodic Review and Update. A newly articulated Vision Statement, Foundational Principles, Goals and Policies, and Actions Plans clearly communicate the priorities for County services and funding decisions to address affordable housing and rural economic development while protecting the public health and environment. The assumptions made as part of the Plan continue to be valid. (5) Whether changes in countywide attitudes necessitate amendments to the goals of the Plan and the basic values embodied within the Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement. Discussion: The Comprehensive Plan is intended to reflect, to the extent possible, countywide attitudes about the future growth and management of the County. The Comprehensive Plan development under GMA was adopted in 1998 and most recently reviewed and revised in 2018. The Plan’s goals and vision statement are consistent with current countywide attitudes. (6) Whether changes in circumstances dictate a need for amendments. Discussion: With a newly reviewed and revised plan, the UDC is undergoing a thorough review under Regulatory Reform as required by resolution of the BoCC. Regulatory reform efforts and changes to state policies and regulations resulted in amendments to the UDC, such as updates to the Critical Areas Ordinance and permit processing procedures. In 2020, the County received a draft sewer plan for the Port Hadlock sewer, which revises the engineering details of the sewer to provide a more cost- effective solution for sewering the Port Hadlock UGA. This plan requires edits to the Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the County has begun investigating sewering the Brinnon Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development (“LAMIRD”). Revisions to the Comprehensive Plan policies and narratives, in addition to development regulations are needed to ensure that the Comprehensive Plan and its implementing regulations are consistent with state law and the County’s direction. Finally, as recreational marijuana matures in Washington, the County became aware of unforeseen impacts to production and processing of marijuana in rural residential zoning districts. Based upon this new information, amendments to the development regulations for recreational marijuana may be required. (7) Whether inconsistencies exist between the Comprehensive Plan and the Growth Management Act or the Comprehensive Plan and the Countywide Planning Policy for Jefferson County. Page 9 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Discussion: With the exception of sewering the Brinnon LAMIRD docket item, the Comprehensive Plan is consistent with both the GMA and the Countywide Planning Policies. Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and its implementing development regulations may be needed to support the Brinnon sewer docket item. II. Staff Analysis and Recommendations on 2020 Docket Items DCD staff analysis on each docket item is below. A. MLA19-00019 – Text Amendments to Marijuana Related Development Regulations. Docket Item: Revisions to marijuana development regulations for rural residential zoned properties within unincorporated Jefferson County. Background: In Washington’s 2012 General Election state voters approved Initiative 502 (“I-502”) which legalized recreational marijuana at the state level. In 2013, Washington finalized I-502 administrative rules and began accepting recreational marijuana applications on November 13, 2018. While I-502 authorized recreational marijuana, it did not preempt local government’s zoning authority under its police powers for the siting, location, and operation of recreational marijuana facilities.1 However, when the state began accepting applications for recreational marijuana producers, processors, and retailers, Jefferson County did not have locally adopted zoning regulations governing recreational marijuana. On August 11, 2014, the BoCC established a moratorium on new recreational marijuana facilities. The moratorium prohibited the acceptance or processing of applications for the siting, location, or operation of recreational marijuana facilities within Jefferson County.2 Prior to the moratorium, Jefferson County considered recreational marijuana producing (growing) an agricultural use permitted under JCC 18.20.030 and allowed as a “yes” use in the Rural Residential zoning districts. Processing of recreational marijuana was interpreted as a use requiring a cottage industry permit in the Rural Residential zoning districts. Typically, a marijuana facility includes both production (grow) and processing operations. On June 8, 2015, the BoCC adopted an ordinance establishing development regulations governing the siting, location, and operation of recreational marijuana facilities 1 WAC 314-55-020(11). See also Wa. Att’y Gen. Op. 2014 No. 2 (January 16, 2014). 2 Jefferson County Ordinance No. 04-0608-15 re: Production, Processing, and Retailing of Recreational Marijuana in Jefferson County at pg 5. Page 10 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket within unincorporated Jefferson County (“2015 Ordinance”). The 2015 Ordinance developed zoning restrictions and development regulations to alleviate probable significant adverse environmental impacts resulting from recreational marijuana facilities.3 The 2015 Ordinance established the following use zones for production and processing: Production: Allowed as a yes use in Agricultural zoning district, Rural Industrial and Urban Industrial zoning districts. Allowed as a Conditional Discretionary C(d) use in Rural Residential zoning districts and Forest Resource zoning districts. Prohibited in all other zoning districts.4 Processing: Allowed as a yes use in Rural Industrial and Urban Industrial zoning districts. Allowed as a Conditional Discretionary C(d) with a cottage industry permit in Forest Resource Lands and Rural Residential zoning districts. Prohibited in all other zoning districts.5 The 2015 Ordinance adopted performance standards on recreational marijuana facilities, including size limitations on permanent and temporary producing (grow) structures in the Rural Residential and Forest Resource Lands zoning districts. All permanent or temporary production (grow) facilities in Rural Residential 1:5 (“RR1:5”) zoning district are limited to 5% of the gross parcel size up to a maximum of 10,890 gross square feet. In the Rural Residential 1:10 (“RR1:10”), Rural Residential 1:20 (“RR1:20”), Commercial Forest 80 (“CF80”), Rural Forest 40 (“RF40”), and Inholding Forest 20 (“IF20”) the production (grow) structure is limited to 5% of the gross parcel size up to a maximum of 21,780 gross square feet. There was no size limitation for outdoor production (grow) facilities in the RR1:5, RR1:10, RR1:20, CF80, RF40, and IF20 zoning districts. The 2015 Ordinance also required recreational marijuana processing facilities in the Rural Residential and Forest Resource zoning districts to obtain a cottage industry permit. Consistent with Jefferson County cottage industry performance standards, the 2015 Ordinance established a 5,000 gross square foot size limitation on any processing facilities 3 Id. “Because recreational marijuana is only recently lawful, applicants, the County and the State do not know what PSAEI, if any, will arise from producing or processing marijuana but should have the tools in place ahead of time to mitigate any PSAEI which do occur. It is important to have these regulatory tools in place should they be needed to be proactive rather than reactive.” Id. at 3. 4 Id. Marijuana Producer is defined as “a person licensed by the state liquor control board to produce and sell marijuana at wholesale to marijuana processors and other marijuana producers. Marijuana producing for the purpose of this section shall include drying, trimming and bagging of a recreational marijuana product when done in conjunction with producing.” 5 Id. Marijuana Processor is defined as “a person licensed by the state liquor control board to process marijuana into useable marijuana and marijuana-infused products, package and label useable marijuana and marijuana -infused products for sale in retail outlets, and sell useable marijuana and marijuana-infused products at wholesale to marijuana retailers. Marijuana processing for the purpose of this section may or may not include drying, trimming and bagging of a recreational product. Page 11 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket in the Rural Residential and Forest Resource zoning districts. The processing facility size limitation is independent of the production (grow) size limitations. Existing Marijuana Facilities in Jefferson County Jefferson County has 12 marijuana production and processing facilities licensed by the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (“WSLCB”). Below is a breakdown of existing marijuana facilities in unincorporated Jefferson County, based upon zoning districts: • Light Industrial (LI or LI/C) – 7 marijuana facilities, all in the Glen Cove Industrial area; • Rural Residential (RR1:5) – 3 marijuana facilities; • Agricultural (AP20) – 1 marijuana facility; and, • Forest Resource (CF80) – 1 marijuana facility. A complete list of the marijuana facilities in Jefferson County is attached as Exhibit 1. Of the four marijuana facilities in the Rural Residential and Forest Resource zoning districts, only one (Auntie Onolicious) has been approved under the 2015 Ordinance with a Conditional Use Permit (“CUP”) and a cottage industry permit for the production (grow) and processing facilities. Below is an overview of the four marijuana facilities in the Rural Residential and Forest Resource zoning districts: • Rural Residential o Discovery Garden, 409 Lane De Chantal, Port Townsend, WA. Zoning RR- 5. Approximately 5.04 acres. ▪ Tier 2 producer with processing. ▪ Production use appears to have been established prior to 2015 Ordinance and is likely a non-conforming use. A CUP and cottage Industry permit was granted for the processing facility in 2014. o Auntie Onolicious, 144 Milo Curry Rd, Port Townsend, WA. Zoning RR -5. Approximately 2.46 acres. ▪ Tier 1 producer with processing. ▪ A CUP and cottage industry permit was granted for the production and processing facility in 2018. o Rocky Brook Ranch, 71 Mustang Ln Area C, Suite 2, Brinnon, WA. Zoning RR-5. Approximately .23 acres. ▪ Tier 1 producer with processing. Page 12 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket ▪ Only permit on file is an 8-foot fence permit issued in 2016. Production use may be a nonconforming use; however, there is no approved CUP or cottage industry permit for the processing facility. ▪ On-going code compliance complaints unrelated to the recreational marijuana facility. Unknown is the marijuana facility is operational. • Forest Resource o The High Point (a/k/a Pen Air), 4429 Coyle Rd, Quilcene, WA. Zoning CF- 80. Approximately 99.31 acres. ▪ Tier 3 producer with processing. ▪ A CUP and cottage industry permit was granted in 2016 for the processing facility. Production facility is likely a non-conforming use. Page 13 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Figure 1 – Map of WSLCB Licensced Facilities in Unincorporated Jefferson County Page 14 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Figure 2 – Map of WSLCB Licensced Facilities in Unincorporated Jefferson County Glen Cove Industrial Area Page 15 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Analysis: Economic Impact from Marijuana Producers and Processors in Unincorporated Jefferson County The economic impact to Jefferson County from marijuana production and processing facilities in Rural Residential zoning districts is relatively small. Reported 2020 year-to-date (“YTD”) (January – November 2020) sales of wholesale marijuana from Rural Residential zoned producers and processors was approximately $103,022 (1.8% of all wholesale producer and processor sales within the County). The majority of producer and processor sales came from the Light Industrial zoning district. Below is an overview of the YTD wholesale sales of producers and processors based upon zoning districts: • Light Industrial (LI and LI/C) - $3,743,254 / 66% • Agricultural (AP-20) - $1,089,263 / 19.2% • Forest Resource (CF-80) - $738,964 / 13% • Rural Residential (RR-5) - $103,022 / 1.8% Page 16 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Jefferson County ranks 25 out of 39 counties for total number of producers and processors and number 26 out of 39 counties for total sales of wholesale marijuana product from producers and processors.6 In Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2020, Jefferson County received $49,049 in local tax revenue from its share of the marijuana excise tax.7 The City of Port Townsend received $17,303.8 Washington levies a 37% tax on the retail sales of marijuana within the state. This tax is collected by the state with a share going to jurisdictions, based upon a formula, which includes the amount of marijuana retail sales. Jefferson County ranks 19 out of 39 counties for amount of excise tax returned to the county. The excise tax is not levied on producers or processors. Unsuccessful Conditional Use Permit and Cottage Industry Permit Applications for Marijuana Producers and Processors in the Rural Residential Zoning Districts Since the 2015 Ordinance, Jefferson County has conducted four public hearings, through the Office of the Hearing Examiner, determining whether or not to grant a CUP and cottage industry permit for marijuana production and processing facilities in the Rural Residential zoning districts. Three of the four applications were denied (three applications were received, with one application being heard twice by the Hearing Examiner). The only application to be approved was for Auntie Onolicious, 144 Milo Curry Rd, Port Townsend, WA. Auntie Onolicious is a Tier 1 Producer (the smallest) and processor.9 The primary test for approval of marijuana production or processing facility in the Rural Residential zoning district is the CUP approval criteria. The JCC requires CUP applicants to demonstrate that their application is consistent with the following approval criteria: (a) The conditional use is harmonious and appropriate in design, character and appearance with the existing or intended character and quality of development in the vicinity of the subject property and with the physical characteristics of the subject property; (b) The conditional use will be served by adequate infrastructure including roads, fire protection, water, wastewater disposal, and stormwater control; (c) The conditional use will not be materially detrimental to uses or property in the vicinity of the subject parcel; 6 Source 502data.com available at https://502data.com and WSLCB Frequently Requested Lists available at https://lcb.wa.gov/records/frequently-requested-lists. 7 Id. 8 Id. 9 A tier 1 producer is a producer with less than 2,000 square feet; A tier 2 producer has 2,000 square feet but less than 10,000 square feet; and a tier 3 producer has 10,000 square feet but less than 30,000 square feet. Page 17 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket (d) The conditional use will not introduce noise, smoke, dust, fumes, vibrations, odors, or other conditions or which unreasonably impact existing uses in the vicinity of the subject parcel; (e) The location, size, and height of buildings, structures, walls and fences, and screening vegetation for the conditional use will not unreasonably interfere with allowable development or use of neighboring properties; (f) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the conditional use will not be hazardous to existing and anticipated traffic in the vicinity of the subject parcel; (g) The conditional use complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of this title and any other applicable provisions of the Jefferson County Code or state law; and more specifically, conforms to the standards contained in Chapters 18.20 and 18.30 JCC; (h) The proposed conditional use will not result in the siting of an incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield; (i) The conditional use will not cause significant adverse impacts on the human or natural environments that cannot be mitigated through conditions of approval; (j) The conditional use has merit and value for the community as a whole; (k) The conditional use is consistent with all relevant goals and policies of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan; and (l) The public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. Consideration shall be given to the cumulative effect of similar actions in the area.10 While the CUP approval criteria are stringent, they provide applicants flexibility in meeting their burden of proving compliance. During the recent Williamson production and processing marijuana application (MLA18-00102), the Hearing Examiner found that the applicant failed to carry their burden of proof on several of the CUP approval criteria, including: (1) noise; (2) odor management; (3) on-site residency; (4) compatibility with other allowable uses, such as forest resource, residential, and agricultural uses; and (5) failure to prove compliance with all JCC sections, such as traffic, wastewater, and lighting. In another example, the Hearing Examiner found that Austin Smith (MLA17- 00019) failed to carry his burden of proof on several of the CUP approval criteria, such as: (1) noise; (2) odor management; (3) community compatibility; (4) water and wastewater; and (5) on-site residency. The Austin Smith application was heard twice by the Hearing Examiner, as the Hearing Examiner denied the first application without prejudice. Both hearings were denied. 10 JCC 18.40.530(1). Page 18 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Further, unforeseen environmental factors, such as increased water use, on-site wastewater treatment, and light pollution have become issues during public hearings on proposed marijuana production and processing facilities in rural residential zones. In conclusion, significant environmental concerns have been raised by the public and project opponents during the four public hearings which call into question whether the 2015 Ordinance adequately protects the environment from all known marijuana production and processing facility impacts in rural residential zones. All Applications Since the 2015 Ordinance Have Proposed Indoor Facilities All three applications received for marijuana production and processing facilities on Rural Residential zoned properties received since the 2015 Ordinance have proposed indoor production and processing. Indoor production and processing generally involves mechanical equipment systems, such as heating ventilation and air conditioning, odor management fans and filters, lights, etc. to maintain the operations and meet the CUP approval criteria. However, these indoor facilities may cause community compatibility issues, such as increased noise, light, glare, runoff, and commercial development within residential or forest resource zoning districts. Below is an overview of the significant environmental concerns that were raised during the hearing for these indoor facilities. Odor Management Odor management has been an issue raised at all the public hearings and generally the Hearing Examiner has required extensive expert witness testimony to establish odor impacts and the mitigation requirements. This has proved costly to both applicants (mitigation measures and expert witnesses) as well as project opponents. Usually, the Hearing Examiner will weigh this expert witness testimony in findings of fact and conclusions of law. Noise Noise has been a significant environmental issue in all applications. Jefferson County Resolution 67-85 establishes EDNA classifications based upon zoning. Rural Residential is considered residential zoning. It is very challenging for applicants to meet EDNA noise requirements when they are proposing a marijuana production and processing facility on Rural Residential land that is adjacent to Rural Residential land. In this example, the emitting property would have to have a dBA of 60 or less at the receiving property line.11 From 10pm until 7am, the noise level must be 50 dBA or less.12 For example, a 11 WAC 173-60-040(2)(a). 12 Id. Page 19 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket household refrigerator emits noise at approximately 55 dBA.13 Compliance with EDNA noise limitations are a consistent issue for applicants. Typically, noise requires expert witnesses. Water and Wastewater It is alleged that marijuana production and processing facilities use considerable amounts of water and that wastewater treatment for the excess chemicals is necessary. Some applicants have proposed using recycled water and hand spraying of the plants; however, there have been significant environmental concerns with the excess wastewater will be disposed of in accordance with all regulations. Summary on Indoor Marijuana Facilities in Rural Residential Overall, the community generally has opposed new marijuana production and processing facilities in the Rural Residential zoning districts, with the exception of the Auntie Onolicious (MLA17-00055) application. These hearings have proven costly to both the applicant and the community opposing the application. This item was docketed, in part, due to the community opposition to marijuana production and processing facilities within the Rural Residential zoning districts. In conclusion, the following significant environmental concerns have been consistently raised during these applications: (1) noise; (2) odor management; (3) community compatibility; (4) water and wastewater; and (5) on- site residency. Required Minimum Buffer Distance of Marijuana Facilities to Certain Uses The 2015 Ordinance does not implement that required minimum buffer distances from certain uses, such as schools and public parks. Under RCW 69.50.331(8), marijuana producers, processors, or retailers must be at least 1,000 feet from: • Elementary of secondary school; • Playground; • Recreation center or facility; • Child care center; • Public park; • Public transit center; • Library; or, • Any game arcade (where admission is not restricted to persons age 21 or older).14 13 Decibel Level Comparison Chart available at https://ehs.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/decibel-level-chart.pdf. 14 RCW 69.50.331(8). Page 20 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Since the 2015 Ordinance does not incorporate the required minimum buffer distances, DCD staff recommends that the regulations be updated to include this performance standard. WSLCB Prohibits New Licenses on Residential Parcels, but Cottage Industry Performance Standards Require an On-site Full-Time Bona Fide Resident. “The WSLCB will not approve any marijuana license for a location where law enforcement access, without notice or cause, is limited. This includes a personal residence.”15 However, the 2015 Ordinance requires that processing facilities located on Rural Residential or Forest Resource zoned lands must have a “at least one full-time, bona fide resident in a single-family residence of the parcel on which the proposed use is being requested.”16 Under the 2015 Ordinance, marijuana processing is classified as a cottage industry. The purpose of a cottage industry is “to provide for small-scale economic development activities on residential parcels, subordinate to the primary residential use”.17 The cottage industry requires that the applicant prove their full-time residency on the parcel by the time of the application approval.18 The full-time residency requirement has been a primary factor in the Hearing Examiner denying at least two CUP and cottage industry permit applications for marijuana production and processing facilities on Rural Residential zoned properties. Cottage industry uses on rural parcels are a form of a limited area of more intensive rural development (“LAMIRD”).19 Counties “may allow isolated small-scale businesses and cottage industries that are not principally designed to serve the existing and projected rural population and nonresidential uses, but do provide job opportunities for rural residents”.20 Cottage industry requirements must be consistent with the county’s rural character. The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, through its goals and policies reinforces the requirement that cottage industries are an accessory use to the primary use of single- family residency. 15 WAC 314-55-015(5). (emphasis added). 16 JCC 18.20.170(5)(a). 17 JCC 18.20.170(1). 18 JCC 18.20.170(5)(a); JCC 18.40.530(1). 19 RCW 36.70a.070(5)(c)(i)(C)(iii); WAC 365-196-425(6)(c)(iii); Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1-50. 20 WAC 365-196-425(6)(c)(iii). Page 21 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Policy LU-P-27.1 Permit home-based business and cottage industries that are accessory to the residential use of the property throughout the unincorporated portions of the County, subject to permit review procedures.21 The Jefferson County cottage industry requirement of a full-time bona fide resident is a key requirement of implementing the Comprehensive Plan’s Rural Character and its implementing goals and policies.22 Given the conflict between WAC 314-55-015(5) and the cottage industry permit’s requirement of a full-time bona fide on-site resident, DCD staff recommends that processing not be permitted as a cottage industry use. WSLCB Does Not Have Any New Production or Processing Permits Available The WSLCB does not have any new marijuana production or processing permits available and does not plan on opening up any new permits in the near future.23 Forest Resource Land Issues The 2015 Ordinance allows production facilities in the Forest Resource zoning districts as a CUP. There is no size limitation on outdoor production facilities in the Forest Resource zoning districts. However, the 2015 Ordinance imposes size limitations on any all permanent or temporary production facilities limiting the structures to 5% of the gross parcel size up to a maximum of 21,780 gross square feet. Further, an additional 5,000 gross square feet could be obtained for a processing facility as a cottage industry permit. GMA Planning Goals require the conservation of forest resource lands. The Planning Goal states “maintain and enhance natural resource-based industries, including protective timber, agricultural, and fisheries industries. Encourage the conservation of productive forest lands and productive agricultural lands, and discourage incompatible uses.”24 Allowing conversion of resource lands to other uses, or allowing incompatible uses nearby, impairs the viability and productivity of resource industries.25 Counties “shall adopt development regulations … to assure the conservation of agricultural, forest, and mineral resource lands designated under RCW 36.70A.170.”26 21 Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan at 1-106. 22 See Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan at 1-48 – 49; 1-106. 23 See https://lcb.wa.gov/mjlicense/marijuana-licensing and https://lcb.wa.gov/mjlicense/mj_licensing_faq. 24 RCW 36.70A.020(8). 25 Richard L. Settle, Washington’s Growth Management Revolution Goes to Court, 23 Seattle U.L. Rev. 5, 22 (1999). 26 RCW 36.70A.060. Page 22 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Allowing up to 26,780 gross square feet of temporary or permanent grow structures and processing structures on forest resource lands may allow for the conversion of the forest resource lands into another use.27 Further, any processing facilities on Forest Resource zoned lands must obtain a cottage industry permit, which requires an on-site full- time resident. As discussed above, the cottage industry full-time resident requirement is in conflict with WAC 314-55-015(5). For these reasons, DCD staff recommends that marijuana production or processing should not be a permitted use in Forest Resource zoned (CF80, RF40, and IF40) lands. Surrounding County Treatment of Marijuana Production and Processing Facilities Kitsap County is the strictest nearby county in terms of allowable zoning districts for marijuana production and processing. Kitsap County generally allows marijuana production and processing in industrial and business park zoning only.28 Kitsap County does not permit any production or processing in rural residential. Clallam County generally permits marijuana production and processing in industrial, forest resource, and some commercial zones with a conditional use permit.29 Clallam County does not permit marijuana production or processing in rural residential. Mason County is the least restrictive. Mason County does not permit outdoor marijuana production in rural residential, but they do permit indoor production with at least 5 acres for a tier 1 production facility and at least 10 acres for a tier 2 or 3 production facility. Mason County generally allows it in industrial, commercial, and forest resource lands.30 Land Availability Analysis Supporting Recommendations To ensure that there is adequate land available for future marijuana production and processing facilities, DCD staff analyzed vacant land within the Rural and Urban Industrial (RBI, LI, LI/C, HI, and ULI) zoning districts. The analysis demonstrates that there are 100 vacant Rural and Urban Industrial zoned properties in the County. The parcels total 184.97 acres, with an average of 1.85 acres per parcel. Further, this does not include properties with existing improvements. Often marijuana production and grow facilities in the Rural Industrial zoning district changes the use of existing structures. Below is a map of the vacant Rural and Industrial zoned properties in the County. 27 See Lake Cavanaugh Improvement Association v. Skagit County, WWGMHB, 04-2-011, Order on Dispositive Motion (September 21, 2004) (holding that the construction of a gun range, including parking lots and supporting structures, was the improper conversion of forest resource lands). 28 See KCC 17.520.030. 29 See CCC 33.52.030. 30 See MCC 17.17.005. Page 23 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Figure 3 – Vacant Rural and Urban Industrial Zoned Properties Page 24 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket The majority of the vacant Rural and Industrial zoned parcels are in the Glen Cove industrial area. Of the 100 vacant Rural and Industrial zoned parcels in the County, 87 are in the Glen Cove industrial area with a total of 59.35 of the 184.97 vacant acres. While the parcel average is smaller in the Glen Cove industrial area at 0.68 acres compared to 1.84 acres for the County as a whole, there appears to be ample available land for reasonable expansion of future marijuana production and processing facilities on these parcels. Further, marijuana businesses aren’t limited to vacant land. Existing marijuana businesses in the Glen Cove industrial area often lease existing space and modify the space to their needs. Below is a map of vacant Rural Industrial zoned parcels in the Glen Cove industrial area. Page 25 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Figure 4 – Vacant Rural Industrial Zoned Properties in the Glen Cove Industrial Area Page 26 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Allowing Marijuana Production and Processing Facilities on Vacant Conforming RR1:10 and RR1:20 Will Not Add Significant Amounts of Available Land All of the CUP and cottage industry permit applications requesting marijuana production or processing on Rural Residential zoned lands that DCD has received since the 2015 Ordinance have been on vacant parcels. While the property has been vacant, the applicants did or had plans to establish full-time bona fide residency on the properties. Since the application trend has been on vacant Rural Residential zoned properties, DCD staff analyzed how much additional lands would be available if marijuana production and processing was allowed as a CUP and cottage industry permit on vacant conforming (meeting the minimum zoning lot size requirements) Rural Residential 10 and 20 zoned properties. The analysis found that there are 58 RR1:10 and 67 RR1:20 vacant conforming parcels in the unincorporated County. While these vacant conforming RR1:10 and RR1:20 properties represent 125 additional parcels, there are still significant community compatibility, noise, and RCW and WAC compliance issues if marijuana production and processing were allowed on these properties as a CUP and cottage industry. Below is a map showing vacant conforming RR1:10 and RR1:20 parcels within the County. For these reasons, DCD staff recommends against allowing marijuana production or processing on these RR1:10 and RR1:20 parcels. Page 27 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Figure 5 – Vacant RR1:10 Parcels At Least 10 Acres in Size Page 28 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Figure 6 – Vacant RR1:20 Parcels At Least 20 Acres in Size Page 29 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Recommendations: Given the issues described in this Staff Report, including community compatibility issues, environmental issues, permitting issues, and forest resource land compatibility issues, DCD staff recommends the following amendments to the 2015 Ordinance: 1. Incorporation of RCW 69.50.331(8), which requires at least a 1,000-foot buffer distance from certain uses, such as schools from marijuana production, processing, or retailing facilities; 2. Change marijuana production and processing from a conditional discretionary use in Rural Residential (RR1:5, RR1:10, and RR1:20) and Forest Resource (CF80, RF40, and IF40) zoned lands to a “no” use under JCC 18.15.040, Table 3-1; 3. Remove cottage industry performance standards for marijuana processing; 4. Continue to allow marijuana production and processing as “yes” use on the Rural and Urban Industrial (RBI, LI, LI/C, HI, and ULI) zoned lands; 5. Continue to allow marijuana production as a “yes” use on Agricultural (AP20 and AL20) zoned lands; and, 6. Continue to allow marijuana processing and retailing as a conditional discretionary use on Agricultural (AP20 and AL20) zoned lands. The proposed recommended changes, in line in and line out format, are attached to Exhibit 2, Appendix 1. Consistency with the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan DCD staff recommended amendments, as contained in Exhibit 2, Appendix 1 are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the GMA, and the GMA and County enhanced rural character. While marijuana production and processing facilities provide economic development and placed based jobs for Jefferson County residents, the now known environmental and community impacts on surrounding Rural Residential zoned property makes the use incompatible with the County’s rural character and Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-P-15.1 and 16.2. DCD staff recommend changes improves the compatibility of uses within both the Rural Residential and Forest Resource zoned lands and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Page 30 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket B. Text Amendments to Support Sewering the Brinnon Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development. Docket Item: Comprehensive Plan and UDC text amendment to support future sewer hookups of the Brinnon LAMIRD to the existing Dosewallips State Park sewer system. Background: In October 2020, the BoCC docketed an annual comprehensive plan amendment to create development regulations allowing the extension of sewer facilities to the Brinnon Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development (“LAMIRD”). However, extending sewer facilities to rural areas is a complex topic. Generally, the GMA precludes extension of sewer facilities to rural areas unless it can be shown that the sewer is: (1) necessary to protect public health and the environment; (2) the sewer services are financially supportable at rural densities; and (3) the sewer services do not permit urban development. However, the GMA may allow sewers in LAMIRDs if it can be demonstrated that the sewer is necessary to support the LAMIRD and the extension is consistent with the Countywide Planning Policies. In 2016, the Dosewallips State Park, located in Brinnon, WA, opened a wastewater treatment plant (“Dosewallips Sewer”) replacing its aging on-site sewage (septic) system. The Dosewallips Sewer was constructed to improve the ecological functions and environmental quality of the Hood Canal and Puget Sound Watershed. The Dosewallips Sewer was purposefully designed to allow for future hookup of properties within the Brinnon LAMIRD. The Dosewallips Sewer was constructed north of the Brinnon LAMIRD with its sewer lines running through the core of the Brinnon LAMIRD, south to the Dosewallips State Park. During the planning of the Dosewallips Sewer, Jefferson County investigated the feasibility of allowing properties within the Brinnon LAMIRD to hookup to the Dosewallips Sewer. After community outreach and feasibility analysis, Jefferson County decided not to take action allowing properties within the Brinnon LAMIRD to hookup to the planned Dosewallips Sewer. In 2019, Washington State Parks commissioned a study, with partial Jefferson County funding, analyzing available capacity of the Dosewallips Sewer. The 2019 study demonstrated a capacity of 130 ERUs in the Dosewallips Sewer, assuming the installation of an additional rapid infiltration basin.31 As a result of the study, the BoCC directed DCD to analyze and draft development regulations allowing properties within the Brinnon 31 Approximately 130 ERUs is based up the projected availability of 31,962 GPD with an average of 245 GPD/ERU. The average of 245 GPD/ERU is based upon the average of Port Townsend’s 260 GPD/ERU and Port Ludlow’s 230 GPD/ERU. Page 31 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket LAMIRD to hookup to the existing Dosewallips Sewer as a part of the 202 0 Comprehensive Plan docket amendments. Prior to adopting development regulations and Comprehensive Plan revisions potentially allowing future hookup of properties within the Brinnon LAMIRD to the Dosewallips Sewer the following questions should be analyzed to guide the decision- making process: (1) does the GMA allow new sewer connections within LAMIRDs; (2) if the GMA allows new sewer connections within LAMIRDs is there a necessity showing and if so, what is the necessity showing; and (3) if Jefferson Co unty permits sewer connections for properties within the Brinnon LAMIRD to the Dosewallips Sewer, does the Comprehensive Plan have to be amended? Page 32 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Figure 7 – Map of Brinnon LAMIRD Page 33 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Figure 8 – Location of Dosewallips Sewer and Routing of Sewer Lines Page 34 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Analysis: Question 1 – Does the GMA Allow New Sewer Connections Within LAMIRDs? Difference Between Septic and Sewer Systems Sewer and septic systems are similar in that they treat human waste. The difference comes in how they collect, convey, and treat that waste. Sewers are usually large, publicly owned and operated systems that collect the waste at the source and convey it to a remote location for treatment. On-site septic systems are typically privately owned individual stand-alone systems that require a holding tank to separate the effluent into sludge and water, allowing the water to infiltrate back into the aquifer through an on-site drainfield. Sewers permit higher density development as there is no requirement for on-site treatment. Septic systems require significantly larger lots with a minimum residential lot size ranging from 12,500 – 87,120 square feet depending upon the soil and water supply type.32 Under the GMA, sewers are used for urban development and septic systems are used for rural development because of the difference between the density potential.33 Overview of Differences Between GMA Rural Area and Urban Growth Area Planning The GMA segments its planning into urban growth areas (“UGAs”) and rural areas.34 “Each county … shall designate an urban growth area … which urban growth shall be encouraged and outside of which growth can occur only if it is not urban in nature.”35 Generally, rural areas are those areas that are not UGAs and include designated agricultural, forest, and mineral resource lands.36 Under GMA, development within rural areas is limited to “a variety of uses and residential densities … at levels that are consistent with the preservation of rural character and the requirements of the rural element.”37 The GMA limits rural development, in part, to concentrate urban development and prevent sprawling, low-density development of rural areas.38 Washington recognizes the need for commercial development and a stable job base in rural areas.39 To this end, the GMA authorizes three types of LAMIRDs in rural areas, which allows for more intensive development than what would otherwise be authorized in 32 WAC 246-272A-0320(d). 33 Large on-site septic systems are considered a septic system and a rural governmental service. See ARD/Diehl v. Mason County, WWGMHB, 06-2-0006, Order Finding Non-Compliance at 12 (November 14, 2007). 34 Resource lands is a distinct planning group; however, resource lands are usually included within the rural land planning group. 35 RCW 36.70A.110(1). 36 RCW 36.70.A.070(5)(b). 37 RCW 36.70A.030(21). 38 RCW 36.70A.020(1-2). 39 RCW 36.70A.011. Page 35 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket the rural area.40 Under a Type I LAMIRD, usually an existing hamlet or rural crossroad areas, infill, intensification, and limited new development is permitted within the logical outer boundaries of the existing development as of July 1, 1990.41 A key principle of LAMIRDs is that their development regulations must “minimize and contain the existing areas or uses of more intensive rural development”.42 The GMA also authorizes two other types of LAMIRDs, which are generally site-specific. A Type II LAMIRD consists of site- specific small-scale tourist and recreation uses.43 A Type III LAMIRD consists of site- specific small-scale businesses and cottage industry uses.44 For the purposes of this memorandum, only a Type I LAMIRD will be discussed and it will be referred to as a “LAMIRD”. To accomplish GMA planning goals, including prevention of sprawling, low- density development of rural areas, new sewers or new sewer connections generally are prohibited in rural areas: In general, cities are the units of local government most appropriate to provide urban governmental services. In general, it is not appropriate that urban governmental services be extended to or expanded in rural areas except in those limited circumstances shown to be necessary to protect basic public health and safety and the environment and when such services are financially supportable at rural densities and do not permit urban development.45 The GMA defines urban governmental services as: [T]hose public services and public facilities at an intensity historically and typically provided in cities, specifically including storm and sanitary sewer systems, domestic water systems, street cleaning services, fire and police protection services, public transit services, and other public utilities associated with urban areas and normally not associated with rural areas.46 The GMA defines rural governmental services as: [T]hose public services and public facilities historically and typically delivered at an intensity usually found in rural areas, and may include 40 RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d). 41 RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(v). 42 RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(iv). 43 WAC 365-196-425(6)(c)(ii). 44 WAC 365-196-425(6)(c)(iii). 45 RCW 36.70A.110(4). (emphasis added). 46 RCW 36.70A.030(24). (emphasis added). Page 36 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket domestic water systems, fire and police protection services, transportation and public transit services, and other public utilities associated with rural development and normally not associated with urban areas. Rural services do not include storm or sanitary sewers, except as otherwise authorized by RCW 36.70A.110(4).47 The Washington Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) has adopted regulations interpreting the GMA through the Washington Administrative Code (“WAC”).48 The WAC adopts the three-part test under RCW 36.70A.110(4) for new sewer service in rural areas under “rural governmental services”, which states: (4) Rural governmental services. (a) Rural governmental services are those public facilities and services historically and typically delivered at intensities usually found in rural areas, and may include the following: (i) Domestic water system; (ii) Fire and police protection; (iii) Transportation and public transportation; and (iv) Public utilities, such as electrical, telecommunications and natural gas lines. (b) Rural services do not include storm or sanitary sewers. Urban governmental services that pass through rural areas when connecting urban areas do not constitute an extension of urban services into a rural area provided those public services are not provided in the rural area. Sanitary sewer service may be provided only if it: (i) Is necessary to protect basic public health and safety and the environment; (ii) Is financially supportable at rural densities; and (iii) Does not permit urban development.49 Exceptions to the Prohibition of New Sewers or Connections in Rural Areas The GMA allows for four exceptions for new sewer or sewer connections in rural areas. First, master planned resorts and major industrial developments allow new sewers or connections when the sewer is contained to that development (not at issue here).50 Second, new sewers or connections are allowed in rural areas when: (1) it is necessary to protect public health and the environment; (2) the sewer services are financially 47 RCW 36.70A.030(22). (emphasis added). 48 Chapter 165-196 WAC. 49 WAC 365-196-425(4). (emphasis added). 50 RCW 36.70A.070(3). Note sewers within a master planned resort or major industrial development will not be discussed in this analysis. Page 37 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket supportable at rural densities; and (3) the sewer services don’t permit urban development.51 The majority of litigation (discussed below) has occurred under Exception 2. Third, new sewer systems or connections may be permitted for a school supporting both urban and rural students, when certain factors are met.52 Finally, there is a fourth exception, which allows new sewers or connections when they are “necessary public facilities” supporting a LAMIRD.53 Exception 4 has not been tested in Washington courts, but there are favorable decisions from the Washington Growth Management Hearings Board (“GMHB”). For the purposes of this memorandum the first exception (MPRs) will not be analyzed. Exception 2 – Necessary for Protection of the Public Health and Environment RCW 36.70A.110(4) and WAC 365-196-425(4) adopt a three-part test which allows new sewer or connections in rural areas under very limited circumstances. As described in detail below, it is unlikely that Jefferson County can prove with the data required that sewering the Brinnon LAMIRD is necessary to protect basic public health and safety of the environment. Factor 1 - Necessary to Protect Basic Public Health and Safety of the Environment The Washington Supreme Court has adopted a “strict necessary to protect standard” when extending sewer connections in rural areas. 54 In Thurston County v. Cooper Point Ass’n (“Cooper Point”), the court held that Thurston County did not meet the requirement that the sewer extension to the rural area was “necessary to protect basic public health and safety of the environment.”55 The court noted that of the 998 septic systems in the proposed service area, only 96 of them had failed and that all of the failing septi c systems had been corrected by an environmentally sustainable on-site solution.56 The court stated that since none of the septic systems were currently failing, the proposed sewer system was for the “betterment of the health or environment” and that the proposed system was not “necessary” to protect basic public health and safety of the environment.57 The court heavily relied on the GMA planning goals of reducing low-density sprawl and the prohibition of urban governmental services in rural areas.58 51 RCW 36.70A.110(4). 52 RCW 36.70A.213. 53 RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d). 54 Thurston Cty. v. Cooper Point Ass'n, 148 Wn.2d 1, 13, 57 P.3d 1156, 1162 (2002). (“Cooper Point”). 55 Id. 56 Id. at 5. 57 Id. at 13-15. 58 Id.; See also Campbell, et al. v. San Juan County, WWGMHB, 05-2-0022c, Compliance Order and Final Decision Order (June 20, 2006). (holding that extension of sewer line and connections in rural area, which was planned to be a LAMIRD, violated RCW 36.70A.110(4) because the county failed to prove any that there were any failing septic systems and that it was necessary for the protection of public health and the environment). Page 38 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Under Cooper Point, Jefferson County must have the necessary data to prove that the Brinnon sewer connections are strictly necessary to protect basic public health and safety of the environment. This likely requires a showing that the septic systems are failing in the area, that the failing septic systems currently impacting both public health and the environment, and that on-site solutions will not remedy the failures. While there are favorable facts for Jefferson County, such as previously failing septic systems in the Brinnon LAMIRD, often closed shellfish beds near the Dosewallips River due to effluent contamination, and the 100-year flood zone status of the Brinnon LAMIRD, these factors alone are not likely enough to meet the “strict necessity” test announced in Cooper Point. The strict necessity test demands a direct correlation between currently failing septic systems and public health and the environment. For example, a well-executed dye trace study, which demonstrates that the effluent from the Brinnon LAMIRD septic systems is leaching into the Dosewallips River, the groundwater, or the shoreline would likely fulfill this requirement, along with an analysis that the existing septic systems cannot be repaired on-site. Based upon initial conversations with Jefferson County Environmental Public Health, the septic system at issue in the Brinnon LAMIRD likely do not meet the Cooper Point “strict necessity” test, without further study and analysis.59 It is recommended that further conversations, research, and potential studies continue on this factor to allow for further investigation. Factor 2 - Sewer Services are Financially Supportable at Rural Densities The Dosewallips Sewer is an existing facility. The system, which cost approximately $3.2 million to construct likely can be extended to the Brinnon LAMIRD with minimal capital costs. The system will have approximately 130 ERU connections available in the future, assuming the installation of an additional rapid infiltration basin at an approximate cost of $40,000.60 Overall, we believe Jefferson County will be able to demonstrate that the extension of the Dosewallips Sewer to the Brinnon LAMIRD is financially supportable at rural densities, given that the capital facility cost of $3.2 million has been absorbed b y the state and the additional capacity will cost approximately $40,000. However, further study on this factor is likely required. 59 The information provided by Jefferson County Environmental Public Health was preliminary and further study may demonstrate compliance with the strict necessity test. 60 Parametrix, Engineering Report: Dosewallips Design Criteria and Capacity Rerating 3, 10 (November 2019). Approximately 130 ERUs is based up the projected availability of 31,962 GPD with an average of 245 GPD/ERU. The average of 245 GPD/ERU is based upon the average of Port Townsend’s 260 GPD/ERU and Port Ludlow’s 230 GPD/ERU. Page 39 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Factor 3 - Sewer Services do not Permit Urban Development A key requirement of LAMIRDs is that they “minimize and contain the existing areas or uses of more intensive rural development”.61 For example, the logical outer boundaries of the LAMIRDs must follow historic development patterns, existing as of July 1, 1990.62 In addition, the zoning of the area generally must reflect the development patterns allowable as of July 1, 1990. A key point of LAMIRDs is to allow the more intensive rural uses to continue and to expand through infill development but stay within their existing boundaries. Jefferson County’s Comprehensive Plan and development regulations limit the development of the Brinnon LAMIRD to that of a rural area through the Rural Village Center (“RVC”) zoning classification. Further, the RVC zoning district is tightlined to the logical outer boundaries as of July 1, 1990. Given the tightlined RVC zoning and limitation of sewering only the Brinnon LAMIRD, it is likely that this extension will not permit urban development in the rural area. Exception 3 – Sewering Schools in Rural Areas Serving Both Urban and Rural Student Populations In 2017, the Legislature enacted amendments to the GMA allowing schools in rural areas, serving both rural and urban student populations, to be sewered under limited circumstances.63 The plain text of the statute appears to only authorize sewering of schools that serve both rural and urban students, as opposed to a school that only serves rural students. Given this limitation, it is unlikely that the amendment authorizes schools which only serve rural students, such as Brinnon Schools, to be sewered. However, this amendment may be helpful for the Chimacum High School, which is located in a rural area and serves both rural and urban student populations. For this reason, DCD staff recommends including the 2017 GMA amendment in the County’s Comprehensive Plan and UDC. Exception 4 – Necessary Public Facility to Support a LAMIRD LAMIRDs may be sewered if the sewer is a “necessary public facility” supporting the LAMIRD. “[T]he rural element may allow for limited areas of more intensive rural development, including necessary public facilities and public services to serve the limited area”.64 61 RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(iv). 62 RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(v). 63 RCW 36.70A.213. 64 RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d). See also WAC 365-196-425(6)(c) (“Counties may allow for more intensive uses in a LAMIRD than would otherwise be allowed in rural areas and may allow public facilities and services that are appropriate and necessary to serve LAMIRDs subject to the following requirements ”). Page 40 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket GMHB Decisions Expressly Allow LAMIRDs to Be Sewered if Necessary to Support the LAMIRD The view that LAMIRDs may be sewered as a “necessary public facility” has been endorsed by the GMHB in two cases. In Gain v. Pierce County, the Central Puget Sound GMHB dismissed a petition for review with prejudice which, in part, challenged Pierce County’s Comprehensive Plan policies allowing LAMIRDs to be sewered finding it consistent with the GMA.65 The comprehensive language at issue in Gain was whether “sewer service will serve only a rural area of more intensive development in accordance with the County-Wide Planning Policies.”66 The GMHB held that: Petitioners argue that “RAIDs [LAMIRDs] are not within UGAs and should not be served with sewer service.” Gain PHB, at 4. The GMA does not support this argument. “Limited areas of more intensive rural development” are permitted by the GMA, “including necessary public facilities and public services to serve the limited area.” RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d). The Legislature explicitly determined that these areas (called RAIDs in the County’s Plan) are “not urban growth”. … Providing sewer service to RAIDs does not amount to “an inefficient extension of urban services and contribute[s] to urban sprawl”; providing sewer service to RAIDs is explicitly permitted by the GMA.67 In addition to Gain, Pierce County was also challenged by the City of Tacoma regarding delineation and sewering of its LAMIRDs. In City of Tacoma v. Pierce County, the Central Puget Sound GMHB held that Pierce County’s sewered LAMIRD was inconsistent with their county-wide planning policies because the county-wide planning policies only allowed sewer extensions outside of urban growth areas when: (1) sewer remedied a health or environmental problem; or (2) a formal binding agreement to service an area [LAMIRD] was in place prior to the establishment of the UGA.68 The GMHB did not reach the issue of whether the comprehensive plan policy at issue in Gain was consistent with GMA, as the argument was abandoned by Tacoma.69 However, the GMHB did quote and reiterate Gain’s holding that “providing sewer service to RAIDs is explicitly permitted by the GMA.”70 65 Gain v. Pierce County, CPSGMHB, 99-3-0019, Final Decision and Order at 8 (April 18, 2000). 66 Id. at 5. 67 Id. at 6. (emphasis added). 68 City of Tacoma v. Pierce County, CPSGMHB, 99-3-0023c, Final Decision and Order at 7 (June 26, 2000). (“Tacoma II”) 69 Id. 70 Tacoma II at 9 (quoting Gain v. Pierce County, CPSGMHB, 99-3-0019, Final Decision and Order (April 18, 2000)). Page 41 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket No other GMHB cases have directly reached the issue of sewering LAMIRDs. However, the GMHBs and Washington courts have reached the conclusion that sewering rural areas [other than LAMIRDs] is prohibited by the GMA unless the three-factor test in RCW 36.70A.110(4) and WAC 365-196-425(4) is demonstrated by a strict necessity test or another exception applies.71 Washington Courts Have Not Expressly Addressed the Issue of Sewering a LAMIRD There are no published Washington court opinions on whether LAMIRDs may be sewered. However, Cooper Point may provide some guidance. As noted above, the Washington Supreme Court upheld a strict necessary to protect the public health and the environment standard when analyzing whether sewer extensions in a rural area meet the RCW 36.70A.110(4) and WAC 365-196-425(4) exception.72 In Cooper Point, Thurston County argued that a lower “necessary” test should be established when sewering rural areas because the Legislature allows for “necessary public facilities” within LAMIRDs.73 The court noted that the area at issue in Cooper Point was not a LAMIRD and further that RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d) [LAMIRDs] “requires a showing of necessity … [b]ecause that provision does not define ‘necessary’ it is not helpful in ascertaining the meaning of that term [necessary under RCW 36.70A.110(4)].”74 This dicta could be read to indicate that the court understands that LAMIRDs may be sewered, but they are still subject to a “necessary” test and that the LAMIRD necessary test may be a lower threshold than RCW 36.70A.110(4). Sewering Rural Areas Must be Consistent with the Countywide Planning Policies Countywide planning policies (“CPPs”) are policy statements, developed by the county and its incorporated cities, which establish a common framework for which the jurisdictions’ comprehensive plans are based.75 Comprehensive plans must be consistent with the CPPs.76 A review of the Jefferson County CPPs reveal that sewering the Brinnon LAMIRD may be supportable if there is a threat to the public health or welfare or to protect an area of environmental sensitivity. Below is a review of the CPPs at issue. Policy # 2 – Policy on the Promotion of Contiguous and Orderly Development and the Provision of Urban Services to Such Development 71 Cooper Point at 13; See also Director of the State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development v. Snohomish County, CPSGMHB, 03-3-0017, Final Decision and Order (March 8, 2004). (holding that extension of sewer services to churches in rural areas violated RCW 36.70A.110(4)). 72 Id. at 13-15. 73 Id. at 13. 74 Id. 75 RCW 36.70A.210(1). 76 Id. Page 42 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket 4. Urban services and facilities will not be extended beyond UGA boundaries unless needed to mitigate a threat to the public health or welfare, or to protect an area of environmental sensitivity. To avoid encouraging the spreading of urban development outside of UGAs, this policy shall apply only to threats caused by existing development, and only those existing uses requiring the service or facility to mitigate the threat will be allowed to hook up to any extended services.77 Policy # 8 – Policy on Rural Areas 1. The rural element of the comprehensive plan will be designed to recognize and maintain the unique character of individual rural areas without degrading the environment or creating the need for urban level of services. 3. Level of services standards will be adopted which identifies the type and scale of public facility and infrastructure improvements anticipated for rural areas and rural centers. 5. Rural centers are those existing unincorporated places which serve the retail commercial and service needs of the local area. These areas will be delineated and recognized in the comprehensive plan consistent with level of service standards.78 Unlike RCW 36.70A.110(4) which adopts a “strict necessary to protect standard” when extending sewer connections in rural areas, Jefferson County CPP Policy # 2 adopts a “threat” standard. This distinction may be important in the context of sewering the LAMIRD, as the County can likely demonstrate that sewering the LAMIRD meets the “threat” test under Exception 4. Question 2 - If the GMA Allows new Sewer Connections Within LAMIRDs is There a Necessity Showing and if so, What is the Necessity Showing? Under Exception 4, the GMA may allow new sewer connections within LAMIRDs if: (1) they are a “necessary public facility”; and (2) if the County can demonstrate that sewering the LAMIRD is consistent with its CPPs, specifically that the sewer is necessary to remedy a threat to public health, welfare, or the environment. 77 Jefferson County Washington, Resolution No.128 -92 at 7, December 21, 1992. (emphasis added). 78 Id. at 21-22. Page 43 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket The Necessity Test Under Exception 4 is Lower than the Strict Necessity Test in Cooper Point. Under RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d) and Gain, LAMIRDs may be sewered if the sewer is a “necessary public facility” supporting the LAMIRD. This likely requires a showing that the LAMIRD needs a sewer to support development at the density allowed under the RVC zoning classification. The Brinnon LAMIRD is located within a 100-year flood zone, within close proximity of the Hood Canal (approximately 630 – 3,000 feet from the OHWM of the Hood Canal), within close proximity of the Dosewallips River (approximately 150 feet from the OHWM of the Dosewallips River), and has soil types which are not ideal for septic systems. Because of these environmental factors, Jefferson County Environmental Public has reported that septic systems are more difficult to construct and more difficult to effectively operate without impacts to public health and the environment within the Brinnon LAMIRD. Further, certain existing developments within the Brinnon LAMIRD, such as the Brinnon School, generally require sewers to effectively operate. Given these facts, it is likely that a sewer is a necessary public facility to support the current and future development of the Brinnon LAMIRD. Further, any extension of sewer services to the Brinnon LAMIRD must be consistent with the Jefferson County CPPs, specifically Policy #2, which adopts a threat to public health, welfare, or the environment standard. Jefferson County must demonstrate that the sewer is needed to mitigate a threat to public health, welfare, or the environment. Further, CPP Policy # 2 requires that the threat be caused by existing development. As stated above, the Brinnon LAMIRD is located in a 100-year flood zone, in close proximity to the Hood Canal and Dosewallips River, has types of pre-existing development which usually require sewers, and there has been a long-established history of effluent contamination closing the shellfish beds adjacent to the Brinnon LAMIRD. These facts are likely enough to meet a threat standard. Question 3 - If Jefferson County Permits Sewer Connections for Properties Within the Brinnon LAMIRD to the Dosewallips Sewer, Does the Comprehensive Plan Have to be Amended? The Comprehensive Plan Must Be Amended to Incorporate and Plan for the Dosewallips Sewer and Amended to Ensure Consistency Prior to Any Hookups Yes, if the BoCC decides to allow the Brinnon LAMIRD to be sewered, the Comprehensive Plan must be amended to incorporate the Dosewallips Sewer and ensure consistency. However, at this point an initial Comprehensive Plan policy, amendments to the narrative, and development regulation are proposed to ensure that future work to sewer the LAMIRD can occur. Existing language in the Land Use Element and Capital Facilities Page 44 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Plan must be amended to: (1) create a clear comprehensive plan policy for the extension of sewer facilities to rural areas; and (2) improve consistency among the Comprehensive Plan with the CPPs and governing law. Future amendments may be required to actually incorporate the Dosewallips Sewer plan and its facility elements into the Comprehensive Plan. Further, the GMA requires a capital facilities element consisting of: I. An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, showing the locations and capacities of the capital facilities; II. A forecast of the future needs of such capital facilities; III. The proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities; IV. At least a six-year plan that will finance such capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes; and, V. A requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs and to ensure that the land use element, capital facilities plan element, and financing plan within the capital facilities plan are coordinated and consistent.79 The GMHB has interpreted RCW 36.70A.070(3) as requiring capital facility planning for all facilities that are “streets, highways, sidewalks, … domestic water systems, storm and sanitary sewer systems, parks and recreational facilities, and schools.”80 Even if the public facilities are provided by a non-county or private provider, they must still be integrated into the capital facilities element.81 Therefore, since the Dosewallips Sewer meets the definition of a public facility, it must be incorporated and planned for in the Capital Facilities Plan if sewer services are to be provided to the Brinnon LAMIRD.82 It is recommended that this occurs at a later time. 79 RCW 36.70A.070(3). 80 RCW 36.70A.030(18); West Seattle Fund v. City of Seattle, CPSGMHB, 94-3-0016, Final Decision and Order (April 4, 1995). 81 Durland v. San Juan County, WWGMHB, 00-2-0062c, Final Decision and Order (May 7, 2001). 82 If development regulations are adopted without the necessary capital facilities planning and Jefferson County enters into any agreement or other binding authority to provide sewer to the Brinnon LAMIRD, it may be deemed a de facto comprehensive plan amendment under Ronald Wastewater District, et al. v. Snohomish County, CPSGMHB, 16-3-0004c, Final Decision and Order (January 25, 2017). Page 45 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Sewering the Brinnon LAMIRD May Require a Sewer Plan In addition to the capital facilities planning effort, extending the Dosewallips Sewer may require further approval from the Washington Department of Ecology, including a sewer plan.83 It is recommended that this occurs at a later time and the Comprehensive Plan be amended once the sewer plan is approved, if needed. Consistency Amendments to Existing Language Within the Comprehensive Plan Below is an overview of the Comprehensive Plan policies and narrative which must be amended if Exception 4 is selected: • Policy CF-P-6.3 states: New urban public services will only be provided within a UGA and not be extended beyond a UGA unless deemed to be an essential public service to mitigate a threat to public health, safety, or general welfare. Existing sanitary sewer treatment facility capacity will not be used as a justification for expansion of a sewer system or development inconsistent with County- wide Planning Policies and the Comprehensive Plan. 84 o DCD staff recommends amending CF-P-6.3 to provide for a comprehensive sewer policy addressing: (1) sewering rural areas under RCW 36.70A.110(4); (2) sewering LAMIRDs; (3) sewering rural schools serving urban and rural student populations; and (4) sewering essential public facilities in rural areas. o As currently written, the policy does not align with the CPPs or the governing law. • Exhibit 8-2 states “[d]o not extend urban public facilities beyond UGA boundaries (a requirement of GMA).” 85 Exhibit 8-2 relates the CPPs to the Capital Facility Plan. o DCD staff recommends amending this Exhibit to align with the new Comprehensive Plan policy. 83 RCW 90.48.110 (“all engineering reports, plans, and specification of the construction of new sewerage systems … or for improvements or extension to existing sewerage syst ems or sewage treatment or disposal plants … shall be submitted to and approved by the department, before construction thereof may begin.”); See also RCW 57.16.010 and WAC 173-240-050. 84 Jefferson County Washington, Comprehensive Plan, at 8 -30, December 2018. (emphasis added). 85 Id. at 8-6. Page 46 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket o Exhibit 8-2 oversimplifies the GMA and the CPPs, which may allow the extension of urban services (e.g., sewer facilities) to rural areas under the exceptions described in this paper. • The Rural Economy narrative states that “GMA allows sanitary sewer infrastructure in rural areas if abates an environmental problem, does not induce sprawling development, and is affordable by the community it serves. The application of this allowance is being investigated in the Brinnon Rural Village Center, adjacent to the Dosewallips State park’s wastewater treatment facility.”86 o The Rural Economy narrative oversimplifies the GMA and the CPPs, which may allow the extension of sewer facilities to rural areas under the exceptions described in this paper. o DCD staff recommends amending this Exhibit to align with the new Comprehensive Plan policy. Recommendations: DCD staff recommends Exception #4, establishing a Comprehensive Plan policy and development regulation providing for a comprehensive sewer policy addressing: (1) sewering rural areas under RCW 36.70A.110(4); (2) sewering LAMIRDs; (3) sewering rural schools serving urban and rural student populations; and (4) sewering essential public facilities in rural areas. Further actions, such as the development of a “threat” finding, improvements to the sewer, inclusion of the sewer plan in the Comprehensive Plan, inclusion of level-of-service, and other capital facilities planning actions must occur prior to sewering the LAMIRD. It is recommended that these occur at a later date. The Comprehensive Plan policy and development regulation will “tee up” this future work. The proposed recommended changes, in line in and line out format, are attached to Exhibit 2, Appendix 2. 86 Id. at 1-80. Page 47 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket C. MLA20-00102 – Text Amendments to Support the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update. Docket Item: Comprehensive Plan text amendment to support the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update. Background: Jefferson County Public Works has developed technical revisions to the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer which improve the proposed system’s cost -effectiveness. Public Works has or will obtain funding for the more cost-effective sewer system. The technical revisions meet the requirements of the 2008 Port Hadlock Sewer Plan. The more cost- effective sewer system uses new prefabricated, modular membrane bioreactor (“MBR”) treatment units and a pressurized collection system to reduce initial project cost. Zoning, population, project phasing, and level-of-service remain the same. The revised draft sewer plan may be viewed at https://www.jeffersoncountypublichealth.org/1158/Port-Hadlock- Wastewater-System. Capital facilities planning is a stated GMA planning goal, and a capital facilities element is a required element.87 The GMA requires that jurisdictions coordinate their comprehensive and capital facilities planning. The capital facilities element must contain the following: • An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, showing the locations and capacities of the capital facilities; • A forecast of the future needs for such capital facilities; • The proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities; • At least a six-year plan that will finance such capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes; and • A requirement to reassess the Land Use Element if probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs and to ensure that the land use element, capital facilities plan element, and financing plan within the capital facilities plan element are coordinated and consistent. Park and recreation facilities shall be included in the capital facilities plan element.88 While the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan discusses the Port Hadlock Sewer and adopts the 2008 Port Hadlock Sewer Plan and 2013 Engineering Plan, the 6-year financing plan for planned public facilities states that the sewer will not be implemented within the next 6 years. This docket item revises the language in the Comprehensive Plan to indicate that the sewer may be built within 6-years, revises the 6-year financing plan for 87 RCW 36.70A.020(12); RCW 36.70A.070(3). 88 RCW 36.70A.070(3). Page 48 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket planned public facilities, adopts the level of service (“LOS”) standard from the 2008 Port Hadlock Sewer Plan (same as 2020 update), and incorporates by reference the 2020 Port Hadlock Sewer Facility Plan Update. Analysis: • Adoption of the 2020 Port Hadlock Sewer Facility Plan Update – While the update to the Port Hadlock Sewer Facility Plan is currently under review by the Department of Ecology, the Comprehensive Plan should incorporate by reference the 2020 updates, as they are consistent with the 2008 Port Hadlock Sewer Facility Plan, which was approved by Ecology, and are technical in nature. GMA requires that cost and financing information from the 2020 update to be included in the Comprehensive Plan. • Level of service - Performance standards in the 2008 Port Hadlock Sewer Plan have been approved by the Department of Ecology and constitute the minimum level of service standards for sanitary sewer systems. Port Hadlock’s sanitary sewer system LOS is established in its 2008 system plan and confirmed in the 2020 Port Hadlock Sewer Facility Plan Update. The adopted LOS is 132 gallons per day / estim ated residential unit. • 6-year financing plan – The GMA requires a 6-year financing plan for planned public facilities. Currently the Comprehensive Plan states “$0” for the 6-year financing plan. DCD staff recommends putting in the draft numbers from the revised draft plan for the 2018-2023 planning horizon, along with details on the source of the revenues. The total cost for the planning horizon is $25,900,139 with $11,903,121 coming from local sources. • Narrative – The Comprehensive Plan has statements in the narrative and action plans which indicate that the Port Hadlock sewer will not operate within the next 6years. This language is proposed to be revised and replaced with language indicating that the County may be operating the system within the next 6 years. Recommendations: DCD staff recommends that the Comprehensive Plan be updated to indicate that the County plans to implement the more cost-effective technical strategies from the 2020 Port Hadlock Facility Plan Update, as discussed above. The proposed recommended changes, in line in and line out format, are attached to Exhibit 2, Appendix 3. Page 49 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket D. MLA20-00039 – Seton Site-specific Rezone from RR1:10 to RR1:5, Parcel ID No. 001281002, Located at Airport Cutoff Road (SR 19) and Romans Road. Docket Item: Site-specific amendment (rezone) of approximately 22.51 acres from RR1:10 to RR1:5 for Parcel ID No. 001281002, located at Airport Cutoff Road (SR19) and Romans Road. Background: The proposed site-specific amendment, if approved, will rezone approximately 22.51 acres from Rural Residential one dwelling unit per ten acres (RR1:10) to Rural Residential one dwelling unit per five acres (RR1:5). The property is located near Romans Road (at Airport Cutoff Road / SR 19) to the south and Parkridge drive to the north. The property is surrounded to the north, east, and south by the Woodland Hills neighborhood and commercial, residential, public purpose, and church uses to the west and south. Overall, the parcel is in a fully developed neighborhood and is infill development. Access is proposed through an existing easement on Romans Road to the south and an existing easement from Parkridge Drive to the north. The property has a mapped non-fish bearing streaming. However, the applicant’s State Environmental Policy Act (“SEPA”) Environmental Checklist indicates that the mapped stream is not present and was a mapping error. DCD’s consultant visited the site on January 27, 2021 and could not locate any stream or depression areas similar to a stream. It is DCD’s initial opinion that the stream does not exist where it was mapped and that there is a mapping error. The eastern portion of the property is within the Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (“CARA”); however, the proposed residential development will not likely require any regulatory compliance under the CAO for the mapped CARA.89 If the rezone is approved, the property owner’s desire is to subdivide the property into four 5 acre lots at a later time. The total development would allow 4 single-family homes (“SFRs’) and 4 accessory dwelling units (“ADUs”). The future subdivision and development must comply with all applicable county, state, and federal laws and regulations, such as the subdivision ordinance, critical area ordinance, and performance/ development standards. 89 See JCC 18.22.320(1) (holding that CARA regulates for industrial and co mmercial land uses with impacts to ground water and residential development using community managed sewage systems, LOSS, and planned rural residential developments). Page 50 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Figure 9 – MLA20-00039 Aerial Page 51 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Figure 10 – MLA20-00039 Aerial Page 52 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Figure 11 – MLA20-00039 Current Zoning Page 53 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Figure 12 – MLA20-00039 Mapped Critical Areas Page 54 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Figure 13 – MLA20-00039 Potential Building Locations and Access Page 55 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Figure 14 – MLA20-00039 Potential Lot Layout Page 56 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Figure 15 – MLA20-00039 View of Property From Romans Road (on right) Figure 16 – MLA20-00039 View of Property From Romans Road Page 57 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Figure 17 – MLA20-00039 View of Adjacent Development (west) of Property from Property Viewpoint Analysis: Review and Analysis of Surrounding Uses and Zoning The property is an area which is characterized by similar rural development. To the north, east, and south is the Woodland Hills neighborhood. While Woodland Hill’s zoning is RR1:10, the development pattern is 1 SFR per 5 acres. Further to the east is the Kala Point neighborhood which is zoned RR1:5, but on average has a development patter of 1 SFR per 0.5 acres, in addition to higher density condominium and commercial development adjacent to the shoreline. To the immediate south is the Calvary Community Church, which is off of Romans Road. While zoned RR1:10 this development is consistent with more urbanized areas. To the immediate west is RR1:10 zoning with commercial development (adjacent to SR19) which includes Secret Gardens Northwest and the Jefferson County Genealogical Society Research Center. To the immediate west is RR1:10 zoning with a few SFRs with a development pattern of 1 SFR per 5 acres. Page 58 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket If approved, the RR1:5 zoning, when developed with 5 acres homesites will be consistent with the historic development patterns of the area. The property is an infill site for the Woodland Hills neighborhood. The Comprehensive Plan establishes the following criteria for RR1:5 designation “located in areas of similar development; areas with similar lots of record; along the coastal area; adjacent to Rural Village Center and Rural Crossroad designations; overlay designation for pre-existing platted subdivisions”.90 The proposed rezone meets the RR1:5 designation criteria as the property is surrounded by areas of similar or more intensive development and with existing similar lots of record (5 acres or less). Applicable Comprehensive Plan Narrative, Goals, and Policies Rural Areas Policies Summarized from County-wide Planning Policies91 – Rural areas are “characterized by low density development, open spaces, minimal public services, resource dependent activities, and industries; and outdoor recreational facilities”. Level of service standards are to fit rural areas and rural centers such as “emergency services, transportation and roads, individual septic systems, individual or community water systems, and storm water and water quality” systems. Parcel sizes are to be “commensurate with the character of existing rural communities” and rural areas are to have a “variety of acreage parcels”. The proposed rezone is consistent with the summarized rural area policies, especially considering the surrounding historic development patterns of similar or more intensive uses. Goals and Policies – • Goal LU-G-18 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.92 • Goal LU-G-20 Ensure that rural residential development preserves rural character, protects rural community identity, is compatible with surrounding land uses, and minimizes infrastructure needs.93 o Policy LU-P-20.1 Identify and encourage diverse rural land uses and densities which preserve rural character and rural community identity.94 o Policy LU-P-20.2 Establish rural residential land use densities for all lands located outside of designated Urban Growth Areas. Proposed rural 90 Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan at 1-19. 91 Id. at 1-34. 92 Id. at 1-98. 93 Id. at 1-99. 94 Id. Page 59 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket residential densities and site-specific re-zones shall allow for an adequate supply of appropriately zoned land based upon the County’s rural population projections and needs while maintaining rural character and rural community identity, preserving rural resource-based uses, and avoiding sprawl. Proposed changes to residential land use designations shall take into consideration the vacant lot supply of the local area before allowing site- specific changes to residential zoning.95 DCD staff has analyzed the applicable Co mprehensive Plan narrative, goals, and policies and finds that the proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as the rezone: (1) is consistent with similar and more intensive land use patterns in the vicinity; (2) that little to no vacant lots are available in the near vicinity of the rezone; and, (3) that the rezone is consistent with the rural character of the area. Vehicular Transportation Impacts The proposed rezone will result in 2 additional SFRs and 2 additional ADUs if the rezone is approved, the property subdivided, and the property developed. This would result in an additional 33.52 average daily trips (“ADT”).96 With full build out, a total of 67.02 ADT is estimated from the development (assuming 4 SFRs and 4 ADUs). SR19 at Airport Road has an ADT capacity of 24,000.97 In 2016, the ADT was 14,000.98 It is estimated that the ADT will be 21,350 on this road segment in 2038, which is under the segment’s ADT capacity. Other County Department Review and Comments Public Works Review Comments – • From the north, the site has an existing approach permitted under #RAP08-00016 from Parkridge Drive, a county road, with access through an easement between lots 52 and 53 of Woodland Hills. • From the south, the site has access over an easement through the adjacent parcel, connecting to State Route 19 along Romans Road, a private road. • Department of Public Works takes no exceptions to the proposed comprehensive plan amendment to rezone Assessor Parcel Number 001281002 from RR-10 to RR-5. 95 Id. 96 18.88 ADT from 2 detached SFR development (based upon 9.44 ADT per SFR – per ITE Trip Generation Manual) and 14.64 ADT from 2 ADUs (based upon 7.32 ADT per ADU – per ITE Trip Generation Manual, multi- family land use). 97 Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Technical Document at 31. 98 Id. Page 60 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Environmental Public Health Review Comments – • At the time of the future subdivision, a septic system designer must log at least 4 soil test pits per proposed lot and locate a primary and reserve drainfield area on each proposed lot. • This property is located in the current “Quimper” water service area. Applicant must connect to the public water supply for any future development on any of these parcels. • Health has no objections to reducing the zoning density from 1:10 to 1:5 acres with the following above comments. Recommendation: DCD staff recommends approval of MLA20-00039, which is a site-specific amendment (rezone) of approximately 22.51 acres from RR1:10 to RR1:5 for Parcel ID No. 001281002, located at Airport Cutoff Road (SR 19) and Romans Road. Page 61 of 61 DCD Staff Report – 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket III. State Environment Policy Act Compliance DCD staff is currently preparing State Environmental Policy Act (“SEPA”) compliance documents and expects that SEPA compliance will be accomplished shortly. Once SEPA compliance documents are available, DCD staff will issue an update to this Staff Report. Number Legal Name DBA Processor Producer Permit # First Permit Date Address Parcel ID No.Zoning YTD Sales Known (Jan - Oct) AVNs or Written Warnings Permitted by Jeff Co Notes 1 Pacala Inc Dream City Yes Tier 3 415970 3/20/18 192 W Fredericks St, Port Townsend, WA 98368 948601301 LI $1.98m Written warning in 2015 for failure to maintain security alaram and surveillance system Yes West Glen Cove Area 2 Treehawk Farms Yes Tier 3 412193 1/26/16 5030 Eaglemount Rd, Suite A, Chimacum, WA 98325 801091002 AP-20 $1.04m One AVN (administrative violation notice) in 2017 for using unauthorized pesticides, soil amendments, fertilizers, or other crop production Yes Change of use applied for on 11/5/2014 and finaled on 8/6/2018. Appears to be a non-conforming legal use. 3 The Hight Point Northern Canal Investmens, Olympic Mountain Gardens, and Pen Air Yes Tier 3 413625 2/16/16 4429 Coyle Rd, Quilcene, WA 98376 701142002 CF-80 $700k No known Yes C(d) granted in 2016 for the Marijuana Processing. Production seems to be a non-conforming use. 4 Kohl Processing Enterprises American Hash Makers Yes No 416772 1/9/17 234 Otto St, Suite R-3, Port Townsend, WA 98368 001212015 LI/C $393k AVN issued in 2019 for violation of transportation requirements Yes Glen Cove Area. Change of use permit. 5 Glen Cove Company High Dive, Honor Roll, Infamy, Leaf Chief, and Medina Yes Tier 2 416830 12/31/14 272 Otto St, Port Townsend, WA 98368 986700901 LI $382k Written warning in 2020 for failure to use and maintain traceability, or both Yes Glen Cove Area. Building permits. 6 Emerald Experience Sacred Yes Tier 1 414273 4/5/19 274 Otto St, Suite U, Port Townsend, WA 98368 001212016 LI/C $367k No known Yes Glen Cove Area. Change of use permit/building permit. 7 Pure Funk Northwest Funk Yes Tier 1 412856 1/27/15 274 A Otto St, Port Townsend, WA 98368 001212016 LI/C $90k No known Yes Glen Cove Area. Change of use permit/building permit. 8 Discovery Garden Yes Tier 2 416103 2/22/16 409 Lane De Chantal, Port Townsend, WA 98368 001302012 RR-5 $70k Written warning in 2019 for failure to use and maintain traceability, or both Yes 5.04 ac, shoreline, discovery bay area. CUP for Processing approved on 10/30/2014. Production appears to be a legal non-conforming use. 9 Auntie Onolicious Yes Tier 1 412300 1/2/15 144 Milo Curry Rd, Port Townsend, WA 98368 001321096 RR-5 $21k Written warning in 2015 for failure to maintain security alaram and surveillance system Yes Disco Bay Heights, 2.46 ac, Roger Hall, CUP, Cottage Industry for production and processing approved on 10/24/2018. 10 Central Business District CBD of Washington, Central Business District, and Port Townsend Yes No 417097 12/31/14 205 N Otto St, Suite B, Port Townsend, WA 98368 986701902 LI Unkn No known Yes Glen Cove Area. Change of use permit/building permit. 11 PDT Technologies Chong's Choice/Alta Nova, PDT Technologies, and Tetra Labs Yes No 415704 3/3/15 205A N Otto St, Port Townsend, WA 98368 986701902 LI Unkn No known Yes Glen Cove Area. Change of use permit/building permit. 12 Rocky Brook Ranch Yes Tier 1 417763 6/1/16 71 Mustang Ln Area C, Suite 2, Brinnon, WA 98320 966900117 RR-5 Unkn No known Unknown .23 acres, Lazy C Ranch. 8 Foot Marijuana Fence Permit applied for on 2/18/2015, finaled in 2016. May or may not be a legal non-conforming use, moratorium in place when fence applied for. Open solid waste cases. No CUP for Processing. Exhibit 1 - Existing Jefferson County Producers and Processors *As of 15 Dec 2020. Data from WSLCB, 502data.com, and Jeff Co permitting systems. Approximate numbers, please verify all data Exhibit 2 ADOPTING ORDINANCE – INSERT LATER Appendix 1 MLA19-00019 – Draft Proposed Text Amendments to Marijuana Related Development Regulations Jefferson County Code Page 1/5 DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020. 18.20.295 Recreational marijuana/cannabis. (1) General Provisions. In addition to all other applicable development standards of this chapter and other applicable regulations within Jefferson County Code, the standards set forth below shall apply to all recreational marijuana activities in the unincorporated areas of Jefferson County. In the event of conflicts, the more restrictive measure shall apply. In addition to these provisions, recreational marijuana activities shall comply with all applicable provisions of state law (Chapter 314-55 WAC), including the rules governing recreational marijuana as promulgated by the Washington State Liquor Control Board and other agencies with jurisdiction. (2) Definitions. For purposes of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply. Where these definitions conflict with RCW 69.50.101, as now or hereafter amended, those in state law shall govern. (a) Marijuana or marihuana means all parts of the plant Cannabis, whether growing or not, with a THC concentration greater than 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant, its seeds or resin. The term does not include the mature stalks of the plant, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of the plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the mature stalks (except the resin extracted therefrom), fiber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed of the plant which is incapable of germination. (b) Marijuana processor means a person licensed by the State Liquor Control Board to process marijuana into useable marijuana and marijuana-infused products, package and label useable marijuana and marijuana-infused products for sale in retail outlets, and sell useable marijuana and marijuana-infused products at wholesale to marijuana retailers. Marijuana processing for the purpose of this section may or may not include drying, trimming and bagging of a recreational marijuana product. (c) Marijuana producer means a person licensed by the State Liquor Control Board to produce and sell marijuana at wholesale to marijuana processors and other marijuana producers. Marijuana producing for the purpose of this section shall include drying, trimming and bagging of a recreational marijuana product when done in conjunction with producing. (d) Marijuana-infused products means products that contain marijuana or marijuana extracts and are intended for human use. The term marijuana-infused products does not include useable marijuana. (e) Marijuana retailer means a person licensed by the State Liquor Control Board to sell useable marijuana and marijuana-infused products in a retail outlet. (f) Plant canopy means the square footage dedicated to live plant production, such as maintaining mother plants, propagating plants from seed to plant tissue, clones, vegetative or flowering area. Plant canopy does not include areas such as space used for the storage of fertilizers, pesticides, or other products, quarantine, office space, etc. (3) Use Zones. Three categories of recreational marijuana activities are recognized by rules of the state of Washington as follows: production, processing, and retailing; and each category of such use shall be allowed in the following comprehensive plan zones and as further shown in JCC 18.15.040, Table 3-1, and JCC 18.18.040, Table 3A-1: (a) Production. Allowed as a yes use in agricultural zoning district, rural industrial, and urban industrial zoning districts. Allowed as a conditional discretionary (C(d)) use in rural residential zoning districts and forest resource zoning districts. Prohibited in rural residential, forest resource, rural commercial, urban commercial, urban public, urban residential, county waste management essential public facility (CWMEPF) and mineral resource lands (MRL), parks, preserves and recreation (PPR) and Port Ludlow master plan resort zoning districts. (b) Processing. Allowed as yes use in rural industrial and urban industrial zoning districts. Allowed as a conditional discretionary (C(d)) use on agricultural resource lands. Allowed as conditional discretionary (C(d)) Jefferson County Code Page 2/5 DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020. with a cottage industry permit in forest resource lands and rural residential zoning districts. Prohibited in rural residential, forest resource, rural commercial zoning districts, urban commercial, urban public, urban residential, county waste management essential public facility (CWMEPF) and mineral resource lands (MRL), parks, preserves and recreation (PPR) and Port Ludlow master plan resort zoning districts. (c) Retailing. Allowed as a yes use in neighborhood/visitor (NC), general crossroads (GC), rural village center (RVC), urban commercial (UC) and urban industrial (ULI) zoning districts. Allowed as a conditional discretionary (C(d)) use on agricultural resource lands. Allowed as conditional discretionary (C(d)) with a cottage industry permit in forest resource and rural residential zoning districts. Prohibited in rural residential, forest resource, convenience crossroads (CC), visitor-oriented commercial (VOC), urban public, urban residential, county waste management essential public facility (CWMEPF) and mineral resource lands (MRL), parks, preserves and recreation (PPR) and Port Ludlow master plan resort zoning districts. (4) The following standards shall apply for all recreational marijuana activities: (a) Producing in the forest resource lands and rural residential zones is allowed as a conditional discretionary (C(d)) use subject to the recreational marijuana standards and structure size limitation: (i) Permanent and temporary growing structures on rural residential lands RR 1:5, RR 1:10 and RR 1:20 and forest resource lands shall meet the following standards in addition to all other applicable sections of the Jefferson County Code. (A) Rural Residential 1:5 ñ Temporary or Permanent Growing Structure Size. The allowed structure size is a total combination of square footage of gross floor area for all growing structures. (I) Five percent of gross parcel size in square feet, up to a maximum 10,890 square feet gross floor area. (B) Rural Residential 1:10 and 1:20 and forest resource lands CF-80, RF-40, IF ñ Temporary or Permanent Growing Structure Size. The allowed structure size is a total combination of square footage of gross floor area for all growing structures. (I) Five percent of gross parcel size in square feet, up to a maximum of 21,780 square feet gross floor area. (b a) Producing in agricultural zoning district is allowed as a yes use without size limitations but shall be subject to the standards in JCC 18.20.030, agricultural performance standards, and this subsection (4), recreational marijuana performance standards. (c) Processing in the forest and rural residential zoning districts is allowed subject to a conditional discretionary (C(d)) use permit per JCC 18.20.170, cottage industry standards, and as consistent with this section, recreational marijuana. In addition to the maximum structure size of 5,000 square feet for a processing structure authorized as a cottage industry per JCC 18.20.170(5)(o) for cottage industry, an additional growing structure(s) such as greenhouses may be allowed up to the size limits per parcel size and structure size for producing only per subsection (4)(a)(i) of this section. (d b) Processing and retail in the agricultural zoning district is allowed as conditional discretionary (C(d)) and shall be subject to the standards in JCC 18.20.030(3), agricultural performance standards, and this section, recreational marijuana performance standards. (e c) No recreational marijuana operation may be permitted as a home business or cottage industry. All recreational marijuana activities are subject to the applicable requirements of Chapters 18.20 and 18.30 JCC. (f) Outdoor Producing. All outdoor producing activities in rural residential and forest zones shall have an unlimited outdoor canopy without size limitations. All outdoor producing activities for a cottage industry shall have an unlimited outdoor canopy without size limitations. Jefferson County Code Page 3/5 DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020. (g d) Landscape Screening. All recreational marijuana activities shall have Type A landscape screening from adjacent parcels, per JCC 18.30.130, development standards. (h e) Setbacks. All recreational marijuana structures and activities in agriculture, commercial forest, rural forest, or rural commercial or rural residential zones that abut residential zoned land shall be a minimum 25 feet setback from all property lines including front road setbacks. Setback requirements for other zone combinations are as stated in JCC 18.30.050, development standards, Table 6-1, Density, Dimension and Open Space Standards. In the event of conflict, the more restrictive measures shall apply. (i f) Cameras. Any security cameras proposed for a recreational marijuana facility shall be positioned so as to not intrude on the privacy of adjacent parcels. (j g) Any fence eight feet or taller shall be located a minimum 25 feet from all parcel property lines. (k h) Recreational marijuana activities and facilities shall comply with all applicable standards of JCC Title 18 including but not limited to development standards in Chapter 18.30 JCC, performance and use-specific standards in Chapter 18.20 JCC including JCC 18.20.010, General provisions, JCC 18.20.020, Accessory uses and structures, JCC 18.20.030, Agricultural activities and accessory uses, JCC 18.20.140, Commercial uses Standards for site development, JCC 18.20.170, Cottage industry, and JCC 18.20.220, Industrial uses Standards for site development. (l i) All recreational marijuana licensees shall provide to the department of community development and environmental health a copy of all operations plans as submitted to the Washington State Liquor Control Board, including details of any chemicals, processes, extraction methods, waste handling procedures and safety measures planned for their operations. [Ord. 4-15 ß 5 (Att. D)] (j) Minimum Buffer Requirements. All recreational marijuana activities and facilities must be located at least a 1,000 feet from the perimeter of the following locations or uses: (1) elementary or secondary schools; (2) playgrounds; (3) recreation centers or facilities; (4) childcare centers; (5) public parks; (6) public transit centers; (7) libraries; or (8) any game arcades (where admission is not restricted to persons age 21 or older). 18.20.170 Cottage Industry. (1) Purpose. To provide for small-scale economic development activities on residential parcels, subordinate to the primary residential use, if the administrator finds that such activities can be conducted without substantial adverse impact on the residential environment and rural character in the vicinity. The scale and intensity of cottage industries are typically greater than could be accommodated as a home business, but less than would require a land use district designation of commercial or industrial. (2) The following list of uses allowable as cottage industries include, but are not necessarily limited to: (a) Sales of antiques and collectibles; (b) Art or photography studios; (c) Computer software development; (d) Handicrafts; (e) Ironworking or blacksmith shop; (f) Construction office; (g) Furniture repair or refinishing; (h) Pottery shop; Jefferson County Code Page 4/5 DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020. (i) Real estate sales office; (j) Small equipment repair; (k) Woodworking shop; (l) Excavating contractors; (m) Small engine and boat repair; and (n) Auto and truck repair and service (excludes auto and truck sales, fuel stations and heavy equipment repair). (3) The following occupations are prohibited as cottage industries, except in the West End Planning Area – Remote Rural (WEPA RR) overlay district (Article VI-L of Chapter 18.15 JCC) and when located on parcels with direct access to a principal arterial (i.e., Highway 101) in the Brinnon Planning Area – Remote Rural (BRPA RR) overlay district: (a) Heavy equipment repair shop; (b) Autobody work or paint shop; and (c) Large-scale furniture stripping. (4) The following occupations are prohibited as cottage industries in all of unincorporated Jefferson County: (a) Commercial shooting facilities or uses that are associated with shooting firearms.; and, (b) Marijuana recreational processor. (5) All cottage industries shall be subject to the following standards, except as provided for in the West End Planning Area and Brinnon Planning Area – Remote Rural overlay districts as specified in Article VI-L of Chapter 18.15 JCC, Remote Rural Overlay Districts for the West End Planning Area and the Brinnon Planning Area: (a) The cottage industry shall be operated by at least one full-time, bona fide resident in a single-family residence of the parcel on which the proposed use is being requested. (b) The cottage industry may not employ more than four employees on the site who reside off the subject property. Auto and truck repair shall only employ two persons on the site who reside off the subject property. (c) Only those buildings or areas as specifically approved by the county may be utilized in the conduct of business. (d) Any business requiring customers to visit the site shall provide adequate on-site parking spaces, in addition to one for each full-time equivalent employee who resides off the subject property, and two for the owners of the property. All parking spaces shall meet the standards of JCC 18.30.100. (e) All structures and outside activities shall be so located or screened from adjacent properties to avoid disturbances through glare, noise, dirt or other nuisances or hazards. (f) All activity related to the conduct of the business or industry, except for activities related to the growing and storing of plants, shall be conducted within an enclosed structure or be sufficiently screened from view of adjacent residences. (g) All cottage industry activities shall be sufficiently screened from view of adjacent residences, using site location, topography, landscaping, fencing, the retention of native vegetation, or a combination thereof necessary to meet the Type A screening requirements of JCC 18.30.130. (h) Traffic generated by the cottage industry shall not exceed the level of service adopted for the public roadway which accesses the use, nor generate significant traffic in excess of that normally generated by typical uses found within the particular district. Jefferson County Code Page 5/5 DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020. (i) No business may provide drive-through service. (j) Cottage industries shall be limited in their hours of operation. No business on-site customer service shall be conducted before 8:00 a.m. or after 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and before 9:00 a.m. or after 6:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday. (k) The administrator may attach additional conditions or requirements, or may make modifications to the site plan where necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public. (l) The granting of the proposed cottage industry use shall not constitute a rezone. No expansions of approved cottage industries are permitted, except as specified in Article VI-L of Chapter 18.15 JCC, Remote Rural Overlay Districts for the West End Planning Area and the Brinnon Planning Area, concerning the rural remote overlay districts. (m) No exterior display of goods for sale shall be allowed. (n) The cottage enterprise is an accessory use to the residential use of a dwelling unit, and the residential function of the buildings and property shall be maintained. (o) Any new structure constructed to accommodate the cottage industry shall be limited in scale so that it is in character with neighboring properties. In no case shall more than 5,000 square feet of total building area on the property be devoted to the cottage industry. (p) No more than one sign is allowed, consistent with the sign standards in JCC 18.30.150. (q) No on-site direct retail sales of products not produced on site are allowed, except for items collected, traded and occasionally sold by hobbyists, such as coins, stamps and antiques, and their accessories. (r) Minimum parcel size shall be one acre gross site area. (s) No use shall be made of equipment or material which produces unreasonable vibration, noise, dust, smoke, odor, or electrical interference to the detriment of the quiet use and enjoyment of adjoining and surrounding property. Any after-hours business activities shall not have noise impacts discernible beyond the property boundaries. (t) Not more than one cottage industry shall be allowed in or on the same premises. (u) The proposed cottage industry shall comply with the standards and requirements of the Jefferson County environmental health department. (v) Where shooting firearms is associated with a cottage industry at a property, such property shall be considered a commercial shooting facility, which is prohibited. (6) Auto repair and service proposals are subject to the following additional requirements: (a) The proposal shall submit a detailed operating plan in compliance with the latest edition of the Washington State Department of Ecology’s Guide for Automotive Repair Shops identified as Publication No. 92-BR-16. (b) The proposal shall include an operating plan which complies with the Department of Ecology’s SMM. The submittal shall include a stormwater management plan in compliance with Chapter 18.30 JCC and include supplemental information which addresses and complies with Volume IV-2.1 and 2.2 of the SMM. (c) The operation shall be limited to two stalls or bays for repair and servicing. (d) The cottage industry shall not store more than three vehicles at any one time awaiting or departing for or from servicing or repair. This excludes the vehicles being actively serviced in the facility. (e) A 50-foot buffer shall be maintained from the structure housing the auto repair and service to all adjacent property lines. [Ord. 3-20 § 1 (Appx. A); Ord. 8-06 § 1] Jefferson County Code DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 Page 1/2 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020. 18.15.040 Categories of land use. Table 3-1. Allowable and Prohibited Uses Resource Lands Rural Residential Rural Commercial Rural Industrial Public UGA Agricultural – Prime and Local Forest – Commercial, Rural and Inholding 1 DU/5 Acres 1 DU/10 Acres 1 DU/20 Acres Rural Village Center Convenience Crossroad Neighborhood/ Visitor Crossroad General Crossroad Resource- Based Industrial Light Industrial/Commercial (Glen Cove) Light Industrial (Glen Cove) Light Industrial/Manufacturing (Quilcene and Eastview) Heavy Industrial Parks, Preserves and Recreation Irondale and Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area Specific Land Use AG CF/RF/IF RR 1:5 RR 1:10 RR 1:20 RVC CC NC GC RBI LI/C LI LI/M HI PPR UGA Industrial Uses See Chapter 18.18 JCC Bulk plant or terminal facilities No No No No No No No No No No C C C C No Asphalt and concrete batch plants No C No No No No No No No No No No No Yes No Heavy equipment sales and rental services No No No No No C(a) No No C(a) No Yes Yes Yes No No Heavy industrial, resource- based No No No No No No No No No C(a) No No No Yes No Light industrial/manufacturing (not including recreational marijuana processing) See JCC 18.20.030 No No No No No No No No C(a) Yes Yes Yes No No Food or beverage bottling and/or packaging See JCC 18.20.030 No No No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No Outdoor storage yards See JCC 18.20.030 No No No No No No No No C(a) Yes Yes Yes Yes No Recycling center See JCC 18.20.030 No No No No No No No/C5 No/C6 No Yes Yes Yes No No Marijuana recreational processor C(d) C(d) No C(d) No C(d) No C(d) No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Mineral extraction activities (without MRL overlay) Yes Yes C C C No No No No No No No No No No Mineral extraction activities (w/MRL overlay) (10-acre min. lot size) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No No No No No Jefferson County Code DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 Page 2/2 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020. Resource Lands Rural Residential Rural Commercial Rural Industrial Public UGA Agricultural – Prime and Local Forest – Commercial, Rural and Inholding 1 DU/5 Acres 1 DU/10 Acres 1 DU/20 Acres Rural Village Center Convenience Crossroad Neighborhood/ Visitor Crossroad General Crossroad Resource- Based Industrial Light Industrial/Commercial (Glen Cove) Light Industrial (Glen Cove) Light Industrial/Manufacturing (Quilcene and Eastview) Heavy Industrial Parks, Preserves and Recreation Irondale and Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area Specific Land Use AG CF/RF/IF RR 1:5 RR 1:10 RR 1:20 RVC CC NC GC RBI LI/C LI LI/M HI PPR UGA Mineral processing accessory to extraction operations (without MRL overlay) C C C C C No No No No Yes C C C Yes No Mineral processing accessory to extraction operations (w/MRL overlay) Yes Yes C C C No No No No Yes No No No Yes No Warehouse/wholesale distribution center See JCC 18.20.030 No No No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No See Chapter 18.18 JCC (Automobile) wrecking yards and junk (or salvage) yards No No No No No No No No/ Yes7 No/ Yes8 No No No Yes Yes No Unnamed industrial uses No No No No No No No No No D D D D D No Agricultural and Forestry Uses Agricultural activities and accessory uses See JCC 18.20.030 Aquacultural uses and activities (outside of shoreline jurisdiction) Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No No No No No Aquatic plant and animal processing and storage See JCC 18.20.030 No No No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Lumber mills and associated forestry processing activities and uses See JCC 18.20.030 C(a) No No No No No No No Yes No No No Yes No Marijuana Recreational Producer Yes C(d) No C(d) No C(d) No C(d) No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Nurseries Yes Yes C(d) C(d) C(d) Yes No Yes Yes No No No No No No Unnamed agricultural and forestry uses D D D D D No No No No No No No No No No Appendix 2 MLA20-00116 – Draft Proposed Text Amendments to Support Sewering the Brinnon Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–30 January 2021 ▶ Policy CF-P-5.7 Work with purveyors to promote the use of unaffected upland water sources and other alternative supplies, where appropriate, to supply new and existing development in affected areas. ▶ Policy CF-P-5.8 Support implementation of conservation strategies that reduce average annual and peak day water use for public and individual water systems. ▶ Policy CF-P-5.9 Recognize the authority of Public Utility District #1 pursuant to Title 54 RCW and other applicable statutes. The County will cooperate with Public Utility District #1 to develop final development regulations consistent with that authority. Sewer & Wastewater Goal CF-G-6 Promote sanitary sewer systems that accommodate growth, are cost-effective to construct and operate, and are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. ▶ Policy CF-P-6.1 Plan sanitary sewer system sizing, phasing, development, and expansion within urban growth areas to accommodate the allocated population and planned urban development to the greatest extent possible within the current planning period; while also planning implementation phases that provide service at the greatest cost- effectiveness. ▶ Policy CF-P-6.2 Encourage development of community septic systems in Rural Centers to protect public health, the environment, and foster a reliable, integrated collection system. In areas with water quality concerns that are or appear to be related to problems associated with individual septic systems, Jefferson County supports utilizing a range of sewage treatment options, including community drainfields and centralized systems, subject to State law. ▶ Policy CF-P-6.3 New urban public services sanitary sewer systems will only be provided within a UGA and will not be extended beyond a UGA unless: -It is a necessary response to protect basic public health, safety, and the environment; the sewer, extension, or connection is financially supportable at rural densities; and the sewer, connection, or extension does not permit urban development; CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–31 January 2021 -It is necessary to support a Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development (LAMIRD) consistent with the County-wide Planning Policies; -It is necessary to provide service to an essential public facility if no practicable alternative exists to site the essential public facility in an Urban Growth Area; or, -It supports a rural school serving both rural and urban student populations, consistent with state law. deemed to be an essential public service to mitigate a threat to public health, safety, or general welfare. Existing sanitary sewer treatment facility capacity will not be used as a justification for expansion of a sewer system or development inconsistent with County-wide Planning Policies and the Comprehensive Plan. ▶ Policy CF-P-6.4 Encourage the use of water-conserving fixtures with new systems or services. ▶ Policy CF-P-6.5 Consider the full range of actions that will enable urban development to occur in a UGA, including urban development initially on Large Onsite Septic Systems to accommodate growth, affordable housing, economic development, and environmental protection in advance of an operational sanitary sewer system. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–79 January 2021 Since GMA’s inception, the State of Washington Growth Management Hearings Board (Hearings Board) has interpreted the GMA and its rules to local jurisdictions’ comprehensive plans. Over the years, a body of law has developed, which appears to force counties to curtail innovation in rural area development, such as prescriptively establishing rural and urban densities and requiring tightlined LOBs in LAMIRDs. This imposes a difficult challenge when trying to meet affordable housing needs outside of designated urban growth areas. Some LAMIRDs, such as Chimacum, do not fit neatly within this urban rural dichotomy. This provides only two boxes, urban or rural for solutions to complex land use issues. Solutions may require more in-between areas to meet requirements, such as a greater focus on performance standards for some housing developments over a prescriptive residential density. Innovations to meet current housing crises is limited by GMA. If a county allows bonus densities in a rural cluster the resulting density after applying the bonus must be a rural density, which doesn’t yield enough bonus density to enable the types of housing developments that can meet the challenges of providing density for affordable housing, even within a rural context. Jefferson County proposes to investigate provisions for planned residential developments and investigate the feasibility of alternative performance standards that could potentially increase rural residential density above the current maximum rural density. Jefferson County is aware that these options require a legislative amendment to the GMA. Rural Economy Jefferson County’s rural economy has responded to economic conditions and market forces pivoting towards tourism, agricultural businesses, and small businesses. Our economy is similar to other rural economies, transitioning away from natural resource industries. Our rural economy needs infrastructure to support its economic activities and changes in modern infrastructure, such as the ability to scale wastewater management solutions to meet small community needs is evolving. Even though developments in infrastructure, such as small and innovative sanitary sewer systems may be able to support the overarching planning goals of GMA, while containing and controlling growth in rural areas, GMA generally precludes small and innovative sanitary sewer systems in rural areas as they are defined as urban levels of service. This ignores potential opportunities to provide modern, scaled treatment facilities to support a variety of community needs such as housing and economic development. Jefferson County is aware these rural infrastructure systems would require a legislative amendment to the GMA. GMA allows sanitary sewer infrastructure in rural areas when: (1) it if abates an public health and environmental problem, does not induce sprawling urban development, and is affordable by the community that it serves; (2) it is necessary to support a LAMIRD and it is consistent with the County-wide Planning Policies; or (3) supports a school located in the rural area serving both rural and urban students. Jefferson County is investigating sewering the Brinnon LAMIRD, using the existing Dosewallips State Park sewer system. The Dosewallips State Park sewer treatment plant Jefferson County LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–80 January 2021 is located in the Brinnon LAMIRD and its lines run through the LAMIRD to the Dosewallips State Park. Sewering Brinnon would alleviate known and potential environmental problems associated with on-site sewage systems, considering that the Brinnon LAMIRD is located within the 100-year floodzone and is adjacent to the Hood Canal. The application of this allowance is being investigated in the Brinnon Rural Village Center, adjacent to Dosewallips State park’s wastewater treatment facility. The County is working to address requirements of GMA, while allowing limited service by the Dosewallips State park’s system. Currently, Brinnon is served entirely by septic systems. These septic systems have current and potential problems and some systems are located within flood zones. In a 2002 amendment to the GMA, the Washington State Legislature found that GMA is intended to recognize the importance of rural lands and rural character to Washington's economy, and find that rural lands and rural-based economies enhance the economic desirability of the State of Washington. To retain and enhance the job base in rural areas, rural counties must have flexibility to create opportunities for business development and to retain existing businesses and allow them to expand. The legislature’s findings close with: “[T]he legislature finds that in defining its rural element under RCW 36.70A.070(5), a county should foster land use patterns and develop a local vision of rural character that will: [h]elp preserve rural-based economies and traditional rural lifestyles; encourage the economic prosperity of rural residents; foster opportunities for small-scale, rural-based employment and self-employment; permit the operation of rural-based agricultural, commercial, recreational, and tourist businesses that are consistent with existing and planned land use patterns; be compatible with the use of the land by wildlife and for fish and wildlife habitat; foster the private stewardship of the land and preservation of open space; and enhance the rural sense of community and quality of life.” In summary, as Jefferson County reviews rural commercial areas, we explore ways to meet GMA’s fundamental purposes in flexible and meaningful manners. For example, flexibility in designating LAMIRDs, while meeting the purpose and intent of GMA would assist the County with contained and controlled development, enhanced rural economies, additional housing, preservation of natural resources, enhanced open space and parks, and enhanced rural character. The legislative findings for GMA include the conservation and wise use of our lands, along with sharing economic development with communities experiencing insufficient economic growth. GMA should not be a barrier for rural counties, but a platform to encourage sustainable, coordinated, and controlled growth and economic development in accordance with the public’s interest. Jefferson County Code Page 1/2 DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020. 18.30.040 Sewage disposal. (1) All development shall be provided with an individual, on-site septic system and drainfield approved by Jefferson County public health in compliance with Chapter 8.15 JCC, unless Jefferson County public health determines that public sewer is available which would then require connection to the approved public sewer. (2) Design and construction standards for on-site sewage disposal shall conform to the requirements of Jefferson County public health or the agency having regulatory responsibility for the system. [Ord. 14-18 § 4 (Exh. B); Ord. 8- 06 § 1] (3) Large on-site sewage systems (LOSS) and community drainfields are not considered a sanitary sewer system as applied under the Growth Management Act. Jefferson County considers these systems a rural governmental service. (4) New construction of a sanitary sewer system, extension, or connection to a sanitary sewer system located outside of an urban growth area may only occur if: (a) The new sanitary sewer system, extension, or connection is a necessary response to protect basic public health, safety, and the environment; the sewer is financially supportable at rural densities; and, the sewer, extension, or connection does not permit urban development; (b) The new sanitary sewer system, extension, or connection is necessary to support a Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development (LAMIRD); the sewer is needed to mitigate a threat to the public health, welfare, or to protect an area of environmental sensitivity caused by existing development; and the sewer is limited to those properties or facilities needed to mitigate the threat to the public health, welfare, or to protect an area of environmental sensitivity; (c) The new sanitary sewer system, extension, or connection is necessary to provide service to an essential public facility if no practicable alternative exists to site the essential public facility in an Urban Growth Area; or, (d) The new sanitary sewer system, extension, or connection supports schools sited in a rural area that serve students from a rural area and an urban area, when consistent with the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, RCW 36.70A.213, and the following requirements: (i) The applicable school district has adopted a policy addressing the school service area, facility needs, and educational program requirements; (ii) The applicable school district has made a finding, with the concurrence of the county legislative authority and the legislative authorities of any affected cities, that the proposed site is suitable to site the school and any associated recreational facilities that the applicable district has determined cannot reasonably be collocated on an existing school site, taking into consideration the extent to which vacant or developable land within an urban growth area meets those requirements; (iii) The county and affected cities agree to the extension of sewer to serve the school sited in a rural area that serves urban and rural students at the time of concurrence of subsection (4)(d)(ii); (iv) Any impacts associated with the siting of the school are mitigated as required by the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW; and, (v) Any extension of the sewer beyond the urban growth area is subject to the following: Jefferson County Code Page 2/2 DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020. (1) Must only serve the applicable school and the costs of the extension must be borne by the applicable school district based on a reasonable nexus to the impacts of the school. (2) Any exception from subsection (4)(d)(v), when consistent with RCW 36.70A.110(4), shall allow the sewer to serve a property or properties in addition to the school if the property owner so requests, provided that the county and affected cities agree with the request and provided that the property is located no further from the sewer than the distance that, if the property were within the urban growth area, the property would be required to connect to the sewer. (3) If a property owner connects to the sewer under subsection (4)(d)(v)(2), the school district may, for a period of time not to exceed 20 years, require reimbursement from a requesting property owner for a proportional share of the construction costs incurred by the school district for the extension of the sewer. Appendix 3 MLA20-00102 – Draft Proposed Text Amendments to Support the Port Hadlock Sewer LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–124 February 2021 Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area History of Planning Designation Detailed planning for the designation of a Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area in compliance with the requirements of the GMA has been on- going since the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan was originally adopted in 1998. Specific policy language in the Comprehensive Plan indicated the joint city/county intent to pursue future Urban Growth Area planning for the “Tri-Area” (including Irondale, Port Hadlock and Chimacum). As part of the on-going joint City/County urban growth area planning, the Tri-Area Provisional Urban Growth Area (Urban Growth Area) was designated by Jefferson County on October 5, 1999 as an interim step in the Urban Growth Area planning process. In 2000, the boundary of the Interim Urban Growth Area was established, and included the Irondale and Port Hadlock communities. In-depth analysis and environmental impact review of the land use, population, capital facilities and public services, natural systems and critical area constraints, open space, housing, and non-residential land use needs for a Tri-Area Urban Growth Area are incorporated in the Tri Area/Glen Cove Special Study conducted from 1998-2002. Public Facilities & Services Specific planning for public facilities and services in the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area is referenced in this section and in the Capital Facilities Element, as well as supporting appendices of the Comprehensive Plan, the Tri Area/Glen Cove Special Study, the Jefferson County Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area Sewer Facility Plan of September 2008, andthe Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area Sewer System/Water Reclamation Facility and Influent Pipeline Design Plans & Specifications dated December 2013., and the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update. Inside the Puget Sound Iron Company, Jefferson County, from the Collection of the Jefferson County Historical Society LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–131 February 2021 and policies guiding the development of the Urban Growth Area. This included identification of additional plans and capital facilities (including costs and funding sources) needed to implement the full range of urban services and facilities within the Urban Growth Area. The next phase involved preparation and adoption of Urban Growth Area development regulations now codified in Chapter 18.18 of the JCC. This phase also included completion of the capital facility plans needed to implement the full range of urban services required in CWPP 2.1, including the adoption of urban level of service standards for Urban Growth Area transportation improvements, storm water management facilities, and a new sanitary sewer system. These capital facility plans are adopted herein by reference and are included as appendices to the Comprehensive Plan. The Urban Growth Area functional capital facility plans as adopted herein are available under separate cover and include: ▶ Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area Sewer Facility Plan, September 2008 and Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update, August 2020. ▶ Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area Stormwater Management Plan, May 2004 ▶ Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area Transportation Plan, May 2004 as updated in Appendix C Consistent with CWPP 1.5, the adopted Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area General Sewer Plan identifies phased development areas within the Urban Growth Area based on where the six (6) year capital facilities plan is prepared to provide urban sanitary sewer service in the Urban Growth Area core, followed by expansion of sewer service availability throughout the Urban Growth Area in the 20 year planning period. More complete discussion and analysis of these areas are found in the “Capital Facilities” section of this element and in the adopted Urban Growth Area General Sewer Plan. Public involvement was a key component of all phases of Urban Growth Area planning. The County appointed an Urban Growth Area Citizen Advisory Committee during the initial Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area boundary and land use planning phase in 2001. The CAC was comprised of local Urban Growth Area residents and business owners and participated in developing the initial recommendations for the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area boundary and land use designations adopted in 2002. An Urban Growth Area Citizens Task Force was appointed in 2004, again comprised of local business owners and residents, to help the Planning Commission Urban Growth Area Subcommittee develop specific implementing regulations and capital facility development standards for the Urban Growth Area. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–132 February 2021 Alternative Phasing Sewer Policy Within the UGA, the principal barrier to greater density is the lack of a sanitary sewer. Some communities in Washington State allow development activity on alternative wastewater treatment systems that do not preclude future hook-up to traditional sewer. For example, Kitsap County explored pocket plants, membrane bioreactor treatment systems, and community drain fields, and the Growth Management Hearings Board found these types of systems provided an urban level of service for new development (KCRP VI v. Kitsap County; Case 06-3-0007). Pierce County allows dry sewer lines to be installed; residential development up to the maximum density may be allowed, if lots in excess of the density permitted with on-site septic cannot be developed until the sewer line is extended and connected to all the lots. The City of Yakima allows urban development if there are either public sewer systems or approved community sewer systems. A policy is included allowing for alternative technologies and phasing to advance development in the Urban Growth Area, and meet community needs such as for housing variety and affordability. Land Use Map & Zoning Designations The Future Land Use and Zoning Map, adopted as a part of this element, is the graphic representation of the densities and intensities of use and the goals, policies and strategies contained within this plan. The Land Use and Zoning Maps were developed based on consistency with the GMA, community involvement, consideration of the 1995 Tri-Area Community Development Plan, the results of the Special Study, the Proposed Irondale/Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area: Dwelling Unit & Population Holding Capacity Analysis, Cascadia Community Planning Services, January 21, 2009, and the specific criteria contained within this element. Land use and zoning designations are as follows: ▶ The Urban Low Density Residential (UGA-LDR) zone will allow housing density from four (4) to six (6) dwelling units per acre. Moderate Density Residential (UGA-MDR) zoning will allow housing at a density of 7-12 units per acre. The High Density Residential (UGA-HDR) zone will allow housing at a density of 13-18 dwelling units per acre. ▶ The Urban Commercial (UGA-UC) zone covers both the existing and planned future commercial development in the Port Hadlock core area and along Rhody Drive from Ness” Corner along the commercial strip fronting SR 19. The Visitor-Oriented CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–3 February 2021 EXHIBIT 8-1 Capital Facilities & Public Services Provided Capital Facility & Service Topic Providers Serving Unincorporated Territory Guiding Plans Law Enforcement Jefferson County Sherriff Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office Strategic Plan, Comprehensive Version, 2018 Parks and Recreation Jefferson County Jefferson County Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan Update,2015, Jefferson County Parks and Recreation, Department of Public Works Public Administration Jefferson County Jefferson County Strategic Plan, County Administrator’s Office, 2018 Individual operations plans for community centers, maintenance facilities, and animal control facilities Sewer Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA – Jefferson County Port Ludlow – Olympic Water and Sewer Port Hadlock Wastewater System: Urban Growth Area Sewer Facility Plan, 2008 and Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update, 2020 Design Plans & Specifications, 2013 Solid Waste Jefferson County Jefferson County, Solid Waste Management Plan, September 2016 CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–24 February 2021 Sanitary Sewer: § City of Port Townsend: 260 gallons per day/ERU § Port Ludlow (Ludlow Water Co., Inc.): 230 gallons per day/ERU § Port Hadlock: 132 gallons per day/ERU Water: § City of Port Townsend: 840 gallons per day/ERU § Port Ludlow (Ludlow Water Co., Inc.):160 gallons per day/ERU § PUD No.1: 200 gallons per day/ERU § Tri-Area (City of Port Townsend): 800 gallons per day/ERU Airport: § JCIA: Pursuant to JCIA Master Plan 2014 or successor. Fire and Emergency Medical Services: § Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 1 - East Jefferson Fire and Rescue: 0.29 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 § Fire District 2 (Quilcene): 2.0 fire units in service per 1,000 pop. and 1.4 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 § Fire District 3 (Port Ludlow): 1.0 fire units in service per 1,000 pop. and 0.8 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 § Fire District 4 (Brinnon): 1.25 fire units in service per 1,000 pop. and 0.5 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 § Fire District 5 (Gardiner): 3.0 fire units in service per 1,000 pop. and 3.0 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 § Fire District 7 (Clearwater): 2.0 fire units in service per 1,000 pop. and 0 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 § Port Townsend Fire Department: 0.29 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 Hospital: § Jefferson County Public Hospital District No. 2:: 0.75 beds per 1,000 population 2023 and 2038 Library: § Jefferson County Library. 1:433 square feet per 1,000 population 2023 and 2038 School District facilities: § Brinnon School District 46: K-8: Not to exceed 23 students/classroom § Chimacum School District 49: K-12: Not to exceed 27 students/classroom December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 8 Service Topic Providers Guiding Plans Sewer Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA – Jefferson County Port Ludlow – Olympic Water and Sewer Port Hadlock Wastewater System: Urban Growth Area Sewer Facility Plan, 2008 Design Plans & Specifications, 2013 Port Hadlock Sewer Facility Plan Update, 2020 Solid Waste Jefferson County Jefferson County, Solid Waste Management Plan, September 2016 Stormwater Jefferson County Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area Stormwater Management Plan, May 2004 Jefferson County Surface Water Management Plan, November 2006 Transportation Jefferson County Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization Jefferson Transit Authority Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area Transportation Plan, May 2004 Quimper Peninsula Travel Demand Model, October 2008 Nonmotorized Transportation Plan, 2010 Quimper Peninsula Transportation Study, January 2012 Peninsula RTPO Regional Transportation Plan 2035 (May 2013) Jefferson County Public Works Transportation Improvement Plan, 2017 Jefferson Transit, Transit Development Plan 2017-2022 & 2016 Annual Report, August 2017 Education Brinnon School District No. 46 Chimacum School District No. 49 Port Townsend School District No. 50 Queets-Clearwater School District No. 20 Quilcene School District No. 48 Port Townsend School District No. 50 Individual Operational Plans December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 9 Service Topic Providers Guiding Plans Fire Protection Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 1—East Jefferson Fire and Rescue Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 2—Quilcene Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 3 – Port Ludlow Fire and Rescue Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 4—Brinnon Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 5—Discovery Bay—Gardiner Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 6 – Cape George/Kala Point/Beckett Point – Merged Jefferson County Fire District No. 7 – Clearwater-Queets Individual Operational Plans Water Port Townsend Jefferson County Water District No. 1 – Paradise Bay Jefferson County Water District No. 2 – Brinnon Jefferson County Water District No. 3 – Coyle Port Ludlow Drainage District Port of Port Townsend Public Utility District No. 1 of Jefferson County Jefferson County Coordinated Water System Plan, June 1997. Pending update Jefferson County Public Utility District #1 Water System Plan 2011 Source: BERK, 2018. In conjunction with its budget, the County may revise this Element, as needed, to add new projects needed to accommodate changing development circumstances, remove projects that have been built, and to reevaluate projects remaining in the inventory. In 2020, Jefferson County revised the 2008 Port Hadlock Wastewater System: Urban Growth Area Sewer Facility Plan and 2013 Design Plans & Specifications for the Port Hadlock UGA with technical design updates to provide for a more cost-effective system. The 2020 Sewer Facility Plan Update is currently under review by the Washington State Department of Ecology and is incorporated by reference, as it may be amended, into the Comprehensive Plan. Connections to Other Elements This CFP Technical Document supports the Comprehensive Plan Facilities and Utilities Element, which contains goals and policies per the GMA requirements for the CFP element. This Appendix also supports watershed goals and policies in the Environment Element. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 12 County Facility Type 2017 Adopted LOS 2018 Plan Adjusted LOS through 2023 2018 Plan Adjusted LOS through 2038 Trails: Target LOS if funding allows 1.83 miles /k residents 1.83 acres /k residents 1.83 acres /k residents Public Administration Animal Control Shelter 74.9 sq. ft./k residents 69 sq. ft./k residents 58 sq. ft./k residents Community Centers 1,277.6 sq. ft./k residents 1,185 sq. ft./k residents 1,005 sq. ft./k residents Administrative Facilities 1,509.7 sq. ft./k residents 1,200 sq. ft./k residents 1,020 sq. ft./k residents Maintenance Shop Facilities 1,078.9 sq. ft./k residents 975 sq. ft./k residents 825 sq. ft./k residents Sewer & Water System Port Headlock / Irondale UGA Sewer Pending 132 gallons per day/ERU Pending 132 gallons per day/ERU Pending 132 gallons per day/ERU Solid Waste Waste 4.20 pounds per capita per day 3.12 pounds per capita per day 3.12 pounds per capita per day Recycling 0.80 pounds per capita per day 2.8 pounds per capita per day 2.8 pounds per capita per day Stormwater Standard Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Transportation Rural Roads C C C UGA Roads, MPR Roads, Highways of Regional Significance D D D Source: Jefferson County Given the LOS adjustments in the table above, there are minimal deficiencies, consisting of trails as documented in the 2015 PROS Plan. Regarding other park classifications, to avoid deficiencies in 2038 the plan would need to be amended. EXHIBIT 1-5 Infrastructure Needs & Capacity Projections, 2018-2037 County Facility 2023 2038 Population Projected 33,250 39,221 Law Enforcement County Corrections Inmate Facilities No Deficiency—Adjusted No Deficiency—Adjusted County Sheriff Facilities No Deficiency—Adjusted No Deficiency—Adjusted December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 18 2.5 SIX-YEAR PROJECTED FUNDING & COST COMPARISON The purpose of this section is to compare Jefferson County’s dedicated capital facilities revenue sources with its planned project costs for the six-year planning horizon of 2018- 2023 to understand the difference between near-term future dedicated capital revenues and planned future costs. In Jefferson County, future capital costs are generally larger than future dedicated capital revenues. This trend is seen in most counties and cities throughout Washington State, given the structural and legal limitations on capital funding sources. Understanding the magnitude of this difference can help the County plan for ways to fill in the gap through other funding methods, such as operating transfers or bonds. EXHIBIT 2-2 Estimated Capital Project Costs by Category (2018$) Facility Costs: 2018-2023 Revenues: 2018-2023 Local Funding Strategies Law Enforcement/ Justice $1,090,492 $1,090,492 $1,090,492 REET, Rates, Bonds, Grants, Etc. Parks and Recreation2 $501,500 $501,500 $501,500 General Fund, donations & grants. Seek additional grants and donations for unmet goals in periods prior to 2018 and update phasing. Public Administration1 $3,372,750 $3,372,750 $3,372,750 REET, Fleet Services Fund Balance Sewer $0 $25,900,138* 2018-2023 $27,099,138* 2021-2026 $0 $25,900,139* 2018-2023 $27,099,138 2021-2026 $0 $11,903,121* 2018-2023 $13,102,121* 2021-2026 Seek funding: grants, low interest infrastructure loans, local improvement district, connection charges, and revenue from service rates. Local funding: Local improvement district, connection charges, local borrowing, and revenue. Outside funding: WA Legislature appropriations, WA Dept of Ecology Combined Water Quality Program grant funding, USDA grant funding, and US Economic Development Administration Public Works Program grant funding. Solid Waste3 $0 $0 $0 Rates per 2016 Solid Waste Management Plan. Stormwater $0 $0 $0 See Transportation. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 19 Facility Costs: 2018-2023 Revenues: 2018-2023 Local Funding Strategies Transportation $23,311,966 $25,434,621 $1,662,875 Federal and State Funding at over 70%, Developer Fair Share Contribution, and Local Funds. Total $28,276,708 $54,176,846 $30,399,363 $54,176,846 $6,627,617 $18,530,738 Principally Transportation: seek Federal and State Funds. Notes: 1 Public Administration includes the Animal Shelter, Community Centers, Administrative Facilities, and Maintenance Shops. 2 Funds projected for 2018-2023 would meet the original PROS Program costs for the period, and partially cover some uncompleted projects in prior years, which may require alternative phasing. 3 Regarding solid waste, assessments are planned for two County solid waste handling facilities, which may need capital repairs. When studies are complete projects may be added to the 2018-2023 period or phased in 2024-2038 period. 4 Includes 6-year financing costs for the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer from 2018-2023 (period of last full update) and 2021-2026 (current update to sewer costs and financing). Source: Jefferson County 2018 3 Capital Facilities Assessment 3.1 LAW ENFORCEMENT Overview Jefferson County Law Enforcement facilities include the Correctional Facility, the Sheriff’s administration, investigation and patrol building, the Sheriff’s Clearwater Annex on the west end, and the Courthouse (Prosecuting Attorney, Clerk, Juvenile Services, and District and Superior Courts. Inventory of Current Facilities The Correctional Facility, located in Port Hadlock, was constructed in 1984 with a major addition in 1999. This facility serves both unincorporated and incorporated populations of the County. The current inventory of inmate beds in the corrections inmate facility totals 58. The facility also includes the Emergency Operations Center for the county. The table below lists each facility as well as their current capacities and location. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 32 EXHIBIT 3-23 Public Administration: Summary of Capital Costs (2018$) Category Summary Cost: 2018-2023 Cost: 2024-2038 Total Cost Capacity Projects None None $0 Non-Capacity Projects $3,372,750 $1,000,000 $4,372,750 Total $3,372,750 $1,000,000 $4,372,750 Source: Jefferson County 2018 EXHIBIT 3-24 Public Administration: Summary of Capital Revenues (2018$) Revenue Source Revenue: 2018-2023 Cost: 2024-2038 Total Revenue REET 2,872,750 800,000 3,672,750 Fleet Services fund balance 500,000 200,000 700,000 Total 3,372,750 1,000,000 4,372,750 Source: Jefferson County 2018 3.4 SEWER Overview Jefferson County currently does not provide sewer services. However, the County has plans for providing sewer services to the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area as the area urbanizes. The potential service area is located approximately six miles south of the City of Port Townsend. Information about these service plans are detailed in the 2008 Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan. In 2020, Jefferson County revised the 2008 Port Hadlock Wastewater System: Urban Growth Area Sewer Facility Plan and 2013 Design Plans & Specifications for the Port Hadlock UGA with technical design updates to provide for a more cost-effective system. No changes to the service area, phasing, or level-of-service are planned. The 2020 Sewer Facility Plan Update is currently under review by the Washington State Department of Ecology and is incorporated by reference, as it may be amended, into the Comprehensive Plan. Jefferson County Public Health is responsible for permitting and programs related to onsite sewage systems in rural areas. Non-county sewer service providers include the City of Port Townsend, which provides sewer services to its residents, and the Olympic Water and Sewer District, which provides services to the designated Port Ludlow Master Planned Resort. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 33 The City of Port Townsend serves the city limits and has adopted its 2000 Wastewater Facilities Plan. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan also provides information about city sewer service. Inventory of Current Facilities The County currently does not own or operate sewage collection or treatment facilities. Because of the Port Hadlock / Irondale UGA designation, facility planning was undertaken to determine the specific capacity needs, potential ownership and operations scenarios, and funding requirements. The Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan, dated September 2008, has been accepted by the State Department of Health and State Department of Ecology as an engineering plan-level document. The Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan, dated September 2008 and Sewer Facility Plan Update, dated August 2020, as it may be amended, is hereby incorporated by reference into this Capital Facility Plan Technical Document and the associated Comprehensive Plan. The City of Port Townsend’s Comprehensive Plan lists an inventory of sewer facilities that includes a wastewater treatment plant, a secondary treatment facility, a compost facility, 70 miles of gravity sewer, 3 miles of force mains, seven sewage lift stations, and 1,250 maintenance holes. Olympic Water and Sewer maintains a treatment plant for its sewer services. Level of Service Analysis The County has not adopted a level of service for sewer services since service is pending in the future when funding is available. However, the UGA sewer plan projected an effective level of service for projected flow, shown in Exhibit 3-25. The sewer plan projects an area population of 5,776 by 2030, which is higher than this Plan’s population projections by 2038. For the effective level of service standards, the sewer plan notes peak hour flows as the target service to be met. Jefferson County is currently revising the 2008 Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan to focus on a more cost-effective system. No changes to the service area or phasing are anticipated. Once adopted by Jefferson County and approved by the Department of Ecology, Jefferson County will update its Comprehensive Plan to incorporate level of service standards from the revised plan. The 2008 Jefferson County―Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan 2020 Sewer Facility Plan Update estimated population in the potential service area through 20308, which included an effective level of service based on assumed flow projections per equivalent residential unit. The 2020 Sewer Facility Plan Update used a 2038 population projection of 5,394 residents which is slightly lower than the 5,776 residents projecte in the 2008 Jefferson County Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan. The 2038 population projections are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s population projections. The previous sewer plan analyzed service levels with population projections through 2030, where it assumed 5,776 residents in the service area. Those projections are slightly higher than current projections from the 2018-2038 Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, which projects a 2038 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 34 population of 5,394. Thus, the ability to meet proposed level of services for future sewage systems remains the same. EXHIBIT 3-25 Growth & Potential Sewer Demand System Projected Wastewater Flows (Million gallons per day) Annual Average Maximum Monthly Peak Day Peak Hour Gravity Collection System 0.70 784,844 0.96 1,154,922 1.28 1,651,448 2.59 3,359,568 STEP Collection System 0.63 626,783 0.82 870,412 1.05 1,177,265 2.26 2,664,100 Grinder Pump Collection System 508,238 657,029 821,629 2,142,499 Source: Port Hadlock Sewer Facility Plan, 2009, BERK, 2018.Port Hadlock Sewer Facility Plan Update, 2020. The City of Port Townsend is responsible for its own level of service standards and is regulated by the Department of Ecology. Olympic Water and Sewer Inc. serves Port Ludlow and follows a Development Agreement approved by Jefferson County in 2000 which capped development at 2, 250 residential "Measurement Equivalent Residential Units" (MERU' s). One residential MERU equates to one residential unit and equals 200 gallons per day of sewer waste water flow. In 2015, 1, 544 residential dwelling units had been constructed, leaving 706 dwelling units remaining. (Jefferson County Resolution 38-15) The Master Plan and associated utilities were sized for this growth. County plans assume most but not all the remaining 706 dwelling units would be built. Capital Projects & Funding The Port Hadlock Sewer Facility Plan for the area considered seven alternatives, which would include capital projects if selected. The first capital projects for sewer service would likely be a treatment facility and a collection system. The County anticipates continuing to secure funding in the six-year period of 2018-2023; implementation is not anticipated until after 2023. To allow urban density pending the development of the full treatment system, the County may allow alternative wastewater treatment systems that do not preclude future hook-up to traditional sewer. The County has considered grants, a local improvement district, and revenue collected from service rates to provide funding. The City of Port Townsend maintains a Capital Improvement Plan it adopts annually. The most recent CIP includes capital projects for sewer services within its 2017-2022 planning period. Jefferson County Code Page 1/5 DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08 -20, passed November 16, 2020. 18.20.295 Recreational marijuana/cannabis. (1) General Provisions. In addition to all other applicable development standards of this chapter and other applicable regulations within Jefferson County Code, the standards set forth below shall apply to all recreational marijuana activities in the unincorporated areas of Jefferson County. In the event of conflicts, the more restrictive measure shall apply. In addition to these provisions, recreational marijuana activities shall comply with all applicable provisions of state law (Chapter 314-55 WAC), including the rules governing recreational marijuana as promulgated by the Washington State Liquor Control Board and other agencies with jurisdiction. (2) Definitions. For purposes of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply. Where these definitions conflict with RCW 69.50.101, as now or hereafter amended, those in state law shall govern. (a) Marijuana or marihuana means all parts of the plant Cannabis, whether growing or not, with a THC concentration greater than 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant, its seeds or resin. The term does not include the mature stalks of the plant, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of the plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the mature stalks (except the resin extracted therefrom), fiber, oil, or cake , or the sterilized seed of the plant which is incapable of germination. (b) Marijuana processor means a person licensed by the State Liquor Control Board to process marijuana into useable marijuana and marijuana-infused products, package and label useable marijuana and marijuana-infused products for sale in retail outlets, and sell useable marijuana and marijuana -infused products at wholesale to marijuana retailers. Marijuana processing for the purpose of this section may or may not include drying, trimming and bagging of a recreational marijuana product. (c) Marijuana producer means a person licensed by the State Liquor Control Board to produce and sell marijuana at wholesale to marijuana processors and other marijuana producers. Marijuana producing for th e purpose of this section shall include drying, trimming and bagging of a recreational marijuana product when done in conjunction with producing. (d) Marijuana-infused products means products that contain marijuana or marijuana extracts and are intended for human use. The term marijuana -infused products does not include useable marijuana. (e) Marijuana retailer means a person licensed by the State Liquor Control Board to sell useable marijuana and marijuana-infused products in a retail outlet. (f) Plant canopy means the square footage dedicated to live plant production, such as maintaining mother plants, propagating plants from seed to plant tissue, clones, vegetative or flowering area. Plant canopy does not include areas such as space used for the storage of fertilizers, pesticides, or other products, quarantine, office space, etc. (3) Use Zones. Three categories of recreational marijuana activities are recognized by rules of the state of Washington as follows: production, processing, and retailing; and each category of such use shall be allowed in the following comprehensive plan zones and as further shown in JCC 18.15.040, Table 3 -1, and JCC 18.18.040, Table 3A-1: (a) Production. Allowed as a yes use in agricultural zoning district, rural industrial , and urban industrial zoning districts. Allowed as a conditional discretionary (C(d)) use in rural residential zoning districts and forest resource zoning districts. Prohibited in rural residential, forest resource, rural commercial, urban commercial, urban public, urban residential, county waste management essential public facility (CWMEPF) and mineral resource lands (MRL), parks, preserves and recreation (PPR) and Port Ludlow master plan resort zoning districts. (b) Processing. Allowed as yes use in rural industrial and urban industrial zoning districts. Allowed as a conditional discretionary (C(d)) use on agricultural resource lands. Allowed as conditional discretionary (C(d)) Jefferson County Code Page 2/5 DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08 -20, passed November 16, 2020. with a cottage industry permit in forest resource lands and rural residential zoning d istricts. Prohibited in rural residential, forest resource, rural commercial zoning districts, urban commercial, urban public, urban residential, county waste management essential public facility (CWMEPF) and mineral resource lands (MRL), parks, preserves and recreation (PPR) and Port Ludlow master plan resort zoning districts. (c) Retailing. Allowed as a yes use in neighborhood/visitor (NC), general crossroads (GC), rural village center (RVC), urban commercial (UC) and urban industrial (ULI) zoning distric ts. Allowed as a conditional discretionary (C(d)) use on agricultural resource lands. Allowed as conditional discretionary (C(d)) with a cottage industry permit in forest resource and rural residential zoning districts. Prohibited in rural residential, forest resource, convenience crossroads (CC), visitor-oriented commercial (VOC), urban public, urban residential, county waste management essential public facility (CWMEPF) and mineral resource lands (MRL), parks, preserves and recreation (PPR) and Port Ludlo w master plan resort zoning districts. (4) The following standards shall apply for all recreational marijuana activities: (a) Producing in the forest resource lands and rural residential zones is allowed as a conditional discretionary (C(d)) use subject to the recreational marijuana standards and structure size limitation: (i) Permanent and temporary growing structures on rural residential lands RR 1:5, RR 1:10 and RR 1:20 and forest resource lands shall meet the following standards in addition to all other applicable sections of the Jefferson County Code. (A) Rural Residential 1:5 ñ Temporary or Permanent Growing Structure Size. The allowed structure size is a total combination of square footage of gross floor area for all growing structures. (I) Five percent of gross parcel size in square feet, up to a maximum 10,890 square feet gross floor area. (B) Rural Residential 1:10 and 1:20 and forest resource lands CF -80, RF-40, IF ñ Temporary or Permanent Growing Structure Size. The allowed structure size is a total combination of square footage of gross floor area for all growing structures. (I) Five percent of gross parcel size in square feet, up to a maximum of 21,780 square feet gross floor area. (b a) Producing in agricultural zoning district is allowed a s a yes use without size limitations but shall be subject to the standards in JCC 18.20.030, agricultural performance standards, and this subsection (4), recreational marijuana performance standards. (c) Processing in the forest and rural residential zoning districts is allowed subject to a conditional discretionary (C(d)) use permit per JCC 18.20.170, cottage industry standards, and as consistent with this section, recreational marijuana. In addition to the maximum structure size of 5,000 square feet for a processing structure authorized as a cottage industry per JCC 18.20.170(5)(o) for cottage industry, an additional growing structure(s) such as greenhouses may be allowed up to the size limits per parcel size and structure size for producing only per subsection (4)(a)(i) of this section. (d b) Processing and retail in the agricultural zoning district is allowed as conditional discretionary (C(d)) and shall be subject to the standards in JCC 18.20.030(3), agricultural performance standards, and this sec tion, recreational marijuana performance standards. (e c) No recreational marijuana operation may be permitted as a home business or cottage industry. All recreational marijuana activities are subject to the applicable requirements of Chapters 18.20 and 18 .30 JCC. (f) Outdoor Producing. All outdoor producing activities in rural residential and forest zones shall have an unlimited outdoor canopy without size limitations. All outdoor producing activities for a cottage industry shall have an unlimited outdoor canopy without size limitations. Jefferson County Code Page 3/5 DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08 -20, passed November 16, 2020. (g d) Landscape Screening. All recreational marijuana activities shall have Type A landscape screening from adjacent parcels, per JCC 18.30.130, development standards. (h e) Setbacks. All recreational marijuana structures a nd activities in agriculture, commercial forest, rural forest, or rural commercial or rural residential zones that abut residential zoned land shall be a minimum 25 feet setback from all property lines including front road setbacks. Setback requirements for other zone combinations are as stated in JCC 18.30.050, development standards, Table 6-1, Density, Dimension and Open Space Standards. In the event of conflict, the more restrictive measures shall apply. (i f) Cameras. Any security cameras proposed for a recreational marijuana facility shall be positioned so as to not intrude on the privacy of adjacent parcels. (j g) Any fence eight feet or taller shall be located a minimum 25 feet from all parcel property lines. (k h) Recreational marijuana activities and facilities shall comply with all applicable standards of JCC Title 18 including but not limited to development standards in Chapter 18.30 JCC, performance and use-specific standards in Chapter 18.20 JCC including JCC 18.20.010, General provisions, JCC 18.20.020, Accessory uses and structures, JCC 18.20.030, Agricultural activities and accessory uses, JCC 18.20.140, Commercial uses Standards for site development, JCC 18.20.170, Cottage industry, and JCC 18.20.220, Industrial uses Standards for site development. (l i) All recreational marijuana licensees shall provide to the department of community development and environmental health a copy of all operations plans as submitted to the Washington State Liquor Control Board, including details of any chemicals, processes, extraction methods, waste handling procedures and safety measures planned for their operations. [Ord. 4-15 ß 5 (Att. D)] (j) Minimum Buffer Requirements. All recreational marijuana activities and facilities must be located at least a 1,000 feet from the perimeter of the following locations or uses: (1) elementary or secondary schools; (2) playgrounds; (3) recreation centers or facilities; (4) childcare centers; (5) public parks; (6) public transit centers; (7) libraries; or (8) any game arcades (where admission is not restricted to persons age 21 or older). 18.20.170 Cottage Industry. (1) Purpose. To provide for small-scale economic development activities on residential parcels, subordinate to the primary residential use, if the administrator finds that such activities can be conducted without substantial adverse impact on the residential environment and rural character in the vicinity. The scale and intensity of cottage industries are typically greater than could be accommodated as a home business, but less than would require a land use district designation of commercial or industrial. (2) The following list of uses allowable as cottage industries include, but are not necessarily limited to: (a) Sales of antiques and collectibles; (b) Art or photography studios; (c) Computer software development; (d) Handicrafts; (e) Ironworking or blacksmith shop; (f) Construction office; (g) Furniture repair or refinishing; (h) Pottery shop; Jefferson County Code Page 4/5 DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08 -20, passed November 16, 2020. (i) Real estate sales office; (j) Small equipment repair; (k) Woodworking shop; (l) Excavating contractors; (m) Small engine and boat repair; and (n) Auto and truck repair and service (excludes auto and truck sales, fuel stations and heavy equipment repair). (3) The following occupations are prohibited as cottage industries, except in the West End Planning Area – Remote Rural (WEPA RR) overlay district (Article VI -L of Chapter 18.15 JCC) and when located on parcels with direct access to a principal arterial (i.e., Highway 101) in the Brinnon Planning Area – Remote Rural (BRPA RR) overlay district: (a) Heavy equipment repair shop; (b) Autobody work or paint shop; and (c) Large-scale furniture stripping. (4) The following occupations are prohibited as cottage industries in all of unincorporated Jefferson County: (a) Commercial shooting facilities or uses that are associated with shooting firearms .; and, (b) Marijuana recreational processor. (5) All cottage industries shall be subject to the following standards, except as provided for in the West End Planning Area and Brinnon Planning Area – Remote Rural overlay districts as specified in Article VI-L of Chapter 18.15 JCC, Remote Rural Overlay Districts for the West End Planning Area and the Brinnon Planning Area: (a) The cottage industry shall be operated by at least one full -time, bona fide resident in a single-family residence of the parcel on which the proposed use is being requested. (b) The cottage industry may not employ more than four employees on the site who reside off the subject property. Auto and truck repair shall only employ two persons on the site who reside off the subject property. (c) Only those buildings or areas as specifically approved by the county may be utilized in the conduct of business. (d) Any business requiring customers to visit the site shall provide adequate on-site parking spaces, in addition to one for each full-time equivalent employee who resides off the subject property, and two for the owners of the property. All parking spaces shall meet the standards of JCC 18.30.100. (e) All structures and outside activities shall be so located or screened from adjacent properties to avoid disturbances through glare, noise, dirt or other nuisances or hazards. (f) All activity related to the conduct of the business or industry, except for activities related to the growing and storing of plants, shall be conducted within an enclosed structure or be sufficiently scree ned from view of adjacent residences. (g) All cottage industry activities shall be sufficiently screened from view of adjacent residences, using site location, topography, landscaping, fencing, the retention of native vegetation, or a combination thereof n ecessary to meet the Type A screening requirements of JCC 18.30.130. (h) Traffic generated by the cottage industry shall not exceed the level of service adopted for the public roadway which accesses the use, nor generate significant traffic in excess of that normally generated by typical uses found within the particular district. Jefferson County Code Page 5/5 DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08 -20, passed November 16, 2020. (i) No business may provide drive-through service. (j) Cottage industries shall be limited in their hours of operation. No business on -site customer service shall be conducted before 8:00 a.m. or after 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and before 9:00 a.m. or after 6:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday. (k) The administrator may attach additional conditions or requirements, or may make modifications to the site plan where necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public. (l) The granting of the proposed cottage industry use shall not constitute a rezone. No expansions of approved cottage industries are permitted, except as specified in Article VI-L of Chapter 18.15 JCC, Remote Rural Overlay Districts for the West End Planning Area and the Brinnon Planning Area, concerning the rural remote overlay districts. (m) No exterior display of goods for sale shall be allowed. (n) The cottage enterprise is an accessory use to the residential use of a dwelling unit, and the residential function of the buildings and property shall be maintained. (o) Any new structure constructed to accommodate the cottage industry shall be limited in scale so that it is in character with neighboring properties. In no case shall more than 5,000 square feet of total building area on the property be devoted to the cottage industry. (p) No more than one sign is allowed, consistent with the sign standards in JCC 18.30.150. (q) No on-site direct retail sales of products not produced on site are allowed, except for items collected, traded and occasionally sold by hobbyists, such as coins, stamps and antiques, and their accessories. (r) Minimum parcel size shall be one acre gross site area. (s) No use shall be made of equipment or material which produces unreasonable vibration, noise, dust, smoke, odor, or electrical interference to the detriment of the quiet use and enjoyment of adjoining and surrounding property. Any after-hours business activities shall not have noise impacts discernible beyond the property boundaries. (t) Not more than one cottage industry shall be allowed in or on the same premises. (u) The proposed cottage industry shall comply with the standards and requirements of the Jefferson County environmental health department. (v) Where shooting firearms is associated with a cottage industry at a property, such property shall be considered a commercial shooting facility, which is prohibited. (6) Auto repair and service proposals are subject to the following additional requirements: (a) The proposal shall submit a detailed operating plan in compliance with the latest edition of the Washington State Department of Ecology’s Guide for Automotive Repair Shops identified as Publication No. 92 -BR-16. (b) The proposal shall include an operating plan which complies with the Department of Ecology’s SMM. The submittal shall include a stormwater management plan in compliance with Chapter 18.30 JCC and include supplemental information which addresses and complies with Volume IV-2.1 and 2.2 of the SMM. (c) The operation shall be limited to two stalls or bays for repair and servicing. (d) The cottage industry shall not store more than three vehicles at any one time awaiting or departing for or from servicing or repair. This excludes the vehicles being actively serviced in the facility. (e) A 50-foot buffer shall be maintained from the structure housing the auto repair and service to all adjacent property lines. [Ord. 3-20 § 1 (Appx. A); Ord. 8-06 § 1] Jefferson County Code Page 1/2 DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08 -20, passed November 16, 2020. 18.30.040 Sewage disposal. (1) All development shall be provided with an individual, on-site septic system and drainfield approved by Jefferson County public health in compliance with Chapter 8.15 JCC, unless Jefferson County public health determines that public sewer is available which would then require connection to the approved public sewer. (2) Design and construction standards for on-site sewage disposal shall conform to the requirements of Jefferson County public health or the agency having regulatory responsibility for the system. [Ord. 14 -18 § 4 (Exh. B); Ord. 8- 06 § 1] (3) Large on-site sewage systems (LOSS) and community drainfields are not considered a sanitary sewer system as applied under the Growth Management Act. Jefferson County considers these systems a rural governmental service. (4) New construction of a sanitary sewer system, extension, or connection to a sanitary sewer system located outside of an urban growth area may only occur if: (a) The new sanitary sewer system, extension, or connection is a necessary response to protect basic public health, safety, and the environment; the sewer is financially supportable at rural densities; and, the sewer, extension, or connection does not permit urban development; (b) The new sanitary sewer system, extension, or connection is necessary to support a Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development (LAMIRD); the sewer is needed to mitigate a threat to the public health, welfare, or to protect an area of environmental sensitivity caused by existing development; and the sewer is limited to those properties or facilities needed to mitigate the threat to the public health, welfare, or to protect an area of environmental sensitivity; (c) The new sanitary sewer system, extension, or connection is necessary to provide service to an essential public facility if no practicable alternative exists to site the essential public facility in an Urban Growth Area; or, (d) The new sanitary sewer system, extension, or connection supports schools sited in a rural area that serve students from a rural area and an urban area, when consistent with the Jefferson Cou nty Comprehensive Plan, RCW 36.70A.213, and the following requirements: (i) The applicable school district has adopted a policy addressing the school service area, facility needs, and educational program requirements; (ii) The applicable school district has made a finding, with the concurrence of the county legislative authority and the legislative authorities of any affected cities, that the proposed site is suitable to site the school and any associated recreational facilities that the applicable district has determined cannot reasonably be collocated on an existing school site, taking into consideration the extent to which vacant or developable land within an urban growth area meets those requirements; (iii) The county and affected cities agree to the extension of sewer to serve the school sited in a rural area that serves urban and rural students at the time of concurrence of subsection (4)(d)(ii); (iv) Any impacts associated with the siting of the school are mitigated as required by the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW; and, (v) Any extension of the sewer beyond the urban growth area is subject to the following: Jefferson County Code Page 2/2 DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08 -20, passed November 16, 2020. (1) Must only serve the applicable school and the costs of the extension must be borne by the applicable school district based on a reasonable nexus to the impacts of the school . (2) Any exception from subsection (4)(d)(v), when consistent with RCW 36.70A.110(4), shall allow the sewer to serve a property or properties in addition to the school if the property owner so requests, provided that the county and affected cities agree with the request and provided that the property is located no further from the sewer than the distance that, if the property were within the urban growth area, the property would be required to connect to the sewer. (3) If a property owner connects to the sewer under subsection (4)(d)(v)(2), the school district may, for a period of time not to exceed 20 years, require reimbursement from a requesting property owner for a proportional share of the construction costs incurred by the school district for the extension of the sewer. Jefferson County Code DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 Page 1/2 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020. 18.15.040 Categories of land use. Table 3-1. Allowable and Prohibited Uses Resource Lands Rural Residential Rural Commercial Rural Industrial Public UGA Agricultural – Prime and Local Forest – Commercial, Rural and Inholding 1 DU/5 Acres 1 DU/10 Acres 1 DU/20 Acres Rural Village Center Convenience Crossroad Neighborhood/ Visitor Crossroad General Crossroad Resource- Based Industrial Light Industrial/Commercial (Glen Cove) Light Industrial (Glen Cove) Light Industrial/Manufacturing (Quilcene and Eastview) Heavy Industrial Parks, Preserves and Recreation Irondale and Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area Specific Land Use AG CF/RF/IF RR 1:5 RR 1:10 RR 1:20 RVC CC NC GC RBI LI/C LI LI/M HI PPR UGA Industrial Uses See Chapter 18.18 JCC Bulk plant or terminal facilities No No No No No No No No No No C C C C No Asphalt and concrete batch plants No C No No No No No No No No No No No Yes No Heavy equipment sales and rental services No No No No No C(a) No No C(a) No Yes Yes Yes No No Heavy industrial, resource- based No No No No No No No No No C(a) No No No Yes No Light industrial/manufacturing (not including recreational marijuana processing) See JCC 18.20.030 No No No No No No No No C(a) Yes Yes Yes No No Food or beverage bottling and/or packaging See JCC 18.20.030 No No No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No Outdoor storage yards See JCC 18.20.030 No No No No No No No No C(a) Yes Yes Yes Yes No Recycling center See JCC 18.20.030 No No No No No No No/C5 No/C6 No Yes Yes Yes No No Marijuana recreational processor C(d) C(d) No C(d) No C(d) No C(d) No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Mineral extraction activities (without MRL overlay) Yes Yes C C C No No No No No No No No No No Mineral extraction activities (w/MRL overlay) (10-acre min. lot size) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No No No No No Jefferson County Code DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V1 Page 2/2 The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020. Resource Lands Rural Residential Rural Commercial Rural Industrial Public UGA Agricultural – Prime and Local Forest – Commercial, Rural and Inholding 1 DU/5 Acres 1 DU/10 Acres 1 DU/20 Acres Rural Village Center Convenience Crossroad Neighborhood/ Visitor Crossroad General Crossroad Resource- Based Industrial Light Industrial/Commercial (Glen Cove) Light Industrial (Glen Cove) Light Industrial/Manufacturing (Quilcene and Eastview) Heavy Industrial Parks, Preserves and Recreation Irondale and Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area Specific Land Use AG CF/RF/IF RR 1:5 RR 1:10 RR 1:20 RVC CC NC GC RBI LI/C LI LI/M HI PPR UGA Mineral processing accessory to extraction operations (without MRL overlay) C C C C C No No No No Yes C C C Yes No Mineral processing accessory to extraction operations (w/MRL overlay) Yes Yes C C C No No No No Yes No No No Yes No Warehouse/wholesale distribution center See JCC 18.20.030 No No No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No See Chapter 18.18 JCC (Automobile) wrecking yards and junk (or salvage) yards No No No No No No No No/ Yes7 No/ Yes8 No No No Yes Yes No Unnamed industrial uses No No No No No No No No No D D D D D No Agricultural and Forestry Uses Agricultural activities and accessory uses See JCC 18.20.030 Aquacultural uses and activities (outside of shoreline jurisdiction) Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No No No No No Aquatic plant and animal processing and storage See JCC 18.20.030 No No No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Lumber mills and associated forestry processing activities and uses See JCC 18.20.030 C(a) No No No No No No No Yes No No No Yes No Marijuana Recreational Producer Yes C(d) No C(d) No C(d) No C(d) No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Nurseries Yes Yes C(d) C(d) C(d) Yes No Yes Yes No No No No No No Unnamed agricultural and forestry uses D D D D D No No No No No No No No No No Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–1 February 2021 1 Land Use 1.1 FRAMEWORK The Land Use Element establishes the future goals and policies addressing rural lands and rural character, rural villages, and communities, and incorporated and unincorporated urban growth areas (UGAs).A fundamental focus of the periodic update has been a refreshed set of land use goals and policies that meets community needs to strengthen the economy, provide housing choices, welcome tourists, create opportunities for active living, steward the natural environment, offer public services and infrastructure to support growth, and maintain an exceptional quality of life. The Land Use Element is arranged in four components: ▶ Framework: The Framework section presents county-wide land use plan concepts, population trends and forecasts, current land use inventories, current surface water conditions, public health, comprehensive land use map categories, and general land use and surface water policies that apply county-wide. ▶ Rural: Consistent with Rural Element requirements under the GMA, the Rural section addresses rural character, rural residential densities, and areas that qualify as Casey Scalf via the Jefferson Landworks Collaborative This element supports the Vision Statement by preserving the rural character of land and lifestyle in Jefferson County. Priorities in this element protect open spaces, forests, and farmland for long-term management and conservation, while also embracing ideas that foster opportunities for increased synergy between natural and built environments. Additional concepts support integrating diversified economic activity and innovations in housing and industry that benefit overall ecosystem vitality and offer opportunities for all residents to thrive. Connection to the Vision Statement LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–2 February 2021 exceptions to rural densities: limited areas of more intensive rural development (LAMIRDs) and Master Planned Resorts (MPRs). ▶ Resource: This section summarizes the Comprehensive Plan’s approach to conservation of natural resource lands of long- term commercial significance; these lands are more fully addressed in the Natural Resource Element. Additionally, this section addresses conservation of forested lands in rural areas not zoned for resource production. ▶ Urban: The Urban section of the Land Use Element addresses UGAs, including the City of Port Townsend and the Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA. Additionally, this section addresses current and planned residential and commercial uses, and urban services necessary to support the UGA. Land Use Typologies Under the GMA, lands are generally characterized as rural, resource, or urban. Accordingly, this Land Use Element defines and regulates these categories as follows: ▶ Rural Areas: This term refers to lands which are not within an UGA and are not designated as natural resource lands having long-term commercial significance for production of agricultural products, timber, or the extraction of minerals. Rural areas may consist of a variety of uses and residential densities at levels that are consistent with the preservation of rural character. Rural areas can include LAMIRDs, which provide opportunities for rural economic development and housing, and Master Planned Resorts (MPRs). ▶ Natural Resource Lands: This term refers to agriculture, aquaculture, forest, and mineral resource lands which have long-term commercial significance. A detailed discussion of Natural Resource Lands can be found in the Natural Resources Element, and goals and policies related to aquaculture are contained in the Jefferson County Shoreline Master Program. ▶ Urban Growth Areas: This term refers to areas designated for growth that make intensive use of land for the location of buildings, structures, and impermeable surfaces to such a degree as to be incompatible with the primary use of such land to produce food, other agricultural products, fiber, or the extraction of mineral resources. The three major land use categories are reflected on the following map. Rural (Chimacum), Windermere Resource, Carolyn Gallaway Urban, Carolyn Gallaway LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–3 February 2021 EXHIBIT 1-1 General Land Use Categories Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–4 February 2021 Population Projections The State of Washington Office of Financial Management (OFM) publishes population projections for each county for use in the GMA planning efforts every five years. The County is responsible under the GMA for allocating population in consultation with the City of Port Townsend. In 2015, Jefferson County and the City of Port Townsend developed a population projection and urban population allocation for the City of Port Townsend, Port Hadlock/Irondale Urban Growth Area, and the Port Ludlow and Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resorts based on OFM’s 2012 Medium projections. The County passed Resolution #38-15 on October 26, 2015, adopting the Updated Population Forecast (see page 30 of Appendix B. OFM has since published 2017 projections, but results are nearly identical.1 The 2018-2038 population forecast is summarized in Exhibit 1-2. EXHIBIT 1-2 Jefferson County & City of Port Townsend 20-year Population Projection & Distribution (2018-2038) Location (Unincorporated unless noted) 2010 Population 1 Allocation Total Growth County-wide Projected Growth (2010-38) 2018 Projected Population7 Estimated Growth (2018- 38)2 Projected Population 2038 2010-38 Projected Growth Rate3 Port Townsend UGA (Incorporated) 9,113 36% 3,366 9,661 2,814 12,479 1.13% Port Hadlock/ Irondale UGA4 3,580 19.4% 1,814 3,795 1,516 5,394 1.48% Port Ludlow MPR 2,603 10.1% 944 2,759 789 3,547 1.11% Pleasant Harbor (Brinnon) MPR -- 4.5% 421 -- 352 421 24.1 % UGA/MPR Subtotal 15,296 70% 6,545 16,215 5,471 21,841 1.28% Rural & Resource Areas Subtotal 14,576 30% 2,804 15,452 2,445 17,380 0.63% County-wide Total 29,8725 100% 9,349 31,667 7,8166 39,221 0.98% Legend: UGA = Urban Growth Area, MPR = Master Planned Resort 1 Source: Estimated using tract and block data, 2010 U.S. Census. 2 Source: Estimated based on OFM’s 2018 Projection for Jefferson County (31,405) and 2010 population shares. 3 Calculated as a compound annual growth rate. 4 In 2004, the Tri-Area UGA became known as the Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA. 5 Source: 2010 U.S. Census 6 The net total of 7,816 was reported in Resolution 38-15; however, when adding 5,471 and 2,445 the total is 7,916. 1 The OFM medium growth forecast for 2038 developed in 2017 shows a projected population of 39,397, slightly higher than the 2012 medium series at 39,221. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–5 February 2021 7 Calculated 2018 from increasing OFM published 2017 population 31,360 by 1.0098 = 31,667. CAGR 2010-2018 = 0.00732086. (31,667/29,872)^(1/8)-1, and increased 2010 allocations to 2018 by (n2010 * 1.00732086)^8 Because of legislative changes to Comprehensive Plan Periodic review schedules, the Joint Growth Management Steering Committee adopted population projections for separate planning periods for the City of Port Townsend and Jefferson County. The City of Port Townsend’s allocation and planning efforts were conducted based on the 2016-2036 20-year planning period. The City of Port Townsend completed its plan in 2016 consistent with the original due date for Growth Management Act planning by the City of Port Townsend, whereas Jefferson County, as a slow-growing county, was allowed by Commerce to extend its Growth Management Act planning efforts to 2018 and is addressing a 2038 horizon. The Port Townsend 2036 population projection of 12,165 is very similar to the projection in 2038 of 12,479. Consistent with the County’s and the City of Port Townsend’s prior methodology, 36% of the projected County-wide growth would be planned for and accommodated within the Port Townsend UGA, an increase from the observed share of 30.5% in 2010. The Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA would increase its population share from 12% to 19.4% with implementation of urban wastewater services and planned urban densities. MPR shares are based on development agreements and expected growth trends. EXHIBIT 1-3 Population Shares 2010 & 2038 Source: Jefferson County Resolution #38-15, BERK, 2018. Overall, with adopted plans and agreements, the urban and MPR share would increase from 51% in 2010 to 70% in 2038. The rural share would decrease from 49% in 2010 to 44% in 2038 by allocating 30% of growth to rural areas. This is consistent with LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–6 February 2021 the goals of this Comprehensive Plan to protect rural character and offer more housing and employment choices in Urban Growth Areas, in MPR areas where urban services are available, and in existing rural communities classified as LAMIRDs. Resolution 038-15 provided assumptions regarding housing units in relation to the population allocation, as summarized below: ▶ Port Townsend UGA: Assuming a population increase of 2,711 at 1.98 persons/household, approximately 1,369 additional units will be needed by the end of the City of Port Townsend’s 20-year planning period at 2036. ▶ Port Hadlock/Irondale) UGA: The population projections for this area assume development at urban densities with sewer service available. Assuming 2.1 persons per household in the UGA, to accommodate the projected population increase of 1,516, approximately 758 additional units will be required by the end of the County’s 20-year planning period at 2038. ▶ Port Ludlow Master Planned Resort: The development agreement adopted in 2000 provides for approximately 2,250 residential “Measurement Equivalent Residential Units” (MERU’s); the development agreement addresses both commercial and dwelling units. In 2015, 1,544 residential dwelling units had been constructed. A population of 789 per the allocation, together with a household size of about 1.49 persons, results in approximately 529 units during the 2018-2038 period. Growth would occur consistent with the CWPPs, this Comprehensive Plan, and the development agreement that expires in 2025. ▶ Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort: The land use designation was established in 2008, and a final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement capped the maximum number of development units at 890 with 52 units designated for staff housing and no more than 65% dedicated to time-share and short-term rental units, leaving approximately 293 units for permanent housing. Approval of the Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort development regulations was made by the Board of County Commissioners in 2018 through Ordinance No. 03- 0604-18, and a development agreement approved through Ordinance No. 04-0604-18. ▶ LAMIRDs and Rural Communities: As a predominantly rural county, Jefferson County has many small, existing rural communities characterized by more intense, yet not fully urban, levels of development. These include rural villages and commercial crossroads of Quilcene, Brinnon, Gardiner, Chimacum, Nordland, and Discovery Bay, as well as a number of smaller rural commercial areas. These Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Developments (LAMIRDs) serve the housing and LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–7 February 2021 day-to-day commercial needs of local residents and the travelling public, and provide opportunities for rural economic development. Rural population is allocated to unincorporated Rural and Resource Areas and to Master Planned Resorts. It is expected that additional rural housing would occur in and around the existing rural communities and, in a more dispersed pattern, in rural residential and resource zones. An overview of Jefferson County’s rural community classification system and detailed descriptions of each village or center are provided in Section 1.2 of this Land Use Element. Employment shares within planning areas show another distribution factor of population when considering planning policies. For comprehensive plan periodic reviews, the Joint Growth Management Steering Committee (JGMSC), through joint resolutions between County and City, allocate the 20-year projected population, but not employment. Current employment covered by unemployment insurance is about 8,356 jobs as of 2016 (ESD, 2017). This does not include sole proprietors, clergy, chief executives, etc. Covered employment generally represents 85-90% of total employment in communities. (Employment Security Department and PSRC, 2017) If adding 15% to the total covered employment in 2016 there would be about 9,600 jobs. Employment figures prepared for the Quimper Peninsula Travel Demand model in 2018 estimates about 11,907 jobs in 2018, rising to about 18,893 in 2038 (see Appendix C). As shown in Exhibit 1- 4, it is estimated that over 50% of the jobs in 2018 and in 2038 would be found in the City of Port Townsend, and over 10% would be in Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA. EXHIBIT 1-4 Employment: Quimper Peninsula Travel Demand Model Updated 2018 Area 2007 Employment Share 2018 Employment Share 2038 Employment Share Port Townsend 51% 52% 54% North Peninsula 6% 6% 7% Mid-Peninsula 9% 8% 9% Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA 9% 10% 13% South Peninsula 2% 2% 2% Port Ludlow MPR 3% 3% 3% Refer to Appendix C— Transportation Plan Technical Document LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–8 February 2021 Area 2007 Employment Share 2018 Employment Share 2038 Employment Share Rural Jefferson County 19% 18% 13% Total 10,611 11,907 18,893 Source: Transpo Group, 2018. Land Use, Health, & Surface Water Analysis Land Use Inventory & Analysis Based on parcel records maintained by the Jefferson County Assessor, about 65% of the current land use in the County consists of parks and open space due to the Olympic National Park. About 31% consists of forestry. Relatively small areas are residential, agriculture, public/civic and industrial. See Exhibit 1-5 and Exhibit 1-6. Refer to the Natural Resources Element for detailed information regarding forestry, mineral resources, and agriculture lands. Of the total acreage zoned forest lands by Jefferson County (CF-80, RF-40, IF), approximately 40% is privately held forest land and approximately 60% is in public ownership. Of the public ownership category, approximately 99% is owned by Washington Department of Natural Resources. A majority of the forest lands in East Jefferson County are privately owned, while a majority of the forest lands in West Jefferson County are publicly owned. Forest Lands LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–9 February 2021 EXHIBIT 1-5 Current Land Use Map, 2018 Assessor Information Source: Jefferson County Assessor, BERK, 2018. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–10 February 2021 EXHIBIT 1-6 Current Land Use, 2018 Assessor Information Current Use Category Parcel Count Parcel Acres Percentage Agriculture 357 6,749 1% Commercial 540 1,405 0.1% Forestry 1,931 358,557 31% Industrial 55 238 0.02% Parks and Open Space 11,581 746,858 65% Military1 1 2,573 0.2% Public/Civic 322 7,407 1% Residential 17,317 28,176 2% Total 32,104 1,151,964 100% Source: Jefferson County Assessor, BERK, 2018. 1 Military lands are located on Indian Island and on the Thorndyke/Toandos Peninsula fronting Hood Canal. Land Use & Public Health The GMA suggests that counties and cities “consider utilizing urban planning approaches that promote physical activity” in their Land Use Elements. Some indicators of health risk in a 2016 State of Washington Department of Health profile of chronic disease included: ▶ 79% of 10th graders in Jefferson County had insufficient physical activity, similar to 80% for the State as a whole. ▶ 36% of adults 18 years or older in Jefferson County had insufficient physical activity, similar to 38% for the State as a whole. ▶ About 29% of adults were obese in Jefferson County compared to 27% of adults in the state as a whole. ▶ Rates of cancer (16%), heart disease (12%), and diabetes (11%) were higher for adults in Jefferson County than the state as a whole (cancer-12%, heart disease 6%, diabetes 9%). ▶ The proportion of Jefferson County’s population over the age of 65 is more than double the state average, which results in an increased incidence of chronic disease and creates increased demand for ongoing health services. For example, approximately 84% of Jefferson County residents 65+ years are living with a chronic disease. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–11 February 2021 In 2012, Jefferson County commissioned an evaluation of the County’s Comprehensive Plan regarding active living and healthy food access under the Washington State Department of Health’s Healthy Communities grant program (Alta Planning + Design, ChangeLab Solutions, September 2017). The 2012 evaluation cited the National Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations that identified that healthy community design can improve people’s health by increasing physical activity, increasing access to healthy food, improve air and water quality, decrease mental health stress, reduce the effects of climate change, strengthen social ties, provide access to livelihood, education, and resources. The analysis also made several recommendations to integrate active living and healthy food access into policies (see text box). The evaluation led to the Jefferson County Community Health Improvement Plan (CHIP), a 2013 partnership between Jefferson Healthcare and Jefferson County Public Health, to identify the health needs in Jefferson County. Additional partners such as Discovery Behavioral Healthcare, Jefferson County, and the City of Port Townsend, joined the initiative and developed the 2016 CHIP and companion Strategic Results Framework strategic plan document. Active Living Accessibility: ▶Mixed Use zoning ▶Connectivity ▶Multimodal options/ standards ▶Active Recreation Facility design: ▶Safety ▶Complete Streets Active Living & Healthy Food Access Recommendations Healthy Food Access Linking residents to local food: ▶Rural and regional agriculture ▶Urban agriculture: community and school gardens ▶Local processing and value-added production ▶Farmers’ markets and farm stands Improving access to healthy food and limiting unhealthy food: ▶Grocery stores and healthy food retailers ▶Fast food and convenience stores ▶Nutrition education and support for healthy eating The Community Health Improvement Plan (CHIP) is addressed in the following Elements: Land Use Land Use & Public Health Natural Resources, Agriculture Open Space, Parks & Rec. Challenges & Opportunities Environment Environmentally Friendly Development Techniques Transportation Active Living Community Health Improvement Plan LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–12 February 2021 The Land Use Element supports active living recommendations by including mixed use zoning in urban areas, master planned resorts, and rural centers; and by directing growth to urban areas where there is access to transit or other modes of non- motor vehicle transportation opportunities. Promoting parks and other destinations connected by regional trails also supports active living and is supported by this Land Use Element. Exhibit 1-7 shows existing and proposed trail connections in the vicinity of Chimacum Crossroads and the Irondale-Port Hadlock UGA. It illustrates connectivity between rural and urban communities, and linking destinations such as schools, parks, and other amenities. Non-motorized transportation connections and supporting non- motorized and park system plans are discussed in greater detail in the Transportation Element. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–13 February 2021 EXHIBIT 1-7 Recreation Trail Connections to Schools and Parks of the Irondale-Port Hadlock UGA and Chimacum Source: Jefferson County Assessor, BERK, 2018. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–14 February 2021 Healthy food access is well supported by the land use strategy in this plan. A healthy food system supports the livelihoods of local farmers and ranchers and the economic viability of farmland and other working landscapes, both of which are necessary to protect open spaces from sprawl. Local food systems can also reduce the environmental impacts associated with shipping agricultural products long distances. Local food supports healthy eating, food literacy, and a healthy local economy. This Land Use Element supports commercial agriculture and allows agriculture in rural areas including farm-related accessory uses such as food processing and farm stands. Land Use and Economic Development Element policies support local food processing in industrial areas. The Land Use Element also supports urban agriculture and farmer’s markets in urban and rural centers. Considering health while planning our communities is a critical step toward a framework for future growth and design that maximizes a community’s ability to lead active, healthy lifestyles. Review of Surface Water Conditions & Existing Polluted Discharges The GMA requires that the land use element of each comprehensive plan include a review of drainage, flooding and stormwater runoff in the area and nearby jurisdictions. (RCW 36.70A.070(1)). The GMA recognizes that drainage, flooding, and storm water runoff issues are watershed basin concerns not confined by political or planning boundaries. The County has adopted the Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (2001) as a technical guide and set of standards for stormwater management. A comprehensive stormwater program includes: ▶ Adoption of a comprehensive surface/stormwater management plan; ▶ Implementation of an operation and maintenance ordinance for stormwater facilities; ▶ Implementation of additional public education efforts regarding nonpoint source pollution and stormwater management; ▶ Completion of a more thorough inventory of county owned and operated facilities (i.e., cross-culverts and approach culverts); and LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–15 February 2021 Implementation of a clearing and grading ordinance to provide a permit trigger for compliance with stormwater standards at the time of lot clearing. In addition to the goals and policies of the Land Use Element, the Environment Element addresses surface water and stormwater. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–16 February 2021 Land Use Strategy This Land Use Element is designed to Growth Management Act Goals, as balanced by Jefferson County’s Vision, Framework Goals, and this Element by: ▶ Directing growth to urban areas including the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area; ▶ Offering a variety of residential housing types at low, medium, and high densities in designated urban and rural village centers and crossroads; ▶ Ensuring areas designated as Master Planned Resorts follow their adopted development standards and development agreements; ▶ Conserving resource lands—agriculture, forestry, and mineral— of long-term commercial significance; ▶ Accommodating projected rural residential population and employment growth through flexible and innovative approaches to growth in LAMIRDs and other rural communities, including fostering their role as rural employment centers, and offering opportunities to create a vibrant economy while sustaining rural character in a rural county; ▶ Working cooperatively with other groups and individuals to develop long-term future opportunities to improve rural economic development and visitor facilities along established highway/tourist corridors. Land Use & Zoning Designations Based on its Vision, land characteristics, and the provisions of the GMA, Jefferson County does not propose to change its Land Use Map for the next 20-year planning horizon in this periodic update. See Exhibit 1-8. The predominant future land use designation / zoning district is Commercial Forest (CF-80). Other extensive designations include Rural Residential – 20 and Rural Residential – 5. Refer to Overlay Districts, Policy LU-P-1.9, and the Action Plan in Section 1.5 LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–17 February 2021 EXHIBIT 1-8 Land Use / Zoning Map Source: Jefferson County Community Development, 2018. Note: No map changes are proposed as part of this periodic update. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–18 February 2021 Categories of rural land use, including rural commercial and industrial, residential, resort, resource, public and urban land use designations and zoning districts are listed in Exhibit 1-9. Acreage statistics illustrate the great predominance of forest resource land designations / zoning at over 76% of zoned land. Rural Residential categories represent about 20% of zoned land. Master Planned Resorts make up about 0.6% of zoned land. Unincorporated Urban Growth Area land use designations / zoning is at 0.2%. EXHIBIT 1-9 Land Use Designations / Zoning Districts & Acreage General Category Future Land Use Designation / Zoning District Acres Percent RURAL Rural Residential RR-5, RR-10, RR-20 86,341 20.1% Rural Commercial RVC, GC, NC, CC 249 0.1% Rural Industrial LI/M, LI/C, LI, HI, RI 519 0.1% RESORT Master Planned Resorts MPR-PH, MPR-SF-4, MPR-SFT, MPR- MF-10, MPR-RC/CF, MPR-VC, MPR- RA, MPR-OSR 2,366 0.6% RESOURCE LANDS Agriculture Resource Lands AP-20, AL-20 7,281 1.7% Forest Resource Lands IF-20, RF-40, CF-80 328,785 76.4% Mineral Resource Lands MRLO/CF-80 161 0.04% URBAN GROWTH AREA Urban Growth Area Residential UGA-LDR, UGA-MDR, UGA-HDR 736 0.2% Urban Growth Area Commercial UGA-UC, UGA-VOC 234 0.1% Urban Growth Area Industrial UGA-LI 25 0.01% Urban Growth Area Public UGA-P 68 0.02% PUBLIC Public Parks, Preserves, and Recreation PPR 2,812 0.7% Essential Public Facilities EPF-A, EPF-WM 534 0.1% Total 430,110 100% Source: Jefferson County GIS 2018; BERK, 2018. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–19 February 2021 The GMA indicates the land use elements shall include population densities, building intensities, and estimates of future population growth (RCW 36.70A.070(1)). Planned residential densities are listed by zone in Exhibit 1-10. In Jefferson County Code some zones include standards for conditional uses that may have alternative allowed densities, requiring additional review; when consistent with the zone intent the alternative densities may be allowed. EXHIBIT 1-10 Planned Residential Densities Land Use / Zone Acronym Residential Density (DU/AC) RURAL Rural Residential RR-5 0.20 RR-10 0.10 RR-20 0.05 Rural Commercial RVC Allowed GC Allowed NC Allowed CC N/A Rural Industrial LI/M N/A LI/C Allowed LI Allowed HI N/A RI N/A RESOURCE AP-20 0.05 AL-20 0.05 CF-80 0.01 RF-40 0.03 IF-20 0.05 CF-80/MRLO N/A Land Use / Zone Acronym Residential Density (DU/AC) MASTER PLANNED RESORT MPR-PH MPR-GR, MPR— OSR, MPR-MV, Density per Title 17, Division II. Port Ludlow MPR-SF-4 4.00 MPR-SFT 0.40 MPR-MF-10 10.00 MPR-RC/CF Allowed MPR-VC Allowed MPR-OSR N/A MPR-RA N/A PUBLIC PPR N/A EPF-WM N/A EPF-A N/A URBAN GROWTH AREA UGA-LDR 6.00 UGA-MDR 12.00 UGA-HDR 18.00 UGA-UC N/A UGA-VOC N/A UGA-LI N/A UGA-P N/A Source: Jefferson County Code, 2018; BERK, 2018. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–20 February 2021 Notes: Allowed = some residential uses allowed; density not specified and subject to permit review. N/A Not applicable. Rural Designations Rural Land Use Designations & Zones Jefferson County uses three rural residential land use densities ranging from five (5) acres to ten (10) acres, to twenty (20) acres in size. Regulations are included in the development code to encourage residential “clustering” in the rural areas of Jefferson County (see Goal LU-G-18). Subdivision of large parcels for residential purposes in designated commercial forest lands is not permitted. The criteria for designation of rural densities are provided in Exhibit 1-11 below. Exhibit 1-11 includes various land use and zoning designations, criteria used for such designation, and the principal land uses. Greater detail regarding rural character, and limited areas of more intensive rural development, is provided in Section 1.2. EXHIBIT 1-11 Summary of Rural Land Use & Zoning Designations Land Use/Zoning Designation Criteria for designation Principal Land Use RESIDENTIAL Rural Residential 1 unit/5 acres (RR 1:5) Located in areas of similar development; areas with smaller existing lots of record; along the coastal area; adjacent to Rural Village Center and Rural Crossroad designations; overlay designation for pre-existing platted subdivisions. Single family residential Rural Residential 1 unit/10 acres (RR 1:10) Located in an area with similar development patterns; adjacent to Urban Growth Area, transition density between RR 1:5 and RR 1:20; parcels in coastal areas of similar size; includes land affected by critical areas. Single family residential Rural Residential 1 unit/20 acres (RR 1:20) Located in an area with similar development patterns; Adjacent to Urban Growth Area, Resource Production Land or State/National Forest Land; parcels in coastal areas of similar size; includes land affected by critical areas; includes private timberlands; includes agricultural lands. Single family residential COMMERCIAL LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–21 February 2021 Land Use/Zoning Designation Criteria for designation Principal Land Use Convenience Crossroads (CC) Existing rural commercial uses which provide a limited range of basic goods and services (basic foodstuffs, gas, basic hardware, and basic medicinal needs); generally located at the intersection of local arterials or collectors; usually contain a convenience/general store associated with gas pumps. May also serve the traveling public. Rural commercial Neighborhood/ Visitor Crossroads (NC) Existing rural commercial uses which provide an expanded range of basic goods and services for the rural population and traveling public (grocery, hardware, bakery, restaurant, tavern, auto repair, small professional offices, public services, and medical offices). Rural commercial General Crossroads (GC) Existing commercial uses that provide a mixture of local, traveling public, and community uses, and may include limited regional uses due to proximity to population centers in the Tri-Area. Rural commercial Rural Village Centers (RVC) Existing rural commercial uses that provide for many of the basic daily needs of the rural population; typically supplies goods and day-to- day services; provides limited public and social services. Residential uses include single family, duplexes, triplexes, and assisted living facilities. Rural community- based commercial and residential Village Commercial Center (VCC) Commercial area identified in the 1993 EIS for Port Ludlow Master Planned Resort. Commercial uses will provide many essential day-to-day goods and services to residents and resort visitors. Rural community- based commercial INDUSTRIAL Heavy Industrial (HI) Port Townsend Paper Mill Heavy industrial Paper Mill and ancillary activities Light Industrial Glen Cove Center Valley Light industrial Light Industrial/ Manufacturing (LI/M) Quilcene Industrial Area Eastview Industrial Plat (JCIA LI/M Overlay III, consisting of 24 acres, Assessor’s Parcel No. 001-331-005 in the AEPF. Light industrial Light Industrial/ Commercial (LI/C) Glen Cove Industrial Area Light industrial and retail uses associated with an industrial use LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–22 February 2021 Land Use/Zoning Designation Criteria for designation Principal Land Use Forest Resource- Based Industrial Zones (RBIZ) Gardiner West Jefferson County Forest resource- based industrial Source: Jefferson County, 2018. Overlay Districts Jefferson County has established several overlay designations: The following overlay designations allow for additional commercial opportunities in more remote areas of the County in addition to those of the underlying zoning district: ▶ The Remote Rural Overlay designation is applied in two locations in the County: West Jefferson County and Brinnon Planning Area. In Remote Rural Overlay areas, greater flexibility is provided in home-based business and cottage industry regulations. In West Jefferson County, additional small-scale tourist uses are allowed. ▶ The Small-scale Recreation and Tourist (SRT) Overlay is allowed in the Wawa Point Area in the Brinnon Planning Area. Another Overlay District establishes a view corridor along Highway 20 and other major routes: ▶ Highway 20 View Corridor: Maintain a forest buffer between the roadway and other development. ▶ Highway/Commuter Corridor Overlay: This overlay provides for future rural economic development opportunities. The County has established several Jefferson County International Airport Overlays addressing noise, airport safety, and rural scale non-aviation-related industrial uses. Related to western Jefferson County LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–23 February 2021 EXHIBIT 1-12 Summary of Overlay Land Use & Zoning Designations Land Use/Zoning Designation Intent Principal Land Use Remote Rural Overlay District The intent of this designation is to allow for expanded rural-compatible employment opportunities in sparsely populated rural areas that are isolated and remotely located from commercial and urban growth areas. These areas are characterized by high unemployment, distressed traditional resource-based economies, low residential densities, and very limited projected 20-year population growth. In Brinnon and West Jefferson County: home-based businesses and cottage industry uses. Additionally, in western Jefferson County some recreation and tourist uses. Small-scale Recreation and Tourist (SRT) Overlay The intent of this section is to encourage small-scale recreation and tourist development consistent with the needs, scale, and rural character of the Brinnon Planning Area. Recreation and tourist Highway 20 View Corridor Along SR 20 and other suitable roadways, preserve and protect the forest corridor, and to provide a visual buffer between the roadway and new commercial and manufacturing development. Forest corridor Highway/Commuter Corridor Overlay This overlay may be applied through an area wide evaluation of future rural economic development opportunities in heavily traveled existing highway corridors such as State Highway 104 or State Highway 19. Commercial and Tourist Uses in a rural setting Jefferson County International Airport Overlay I Purpose of the Airport Overlay I is to disclose to permit applicants and prospective property owners their proximity to airport operations, and to identify an airport safety zone within which certain uses will be prohibited for public safety and compatibility reasons. The overlay is a fixed boundary reflecting the projected 55 DNL contour mapping in the year 2022, as set forth in Exhibit 6.4 of the adopted Jefferson County Airport Master Plan. Airport noise exposure is measured in a Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL) and is used to analyze and characterize multiple aircraft noise events, and for determining the cumulative exposure of such noise to individuals around airports. Aviation facilities and activities LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–24 February 2021 Land Use/Zoning Designation Intent Principal Land Use Jefferson County International Airport Overlay II Airport Overlay II is an airport operations awareness area delineated by the WSDOT Aviation Division, Aircraft Accident Safety Zone #6 recommendations contained in the “Airports and Compatible Land Use” publication. The safety zone correlates with the FAA mandated airport traffic pattern for JCIA, and is to apprise the public, property owners and developers of the existence of the airport traffic pattern and impacts from routine aircraft over-flights; and to identify an airport safety zone within which certain uses that involve higher concentration of people will be prohibited for safety and compatibility reasons. Aviation facilities and activities Jefferson County International Airport Overlay III The purpose of the Airport Overlay III is to provide a limited opportunity for rural scale non-aviation-related industrial uses that contribute to the long-term financial viability of the AEPF and to enhance the economic vitality and quality of life for the citizens of Jefferson County. Non-aviation- related light industrial/ manufacturing in the Airport Essential Public Facility Source: Jefferson County, 2018. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–25 February 2021 West Jefferson County Rural Residential West Jefferson County includes land use and zoning designations of RR1:10 and RR1:20. Where consistent with rural character and goals of affordable housing and economic development, the County may conduct a comprehensive analysis of potential locations for RR1:5 designations and zoning. West Jefferson County also contains some private inholding parcels within the Quinault Indian Nation Reservation. The County may consult the Quinault Nation about common concerns regarding planning issues. Resource Land Designations Agricultural Resource lands have a designated twenty (20) acre minimum density. Forest Resource lands have a forty (40) acre and eighty (80) acre minimum parcel size (see Natural Resources Element). Exhibit 1-13 includes resource land designations, intents, and the principal land uses. See Section 1.3 for additional discussion. EXHIBIT 1-13 Summary of Resource Land Use & Zoning Designations Land Use/Zoning Designation Intent Principal Land Use Prime Agricultural Lands (AP-20) The purpose of the prime agricultural lands district is to protect and preserve areas of prime agricultural soils for the continued production of commercial crops, livestock, or other agricultural products requiring relatively large tracts of agricultural land. It is intended to preserve and protect the land environment, economy, and lifestyle of agriculture in Jefferson County. These lands must be protected as “agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance.” Agriculture Agricultural Lands of Local Importance (AL-20) The purpose of the agricultural lands of local importance district is to protect and preserve parcels of land which, while not necessarily consisting of prime agriculture soil or relatively large acreage, are still considered important to the local agricultural economy, lifestyle, and environment. As such they deserve protection as “agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance.” Agriculture Related to western Jefferson County LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–26 February 2021 Land Use/Zoning Designation Intent Principal Land Use Inholding Forest (IF-20) This district encompasses parcels at least 20 acres in size that are entirely surrounded by designated forest resource lands and that are not vested for development under Washington State law. Forestry Rural Forest (RF-40) The purpose of the rural forest district is to ensure forest lands of long-term significance are protected from incompatible uses thereby sustaining the ability of forest resource extraction activities to be maintained as a viable commercial activity, while allowing for diversity in the size of forest tracts. Forestry Commercial Forest (CF-80) The purpose of the commercial forest district is to ensure large tracts of forest lands of long-term significance are protected from incompatible uses thereby sustaining the ability of forest resource extraction activities to be maintained as a viable commercial activity. Forestry Mineral Resource Lands Overlay District (MRL) The mineral resource land district is to provide for the conservation of mineral lands of long-term commercial significance. The intent of this district is to aid in sustaining and enhancing mineral extraction and processing activities of long-term commercial significance by protecting designated lands from incompatible development and to allow for the continued contribution of mineral lands to the Jefferson County economy. Mineral Extraction Source: Jefferson County, 2018. Master Planned Resort Designations Master planned resorts (MPRs) are large-scale, self-contained developments that are based on an integrated, conceptual master plan, yet are typically developed in stages depending on market demand or other factors. They are Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development and may constitute urban densities and intensities of growth outside of Urban Growth Areas. ▶ Master planned resorts in existence as of July 1, 1990 and developed, in whole or in part, as a significantly self- contained and integrated development that includes short-term visitor accommodations associated with a range of indoor and outdoor recreational facilities within the property boundaries in a setting of significant natural amenities may constitute urban growth outside of urban growth areas as limited by RCW 36.70A.362. ▶ Master planned resorts not in existence as of July 1, 1990 are allowed if they meet the requirements of RCW 36.70A.360. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–27 February 2021 The Port Ludlow Master Planned Resort was developed consistent with RCW 36.70A.360 per Jefferson County Ordinance 8-99.. The Brinnon Subarea Plan (adopted 2002 and amended 2004) identified the Black Point area an appropriate location for a possible future Master Planned Resort. The Brinnon Master Plan Resort land use designation was established in 2008, and a final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement capped the maximum number of development units at 890 with 52 units designated for staff housing and no more than 65% dedicated to time-share and short-term rental units, leaving approximately 293 units for permanent housing. Approval by the Board of County Commissioners of zoning regulations and a development agreement is required prior final establishment of the Master Planned Resort and project construction. In 2018, a Master Plan, development regulations, and a development agreement were approved by Ordinance No. 03-0604-18 and Ordinance 04-0604-18 to establish the interior zoning and provide for a phased development plan for the Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort, formerly called the Brinnon Master Planned Resort. The Master Plan Resort land use designations are shown in Exhibit 1-14 below. More discussion of the master planned resorts is found in Section 1.2. EXHIBIT 1-14 Summary of Master Planned Resort Land Use & Zoning Designations Land Use/Zoning Designation Intent Principal Land Use Port Ludlow Master Planned Resort with the following zoning designations: MPR-SF-4 MPR-SFT MPR-MF-10 MPR-RC/CF MPR-VC MPR-OSR MPR-RA The master planned resort of Port Ludlow is characterized by both single-family and multifamily residential units with attendant recreational facilities including a marina, resort and convention center. The master planned resort of Port Ludlow also includes a large residential community. The entire MPR is served by a village commercial center, which accommodates uses limited to serving the MPR and local population. Resort with mix of uses LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–28 February 2021 Land Use/Zoning Designation Intent Principal Land Use Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort with the following zoning designations: MPR-GR MPR-OSR MPR-MV Provides a mixture of visitor-oriented transient accommodations, secondary homes, recreational facilities, and supporting commercial facilities Resort with mix of uses Source: Jefferson County, 2018 LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–29 February 2021 Urban Growth Area Designations The Port Hadlock/Irondale Urban Growth Area is planned for urban residential, urban commercial, urban industrial, Both Rural and Urban Zones apply per the Land Use and Zoning map. Rural zones apply until urban wastewater services are available, and then Urban zones apply. See Section 1.4 for additional discussion. EXHIBIT 1-15 Port Hadlock/Irondale Urban Growth Area Land Use & Zoning Designations Land Use Designation Description of Zoning Districts & Location Principal Land Use Urban Residential The Urban Low Density Residential (UGA-LDR) zone will allow housing density from four (4) to six (6) dwelling units per acre. Moderate Density Residential (UGA-MDR) zoning will allow housing at a density of 7-12 units per acre. The High Density Residential (UGA-HDR) zone will allow housing at a density of 13-18 dwelling units per acre. Residential dwellings detached and attached. Urban Commercial The Urban Commercial (UGA-UC) zone covers both the existing and planned future commercial development in the Port Hadlock core area and along Rhody Drive from Ness” Corner following the commercial strip along SR 19. The Visitor- Oriented Commercial (UGA-VOC) zone is applied to the tourism-oriented potential development area around the Old Alcohol Plant and marina. Commercial retail, services, tourism, and other similar uses Urban Industrial The Urban Light Industrial (UGA-LI) zone in the UGA applies to a largely developed industrial area: all but 5 acres are already in light industrial use. These uses are in the southwest corner of the UGA well buffered from the bulk of the residential neighborhoods in the community. Light industrial Public Facilities Public facilities (UGA-P) comprise 80 acres, including public park and open space areas, the Library and Chimacum Creek Elementary School, the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office and Jail, Jefferson County Public Works Department Maintenance Yard, and the Public Utility District #1 of Jefferson County’s (JPUD) Sparling Well facility along Rhody Drive and the Kivley Well in Port Hadlock. Public and institutional Source: Jefferson County, 2018. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–30 February 2021 Public Designations This section addresses public designations of two types: ▶ Public: Lands needed to provide the full range of services to the public provided by government, substantially funded by government, contracted for by government, or provided by private entities to public service obligations. ▶ Essential Public Facilities: Facilities needed to provide public services and functions that are typically difficult to site. Those public facilities that are usually unwanted by neighborhoods, have unusual site requirements, or other features that complicate the siting process. Jefferson County allows public uses in nearly every implementing zone. The County has created a specific zone for the public use of parks due to their unique facilities and needs with some being linear, outdoor, and indoor spaces. Jefferson County has developed zones for two essential public facilities regarding waste management and airports. Each designation and zone are described in Exhibit 1-16. More detailed policies regarding these uses are included in the Capital Facilities, Essential Public Facilities, and Utilities Element. EXHIBIT 1-16 Public Land Use Designations & Zoning Land Use/Zoning Designation Intent Principal Land Use Parks, Preserves and Recreation (PPR) This land use district consists of state and county parks, preserves and recreational sites. It is intended to provide for public recreational opportunities consistent with the rural character of the County and preserve significant natural amenities of special or unique character. Parks, recreation, and open space facilities and activities County Waste Management Essential Public Facility (CWMEPF) This district addresses facilities needed to provide waste management public services and functions. Solid waste and waste management See the Capital Facilities / Essential Public Facilities / Utilities Element for additional background regarding the process of siting essential public facilities LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–31 February 2021 Land Use/Zoning Designation Intent Principal Land Use Airport Essential Public Facility (AEPF) This land use district consists of land owned by the Port of Port Townsend that directly and indirectly supports operations of the Jefferson County International Airport as an essential public facility. It is intended to promote compatible land uses and the long-term economic viability of the JCIA consistent with county goals regarding essential public facilities, the preservation of rural character, and economic development. Additional AEPF information is found in the Transportation and Capital Facilities & Utilities Elements. Aviation facilities and activities Source: Jefferson County, 2018. Major Industrial Development & Industrial Land Banks If there is insufficient industrial land available within an urban growth area for a large industrial operation or if a natural resource-based industrial operation needs to be sited adjacent to natural resources, there is a process within the GMA that allows for the siting of a major industrial development (MID) outside of an urban growth area. (RCW 36.70A.365) Additionally, the Act allowed qualified counties to designate up to two Industrial Land Banks (ILBs) before December 31, 2016 for specific purpose of siting MIDs; the date has changed from 2007 to 2016 and may be changed again at the will of the legislature. MIDs sites in rural lands either through a permitting process (RCW 36.70A.365) or within a designated ILB (RCW 36.70A.367) would be considered industrial development or activity outside of urban growth areas. No MIDs or ILBs are designated in Jefferson County as of the 2018 Periodic Update. Legal Nonconforming Uses & Lots While the 2018 Periodic Update has not proposed Future Land Use Map changes, there may be pre-existing uses of property prior to the 1998 Comprehensive Plan adoption or subsequent changes addressing land use and zoning. Non-conforming uses of property that were legally established are considered grandfathered and may continue to operate when new plans, policies, or regulations are adopted. If a use ceases for a certain period, it may not continue. See policies regarding nonconforming uses later in this element. Some areas zoned for residential uses have smaller lots platted prior to 1998 than would be allowed with new plats. Residential LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–32 February 2021 uses may be permitted on existing lots of record as legal lots. However, in terms of development, some of the smaller lot sizes could require consolidation with other lots to meet current Health Department standards for wells or septic areas, or to meet other regulations, such as critical areas. Establishing Allowed Uses & Regulations Within Land Designations From Rural Character to Development Regulations The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan discusses our vision, rural character, rural lifestyle, working landscapes, rural aesthetics, and rural economy. These sentiments and definitions are provided throughout the Elements, and the entirety of the Comprehensive Plan reflects our definition of rural character. The Comprehensive Plan establishes land designations, harmonizes goals and policies, and implements them through County regulations and local actions. Jefferson County defines rural character not only in terms of visual character, but also in terms of densities and intensities of use. Jefferson County protects natural resources, open spaces, and preserves critical environments. Jefferson County places high regard to meeting our housing, infrastructure, and economic development needs, as we appropriately balance each of the GMA goals to ensuring that our County’s priorities and needs are addressed. Within the aesthetics of our rural character, there is an expectation of an ambient background of rural life affecting our senses: sounds, smells, views, perhaps even tastes of working rural communities and local neighborhoods. Along with the variety of these experiences is an understanding that a rural area is distinctly set apart from a largely urbanized landscape, and there is an expectation of comfort and quiet that is often sought in a rural residential neighborhood. Living in a rural area does not necessarily ensure a continuous bucolic experience. Chainsaws, recreational shooting, or an occasional portable saw mill operating nearby are not out of character in our rural setting. But there is an expectation that one property owner’s use of a property will not interfere with another’s reasonable use and enjoyment of theirs. Our land use goals and policies give direction to protect rural character in ways that meet the broader set of community needs, LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–33 February 2021 and our definition of rural character guides the development of implementing regulations. Rural Character & Review of Regulations for Land Uses, Development Patterns, & Nuisances GMA encourages local jurisdictions to perform a periodic analysis of rural development, to determine if patterns of rural development are protecting rural character. It is the County’s policy to review implementing regulations that affect our rural character. Regulations are tailored for specific land uses. Also, regulations can be tailored to specific communities or sub-areas, such as in the special small-scale recreation and tourism overlays and expanded cottage industry standards for Brinnon and the West End. Many uses that have the potential to create nuisances or other impacts are reviewed under a conditional use permit process. The conditional use permit process provides flexibility in the application of land use regulations accommodating uses that may be appropriate under certain circumstances, but inappropriate under others. Approval of a conditional use permit application includes compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and implementing development standards, such as cottage industry requirements, the Critical Areas Ordinance, the Shoreline Master Program, and the small-scale recreation and tourist overlay. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–34 February 2021 (a) The conditional use is harmonious and appropriate in design, character and appearance with the existing or intended character and quality of development in the vicinity of the subject property and with the physical characteristics of the subject property; (b) The conditional use will be served by adequate infrastructure including roads, fire protection, water, wastewater disposal, and stormwater control; (c) The conditional use will not be materially detrimental to uses or property in the vicinity of the subject parcel; (d) The conditional use will not introduce noise, smoke, dust, fumes, vibrations, odors, or other conditions or which unreasonably impact existing uses in the vicinity of the subject parcel; (e) The location, size, and height of buildings, structures, walls an d fences, and screening vegetation for the conditional use will not unreasonably interfere with allowable development or use of neighboring properties; (f) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the conditional use will not be hazardous to existing and anticipated traffic in the vicinity of the subject parcel; (g) The conditional use complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of this code and any other applicable local, state or federal law; and more specifically, conforms to the standards contained in Chapters 18.20 and 18.30 JCC; (h) The proposed conditional use will not result in the siting of an incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield; (i) The conditional use will not cause significant adverse impacts on the human or natural environments that cannot be mitigated through conditions of approval; (j) The conditional use has merit and value for the community as a whole; (k) The conditional use is consistent with all relevant goals and policies of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan; and (l) The public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. Consideration shall be given to the cumulative effect of similar actions in the area. Jefferson County’s Conditional Use Permit Criteria (JCC 18.40.530(1)) LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–35 February 2021 Impacts from small-scale commercial activity in rural residential zones associated with home business or cottage industries are inevitable. However, these impacts are analyzed under our development standards and typically approved only when they are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, rural character, and development regulations, including conditional use permit approval criteria. The conditional use criteria weigh public interest, potential cumulative effects, assure the use is harmonious and appropriate to the property and to the vicinity, and that the use is not materially detrimental to uses of other’s property in the vicinity, including residential use. Community Planning Efforts Jefferson County has worked with interested communities on area- specific plans over time. The County’s planning areas are shown in Exhibit 1-17. Jefferson County adopted its first Comprehensive Plan in 1998. Prior to that, the County participated in the following community planning efforts spanning 1977 to 1998: ▶ Brinnon Community Development Plan (original 1982) ▶ Coyle Community Development Plan (1977) ▶ Gardiner Community Development Plan (1989) ▶ Marrowstone Community Development Plan (1978) ▶ Tri-Area Community Development Plan (1982) LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–36 February 2021 Additional communities which requested permission to develop community plans prior to 1998 include North Port Ludlow and Lake Leland, but these planning efforts were not completed due to resource constraints. The general content and direction of these community plans provided information for development of the 1998 Comprehensive Plan. The community plans were entirely incorporated into the goals and policies of the 1998 Comprehensive Plan. The community plans have no further standing as individual community plans. As briefly discussed below, additional community-specific planning would be conducted through a more rigorous process of developing a sub- area plan, which would be implemented as a distinct part of the Comprehensive Plan. Refer to Policy LU-P-1.11. Historical planning documents may be found at the Department of Community Development. After the completion of the initial Comprehensive Plan in 1998, Jefferson County has engaged in planning through the policy direction of the Comprehensive Plan for rural and urban areas as allowed under the GMA. Detailed plans developed for a specific area in a comprehensive plan is called a Subarea Plan. These plans are optional elements that must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and become part of the Comprehensive Plan (RCW 36.70a.080(2)). Subarea Plans have been completed as follows: ▶ Brinnon Subarea Plan (2002, Amended 2004) The Brinnon Subarea Plan (BSAP) was adopted as a supplement to, and part of the Comprehensive Plan in 2002 (Ord.#13-1213-02) and was modified by subsequent ordinances in 2004.. The BSAP appends this Land Use Element and is a referenced component of the Land Use Element and Comprehensive Plan. Provisions of the BSAP are implemented in the Unified Development Code. ▶ Port Hadlock/Irondale Urban Growth Area Element (2009) In addition, Master Plans have been prepared for master planned resorts and can be considered a type of subarea plan: ▶ Port Ludlow (1999) ▶ Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort (pending 2018) Fishing on Lake Leland, Jefferson County LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–37 February 2021 EXHIBIT 1-17 Community Planning Areas Source: Jefferson County, 2018. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–38 February 2021 County-wide Planning Policies The Countywide Planning Policy in Resolution 128-92 provides policies that address: ▶ Rural Areas: Includes both rural and resource lands. ▶ Urban Growth Areas: Proper sizing, provision of urban services, joint County and the City of Port Townsend planning, The full text of the policies is provided in the Resolution. The policies are summarized below for brevity. Rural Areas Policies Rural areas are described as “characterized by low density development, open spaces, minimal public services, resource dependent activities, and industries; and outdoor recreational facilities.” Innovative tools such as “clustering or density transfer is considered a positive tool” to maintaining rural character. Level of service standards are to fit rural areas and rural centers such as: “emergency services, transportation and roads, individual septic systems, individual or community water systems, and storm water and water quality” systems. Parcel sizes are to be “commensurate with the character of existing rural communities,” and rural areas are to have a “variety of acreage parcels.” Rural centers serve commercial and service needs of the local area and may have commercial, residential, and community facilities and services. The County’s rural element is to recognize existing industry outside of urban growth areas, with limitations on the potential for conversion of adjacent land uses. Urban Growth Areas & Services Policies on Urban Growth Areas describe using the OFM to develop a joint County-City of Port Townsend population forecast that would be used in capital facility and service plans. Additionally, the policies describe sizing the urban growth area based at least on the low forecast or if capital facilities are sufficient based on a medium or high projection. Sizing of Urban Growth Areas is to be based on adequate supply of developable land to accommodate the joint population forecast, LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–39 February 2021 and including land for residential, commercial, and industrial uses. Urban growth areas are to include lands in city limits and lands already characterized by urban development and served or capable of being served by urban services at defined levels of service. Urban growth areas should include greenbelt and open space corridors. Critical areas and topographic features are to help form boundaries. Port Hadlock and Port Ludlow are considered being "characterized by urban growth" and community plans are to be used as a guide to urban boundaries. Urban growth area boundaries may be changed by reviewing sizing criteria and if there are appropriate capital facility plans. Urban areas are to be separated by rural, resource, or open space lands, or unique topographic features. Within the urban growth area, the full range governmental urban services are to be provided at adopted levels of service: community water, sanitary sewer, piped fire flow, and storm water systems. Urban services and facilities are not to be extended beyond the urban growth area except if there’s a threat to public health or welfare or to protect an area of environmental sensitivity, with a focus on threats from existing development. The County, City of Port Townsend, and Public Utility District are to use updated population forecasts to update the Coordinated Water System Plan. Capital plans may have tiers with the existing developed areas having six-year plans as the first tier, and the second tier being areas included within the capital facilities plan to receive the full range of urban services within twenty (20) years. Improvements in the second tier may be provided by a developer concurrent with development of by public entities. Reciprocal circulation of development applications by the County and the City of Port Townsend is promoted in the policies. Port Ludlow, Port Ludlow Village Council Downtown Port Townsend, BERK LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–40 February 2021 Overarching Land Use Goals & Policies General Land Use Goal LU-G-1 Ensure a community-based Comprehensive Plan that is consistent with the Growth Management Act and the County-wide Planning Policy, and provide for a well- implemented Comprehensive Plan through the preparation of supporting development regulations, system plans, and programs. ▶ Policy LU-P-1.1 Incorporate opportunities for continuous and ongoing public participation into both the comprehensive planning process and the implementation of the resulting Comprehensive Plan. ▶ Policy LU-P-1.2 Acknowledge and protect the rights of private property owners in preparing land use, development, and environmental regulations, prohibit arbitrary and discriminatory actions, and preserve reasonable uses for regulated properties. ▶ Policy LU-P-1.3 Maintain Jefferson County’s character of rural working landscapes, with planning efforts to meet community needs of housing, infrastructure, and economic development. Meet these needs through county leadership and collaborative work with the State for legislative and local solutions to the challenges met with GMA in rural counties. ▶ Policy LU-P-1.4 Encourage the use of innovative site planning and design techniques as a way to preserve rural character, open lands and natural resources, including lot consolidation opportunities, development regulations, and other innovative tools such as farm conservation plans. ▶ Policy LU-P-1.5 If the County chooses to adopt methods of paying for new services and facilities related to new development that causes additional demand for new public facilities or services, by shifting the cost from the community at large to those who benefit, determine through a public process how to apportion the fair share of funding for required public facilities, services, and amenities. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–41 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-1.6 Ensure appropriate services are provided as needed and that the duplication of services is avoided by promoting the coordination of local governmental agencies, non-profits, cooperatives, educational institutions, programs, and planning. ▶ Policy LU-P-1.7 Ensure the annexation of unincorporated territory in Jefferson County occurs in a manner consistent with State law. ▶ Policy LU-P-1.8 Establish land use goals and policies in the Land Use Element of this plan that are internally consistent with and reflective of the goals and policies of all other elements of the Plan. ▶ Policy LU-P-1.9 Cooperatively examine new potential development opportunities along selected regions of existing highway/commuter corridors for trails, multi-use trails, and economic development, consistent with GMA. ▶ Policy LU-P-1.10 Explore opportunities to incentivize standards such as Built Green Washington, Low Impact Development, and /or LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design), dependent upon the availability of funding. ▶ Policy LU-P-1.11 Support Jefferson County communities by reviewing, developing, or updating local community plans, subarea plans, and implementing regulations in sync with the needs of the community, environment, Comprehensive Plan, and Growth Management Act, as staffing capacity and funding allows. Land Use Consistency with Naval Base Kitsap Goal LU-G-2 Continue to partner with the Department of Defense for land use planning that benefits national security, conservation, and economic prosperity in Jefferson County. ▶ Policy LU-P-2.1 Support additional Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) planning work with military and other partners, provided funding is made available. Marrowstone Island, Carolyn Gallaway LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–42 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-2.2 Upon the conclusion of the JLUS Implementation Phase, identify those tools recommended by the JLUS Implementation Committee, which are applicable and appropriate in Jefferson County, and undertake reasonable efforts to implement those tools in a timely manner. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–43 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-2.3 Continue to partner with Navy Region Northwest and other applicable military partners on evolving missions, installation planning, transportation planning, military construction projects, land use compatibility programs, such as Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration, and other issues affecting Jefferson County. Naval Base Kitsap (NBK), as the third largest naval base in the United States has direct and indirect impacts on Jefferson County. NBK missions include: homeporting and maintenance and repair of submarines, aircraft carriers, and surface ships. Additional missions include weapons handling and research, development, testing, and evaluation. NBK is home to approximately 34,000 active-duty, reserves, and US Department of Defense civilian employees. NBK includes the three flag commands (Admiral-directed) of Navy Region Northwest, Carrier Strike Group Three, and Submarine Group Nine. While the vast majority of NBK’s operations are located outside of Jefferson County, Naval Magazine Indian Island, a strategic loading point for the Pacific Fleet, is located in Jefferson County. Naval Magazine Indian Island, located on a 2,700-acre island within Jefferson County, is a strategic loading point for ships in the Pacific Fleet preparing for or returning from deployment. It is also a strategic port for transshipment of joint service ordnance. The pristine and undeveloped deep water nature of Dabob Bay and Hood Canal allows the Navy to perform sensitive acoustical testing. NBK’s evolving mission requires close coordination with Jefferson County to ensure compatible land uses between NBK and Jefferson County. Jefferson County was a participant in the Joint Land Use Study (JLUS), a multi-county and city effort to jointly plan land uses around NBK facilities. The JLUS describes the importance of the military installation in Jefferson County, identifying four areas of interest: 1. Marrowstone Island shares access via the Portage Canal Bridge and utilities w ith Naval Magazine Indian Island. 2. The Port Hadlock-Irondale UGA is a location of the freight route also used by Naval Magazine Indian Island. 3. Development along the western shores of Hood Canal and Dabob Bay could increase water traffic, which could impact the viability of the Navy’s in-water operating areas and testing ranges. The Navy has been partnering with state agencies and land trusts to secure land and easements, including easements on working forests to buffer noise-sensitive areas, reduce electromagnetic interference, and protect habitat. 4. Communication and coordination. Implementing JLUS recommendations can improve land use compatibility and natural area conservation but may also affect the rural economy and rural housing options. For examp le, the US Navy is interested in additional Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration (REPI) funding to purchase development rights in Jefferson County. The REPI program seeks to purchase development rights from targeted property owners, in most cases extinguishing property owner’s ability to develop their property. The REPI program is designed to protect the Navy from existing and future encroachment of military missions, mitigate security risks to the existing and future missions, and improve natural area conservation. However, these REPI acquisitions permanently extinguish current and future development rights. Therefore, it is crucial that Jefferson County and NBK partner in implementing compatibility programs, such as REPI. The County seeks to implement JLUS recommendations that are appropriate to the County’s Comprehensive Plan Vision and this Land Use Element while recognizing the military’s long-standing mission and partnership in the county. Naval Base Kitsap Joint Land Use Study LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–44 February 2021 Industrial Development Goal LU-G-3 Identify and designate sufficient land area within the County for industrial uses and economic development. ▶ Policy LU-P-3.1 Designate sufficient land for light industrial uses within the Irondale/Hadlock Urban Growth Area. ▶ Policy LU-P-3.2 Consider designating major industrial developments (MIDs) outside of Urban Growth Areas consistent with the Uniform Development Code and all the criteria in GMA. Housing Goal LU-G-4 Support opportunities to provide a variety of affordable housing types for county residents of all income groups and needs. ▶ Policy LU-P-4.1 Encourage duplexes, triplexes, senior housing, farmworker housing, and assisted living facilities— limited in size and scale—to be permitted in rural commercial/mixed-use areas within the capacity of local infrastructure and site constraints. ▶ Policy LU-P-4.2 Encourage special needs housing, senior housing, farmworker housing, and assisted living facilities to be permitted conditionally in rural residential areas. ▶ Policy LU-P-4.3 Consider existing platted developments for designation as Residential Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development (Residential LAMIRDs). ▶ Policy LU-P-4.4 Evaluate and support land use that supports and promotes a range of affordable housing types and supplies workforce housing, including farmworker housing, to gain and maintain an adequate workforce and improves local the local economy. Refer also to the Housing Element LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–45 February 2021 Public Purpose Lands Goal LU-G-5 Identify and designate lands for both public purposes, public facilities, and essential public facilities. ▶ Policy LU-P-5.1 Assess for designation public purpose lands to provide a range of services to the public to meet public needs and serve as sites for some public facilities. ▶ Policy LU-P-5.2 Wherever practical, site essential public facilities, such as airports, large-scale transportation facilities, state educational facilities, correctional facilities, solid waste treatment facilities, substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities and group homes, so as to avoid potential adverse impacts to surrounding land uses and critical areas, to meet public need, and be compatible with the surrounding community. ▶ Policy LU-P-5.3 Ensure that designated public purpose lands are appropriate to the level of service standards for the designated land use density. ▶ Policy LU-P-5.4 Provide for broad-based participation by agencies, citizens, tribes, and other interested parties in the process for designating land to be used for essential public facilities. Transportation Goal LU-G-6 Ensure that transportation is safe, efficient, multi-modal, and based on levels of service that correspond to the land use densities in the Comprehensive Plan to connect people to where they live, work, learn, and play. ▶ Policy LU-P-6.1 Encourage development and land use proposals that utilize existing transportation systems and provide interconnected, multi-modal, pedestrian-friendly, non-motorized transportation opportunities that address environment and economic development goals. ▶ Policy LU-P-6.2 Coordinate with state and federal transportation agencies to ensure that their plans meet the land use expectations of the County’s Comprehensive Plan. Refer also to the Transportation Element Refer to related elements and follow multi-modal wayfinding references between goals and policies of the Economic Development, Transportation, Environment, and Land Use Elements LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–46 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-6.3 Site transportation facilities in locations which minimize the disruption of natural habitat, floodplains, wetlands, geologically sensitive areas, resource lands, and other priority systems. ▶ Policy LU-P-6.4 Prioritize non-motorized improvements and connectivity in communities, especially around schools. Environment Goal LU-G-7 Preserve the functions and values of critical environmental areas and protect development from the risks of environmental hazards. ▶ Policy LU-P-7.1 Ensure that land use decisions consider climate change, and are based on land use ordinances which are in compliance with the Critical Areas Ordinance and all applicable state environmental laws. ▶ Policy LU-P-7.2 Allow residential, commercial, and industrial development in a manner that minimizes risk from flooding, earth movement, shoreline erosion, sea level rise, and other natural hazards. ▶ Policy LU-P-7.3 Develop information and action plans regarding impacts to land use from climate change, including protecting or moving infrastructure from inundation areas; review of hydrologic budgets and water impoundment and conservation measures for changing precipitation patterns; and protection of water quality from seawater intrusion or other pollutants to drinking water quality. ▶ Policy LU-P-7.4 Support cooperative ecosystem and habitat management processes between stakeholders and local, state, federal and tribal governments. Refer to the Environment Element for primary information on environmental protection and hazard issues LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–47 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-7.5 Ensure that land use decisions along Jefferson County shorelines protect the shoreline environment, facilitate public access, recognize the needs of water-oriented activities and cooperate with regional plans for protection and management of shorelines. In areas of the County under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act (Chapter 90.58 RCW), activities which are water-oriented will be preferred over those activities which are not, all other factors being equal, consistent with the Shoreline Management Act and the land use designations, goals, and policies of this Comprehensive Plan. ▶ Policy LU-P-7.6 Encourage small-scale marine trades activities, in Port Hadlock, Port Ludlow, Nordland, Brinnon, and Quilcene. ▶ Policy LU-P-7.7 Develop land use ordinances based on comprehensive watershed and salmon recovery plans for the conservation, protection, and management of surface and ground waters, floodplains and estuaries, in order to maintain water quality and quantity, provide potable water, and to restore and protect fish habitat. Refer to the Environment Element for primary information on shorelines and Shoreline Master Program Goals—see the “SMP Purpose & Goals” information box at EN-G-4 Also refer to the Natural Resource Element— Aquaculture Brinnon, Carolyn Gallaway LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–48 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-7.8 Continue to implement, periodically review, and update critical area regulations under the Jefferson County Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) consistent with GMA requirements, including best available science. ▶ Policy LU-P-7.9 Continue to protect aquifer recharge areas from depletion of aquifer quantity or degradation of aquifer quality under the Critical Area Ordinance (CAO). Continue to periodically review and update CAO regulations relating to aquifer recharge, including best available science. ▶ Policy LU-P-7.10 Continue to protect flood hazard areas from development and uses that compromise the flow, storage, and buffering of flood water, normal channel functions, and fish and wildlife habitat, and minimize flood and river process risk to life and property under the Critical Area Ordinance (CAO). Continue to periodically review and update CAO regulations relating to flood hazards, including best available science. ▶ Policy LU-P-7.11 Continue to ensure that landslide, erosion, and seismic hazard areas are appropriately designated and that measures protecting public health and safety are implemented for hazardous areas under the Critical Areas Ordinance. Continue to periodically review and update CAO regulations relating to geologic hazard areas, including best available science. ▶ Policy LU-P-7.12 Continue to protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat under the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO). Continue to periodically review and update CAO regulations relating to fish and wildlife habitat, including best available science. ▶ Policy LU-P-7.13 Continue to protect existing wetland area and functions, while encouraging wetland enhancement and restoration under the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO). Continue to periodically review and update CAO regulations relating to wetlands, including best available science. Refer also to the Environment Element LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–49 February 2021 Drainage, Flooding, Stormwater Management, & Polluted Discharges Goal LU-G-8 Continue to address stormwater management and drainage issues with private property owners and resource agencies to protect shellfish beds, fish habitat and other natural resources and to reduce nonpoint sources of pollution. ▶ Policy LU-P-8.1 Encourage increased coordination between stormwater requirements of Forest Practices and Jefferson County stormwater requirements to reduce potential impacts to off-site residential development, and encourage the preservation of natural drainage systems. ▶ Policy LU-P-8.2 As a condition of project approval, require operation and maintenance agreements for all stormwater management facilities as a means of ensuring long- term compliance with the stormwater management standards of the Jefferson County Unified Development Code. ▶ Policy LU-P-8.3 As appropriate funds, funding sources and staff resources become available, develop and implement an operation and maintenance program for public and private stormwater control facilities. Ensure that the program includes provisions for ongoing monitoring and inspection of stormwater facilities, as well as effective compliance and enforcement measures. ▶ Policy LU-P-8.4 Consider adopting stormwater control facility charges (as authorized by RCW 36.89.080) in order to provide an adequate funding source for stormwater facility development, operation and maintenance, and for public education, water quality monitoring, stream gauges and enforcement. ▶ Policy LU-P-8.5 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. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–50 February 2021 Flood Hazards Goal LU-G-9 Protect life and property from flood hazards and retain the flood storage capacity of rivers and streams. ▶ Policy LU-P-9.1 Periodically review, and if necessary, update the Jefferson County Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance to reflect such things as climate change, and changes in federal, state and local legislation, including Jefferson County-City of Port Townsend Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan adopted in 2004. ▶ Policy LU-P-9.2 Encourage community-based flood hazard management planning through participation in the National Flood Insurance Program’s “Community Rating System” (CRS). ▶ Policy LU-P-9.3 Collaborate with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as a Cooperating Technical Community and enter into Mapping Activity Agreements in order to update and maintain accurate flood hazard area data and maps. Groundwater Goal LU-G-10 Ensure a sustainable and safe water supply for residential, economic, and environmental needs that rely on conservation and other current technologies, while incorporating the most current climate projections into supply planning. ▶ Policy LU-P-10.1 Work cooperatively with water supply purveyors, public utility districts, and other experts at federal, state, local, tribal governments, including private non-profit organizations to preserve and protect existing water supplies while addressing future water supply needs. Such measures may utilize alternative water sources that are compatible with environmental protection. Refer also to the Environment Element LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–51 February 2021 Goal LU-G-11 Protect the quality and quantity of surface, ground, and marine water resources through locally implemented shoreline, critical areas, and other related environmental programs. ▶ Policy LU-P-11.1 Ensure that County water quality program are designed to complement related programs developed and implemented by other local as well as state and federal agencies. For ease of administration and enforcement, reference related programs implemented by other agencies within relevant county plans and regulations. ▶ Policy LU-P-11.2 Preserve the environmental functions of surface and ground water resources by retaining native vegetation and open spaces where feasible and by requiring mitigation measures for land use activities that may adversely impact surface and ground water. ▶ Policy LU-P-11.3 Work with the Department of Ecology and other agencies to minimize salt water intrusion, to evaluate ground water resources that have been damaged either by salt water intrusion or other contamination, and to identify technically and financially feasible measures for remediation of adverse impacts. ▶ Policy LU-P-11.4 Promote best management practices and voluntary open space conservation to protect critical areas in land use regulations related to septic systems, forest management, agricultural practices, industry, and other development. Goal LU-G-12 Cooperatively manage, protect, enhance, and conserve water resources through a comprehensive watershed management program that is integrated with recovery plans for listed species. ▶ Policy LU-P-12.1 Take an active role in implementing watershed plans for Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 16, 17, and 20, as funding allows. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–52 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-12.2 Participate in collaborative watershed, shoreline, and salmon habitat conservation planning processes with state, federal, and tribal governments, including local stakeholders. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–53 February 2021 Legal Nonconforming Uses A legal nonconforming use or structure is one that conformed to all applicable codes in effect on the date of its creation, but no longer complies due to subsequent changes in the code or comprehensive plan. Goal LU-G-13 Allow the continued existence and economic viability of legally established land uses which have now become nonconforming. ▶ Policy LU-P-13.1 Allow existing commercial and industrial uses that become nonconforming to continue and to expand within limits as defined in JCC 18.20.260, including the right to continue and not be subject to nuisance claims if operating in compliance with all County regulations, to be able to change to a different non-conforming use of equal or lesser intensity, and be able to be sold within a reasonable amount of time without jeopardizing the continuation of the use or activity. ▶ Policy LU-P-13.2 Allow existing commercial and industrial uses to expand or be replaced in Rural Residential areas provided that they do not require additional urban levels of government service and they do not impose uncompensated additional costs to the taxpayers of Jefferson County for the provision of infrastructure, its replacement or improvement. Allow expansion or replacement, provided they do not conflict with natural resource industries or surrounding rural uses. Also allow expansion or replacement provided it results in no further adverse environmental or neighborhood impacts, unless mitigated. ▶ Policy LU-P-13.3 Prohibit businesses that do not meet the above criteria from expanding or rebuilding if destroyed. ▶ Policy LU-P-13.4 Allow a legal existing nonconforming structure damaged or destroyed by fire, earthquake, explosion, wind, flood, or other calamity to be completely restored or reconstructed if all the applicable criteria are met and if provisions of Jefferson County Code are met. ▶ Policy LU-P-13.5 Allow a legal existing nonconforming use to change to a conforming use allowed within the zone classification in which the use is located. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–54 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-13.6 Process all proposals to change the use of a legal existing nonconforming use to a different non- conforming use in accordance with a public hearing process to ensure notification of adjacent property owners. ▶ Policy LU-P-13.7 Apply legal existing nonconforming use status only to businesses which were established prior to the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan as legal commercial establishments. This policy does not apply to Home Businesses and Cottage Industries. Permit Processing Goal LU-G-14 Ensure responsive, fair, and efficient permit processing. ▶ Policy LU-P-14.1 Develop and maintain implementing regulations and internal policies that ensure that development applications are processed in a timely, fair, and predictable manner. ▶ Policy LU-P-14.2 Ensure that permit review and requests for additional information are fair, consistent and balanced with the needs of the applicant and the public interest at large. ▶ Policy LU-P-14.3 Implement and maintain a land use and building permit enforcement program that encourages voluntary compliance as the first course of action, but is protective of the community’s life, safety, and environmental health. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–55 February 2021 1.2 RURAL Rural Character Rural counties, as defined by the State of Washington, are “…a county with a population density of less than 100 persons per square mile or a county smaller than two hundred twenty-five square miles” (RCW 82.14.370(5)). Based on this definition and OFM population estimates from April 1, 2017, Jefferson County is a rural county.2 The GMA requires that the County “include measures that apply to rural development and protect the rural character of the area as established by the County.” These measures must be used to control rural development, assure visual compatibility of rural development with surrounding areas, reduce sprawl, protect critical areas and surface and groundwater water resources, and protect against conflict with the use of agricultural, forest, and mineral resource lands (RCW 36.70A.070(b)). The GMA defines rural character as follows: "Rural character" refers to the patterns of land use and development established by a county in the rural element of its comprehensive plan: (a) In which open space, the natural landscape, and vegetation predominate over the built environment; (b) That foster traditional rural lifestyles, rural-based economies, and opportunities to both live and work in rural areas; (c) That provide visual landscapes that are traditionally found in rural areas and communities; (d) That are compatible with the use of the land by wildlife and for fish and wildlife habitat; (e) That reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development; (f) That generally do not require the extension of urban governmental services; and 2 As of April 1, 2017, Jefferson County has a population density of 17.39 persons per square mile (OFM, 2017). LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–56 February 2021 (g) That are consistent with the protection of natural surface water flows and groundwater and surface water recharge and discharge areas RCW 36.70A.030(16). Additional principles that define Jefferson County’s rural character include the following (elements of the GMA definition for rural character supported by each principle are shown in parenthesis): ▶ Ensure that the County’s quality of life is preserved as it is enhanced. (all) ▶ Protect and conserve the County’s agricultural and forest working lands, shoreline and mountain vistas, visual and forest corridors, night sky, and natural ecosystems. (a, c, d) ▶ Encourage development that blends with the County’s natural setting. (a, c) ▶ Promote low-density residential development that is consistent with the historical pattern of growth, prevents a new pattern of sprawling development, and offers a variety of residential densities. (e) ▶ Promote economic development that supports place-based jobs, supports renewable resources, supports local healthy food and local job and housing choices for residents and the local workforce. (b, d) ▶ Encourage and provide incentives for businesses to create local “family wage” employment opportunities, and for modern economic opportunities—including home-based business and cottage industries—compatible with surrounding uses. (b) ▶ Provide efficient delivery of rural public services which minimize the need for additional infrastructure. (f) ▶ Protect and conserve the environment, ecologically sensitive areas, natural surface water and recharge areas, and preclude development and land uses which are incompatible with critical areas. (d, g) The land use designations and the goals and policies of this element have been developed to meet these criteria. Goals and policies of other elements of the Comprehensive Plan have been evaluated for consistency with the protection of rural character as defined above, and by the other factors contributing to local “rural character” as provided under the full text of the amendment. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–57 February 2021 Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development Rural commercial and industrial lands in Jefferson County are designated using criteria in the GMA at RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d), which establishes the criteria by which limited areas of more intensive rural development (LAMIRDs) can be designated by local jurisdictions outside of urban areas. GMA includes LAMIRDs for three types of development patterns in rural areas (WAC 365- 196-425(6)): ▶ Type 1 LAMIRDs: Isolated areas of existing more intense development. Within these areas, rural development consists of infill, development, or redevelopment of existing areas. These areas may include a variety of uses including commercial, industrial, residential, or mixed-use areas. These may be also characterized as shoreline development, villages, hamlets, rural activity centers, or crossroads developments. ▶ Type 2 LAMIRDs: Small-scale recreational uses. Counties may allow small-scale tourist or recreational uses in rural areas. Small-scale recreational or tourist uses rely on a rural location and setting and need not be principally designed to serve the existing and projected rural population. ▶ Type 3 LAMIRDs: Small-scale businesses and cottage industries. Counties may allow isolated small-scale businesses and cottage industries that are not principally designed to serve the existing and projected rural population and nonresidential uses, but do provide job opportunities for rural residents, through the intensification of development on existing lots or on undeveloped sites. Counties making such designations must adopt measures to minimize and contain the existing areas or uses of more intensive rural development. In Jefferson County, rural commercial areas include Rural Village Centers, three types of Rural Commercial Crossroads, and Rural industrial areas. As shown in Exhibit 1-1, Jefferson County predominantly consists of resource lands, with sparsely distributed communities settled many decades ago and serving as focal points including Chimacum, Quilcene, Brinnon, Gardiner, and others. These communities are distant from urban services and limited in their ability to grow or change due to limitations on infrastructure such as wastewater treatment and some limitations on growth under GMA’s rural policy framework. As described in the Housing and Economic Development Elements, Jefferson County has a critical need for safe and affordable housing, accessible health and human services, supportive infrastructure, and local jobs. Urban densities and job growth are planned for a majority of the County’s growth through 2038 in Port Townsend and Port Hadlock/Irondale UGAs. Urban housing and job options in these locations cannot solely meet the needs for housing options and services in other corners of the county that are experiencing housing cost burdens, lack of job opportunities, and in some cases failing septic systems, endangered water supplies and low health outcomes. Jefferson County seeks legislative and rule adjustments to GMA Rural Element provisions for Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development (LAMIRDs) to more fully realize the potential for its historic communities to serve as complete compact communities and rural employment centers (small- scale services, small businesses that support resource-based industries, etc.). Jefferson County LAMIRDs LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–58 February 2021 Rural Centers, Crossroads, & MPRs Exhibit 1-18 shows the location of all designated rural commercial areas and master planned resorts in Jefferson County. A detailed discussion of the types of rural commercial areas and master planned resorts, as well as a description and map of each individual area, follows. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–59 February 2021 EXHIBIT 1-18 Location of Rural Commercial Areas & Master Planned Resorts LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–60 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. Rural Commercial Areas: Centers & Crossroads Rural Village Centers Rural Village Centers are established, historically settled areas with commercial uses that address most of the essential needs of the rural population, supply a large variety of goods and day-to- day services, and provide a broad range of professional and social services. The designated Rural Village Centers contain mixed residential and commercial uses and are designated for residential as well as commercial uses according to historic patterns of mixed development. Rural Village Centers are intended to provide for a mixture of commercial, residential, and community/public services uses. Infill allowed in Rural Village Centers considers affordable housing goals through limited multi-family (duplexes, triplexes) and assisted living/special needs housing, as well as by preserving the existing housing supply (see Housing Element). In addition to residential and commercial uses, land for community clubs, churches, public facilities, and social services are necessary to meet projected population growth and to preserve community identity. There are two designated Rural Village Centers in Jefferson County: Brinnon and Quilcene. The Comprehensive Plan identifies policies in Goal LU-G-21 that help guide development of any new Rural Village Center designation. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–61 February 2021 BRINNON Rural Village Center Carolyn Galloway Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. Undeveloped parcels are those with a land use code of 9100 (undeveloped and unused land area) in the Jefferson County Assessor’s database. Total Area: 66.1 acres Undeveloped: 18.8 acres (29%) Infill Opportunity LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–62 February 2021 Carolyn Galloway The historic community of Brinnon is located on U.S. Highway 101 at the mouth of the Dosewallips River. The traditional community boundaries are the river on the south, the steep valley wall to the north, and Hood Canal on the east. The designated core area consists of mixed commercial and residential uses. Existing uses— such as a nursery and a mixed commercial/residential short plat with an existing mini-storage and a new post office—have been included in the RVC, which was modified through adoption of the Brinnon Subarea Plan in 2002. The boundary allows for areas of infill in Brinnon based on the distressed economy of the area because of decreased employment in logging and fishing. The seasonal increase in the visitor population is expected to increase in the future because of ongoing regional growth in Puget Sound. Limited areas of infill in the Brinnon Rural Village Center will provide employment opportunities for local residents in the transition to a more diversified economy as Brinnon attempts to promote small-scale tourist and recreation-oriented businesses based on a location on Highway 101 adjacent to the Olympic National Park. A high priority for the community is a facility that allows elderly residents to stay in the community rather than moving away from family and friends to facilities elsewhere. Areas of limited infill are also provided in support of the community goal of an extended care or assisted living facility. Although such facilities would be permitted conditionally in residential areas, the community prefers they would be located in the Rural Village Center. Community Priorities LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–63 February 2021 QUILCENE Rural Village Center Joel Peterson Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. Undeveloped parcels are those with a land use code of 9100 (undeveloped and unused land area) in the Jefferson County Assessor’s database. Total Area: 50.6 acres Undeveloped: 12.4 acres (24%) Infill Opportunity LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–64 February 2021 Quilcene Fair & Parade, North Hood Canal Chamber of Commerce Similar to Brinnon, the historic community of Quilcene is distinct from the Port Hadlock and Port Ludlow communities. Quilcene’s location at the gateway to Olympic National Park on Hood Canal and Highway 101 provides a unique opportunity to serve visitors and seasonal residents building a diversified economic base. Areas of commercial infill in Quilcene are intended to provide new living-wage employment opportunities. Commercial development can take advantage of a high volume of visitors because of the community’s location on both Highway 101 and Center Valley Road. The amount of potential commercial infill development depends on the availability of public services, such as the water system and fire flow. Quilcene has a public water system with the assistance of the County Health Department and the JPUD. The Washington State Department of Ecology approved a water rights transfer in 2004 from the National Forest Service to the JPUD with the effect of providing public water for Quilcene. Jefferson County and its partners have taken efforts to prevent sprawl, restore habitat, and preserve environmentally sensitive areas and farmlands in Quilcene. This has been accomplished through restoration efforts, land acquisition, and habitat restoration projects. These efforts along with Quilcene’s natural growth barriers, such as Dabob Bay and the Olympic National Park, work to prevent sprawl in this area. Community concerns in Quilcene indicate a priority need for areas of infill in the commercial core that could allow for enhanced existing and new economic development and residential opportunities. Such development is currently, constrained by the cost of utility and infrastructure upgrades as well as existing LAMIRD boundaries. For example, modern wastewater treatment options, such as modular plants or connections with existing plants are considered an urban level of service and thus prohibited in LAMIRDs. This limits wastewater improvements that would support job growth, existing commercial development, and improve existing housing stock. Community Priorities LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–65 February 2021 Rural Commercial Crossroads Rural commercial crossroads are distinct from rural village centers in that they provide access to a limited range of services for residential and non-residential uses. Three types of rural commercial designations are further defined based on scale and intensity of use. Individual commercial areas are discussed regarding the GMA criteria and local circumstances in the sections that follow. Maps of commercial lands and boundaries are provided in this element and in digital format on the County’s website. This Comprehensive Plan identifies policies in Goal LU-G-22 that help guide development of any new rural commercial crossroads designation, including policies specific to general crossroads, neighborhood/visitor crossroads, and convenience crossroads. General Crossroads General crossroads (GC) are existing commercial areas that provide a broad range of commercial goods and services for a higher population base in the northeastern part of Jefferson County. These areas provide several regional uses, as well as multiple uses at community levels of service. Permitted uses in these areas include all those allowed in convenience and neighborhood/visitor crossroads (see below), as well as building materials, hardware and farm equipment, auto repair with subordinate auto sales, appliance sales and repair, clothing and accessories, mini-storage, Recreational Vehicle (RV) repair and sales, and an expanded range of specialty stores, professional services, and public and social service offices. Performance standards for general commercial uses shall allow for sizes and scales of new development larger than those for neighborhood/visitor crossroads but be more limiting than those for rural village centers. There is one general crossroad designation in Jefferson County: SR 19/20. The Comprehensive Plan identifies policies in Goal LU- G-22 that help guide development of any new general crossroads designation. Neighborhood/Visitor Crossroads Neighborhood/visitor crossroads (NC) are designated based on multiple commercial uses that serve the nearby rural neighborhood and the commuting or traveling public with a limited range of basic goods and services. Permitted uses include all those allowed in convenience crossroads (see below), as well as restaurant, tavern/bar, auto parts and repair, farm supply and LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–66 February 2021 equipment, and a limited range of specialty stores and professional services. Performance standards for new development shall be consistent with the rural character, size, and scale of the existing commercial area and the surrounding neighborhood. There are five neighborhood/visitor crossroad designations in Jefferson County: Mats Mats, Discovery Bay, Gardiner, Chimacum, and Four Corners. The Comprehensive Plan identifies policies in Goal LU-G-22 that help guide development of any new general neighborhood/visitor crossroads designation. Convenience Crossroads Convenience crossroads (CC) typically consist of a single commercial property at a historical crossroads which provides basic goods and commodities for the local population and the commuting or traveling public. There are four convenience crossroad designations in Jefferson County: Wawa Point, Beaver Valley, and Nordland, are existing commercial properties that include a convenience general store with associated uses such as gas station, espresso, or café/deli. SR 104/Shine Road has a single commercial building and accessory structures, The Comprehensive Plan identifies policies in Goal LU-G-22 that help guide development of any new convenience crossroads designation. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–67 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. SR 19/20 General Crossroad Under the criteria for commercial crossroads boundaries, this area has been downsized considerably from 1994 zoning designations. Existing development on one side of State Route 19 was recognized and contained, consisting of a nursery/garden supply store, a former auto dealership—currently commercial self- moving rentals and supplies—under a Binding Commercial Site Plan. Commercial uses excluded from the crossroad include an auto repair business adjacent to residential uses and a drive-in movie theater. These uses have been excluded to limit access near an intersection with high traffic volumes and, prior to the installation of a traffic light, a relatively high incidence of accidents. Total Area: 26.5 acres Undeveloped: 8.8 acres (33%) Undeveloped parcels are those with a land use code of 9100 (undeveloped and unused land area) in the Jefferson County Assessor’s database. Infill Opportunity LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–68 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. MATS MATS Neighborhood/Visitor Crossroad The Mats Mats General Store serves local neighborhood residents as well as visitors to the Oak Bay and Mats Mats Bay shoreline areas. The logical boundary takes in additional uses including a photography studio, a vacant former medical clinic, and a chiropractor’s office. The southern boundary is located along a stream drainage. Total Area: 5.7 acres Undeveloped: 1.2 acres (21%) Undeveloped parcels are those with a land use code of 9100 (undeveloped and unused land area) in the Jefferson County Assessor’s database. Infill Opportunity LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–69 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. DISCOVERY BAY Neighborhood/Visitor Crossroad The Discovery Bay community was historically a thriving economic area on the railroad line, with a sawmill and a cannery. The historic community declined in population as these uses ended, but the commercial area has continued due to its location at the junction of State Route 20 and U.S. Highway 101. It serves nearby residents as well as visitors and commuters. Criteria for logical boundaries have been applied with special consideration of critical areas and traffic issues. The logical boundary to contain this commercial area allows for limited infill but protects critical fish and wildlife habitat in the Salmon and Snow Creek estuaries. Areas of infill are also limited over estuarine lands based on seismic, frequently flooded, and wetlands critical areas. Existing uses have been recognized, and limited areas of infill have been allowed farther from critical areas. Several uses on the western boundary were excluded to address traffic concerns on Highway 101 and to prevent linear commercial sprawl, as development is constrained by the estuary on one side and steep slopes on the other. Total Area: 19.9 acres Undeveloped: 1.6 acres (8%) Undeveloped parcels are those with a land use code of 9100 (undeveloped and unused land area) in the Jefferson County Assessor’s database. Infill Opportunity LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–70 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. GARDINER Neighborhood/Visitor Crossroad The Gardiner commercial area is located on U.S. Highway 101, and historically served the community with a grocery and gas station that closed during the 1980s. Current uses include a bird feeding supplies store, U-fish pond, an antique store, espresso, and a fishing tackle store. The logical boundary around the triangular commercial area has been drawn using Highway 101, the Old Gardiner Road, and the Gardiner Beach Road. A limited amount of infill is allowed to accommodate the community’s desire for future development of uses, such as a convenience store. Total Area: 5.3 acres Undeveloped: 0.2 acres (3%) Undeveloped parcels are those with a land use code of 9100 (undeveloped and unused land area) in the Jefferson County Assessor’s database. Infill Opportunity LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–71 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. CHIMACUM Neighborhood/Visitor Crossroad Chimacum is a historic commercial area that includes a post office and is located adjacent to the public school, therefore serving as a focal point for the local community. Existing uses— such as a farm equipment and supply store—serve nearby agricultural activities in the Chimacum Valley, while other uses— such as mini-storage—provide a community level of service. The logical boundary recognizes and contains existing commercial uses and provides for limited infill on a parcel along Chimacum Road. Total Area: 40.0 acres Undeveloped: 5.5 acres (14%) Undeveloped parcels are those with a land use code of 9100 (undeveloped and unused land area) in the Jefferson County Assessor’s database. Infill Opportunity LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–72 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. FOUR CORNERS Neighborhood/Visitor Crossroad The Four Corners community, which historically served the nearby area with a sawmill, contains a convenience store and gas pump, a construction yard, an auto recycling yard, an UPS distribution office, and a mini-storage rental. The boundary of this commercial area recognizes and contains the existing uses and allows for limited infill development only through subdivision or redevelopment of existing parcels, all of which are developed. Total Area: 26.5 acres Undeveloped: 0 acres (0%) Undeveloped parcels are those with a land use code of 9100 (undeveloped and unused land area) in the Jefferson County Assessor’s database. Infill Opportunity LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–73 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. WAWA POINT Convenience Crossroad The hardware/general store and accessory building at Wawa Point is a designated convenience crossroad. The logical boundary includes limited additional area for possible expansion and area to meet parking requirements. The commercial area designated within the large parcel of 24.3 acres on which the store is located is limited to 4.3 acres. Safe access from Highway 101 is provided by a frontage road. During the Brinnon subarea planning process a Small-Scale Recreation and Tourist Overlay District (see Overlay Districts above) was created at Wawa Point for four lots comprising 18.7 acres. The SRT Overlay recognizes the historic use of the area for recreation and allows low-intensity commercial activities, such as campgrounds, RV parks, nursery or public gardens, Scuba diving facilities, and a farmer’s market. Total Area: 4.3 acres Undeveloped: 0 acres (0%) Undeveloped parcels are those with a land use code of 9100 (undeveloped and unused land area) in the Jefferson County Assessor’s database. Infill Opportunity LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–74 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. BEAVER VALLEY Convenience Crossroad The historic Beaver Valley Store functions as a community center and “bulletin board” for nearby residents in the Beaver Valley area. The store is home to the retail operation for Sugar Hill Farms and sells locally-produced candies and desserts. Located on State Route 19 between the Hood Canal Bridge and northeastern Jefferson County, the store also serves commuters and visitors. Total Area: 3.1 acres Undeveloped: 0 acres (0%) Undeveloped parcels are those with a land use code of 9100 (undeveloped and unused land area) in the Jefferson County Assessor’s database. Infill Opportunity LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–75 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. NORDLAND Convenience Crossroad The Nordland store is located on State Route 116 on Marrowstone Island. The general store has a post office and kayak rental and provides the only basic goods and services available for the island community. It is a historic enterprise which serves as a social and community center. Total Area: 1.0 acres Undeveloped: 0 acres (0%) Undeveloped parcels are those with a land use code of 9100 (undeveloped and unused land area) in the Jefferson County Assessor’s database. Infill Opportunity LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–76 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. SR 104/SHINE ROAD Convenience Crossroad The SR 104/Shine Road location was approved as a Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development (LAMIRD) through the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Amendment process. The half-acre property has been developed for commercial use since approximately 1977. Total Area: 0.4 acres Undeveloped: 0 acres (0%) Undeveloped parcels are those with a land use code of 9100 (undeveloped and unused land area) in the Jefferson County Assessor’s database. Infill Opportunity LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–77 February 2021 Master Planned Resorts Master planned resorts (MPRs) are large-scale, self-contained developments that are based on an integrated, conceptual master plan, yet are typically developed in stages depending on market demand or other factors. Recent amendments to the GMA allow jurisdictions to plan master planned resorts as Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development which may constitute urban levels of growth outside of Urban Growth Areas as limited by RCW 36.70A.360. Jefferson County currently contains two master planned resorts, Port Ludlow and Pleasant Harbor. The Comprehensive Plan contains policies in Goal LU-G-23 that help guide development at Port Ludlow. Many of Port Ludlow’s goals and policies were drafted from issues identified by community residents who, through the establishment of community planning groups, articulated their desired plan for Port Ludlow’s future development. The goals and policies identified by the community and included in Jefferson County’s Comprehensive Plan focus on maintaining and enhancing Port Ludlow’s recreational and community amenities and preserving the community’s lifestyle. Siting of New Master Planned Resorts The GMA also authorizes counties to allow for the development of new MPRs in accordance with RCW 36.70A.360. According to the statute, counties may permit new master planned resorts “in a setting of significant natural amenities, with primary focus on destination resort facilities consisting of short-term visitor accommodations associated with a range of developed on-site indoor or outdoor recreational facilities”. The MPR designation provides an opportunity to encourage economic development that takes advantage of the significant rural recreational resources and scenic amenities of Jefferson County, particularly in the more remote areas of the County where the local economy’s dependence on natural resource-based industries has been negatively impacted, or where other economic opportunities are more limited. For example, in the southern and western portions of Jefferson County, many of the existing communities and rural residential areas have experienced a downturn in resource-based economic activities. These areas are gradually transitioning from primarily a natural resource-based local economy to one that is also dependent on actively engaged in the tourism industry. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–78 February 2021 The economic reasons for siting of a MPR, however, must also be carefully balanced against the potential for significant adverse environmental effects from such a development. Any proposal must be carefully planned and regulated to prevent sprawl development outside of the master planned development that would negatively impact the scenic and often environmentally sensitive setting. The Comprehensive Plan identifies policies in Goal LU-G-23 that help guide development of any new MPR designation. The goal and policies focus on protecting the rural character and natural environment of areas potentially impacted by development of an MPR, ensuring adequate provision of public facilities and services, and preventing the spread of low density sprawl. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–79 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. PORT LUDLOW Master Planned Resort The Master Planned Resort of Port Ludlow has a large residential community that is served by a Village Commercial Center. The designated commercial area is consistent with the 1993 programmatic EIS and has been agreed to by community planning groups. Land use activities and performance standards will be regulated by the County but may be limited to a somewhat greater degree by the Master Planned Resort’s internal community codes, covenants, and restrictions. Port Ludlow Resort Source: The Chamber of Jefferson County LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–80 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County, BERK, 2018. PLEASANT HARBOR Master Planned Resort The remote rural areas of south Jefferson County offer significant recreational opportunities and scenic amenities including access to the Olympic National Park, the Olympic National Forest, and the Hood Canal. Popular recreational activities in the area include boating, fishing, shellfish gathering, hiking, camping, birdwatching, and historical sites. In the peak summer months, it is estimated that as many as 500,000 tourist visitors travel through the North Olympic Peninsula. However, the lack of private tourist accommodations and services in the south County area often means that potential economic benefit from tourism spending is lost to other, more developed, areas of the Peninsula. Pleasant Harbor Marina Source: Pleasant Harbor Marina LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–81 February 2021 Evaluation of Rural Commercial Boundaries Criteria for Determining Logical Boundaries of Rural Commercial Areas The designation of Jefferson County’s rural commercial areas was guided by the GMA criteria as applied to local circumstances. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.070(5), measures used by Jefferson County to protect the rural character of the County must be used to control rural development, assure visual compatibility of rural development with surrounding areas, reduce sprawl, protect critical areas and water resources, and protect against conflict with the use of agricultural, forest, and mineral resource lands. To be consistent with the requirements of the GMA, designated LAMIRDs must also have clearly identifiable and logical outer boundaries delineated predominately by the built environment and/or physical boundaries, such as bodies of water, streets and highways, and land forms and contours. Although new development and redevelopment is allowed, development cannot extend beyond the established boundary and contribute to a new pattern of low density sprawl. Public facilities and services provided to LAMIRDs must not permit low density sprawl. In addition, the boundaries were evaluated based on local considerations that could affect location or require the application of special conditions. The following local considerations were determined in response to extensive public comment heard by County decision-makers during the planning and review process: ▶ Regional transportation concerns, traffic volumes, access, and safety. ▶ Proximity to incompatible uses. ▶ Partial designation of large parcels that are not fully developed for existing uses, to prevent sprawl. ▶ Home businesses/cottage industries should not be used to determine boundaries. ▶ Provide employment opportunities for local residents, in particular in areas of insufficient economic growth or economic decline. ▶ Support community planning goals and rural community cohesion. ▶ Provide for multi-family and special needs housing opportunities. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–82 February 2021 ▶ Avoid creating new non-conforming uses. Application of Criteria to Designation of Rural Commercial Boundaries The process for determining rural commercial boundaries in Jefferson County included public comment and an internal County review to ensure consistency with the GMA criteria, Comprehensive Plan goals and policies, and local considerations discussed above. Historical commercial areas that serve as a focal point for community economic and social activities were recognized for the multiple functions they provide to residents. A number of these areas also serve the visiting public, a seasonal population influx that is increasing during other times of the year. Final Comprehensive Plan boundaries for rural commercial areas resulted in a substantial reduction in the amount of commercial land available for development in rural Jefferson County from 1994 zoning. This reduction in commercial land resulted from the application of the GMA criteria for rural lands, including those established in 1997 legislative amendments (RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)). Logical boundaries were drawn around existing commercial uses to contain and limit new development to existing areas of more intensive development. Current Trends & Opportunity to Serve Community Needs Exhibit 1-19 provides total acreage within each rural commercial area, as well as net acreage of land available for infill in undeveloped parcels based on the County Assessor’s land use codes. The net undeveloped acreage—without factoring in roads, water and right of ways—is followed by the percent that the total undeveloped land comprises of total land for each commercial area. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–83 February 2021 EXHIBIT 1-19 Rural Commercial Area Total Acreage & Infill Acreage Rural Village Centers Total Area Undeveloped* Brinnon 66.1 acres 18.8 acres (29%) Quilcene 50.6 acres 12.4 acres (24%) Total Rural Village Centers 116.7 acres 31.2 acres (27%) Rural Crossroads Total Area Undeveloped* General Crossroads SR 19/20 26.5 acres 8.8 acres (33%) Neighborhood/Visitor Crossroads Mats Mats 5.7 acres 1.2 acres (21%) Discovery Bay 19.9 acres 1.6 acres (8%) Gardiner 5.3 acres 0.2 acres (3%) Chimacum 40.0 acres 5.5 acres (14%) Four Corners 26.5 acres 0.0 acres (0%) Convenience Crossroads Wawa Point 4.3 acres 0.0 acres (0%) Beaver Valley 3.1 acres 0.0 acres (0%) Nordland 1.0 acres 0.0 acres (0%) SR 104/Shine Road 0.4 acres 0.0 acres (0%) Total Rural Crossroads 132.8 acres 17.3 acres (13%) Total Rural Commercial Areas 249.5 acres 48.5 acres (19%) Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. * Undeveloped parcels are defined as parcels that have a land use code of 9100 (undeveloped and unused land area) in the Jefferson County Assessor’s database. The total designated rural village centers acreage of 116.7 acres contains 31.2 acres of undeveloped parcels available for infill, approximately 27% of the total. The total designated rural crossroads acreage of 132.8 acres contains 17.3 acres in undeveloped parcels available for infill, approximately 13% of the total. The number of uses that may develop in these infill areas varies with the size and lot coverage of the use, as well as the requirement for septic systems, critical areas protection, buffering, access roads, and wells or water supply lines. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–84 February 2021 In addition, the convenience/general stores at Wawa Point, Beaver Valley, and Nordland can expand the existing business under the criteria for a Convenience Crossroad but cannot subdivide for an additional commercial use. Of the above rural commercial crossroads, many are limited in infill opportunity. According to the William D. Ruckelshaus Center, regulatory limitations related to LAMIRDs stifle reasonable development and vitality in rural counties, and this topic may be further developed through the Road Map initiative (The William D. Ruckelshaus Center, 2017). Brinnon and Quilcene, for example, are distant from urban services yet limited in their ability to become robust, thriving, and self-sufficient communities because of GMA restrictions concerning infrastructure improvements. Modern wastewater treatments options, such as modular plants or connections with existing plants, are considered an urban level of service and are thus prohibited in LAMIRDs. Improvements to existing commercial development and housing stock are unlikely to occur if necessary infrastructure upgrades cannot take place. A lack of broadband internet capacity in rural areas further limits the reach and effectiveness of emergency response efforts and opportunities for job training, education, public health, and economic vitality; the Jefferson Public Utility District has a broadband initiative. Septic system, water supply, and critical areas issues can substantially reduce the amount of land area available for development on a property by 30-50%, depending on the size of the parcel. For example, a minimum of 12,500 square feet are necessary just to meet septic drainfield and reserve requirements. This results in approximately 15.6-21.8 acres of undeveloped land available for commercial development in rural village centers (50-70% of the 31.2 undeveloped acres), and 8.7- 12.1 acres of undeveloped land available for commercial use in rural commercial crossroads (50-70% of the 17.3 undeveloped acres). The designated logical boundaries thus limit the land available for infill development in existing rural village centers and rural commercial crossroads. The logical boundaries of commercial areas prevent development from expanding beyond existing developed areas. While areas of limited infill are provided within the designated built environment, a significant amount of undeveloped land was removed from commercial zoning status through implementation of the GMA in Jefferson County. There were 967 net acres zoned commercial in unincorporated Jefferson County in 1994. With adoption of the GMA-compliant Comprehensive Plan in 1998, that number was reduced 62% to 368 net acres zoned rural commercial. With adoption of a zoning map for the Irondale/Hadlock Urban Growth Area (UGA) in LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–85 February 2021 2004, the effective percent reduction of commercial area from the 1994 zoning was reduced to 39%. It should be noted that while rural commercial crossroads are designated commercial lands, land within the boundaries of Rural Village Centers (RVCs) is designated as both commercial and residential land, as the existing uses are mixed to a degree that precludes separate designations within the boundaries. The commercial lands identified at Nesses’ Corner, Irondale Road, and the Port Hadlock RVC were re-designated Urban Commercial as a result of the Irondale/Hadlock UGA designation. Periodic Review of LAMIRDs & GMA Implementation Challenges in Rural Counties Overview The Growth Management Act (GMA) advises that counties should perform a periodic analysis of development occurring in rural areas to determine if patterns of rural development are protecting rural character and encouraging development in urban areas. Jefferson County is investigating potential revisions to our limited area of more intensive rural development (LAMIRD) evaluating how we can better meet our rural goals, maintain our rural character, and plan for economically and environmentally sustainable growth. The Comprehensive Plan is our written record of local circumstances, establishing patterns of rural densities and uses while harmonizing GMA planning goals. The Comprehensive Plan establishes a definition of our rural character to guide development of rural policies and implement development regulations. Jefferson County’s definition of rural character is inclusive of our working landscapes, rural economy, and protection of our natural resources, while balancing the need for housing, jobs, and services to care for and support our communities. Recognizing our past and planning for our future, Jefferson County has articulated our rural character throughout the Comprehensive Plan. Jefferson County’s past includes development intensities from World Wars I & II-era industries that were intensive in use and distribution. These uses were significantly more intensive than we experience today. Our communities are not remnants of a greater past, nor are they in a static development pattern as established July 1, 1990, but are communities adapting to local conditions and moving forward. See also sidebars in this Section 1.2—Rural See also the Environment Element, Challenges & Opportunities—Balancing Environmental Protection With Community Needs. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–86 February 2021 Jefferson County is rich with natural and scenic areas. A part of the richness of our natural areas comes from providing our community—and the larger region—with ecosystem services such as clean air, clean water, and a high quality of life. This is a significant part of our rural economy. The County makes environmental protection a high priority in our planning and development. Seen as a resource to protect and a resource that has economic value, the County is interested to explore innovative concepts using our investments in conservation as an alternate way of delineating and containing development. Jefferson County proposes to investigate new opportunities in the following areas: Update LAMIRD Provisions for Outcomes that Reflect Current Local Circumstances, Rural Character, and Balancing of GMA Goals The GMA allows local jurisdictions to balance GMA goals while taking into consideration the jurisdiction’s local circumstances. Because local circumstances vary from county to county, in establishing patterns of rural densities and uses, a county may consider local circumstances when harmonizing the GMA planning goals. This process considers the uniqueness of a place’s geography, such as landscapes, transportation networks, economics, and distribution of resources. To address the uniqueness of our local circumstances and places, Jefferson County seeks flexibility to provide community services in our LAMIRDs and other local places. Review the Tightlined Logical Outer Boundaries of Our LAMIRDs GMA requires the County to adopt measures that contain or control development so that we do not experience inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development patterns. As a result of challenges to the County after the initial delineation of LAMIRDs, Logical Outer Boundaries (LOB) were tightlined to existing infrastructure, even to the point of crossing parcels and creating split-zoning. GMA limits LAMIRD development to infill and intensification within the outer boundary. An analysis needs to be undertaken to determine if the outer boundaries are too tightly drawn, or if a market factor for vacant land needs to be applied. In fact, ordinances implementing Jefferson County LAMIRDs include the finding that the planning work establishing the boundaries needs to continue, and boundaries need to be reviewed when resources allow. The County would likely benefit from legislative and rules changes to GMA better addressing flexibility for rural county Refer to Exhibit 1-19, which shows that there is very little infill potential in our LAMIRDs LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–87 February 2021 development, while limiting development. Jefferson County’s existing development within its rural areas promotes GMA planning goals, such as reducing sprawl, protecting the environment, providing for open space and recreation, and maintained and enhancing natural resource-based industries. Explore Alternate Criteria for Establishing Logical Outer Boundaries To contain or control development, the GMA requires LOBs to be based on criteria that defines an existing area or existing use that was in existence on July 1, 1990 and includes a criterion limiting the boundary to infrastructure that existed on that date. Once a LOB has been adopted, counties may consider changes to the boundary in subsequent amendments, but must use the same criteria used when originally designating the boundary. The current LOB delineation process freezes LAMIRD boundaries as of July 1, 1990. Rural counties characteristically have minimal infrastructure— because of low population density and a correspondingly reduced need, as well as a generally lower financial base to fund and finance infrastructure. Using infrastructure as the method to define LOB constrains the County’s ability to meet community needs in rural areas. Rural areas are resource rich. Jefferson County proposes to investigate alternative LAMIRD delineation, consistent with GMA, focusing on our rural and ecosystems investments, capacity for future investments, and limiting factors on growth. The Washington State Legislature recognizes the economic benefit of the natural resources, open space, and rural resources to the entire state of Washington. Jefferson County proposes investigating alternate ways of containing and controlling growth of LAMIRDs through LOBs bounded by land conservation easements, extinguishment of development rights, natural resources boundaries, and natural barriers to growth. Since GMA’s inception, the State of Washington Growth Management Hearings Board (Hearings Board) has interpreted the GMA and its rules to local jurisdictions’ comprehensive plans. Over the years, a body of law has developed, which appears to force counties to curtail innovation in rural area development, such as prescriptively establishing rural and urban densities and requiring tightlined LOBs in LAMIRDs. This imposes a difficult challenge when trying to meet affordable housing needs outside of designated urban growth areas. Some LAMIRDs, such as Chimacum, do not fit neatly within this urban rural dichotomy. This provides only two boxes, urban or rural for solutions to complex land use issues. Solutions may require more in-between areas to meet requirements, such as a greater focus on performance standards LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–88 February 2021 for some housing developments over a prescriptive residential density. Innovations to meet current housing crises is limited by GMA. If a county allows bonus densities in a rural cluster the resulting density after applying the bonus must be a rural density, which doesn’t yield enough bonus density to enable the types of housing developments that can meet the challenges of providing density for affordable housing, even within a rural context. Jefferson County proposes to investigate provisions for planned residential developments and investigate the feasibility of alternative performance standards that could potentially increase rural residential density above the current maximum rural density. Jefferson County is aware that these options require a legislative amendment to the GMA. Rural Economy Jefferson County’s rural economy has responded to economic conditions and market forces pivoting towards tourism, agricultural businesses, and small businesses. Our economy is similar to other rural economies, transitioning away from natural resource industries. Our rural economy needs infrastructure to support its economic activities and changes in modern infrastructure, such as the ability to scale wastewater management solutions to meet small community needs is evolving. Even though developments in infrastructure, such as small and innovative sanitary sewer systems may be able to support the overarching planning goals of GMA, while containing and controlling growth in rural areas, GMA generally precludes small and innovative sanitary sewer systems in rural areas as they are defined as urban levels of service. This ignores potential opportunities to provide modern, scaled treatment facilities to support a variety of community needs such as housing and economic development. Jefferson County is aware these rural infrastructure systems would require a legislative amendment to the GMA. GMA allows sanitary sewer infrastructure in rural areas when: (1) it if abates an public health and environmental problem, does not induce sprawling urban development, and is affordable by the community that it serves; (2) it is necessary to support a LAMIRD and it is consistent with the County-wide Planning Policies; or (3) supports a school located in the rural area serving both rural and urban students. Jefferson County is investigating sewering the Brinnon LAMIRD, using the existing Dosewallips State Park sewer system. The Dosewallips State Park sewer treatment plant is located in the Jefferson County LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–89 February 2021 Brinnon LAMIRD and its lines run through the LAMIRD to the Dosewallips State Park. Sewering Brinnon would alleviate known and potential environmental problems associated with on-site sewage systems, considering that the Brinnon LAMIRD is located within the 100-year floodzone and is adjacent to the Hood Canal. The application of this allowance is being investigated in the Brinnon Rural Village Center, adjacent to Dosewallips State park’s wastewater treatment facility. The County is working to address requirements of GMA, while allowing limited service by the Dosewallips State park’s system. Currently, Brinnon is served entirely by septic systems. These septic systems have current and potential problems and some systems are located within flood zones. In a 2002 amendment to the GMA, the Washington State Legislature found that GMA is intended to recognize the importance of rural lands and rural character to Washington's economy, and find that rural lands and rural-based economies enhance the economic desirability of the State of Washington. To retain and enhance the job base in rural areas, rural counties must have flexibility to create opportunities for business development and to retain existing businesses and allow them to expand. The legislature’s findings close with: “[T]he legislature finds that in defining its rural element under RCW 36.70A.070(5), a county should foster land use patterns and develop a local vision of rural character that will: [h]elp preserve rural-based economies and traditional rural lifestyles; encourage the economic prosperity of rural residents; foster opportunities for small-scale, rural-based employment and self-employment; permit the operation of rural-based agricultural, commercial, recreational, and tourist businesses that are consistent with existing and planned land use patterns; be compatible with the use of the land by wildlife and for fish and wildlife habitat; foster the private stewardship of the land and preservation of open space; and enhance the rural sense of community and quality of life.” In summary, as Jefferson County reviews rural commercial areas, we explore ways to meet GMA’s fundamental purposes in flexible and meaningful manners. For example, flexibility in designating LAMIRDs, while meeting the purpose and intent of GMA would assist the County with contained and controlled development, enhanced rural economies, additional housing, preservation of natural resources, enhanced open space and parks, and enhanced rural character. The legislative findings for GMA include the conservation and wise use of our lands, along with sharing economic development with communities experiencing insufficient LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–90 February 2021 economic growth. GMA should not be a barrier for rural counties, but a platform to encourage sustainable, coordinated, and controlled growth and economic development in accordance with the public’s interest. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–91 February 2021 Rural Industrial Lands Rural land designated as rural industrial land in this Plan is based on existing industrial uses in areas previously zoned as industrial. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d), counties may recognize areas of more intensive industrial development and contain them within logical boundaries to limit to infill development. All areas meet the following minimum criteria for designation of rural industrial land, as defined in WAC 365-196- 425: An area or use of more intensive industrial development in existence on July 1, 1990; and An area that is not located on designated natural resource lands. The industrial areas designated in 1998 resulted in a reduction in industrial acreage of 1994 zoning designations from a total of 928.3 acres to 616.9 acres, an overall reduction of 34%. The application of GMA criteria protected the economic viability of existing uses while it restricted industrial activities to existing areas. Rural industrial lands provide job opportunities for rural residents through redevelopment of existing rural industrial areas (see Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development above). Designated under this Plan are the following industrial zones: ▶ Port Townsend Paper Mill as Heavy Industrial (HI), ▶ Glen Cove as Light Industrial (LI) and Light Industrial/Commercial (LI/C), ▶ Center Valley as Light Industrial (LI), ▶ Eastview Industrial Plat and Quilcene Industrial Area as Light Industrial/Manufacturing (LI/M), ▶ Forest Resource-Based Industrial zones (RBI) at Gardiner and Western Jefferson County, and ▶ Jefferson County International Airport Non-Aviation-Related Light Industrial/Manufacturing (LI/M) Overlay. Exhibit 1-20 shows the location of all designated rural industrial areas in Jefferson County. A discussion and map of each rural industrial area follows. The Comprehensive Plan contains policies in Goal LU-G-24 and Goal LU-G-25 that help guide development of rural industrial land. Related to western Jefferson County LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–92 February 2021 EXHIBIT 1-20 Location of Rural Industrial Lands Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–93 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. PORT TOWNSEND PAPER MILL HEAVY INDUSTRIAL AREA Rural Industrial Area The Port Townsend Paper Mill has provided employment for several generations of Jefferson County residents. The mill property has been designated as heavy industrial (HI) for the mill and for activities ancillary to the mill. The property includes a water treatment lagoon and a port facility on Port Townsend Bay that are directly related to activities at the mill. The mill is recognized as a heavy industrial activity because it is a large- scale and intensive industrial activity that must meet extensive environmental permitting requirements under industrial standards for air quality, water quality, and wastewater treatment. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–94 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. GLEN COVE INDUSTRIAL AREA Rural Industrial Area Uses for the Light Industrial (LI) and Light Industrial/Commercial (LI/C) designations at Glen Cove include commercial and retail uses that are directly associated with the light industrial uses. Associated commercial and retail uses may include commodities and products, mechanical or electrical supplies, warehousing, and storage, or may provide support services to those who work in the industries, such as a small café. Allowing broader commercial uses at Glen Cove would require addressing concerns regarding pedestrian and traffic safety, infrastructure, and incompatible uses both visually and in terms of hazardous materials storage and use. Thus, the commercial designation for Glen Cove is restricted to uses which differ considerably from those in Rural Crossroads (NC, GC, & CC) and Rural Village Centers (RVC). LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–95 February 2021 Left: Glen Cove Industrial Park, Jefferson County, 2018. Right: Oblique aerial view of Glen Cove Industrial Park, Google Earth, 2018. Light industrial/commercial uses allowed at Glen Cove include but are not limited to: industrial parks, light manufacturing, construction yards, engine repair, metal fabrication or machining, plumbing shops and yards, printing and binding facilities (non-retail), research laboratories, excavating contractors, furniture manufacturing, software development, lumber yards, vehicle repair and restoration, warehousing and storage, boat building and repair, boat storage, craft goods, blacksmith or forge, commercial relay and transfer stations, and associated commercial uses as discussed above. Also permitted as conditional uses are those such as: amateur radio towers greater than 65 feet in height, café, car wash, electronic goods repair, fitness center, kennels, mini-storage, and nursery/landscape materials. The Glen Cove industrial boundary for light industrial/commercial uses recognizes a contained cluster of existing uses. When the County adopted the Comprehensive Plan in 1998 and established the interim LI/C zone at Glen Cove, the GMA was still in its formative years and the case law was not available for guidance. Jefferson County was among the first counties to establish LAMIRDs allowed under the GMA as amended in 1997 by ESB 6094. There was intent to revisit the boundary after thorough analysis was completed (Tri-Area/Glen Cove Special Study Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement with Addendums, August 1999). An expanded Light Industrial (LI) zone was established at Glen Cove in December 2002. The Light Industrial LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–96 February 2021 district does not allow for the commercial uses that are allowed in the LI/C zone. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–97 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. CENTER VALLEY INDUSTRIAL AREA Rural Industrial Area The Center Valley Light Industrial area was previously designated a Resource Based Industrial Zone due to the presence of a small sawmill operation. The sawmill closed and was inactive for several years before the area was rezoned as Light Industrial (LI) in 2008 to accommodate an expanded opportunity of uses at the site. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–98 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. QUILCENE INDUSTRIAL AREA Rural Industrial Area The Light Industrial/Manufacturing (LI/M) area at Quilcene was recognized in the 1998 Comprehensive Plan based on criteria in 1997 amendments to the GMA allowing Counties to recognize and contain existing areas and uses of more intensive industrial development (RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)). The industries need not be limited to those serving the local population. Other criteria and considerations used for this designation include the need to provide local employment in an area of distressed economic conditions located at a distance from the Urban Growth Area, and the desire to reduce commuter-related traffic pressures on County roadways. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–99 February 2021 Quilcene Industrial Area, Google Street View, 2015. The existing industrial uses include a sawmill, machine shop, and industrial storage. A vested project for additional industrial storage is the basis for recognition of an adjacent parcel. Light industrial uses allowed in the Quilcene Industrial Area include but are not limited to those described above for Glen Cove, except for the associated commercial and retail uses. Transportation access is adequate, as the area is on Highway 101. New development will be restricted until water supply issues related to adequate fire flow are addressed following the community election for a Local Utility District in late 1998. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–100 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. EASTVIEW LIGHT INDUSTRIAL/ MANUFACTURING AREA Rural Industrial Area The Eastview Industrial Plat (LI/M) borders the Paper Mill Heavy Industrial Zone on the north. Eastview consists of six lots comprising about 8 acres that was platted in 1978. The current uses include storage, boat yard, and repair services. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–101 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. JEFFERSON COUNTY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT NON-AVIATION-RELATED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL/MANUFACTURING Rural Industrial Area Jefferson County has established an overlay zone in association with the Airport Essential Public Facility (AEPF) in order to provide a limited opportunity for rural scale non-aviation- related industrial uses that contribute to the long-term financial viability of the AEPF, as well as to support rural economic vitality benefiting the Jefferson County community. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–102 February 2021 Forest Resource-Based Industrial Zones Rural Industrial Area Forest resource-based industries at Gardiner and West Jefferson County have been designated as Resource-Based Industrial Zones (RI) to recognize active sawmills and related activities at those sites, based on 1997 GMA amendments codified as RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(i) recognizing existing industrial uses and allowing for their intensification. The Resource-Based Industrial Zones are limited to forest resource-based industrial uses to prevent the establishment of a wider range of industrial uses. It is also intended to support employment in a distressed economic sector that, despite a decline in employment, will continue to have long-term economic importance for the County. Forest resource-based industrial zone boundaries were determined based on criteria in RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d) for determining logical boundaries. The reduction in acreage allows for limited infill and contains the industrial activity and associated uses to an area based on the developed area on July 1, 1990. Jefferson County recognizes that the cyclical nature of the forest industry will continue to result in economic upturns and downturns as reforested areas become available for harvest. To maintain facilities that continue to operate, the County recognizes that conversion of machinery and facilities into forest-related production activities would help to support this industry from one cycle to the next. The development code will include criteria for the permitting and regulation of conversion and/or intensification of these areas for related uses that may involve adapting existing equipment and facilities, recycling, or adding limited value to the forest resource products and byproducts (see Policy LU-P-25.4). Related to western Jefferson County LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–103 February 2021 Source: Jefferson County Community Development, BERK, 2018. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–104 February 2021 Economic Activities Outside of Rural Commercial Areas Jefferson County will allow the following types of economic activities to provide employment opportunities outside of designated Rural Village Centers and Rural Commercial Crossroads: New industrial uses may be allowed in rural areas when they are resource-based pursuant to RCW 36.70A.365—Major Industrial Developments, in that they are dependent on a location near the forest, mining, agricultural, or aquaculture resource (see Section 1.3). Goals and policies in the Natural Resources Element provide for protection of the resource activity as well as of surrounding land uses. Resource-based industries must be in compliance with environmental and other regulations. A major industrial development may be allowed outside of a UGA if the activity requires a parcel of land so large that no suitable parcels are available within the UGA, or if the nature of the activity is incompatible with urban development due to its potential threat to the public health, safety, and welfare. Such development is defined in an amendment to the GMA enacted in Engrossed Senate Bill 5019 and codified as RCW 36.70A.365 as a master planned location for a specific manufacturing, industrial, or commercial business, but it cannot be for commercial shopping development or multi-tenant office parks. Small-scale recreational or tourist-related uses will be reviewed through the conditional use permitting process according to criteria provided in the goals and policies of this element. The activity must rely on a rural setting and nearby natural features for its location. Conditionally permitted uses such as RV parks, boat rentals, marinas, horse arenas and stables, and campgrounds are typical of this type of use. Goal LU-G-26 provides policies for these economic activities. Home-based businesses may be permitted to provide opportunities to supplement a family income, start up a business, or establish a work-place at home. Home-based businesses must be clearly incidental and secondary to the primary use of the premises as a residence. The goals and policies of this element provide limits on home-based businesses designed to prevent adverse impacts from such activity on the preservation of rural character (see Goal LU- G-27). Cottage industries will be reviewed through the conditional use permitting process and must be clearly incidental and subordinate to the residential use of the property. A cottage Related to western Jefferson County LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–105 February 2021 industry is defined as limited small-scale commercial or industrial activities and shall not grow beyond the scale permitted unless it is moved to a location designated for commercial or industrial uses. The limitations provided in land use policies are intended to prevent the activity from detracting from adjacent land uses and the rural character of the area (see Goal LU-G-27). Potential new planning for future zoning designations on existing highway/commuter corridors and tourist routes. West Jefferson County The western portion of Jefferson County is geographically isolated from eastern Jefferson County by Olympic National Park. No existing Commercial-zoned lands currently exist in the West County, and therefore no commercial land for that area was designated in this Plan. Convenience services are available on Upper Hoh Road, at the Kalaloch Lodge store on Olympic National Park land and at a Quinault Nation convenience store at Queets. A regional decline in forestry and fishing has resulted in distressed economic conditions in the area. New employment opportunities in available economic sectors must be developed to respond to this decline of natural resource-based industries, allowing West Jefferson County to transition to a more diversified economy. West Jefferson County is not projected to experience significant growth during the 20-year planning period, with a total 20-year population projection of 43 additional people. Although the population of West Jefferson County is low, a significant number of people visit the tourist and recreation attractions of the area year-round. During the tourist season, the area experiences a large influx of visitors. Situated on U.S. Highway 101 between the mountain/rainforest and the ocean beach portions of the Olympic National Park, West Jefferson County receives visitors from Puget Sound regional metropolitan areas, as well as national and international visitors. The Hoh and Quinault Indian Reservation communities are concentrated population centers that both contribute to and rely upon the economy in West Jefferson County. To encourage employment opportunities in this economically distressed area, policies in this Plan allow additional small- scale recreation and tourism commercial activities serving tourist-related uses so that a broader range of goods and services can be provided, increasing economic development opportunities for the local population (see Policy LU-P-26.5). In addition, policies for home-based businesses and cottage Related to western Jefferson County LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–106 February 2021 industries allow for greater flexibility under criteria specific to West Jefferson County (see Policy LU-P-27.2 and Policy LU-P- 27.4). LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–107 February 2021 Rural Goals & Policies Rural Character Goal LU-G-15 Preserve rural character and protect and promote rural lifestyle, as defined in this element. ▶ Policy LU-P-15.1 Identify and implement rural land uses, densities, and environmental standards which preserve and protect rural character. Evaluate environmental quality as critical to the preservation of rural character when reviewing development applications in rural areas ▶ Policy LU-P-15.2 Protect open space consistent with the goals and policies of this plan and in cooperation with County Conservation Futures and other land conservation programs. ▶ Policy LU-P-15.3 Locate designated open space areas so as to provide connections with adjoining open space areas, offer visual relief for both on and off-site residents, enhance habitat values, and where appropriate allow for recreational opportunities. ▶ Policy LU-P-15.4 Endorse the establishment of visual corridors and forest corridors along suitable roadways in Jefferson County. Endorse the extension of the forest corridor concept from Port Townsend’s City limits south along SR 20 to Old Fort Townsend Road to preserve and protect the forest corridor, and to provide a visual buffer between the roadway and new commercial and manufacturing development. Fall in Quilcene, Carolyn Gallaway LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–108 February 2021 Goal LU-G-16 Ensure that development is accomplished in a manner which protects the long- term habitability, significant historical and cultural areas, and natural beauty of Jefferson County. ▶ Policy LU-P-16.1 Encourage the preservation and conservation of Jefferson County’s unique history, scenic resources, and rural community identities; support the contributions that each community has made to the fabric of the County’s rural and cultural character, and encourage the preservation of community cohesiveness through designated land uses in this Plan. ▶ Policy LU-P-16.2 Encourage project proponents to mitigate potential adverse impacts to the public health, safety, and welfare as a result of a proposed project, action, or use concurrent with project development. ▶ Policy LU-P-16.3 Preserve, protect, and enhance cultural amenities by protecting tribal cultural artifacts, historic structures, farms and other historical settlements throughout the rural landscape, through cultural and historical preservation planning efforts. Local tribes should be consulted and included early in the planning process to ensure that tribal recommendations are thoughtfully considered. ▶ Policy LU-P-16.4 Consider elements of a Night Sky ordinance and lighting provisions in the Jefferson County Code. Goal LU-G-17 Preserve and protect the rural character of the land and the identities of existing rural communities through examination of rural land uses, development densities, rural economies, and economic development opportunities. ▶ Policy LU-P-17.1 Residential uses in the unincorporated portions of the County shall be characterized by a variety of rural residential parcel sizes and densities. Related to western Jefferson County Related to western Jefferson County LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–109 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-17.2 Encourage innovation and creativity in lot and site design and in re-platting of existing lots to create efficient land developments, add flexibility in design, and encourage multi-modal transportation while meeting underlying density and site requirements. ▶ Policy LU-P-17.3 Carefully plan rural commercial development in a way that supports and is compatible with rural community character and that can be supported by rural levels of service. ▶ Policy LU-P-17.4 Review land use, development densities, rural economies, and economic development opportunities in the West End planning area to address local needs within the requirements of GMA. Goal LU-G-18 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. ▶ Policy LU-P-18.1 Rural residential cluster subdivisions shall be encouraged, consistent with development regulations, throughout the rural areas. The open space tracts in these planned rural residential development subdivisions should be permanently preserved. ▶ Policy LU-P-18.2 Integrate open space planning with innovative programs such as the purchase or transfer of development rights, cluster development with density bonuses, open space tax assessment, and acquisition of easements. Goal LU-G-19 Foster sustainable natural resource-based industry in rural areas through the conservation of lands that support forestry, agriculture, mineral extraction, and aquaculture industries and local employment opportunities. ▶ Policy LU-P-19.1 The County has identified resource lands as an integral part of rural character. Resource-based uses that are compatible with the conservation and sustainable use of the county’s resources shall be permitted. Related to western Jefferson County Irondale Park, Carolyn Gallaway LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–110 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-19.2 Use farm and forest preservation programs, such as Forest Stewardship Program, and other tools to preserve historic working lands. ▶ Policy LU-P-19.3 Encourage responsible stewardship of upland areas in support of programs that enable sustainable aquaculture. Rural Centers, Crossroads, & MPRs Rural Residential Land Use Goal LU-G-20 Ensure that rural residential development preserves rural character, protects rural community identity, is compatible with surrounding land uses, and minimizes infrastructure needs. ▶ Policy LU-P-20.1 Identify and encourage diverse rural land uses and densities which preserve rural character and rural community identity. ▶ Policy LU-P-20.2 Establish rural residential land use densities for all lands located outside of designated Urban Growth Areas. Proposed rural residential densities and site- specific re-zones shall allow for an adequate supply of appropriately zoned land based upon the County’s rural population projections and needs while maintaining rural character and rural community identity, preserving rural resource-based uses, and avoiding sprawl. Proposed changes to residential land use designations shall take into consideration the vacant lot supply of the local area before allowing site-specific changes to residential zoning. ▶ Policy LU-P-20.3 Analyze historical subdivisions in Jefferson County to define processes for legal lots of record certifications, and define valid plats in rural and urban areas. ▶ Policy LU-P-20.4 Encourage the development and adoption of new technologies such as alternative wastewater and energy systems that minimize infrastructure cost, reduce environmental impacts, and maintain rural character. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–111 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-20.5 Rural residential densities shown on the Land Use Map shall be designated by three (3) residential land use densities—one dwelling unit per five (5) acres, one dwelling unit per ten (10) acres, and one dwelling unit per twenty (20) acres in size—and subject to the criteria in Chapter JCC 18.15.040. ▶ Policy LU-P-20.6 Within limited areas of more intensive rural development (LAMIRDs), allow infill development at densities comparable to the surrounding area. Measures shall be considered to limit and contain these areas to the logical outer boundary of the existing area or use once identified and designated. Pursue planning analyses that evaluate the LAMIRDs’ ability to achieve housing goals such as with appropriate and innovative wastewater management techniques. ▶ Policy LU-P-20.7 Allow minimum lot sizes within the designated boundaries of Rural Village Centers (RVC) which are flexible and determined by such considerations as: septic or sewer availability, potable water availability, zoning, and building regulations such as setbacks and parking requirements, fire prevention measures, and community character. Rural Commercial Land Use Goal LU-G-21 Support existing and explore opportunities for new appropriately-sized Rural Village Centers (RVC) and provide for the development of appropriately scaled commercial and residential uses, with consideration of innovative planning techniques, such as mixed commercial and residential use, creating vibrant communities with access to local services. ▶ Policy LU-P-21.1 Encourage a variety of commercial, retail, professional, tourist-related, community service, cottage industry, and residential uses—through new infill development—including duplexes, triplexes and assisted living facilities, within the designated boundaries of RVCs at a scale appropriate to protect the rural character of the natural neighborhood. ▶ Policy LU-P-21.2 Concentrate and contain the existing built environment through development regulations allowing for infill development within Rural Village Center boundaries. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–112 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-21.3 ▶ Policy LU-P-21.4 Ensure visual compatibility of Rural Village Center commercial and mixed-use infill development with the surrounding rural area, through the creation and implementation of community based “rural character” design and development standards. Uses within Rural Village Centers shall be scaled and sized to preserve the natural character of the neighborhood. ▶ Policy LU-P-21.5 Periodically review Rural Village Center infill development, logical outer boundaries, and regulations to ensure the success of Rural Village Centers. Integrate infrastructure plans with economic development and housing plans for the Rural Village Centers. LU-P-21.5.1 Encourage affordable housing in Rural Village Centers through the allowance of multifamily housing opportunities such as multifamily residential units, senior housing, assisted living facilities, and manufactured/mobile home parks. LU-P-21.5.2 Allow for adequate economic development to provide economic sustainability, adequate employment opportunities, small business opportunities, family wage jobs, and services in and for the rural areas. LU-P-21.5.3 Promote opportunities for non-motorized and multimodal transportation options within and to Rural Village Centers. ▶ Policy LU-P-21.6 Ensure logical outer boundaries minimize and contain areas of more intensive development and are delineated predominantly by the built environment. Goal LU-G-22 Provide access to a limited range of services in the County’s Rural Commercial Crossroads for residential and non-residential users and other compatible uses. ▶ Policy LU-P-22.1 Designate General Commercial Crossroads (GC), Neighborhood/Visitor Crossroads (NC), and Convenience Crossroads (CC) pursuant with Chapter JCC 18.15.015(2). Chimacum Market, Jefferson County Public Health LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–113 February 2021 LU-P-22.1.1 Lands designated as General Crossroads (GC) are existing historic commercial areas that provide a broad range of commercial goods and services, and shall meet the requirements of LAMIRDs in WAC 365-196-425(6)ii. LU-P-22.1.2 Lands designated as Neighborhood/Visitor Crossroads (NC) serve the nearby rural neighborhood and the commuting or traveling public, and shall meet the requirements of LAMIRDs in WAC 365-196-425(6)ii. LU-P-22.1.3 Land designated as Convenience Crossroads (CC) consist of a single commercial property at a historical crossroads, and shall meet the requirements of LAMIRDs in WAC 365-196-425(6)iii. ▶ Policy LU-P-22.2 Periodically review Rural Commercial Crossroad infill development, outer boundaries, and regulations to ensure the success of Rural Commercial Centers, including access to affordable housing, family wage jobs, small business opportunities, non-motorized and multimodal transportation options, and services in and for the rural areas. LU-P-22.2.1 Encourage affordable housing in General Commercial Crossroads and Neighborhood/Visitor Crossroads through the allowance of multifamily housing opportunities such as multifamily residential units, senior housing, assisted living facilities, and manufactured/mobile home parks. LU-P-22.2.2 Allow for adequate economic development to provide economic sustainability, adequate employment opportunities, small business opportunities, and services in and for the rural areas. LU-P-22.2.3 Promote opportunities for non-motorized and multimodal transportation options within and to Rural Commercial Crossroads. ▶ Policy LU-P-22.3 Ensure visual compatibility and traditional design elements for Rural Crossroads commercial infill development with the surrounding rural area through the creation and implementation of community-based "rural character" design and development standards. Uses within Rural Crossroads shall be scaled and sized to protect the natural character of the neighborhood. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–114 February 2021 Master Planned Resorts Goal LU-G-23 Provide for the siting of, and maintain the viability of, Jefferson County’s Master Planned Resorts (MPR) in locations that are appropriate from both an economic and environmental perspective. ▶ Policy LU-P-23.1 Ensure that development of MPRs comply with County development regulations established for critical areas, that on-site and off-site infrastructure impacts are fully considered and mitigated, and that development is consistent with lawfully established vested rights and approved development permits. ▶ Policy LU-P-23.2 Allow the provision of urban-style services to support the anticipated growth and MPR development only within the designated MPR boundaries. ▶ Policy LU-P-23.3 Discourage any new urban or suburban land uses within the immediate vicinity of MPRs. ▶ Policy LU-P-23.4 Accommodate a variety of housing types in MPRs, including affordable housing, single family, and multi-family housing and assisted living care facilities. ▶ Policy LU-P-23.5 Include designated greenbelts, non- clearing open spaces, and wildlife corridors within the boundary of MPRs as appropriate. ▶ Policy LU-P-23.6 Open Space zones created within the boundaries of MPRs should address non-clearing, permanently vegetated areas and include forest management plans to ensure long-term viability, forest ecosystem health, and fire safety. ▶ Policy LU-P-23.7 Ensure that MPRs, which constitute urban growth outside of urban growth areas, are limited by, and consistent with RCW 36.70A.360. Master planned resorts are generally larger in scale, and involve greater potential impacts on the surrounding area, than uses permitted under the Small-Scale Recreation and Tourist Uses standards. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–115 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-23.8 Require that MPRs contain sufficient portions of the site in undeveloped open space for buffering and recreational amenities to help preserve the natural and rural character of the area. Where located in a rural area, the master planned resort should also be designed to blend with the natural setting and—to the maximum extent practical— screen the development and its impacts from the adjacent rural areas outside of the MPR designation. ▶ Policy LU-P-23.9 Develop and maintain site-specific development regulations to guide the review and development of master planned resorts that include, at a minimum, compliance with these policies and the Jefferson County Code. ▶ Policy LU-P-23.10 Ensure new or expanded existing master planned resorts located in areas of existing shoreline development, such as marinas and shoreline lodges, which promote public access to developed shorelines, and/or locations which promote public access and use of National Parks and National Forests, provide and commit to continued public access. Rural Industrial Lands Goal LU-G-24 Recognize and contain areas and uses of more intensive industrial development within boundaries that may allow for limited areas of infill development. ▶ Policy LU-P-24.1 Maintain the Port Townsend Paper Mill property as Heavy Industrial, the Glen Cove industrial area as Light Industrial/Commercial, Center Valley industrial area as Light Industrial, Quilcene industrial area as Light Industrial/Manufacturing, and Eastview Industrial Plat as Light Industrial/Manufacturing (LI/M), consistent with the provisions of RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d) and in Chapter JCC 18.15.015. ▶ Policy LU-P-24.2 Continue the ongoing planning discussions with the City of Port Townsend regarding infrastructure and boundaries of the Glen Cove Light Industrial/Commercial District and examine alternative solutions such as Large On-Site Sewage Systems (LOSS). LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–116 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-24.3 Encourage establishment of renewable energy power systems in rural areas to foster local economic prosperity, living wage jobs, local energy resiliency, and additional revenue opportunities for rural land owner/operators. ▶ Policy LU-P-24.4 Protect future opportunities for planning Industrial Land Banks and Major Industrial Developments by keeping development regulations current and effective for these land uses. Goal LU-G-25 Locate new natural resource-based industries in rural lands and near the resource upon which they are dependent, in accordance with RCW 36.70A.365. ▶ Policy LU-P-25.1 Encourage the establishment of sustainable natural resource-based industrial uses in rural areas to provide employment opportunities, such as food processing near areas of agricultural production and milling infrastructure near designated commercial forests. ▶ Policy LU-P-25.2 Natural resource-based industries may be located near the agricultural, forest, mineral, or aquaculture resource lands upon which they are dependent. ▶ Policy LU-P-25.3 Maintain existing pre-1990 forest resource-based industrial uses and activities at Gardiner as a Resource-Based Industrial Zone (RBI). ▶ Policy LU-P-25.4 Continue to recognize the Gardiner Resource-Based Industrial Zone as an area of more intensive rural development under RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(i), and allow the Zone to accommodate conversions and/or an intensification of these uses and activities under the provisions contained in RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(iii). LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–117 February 2021 Economic Activities Outside of Rural Commercial Areas Small-Scale Recreational & Tourist Related Uses Goal LU-G-26 Foster economic development that relies on a rural location and setting, and that is small scaled recreational or tourist-related. ▶ Policy LU-P-26.1 Small-scale recreational or tourist uses shall be defined as those uses reliant upon the rural setting, incorporating the scenic and natural features of the land. Under no circumstances should this policy be interpreted to permit new residential development, except that allowed by underlying zoning, and that necessary for on- site management. ▶ Policy LU-P-26.2 Small-scale recreational or tourist uses shall be provided for through a permitting process appropriate to the type of proposed use and the land use district in which it is proposed. ▶ Policy LU-P-26.3 The primary use of the site shall be for the small-scale recreational or tourist use. Commercial facilities, as provided for within an approved conditional use permit for small-scale recreational or tourist uses, shall serve only those recreational and tourist uses. ▶ Policy LU-P-26.4 Upon application for intensification/expansion of existing small-scale recreational or tourist areas and uses, the ultimate size and configuration of the site should be established and maintained by logical outer boundaries. Existing areas and uses are those that are clearly identifiable and contained, and where there is a logical boundary delineated predominately by the built environment on July 1, 1990, but may also include undeveloped lands if the overall goals of the Rural Element are maintained, by: a. preserving the character of the existing natural neighborhood; b. physical boundaries such as bodies of water, roadways, and land forms and contours are used to assist in delineation of the site; c. abnormally irregular site boundaries are prevented; d. public facilities and services are provided in a manner that does not permit low-density sprawl; and e. protecting critical areas and surface and groundwater resources. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–118 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-26.5 Within isolated West Jefferson County, allow small-scale recreation and tourist uses to provide basic goods and services to meet the needs of a local population living at a distance from commercial areas. This limited expansion of uses is also intended to allow for the creation of local jobs in an area of high unemployment and distressed economic conditions. ▶ Policy LU-P-26.6 When a specific area is identified through community planning as appropriate for the expansion of existing small-scale recreation and tourist uses and for new small-scale recreation and tourist uses, a Small-scale Recreation and Tourist (SRT) overlay district for the identified area may establish variations from the conditional use permitting process and the criteria in this section, so long as the overall goals of the Rural Element are maintained. Home-based Businesses & Cottage Industries Goal LU-G-27 Foster home-based businesses or cottage industries in order to provide economic and employment opportunities outside of Rural Commercial zones. ▶ Policy LU-P-27.1 Permit home-based businesses and cottage industries that are accessory to the residential use of the property throughout the unincorporated portions of the County, subject to permit review procedures. ▶ Policy LU-P-27.2 Home-based businesses in West Jefferson County and the Brinnon Planning Area shall be regulated according to Chapter JCC 18.15 Article VI-L in order to encourage new economic development and employment opportunities in unique areas that are isolated and distant from commercial and urban growth areas. ▶ Policy LU-P-27.3 Cottage industries are an accessory use to the primary residential use and shall be operated by the owner or lessee of the property, who shall reside either within a single family dwelling or an accessory dwelling unit, subject to conditional use permit review procedures. ▶ Policy LU-P-27.4 Cottage industries in West Jefferson County and the Brinnon Planning Area shall be regulated according to Chapter JCC 18.15 Article VI-L in order to provide employment opportunities in unique areas that are isolated and distant from commercial and urban growth areas. Related to western Jefferson County Related to western Jefferson County Related to western Jefferson County LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–119 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-27.5 Codify provisions which will ensure that home-based businesses and cottage industries will not create de-facto Commercial Zoning in residential districts. ▶ Policy LU-P-27.6 Periodically evaluate the use and success of home-based business and cottage industry provisions and make modifications as appropriate. Capital Facilities in Rural Areas Goal LU-G-28 Provide Rural Village Centers with the level of infrastructure support that will allow the community to be served with appropriately-scaled housing, commercial services, and/or mixed-use development patterns to provide for community needs through infill and development of the LAMIRD. Limit the establishment or expansion of urban development and infrastructure to those areas designated for urban growth. ▶ Policy LU-P-28.1 Ensure that expansion of urban infrastructure occurs only in coordination with designated land uses based on projected growth estimates and in compliance with provisions of the state Growth Management Act. ▶ Policy LU-P-28.2 Periodically review and update the Coordinated Water System Plan (CWSP) to ensure consistency with the joint population projection and all land use designations. ▶ Policy LU-P-28.3 Ensure that any impact fees adopted by the County require that a “fair share” of development costs be borne by the developer. Land use decisions should consider cost efficiency regarding publicly-funded infrastructure. ▶ Policy LU-P-28.4 Ensure that where the County assumes maintenance responsibilities for infrastructure, the infrastructure is adequately designed to meet the area growth projections and to fulfill the functions the infrastructure is intended to perform. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–120 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-28.5 Require the provision of an appropriate level of facilities and services prior to, or concurrent with, development as identified in Chapter JCC 18.30. These services shall include, but are not limited to, potable water supply, commercial fire flow, adequate sewage disposal and roads, including sidewalks and pathways if safety is an issue. ▶ Policy LU-P-28.6 Ensure that rural areas are adequately served by a rural level of public services. Encourage the development and adoption of new technologies such as alternative wastewater and energy systems that minimize infrastructure costs, reduce environmental impacts, and maintain rural character. ▶ Policy LU-P-28.7 Allow community water facilities and community sewage facilities in rural lands in order to support projected growth, or where necessary to protect public health and safety. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–121 February 2021 1.3 RESOURCE Resource Lands of Long-Term Commercial Significance under the GMA One of the goals of the GMA is the conservation of productive natural resources lands of long-term commercial significance, including forestlands, agricultural lands, and mineral resources. All counties and cities planning under the GMA are required to identify and designate such natural resource lands for conservation to avoid conflicts with other incompatible uses and ensure these lands are available to support economic productivity and healthy ecological systems. Identification and classification of natural resource lands is required by GMA under RCW 36.70A.050 and as described more fully in Element 2 Natural Resources. Forest Forestry has a long history in Jefferson County, and large areas of the unincorporated county are devoted to timber production. Forest lands provide both economic and ecological benefits to local residents, making their conservation a high priority under the GMA. Over three-quarters of the non-federal land in the County is zoned for forestry purposes. Mineral Mineral resource extraction provides nonrenewable raw materials for a wide variety of uses, including construction of essential public infrastructure. The GMA also requires that counties evaluate future needs for mineral resources and ensure that access to mineral resources of long-term commercial significance is not knowingly precluded by other types of land development. To meet the requirements of GMA, mineral extraction should be a priority land use for all designated mineral resource lands. Many of Jefferson County’s designated mineral resource lands are also designated forest land. Without definitive surveys and mapping of mineral resources of Jefferson County, the broad forest land zones covering the largely overlapping resource areas, provide a stand-in protective designation that helps to protect mineral lands until additional surveys and mapping can be done. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–122 February 2021 Agriculture Agriculture plays a vital role in economies of both Washington and Jefferson County, and it is central to the culture and history of many communities across the state. As described in the Framework section of this Element, two agricultural land zones are part of the land use and zoning districts and are supported by strong policies that address both agricultural land protection, and the importance of the food processing industry, as well as healthy food access for the community. Aquaculture: Refer to Natural Resources Element for the primary information on upland aquaculture activities and aquaculture resources regulated by the Shoreline Master Program (SMP). Primary information about the SMP can be found in the Environment Element. Resource Conservation While natural resource lands often consist of large properties under intensive commercial production, valuable natural resource lands also occur on smaller, family-owned parcels. For example, nearly 30,000 acres of land in Jefferson County is designated as forest land for property taxation purposes but is zoned for rural land use other than commercial forestry, primarily rural residential development. Nearly one-quarter of farms in Jefferson County are less than 10 acres in size, and more than half are less than 50 acres. While the long-term commercial significance of properties such as these may not be equal to that of larger commercial operations, they represent resource lands capable of providing economic and ecological benefits to local residents and should be conserved in keeping with the goals of the GMA. Jefferson County LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–123 February 2021 Resource Lands Goals & Policies Goal LU-G-29 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. ▶ Policy LU-P-29.1 Conserve natural resource lands through land use designations and encourage resource-based industries that provide rural employment opportunities. Emphasize the development of agricultural systems, including processing, storage, and distribution, and identify where these facilities will be allowed. ▶ Policy LU-P-29.2 Support cooperative resource and habitat management processes between stakeholders and local, state, federal and tribal governments by integrating cooperative agreements and plans into land use ordinances and regulations. ▶ Policy LU-P-29.3 Work with resource-based industries to achieve compliance with all applicable regulations to protect environmental values and to protect surrounding land uses. ▶ Policy LU-P-29.4 Allow green burials in designated or accepting cemeteries and consider allowing green burial cemeteries consistent with Title 68 RCW, on forest zoned land greater than 20 acres in size with a conditional use permit. See also the Natural Resources Element for goals and policies addressing resource lands of long-term commercial significance. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–124 February 2021 1.4 URBAN Urban Growth Areas Municipal & Unincorporated The GMA authorizes the designation of Urban Growth Areas in RCW 36.70A.110 to include cities and other areas characterized by urban growth or adjacent to such areas. Urban Growth Areas are intended to accommodate a projected population growth for the next twenty years. The GMA specifies that future growth should, first, be located in areas that already have public facilities and service capacity and, second, in areas where such services, if not already available, are planned. In Jefferson County, there are two Urban Growth Areas: ▶ City of Port Townsend Municipal Urban Growth Area; and ▶ Port Hadlock / Irondale Unincorporated Urban Growth Area. The City of Port Townsend is subject to its own Comprehensive Plan and development regulations affecting urban growth and the provision of public facilities and services in the City of Port Townsend. The Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area is an unincorporated Urban Growth Area, located approximately 5 miles south of the City of Port Townsend, adjacent to Port Townsend Bay. This unincorporated Urban Growth Area is subject to the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and implementing regulations. An Urban Growth Area defines where urban developments will be directed and supported with typical urban public facilities and services, such as storm and sanitary sewer systems, domestic water systems, fire and police protection services, and public transit services. Urban growth areas enable new development to locate close to vital capital facilities and urban services or "infill" in existing urbanizing areas. Urban Growth Areas enable fiscal resources associated with capital facilities and urban services to be operated more cost-effectively. The Urban Growth Area is an area where urban public facilities and services are available or are planned. Provision of urban public facilities and services may be available through several service providers, such as Jefferson County, the JPUD, or some other entity such as a sewer and water district. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–125 February 2021 Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area History of Planning Designation Detailed planning for the designation of a Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area in compliance with the requirements of the GMA has been on- going since the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan was originally adopted in 1998. Specific policy language in the Comprehensive Plan indicated the joint city/county intent to pursue future Urban Growth Area planning for the “Tri-Area” (including Irondale, Port Hadlock and Chimacum). As part of the on-going joint City/County urban growth area planning, the Tri-Area Provisional Urban Growth Area (Urban Growth Area) was designated by Jefferson County on October 5, 1999 as an interim step in the Urban Growth Area planning process. In 2000, the boundary of the Interim Urban Growth Area was established, and included the Irondale and Port Hadlock communities. In-depth analysis and environmental impact review of the land use, population, capital facilities and public services, natural systems and critical area constraints, open space, housing, and non-residential land use needs for a Tri-Area Urban Growth Area are incorporated in the Tri Area/Glen Cove Special Study conducted from 1998-2002. Public Facilities & Services Specific planning for public facilities and services in the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area is referenced in this section and in the Capital Facilities Element, as well as supporting appendices of the Comprehensive Plan, the Tri Area/Glen Cove Special Study, the Jefferson County Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area Sewer Facility Plan of September 2008, andthe Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area Sewer System/Water Reclamation Facility and Influent Pipeline Design Plans & Specifications dated December 2013., and the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update. Inside the Puget Sound Iron Company, Jefferson County, from the Collection of the Jefferson County Historical Society LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–126 February 2021 Urban Growth Area Sizing & Capacity Further planning analysis of the size and capacity of the Urban Growth Area was conducted in the Proposed Irondale/Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area: Dwelling Unit & Population Holding Capacity Analysis, Cascadia Community Planning Services, January 21, 2009, and updated by Community Development in 2017 for the periodic review. CWPPs provide a broad framework for UGA planning that were developed in a collaborative process between the City of Port Townsend and the County. Countywide Planning Policy #1.3 provides specific guidance on criteria for the sizing and delineation of UGA boundaries outside of cities: ▶ Adequate amount of developable land to accommodate forecasted growth for the next twenty years. ▶ Sufficient developable land for residential, commercial, and industrial uses to sustain a healthy local and regional economy. ▶ Sufficient area for the designation of greenbelts and open space corridors. ▶ Topographical features or environmentally sensitive areas that may form natural boundaries such as bays, watersheds, rivers, or ridge lines. ▶ Lands already characterized by urban development that is currently served or are planned to be served by roads, water, sanitary sewer, and storm drainage, schools, and other urban services within the next twenty years; provided that such urban services that are not yet in place are included in a capital facilities plan. ▶ The type and degree of existing urban services necessary to support urban development at the adopted interim level of service. The County-wide Planning Policies also provide selected guidance for the phasing of urban growth commensurate with the provision of adequate urban services to UGAs: ▶ Land use plans, regulations and capital facility plans for each UGA will be designed to accommodate the projected population. Growth should first be directed into two tiers: Tier 1—existing commercial centers and urbanized areas where the six (6) year capital facilities plan is prepared to provide urban infrastructure; Tier 2—areas included within the capital facilities plan to receive the full range of urban services within twenty (20) years. Infrastructure LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–127 February 2021 improvements necessary to support development in the second tier will be provided by the developer concurrent with development, or by public entities because of implementing all or a portion of the capital facilities plan. (CWPP 1.5) ▶ Before adopting boundaries of UGAs, interim Level of Service Standards (LOS) for public services and facilities located inside and outside of UGAs must be adopted. (CWPP 1.7) ▶ The full range of governmental urban services at the adopted level of service standards will be planned for and provided within UGAs, as defined in the capital facilities plan, including community water, sanitary sewer, piped fire flow, and storm water systems (CWPP 2.1) ▶ New development will meet the adopted level of service standards for the UGA as a condition of project approval. Said standards will include interim provisions for those urban facilities identified in the capital facilities plan but not yet developed. New development will contribute its proportionate share towards provision of urban facilities identified in the capital facilities plan. (CWPP 2.3) ▶ Local public involvement and citizen advice into the formation and development of UGA land uses and supporting urban public facilities and services are also an important component of planning and implementation for UGAs. (CWPP 2.2) Urban Growth Area Designation Criteria The GMA specifies certain minimum requirements for Urban Growth Area formation. These include the following provisions of RCW 36.70A.110: An urban growth area may include territory that is located outside of a city only if such territory already is characterized by urban growth whether or not the urban growth area includes a city, or is adjacent to territory already characterized by urban growth, or is a designated new fully contained community as defined by RCW 36.70A.350. (RCW 36.70A.110(1)). The vast majority of the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area is “already characterized by urban growth”. In addition, the boundary for the Urban Growth Area was delineated based on the criteria in CWPPs with guidance from the Tri-Area Community Plan (1995) and public input from local residents. Only limited areas “adjacent to territory already characterized by urban growth” are included in the Urban Growth Area to: 1) interconnect areas characterized by existing urban growth; 2) incorporate sufficient developable land to sustain the urban growth projected to occur LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–128 February 2021 during the 20-year planning period; or 3) provide for a reasonable land market supply factor to discourage adverse land and housing price increases. The Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area is significantly smaller and more compact than the “Tri-Area Urban Growth Area” originally proposed in the Special Study. Based upon the growth management population projection made for the county by the office of financial management, the county and each city within the county shall include areas and densities sufficient to permit the urban growth that is projected to occur in the county or city for the succeeding twenty-year period. (36.70A.110(2)). Adequate land area for the expected growth during the planning period has been designated based on both the projected 20-year residential population growth for Port Hadlock / Irondale identified in the Comprehensive Plan as well as the need for commercial/industrial lands identified as a part of the Special Study. The Comprehensive Plan population growth projections indicate a 20-year projected growth from 2018-2038 of 1,516 residents for the Urban Growth Area. The Urban Growth Area buildout capacity analysis is presented later in this element. The boundary (i.e., sizing) of the Urban Growth Area included only those areas “characterized by urban growth...or…adjacent to territory already characterized by urban growth” necessary to accommodate the urban growth projected to occur consistent with the Act. The Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area includes areas designated for Medium and High Density multi-family developments that are “adjacent to territory already characterized by urban growth” as one means to accommodate the projected population increase. Although the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area contains a significant amount of existing single-family urban residential development—from a future urban growth perspective—its major intent is to provide more economic development opportunity to serve the unmet regional commercial needs of eastern Jefferson County identified in the Special Study. Secondarily, Urban Growth Area designation and the provision of urban facilities and services will allow for development of higher density (and more affordable) multi-family housing when a sanitary system becomes available. Each urban growth area shall permit urban densities and shall include greenbelt and open space areas. (36.70A.110(2)). LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–129 February 2021 Average urban density of residential development is above 4 dwelling units per acre in the Urban Growth Area. See the Proposed Irondale/Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area: Dwelling Unit & Population Holding Capacity Analysis, Cascadia Community Planning Services, January 21, 2009. The Urban Low Density Residential (ULDR) designation on the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area Zoning Map requires a minimum density of 4 dwellings units per acre, except where the following criteria are met: 1) in areas where no sanitary sewer service is provided in the adopted Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan; and 2) in such areas within an adopted Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA). The provisions of the Jefferson County Health Department On-Site Sewage Disposal Systems regulations (JCC 8.15) and Unified Development Code (UDC) Section (Best Management Practices for On-Site Sewage Disposal in CARAs) shall apply under these circumstances which effectively limit maximum density to approximately 3.5 units per acre. The so-called “bright line” rule adopted by the Growth Management Hearings Boards suggests that four units per acre is a minimum urban density. However, the Boards have also recognized that jurisdictions may apply densities below that line in Urban Growth Areas if there is a compelling GMA reason for doing so. Protection of critical areas, including CARAs, has been recognized by the Hearings Boards as such a reason. In the Urban Growth Area, the CARA serves to protect the same groundwater aquifer that supplies the public water supply for the Urban Growth Area—the Public Utility District’s Sparling Well located within the Urban Growth Area at the corner of Kennedy Road and Rhody Drive (SR 19). The Zoning Map indicates several additional areas designated for moderate and high density residential development within sewer service areas that are in close proximity to existing commercial centers and community facilities such as the Chimacum Creek Elementary School and the County Library. Open space and greenbelt areas have also been identified for the Urban Growth Area, especially along the Chimacum Creek corridor, in associated wetland areas and along the Port Townsend Bay marine shoreline at the mouth of Chimacum Creek where substantial shoreline restoration has been completed at the site of a former log dump and at the Irondale smelter site. Concurrently with development and re-development of the Urban Growth Area, a primary urban design consideration is to create better connections between residential and commercial uses, non- motorized access to transit services, sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and overall attention to non-motorized transportation connectivity. Refer to the Transportation Element, Non-Motorized Trail & Standards LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–130 February 2021 An urban growth area determination may include a reasonable land market supply factor and shall permit a range of urban densities and uses. (36.70A.110(2)). Single-family and multi-family residential, urban commercial, light industrial, lands for public purposes, and open space and greenbelt land needs are incorporated in the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area. Sizing of the Urban Growth Area was intended to include only those areas “characterized by urban growth...or…adjacent to territory already characterized by urban growth” consistent with the Act. A reasonable land market supply factor was applied to discourage adverse increases to land and housing values in the Urban Growth Area. Reduction factors to account for lands needed for roads and utilities and preservation of environmentally sensitive areas were also applied. Documentation of supporting population and land area analysis are found in the Special Study and in the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area Buildout Analysis, dated March 4, 2004, and the Proposed Irondale/Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area: Dwelling Unit & Population Holding Capacity Analysis, Cascadia Community Planning Services, January 21, 2009, and updated in the 2018 Periodic Review; see Appendix E. Cities and counties have discretion in their comprehensive plans to make many choices about accommodating growth. (36.70A.110(2).) Planning for an unincorporated Urban Growth Area in eastern Jefferson County has been on-going since the initial GMA Comprehensive Plan for the County was adopted in 1998. The Special Study was a collaborative joint planning process between the City of Port Townsend and the County that entailed a broad analysis of population and employment growth and land use needs as well as alternative Urban Growth Area boundary configurations and their associated impacts. It presented many choices about accommodating growth. One of the key findings of the Special Study was that the County experienced a significant amount of “retail leakage” to urban areas in adjacent counties due to an inadequate commercial land use base in the County. The City of Port Townsend and the County also jointly chose through the Joint Growth Management Steering Committee to accommodate new growth through formation of a Tri-Area Unincorporated Urban Growth Area rather than accommodate the unmet demand for commercial growth in the existing Port Townsend Urban Growth Area. The Comprehensive Plan and the CWPPs both identify the Tri-Area (now Port Hadlock / Irondale Unincorporated Urban Growth Area) as the primary regional commercial growth center for the unincorporated County. However, the lack of the full range of LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–131 February 2021 urban services, including a sanitary sewer system, has been an impediment to significant commercial development and job creation. The Urban Growth Area planning process involved an extensive amount of public involvement. The Implementation Plan for the Special Study identified and analyzed more specific Urban Growth Area land use alternatives for the area. Because of the extensive public involvement process and capital facilities impact analysis conducted throughout the life of the Special Study, the Tri-Area Urban Growth Area represents a significantly smaller, more compact and more fiscally viable Urban Growth Area than originally proposed in the DSEIS/FSEIS prepared as a part of the Special Study. Urban growth should be located first in areas already characterized by urban growth that have adequate existing public facility and service capacities to serve such development, second in areas already characterized by urban growth that will be served adequately by a combination of both existing public facilities and services and any additional needed public facilities and services that are provided by either public or private sources, and third in the remaining portions of the urban growth areas. (36.70A.110(3)). The Special Study included several alternative Urban Growth Area boundaries and permitted land use alternatives for Urban Growth Areas in Jefferson County. One of these alternatives (Alternative 1) was not to adopt a new unincorporated Urban Growth Area but rather accommodate the unmet need for regional commercial growth identified in the Special Study through intensification of the existing Port Townsend Urban Growth Area. Following issuance of the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Amendments, dated August 1999 (FSEIS) the Joint Growth Management Steering Committee (comprised of three City Councilors and three County Commissioners) decided on August 24, 1999 (by a vote of 5 to 1) to move forward with Urban Growth Area implementation for Port Hadlock / Irondale and to reject implementation of Alternative 1—effectively precluding allocation of the unmet employment and commercial growth needs identified in the Special Study to the existing Port Townsend Urban Growth Area. Phased Implementation In 2002, Port Hadlock / Irondale lacked the full range of urban services needed for immediate Urban Growth Area implementation indicated in CWPP 2.1, above. Therefore, the Comprehensive Plan had to plan for the provision of those services as required by RCW 36.70A.110(3). The Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–132 February 2021 was programmatically defined in several phases. The initial phase involved amendments to the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan in 2002 to adopt the final Urban Growth Area boundary, land use map and interim levels of service for urban facilities as well as goals and policies guiding the development of the Urban Growth Area. This included identification of additional plans and capital facilities (including costs and funding sources) needed to implement the full range of urban services and facilities within the Urban Growth Area. The next phase involved preparation and adoption of Urban Growth Area development regulations now codified in Chapter 18.18 of the JCC. This phase also included completion of the capital facility plans needed to implement the full range of urban services required in CWPP 2.1, including the adoption of urban level of service standards for Urban Growth Area transportation improvements, storm water management facilities, and a new sanitary sewer system. These capital facility plans are adopted herein by reference and are included as appendices to the Comprehensive Plan. The Urban Growth Area functional capital facility plans as adopted herein are available under separate cover and include: ▶ Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area Sewer Facility Plan, September 2008 and Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update, August 2020. ▶ Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area Stormwater Management Plan, May 2004 ▶ Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area Transportation Plan, May 2004 as updated in Appendix C Consistent with CWPP 1.5, the adopted Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area General Sewer Plan identifies phased development areas within the Urban Growth Area based on where the six (6) year capital facilities plan is prepared to provide urban sanitary sewer service in the Urban Growth Area core, followed by expansion of sewer service availability throughout the Urban Growth Area in the 20 year planning period. More complete discussion and analysis of these areas are found in the “Capital Facilities” section of this element and in the adopted Urban Growth Area General Sewer Plan. Public involvement was a key component of all phases of Urban Growth Area planning. The County appointed an Urban Growth Area Citizen Advisory Committee during the initial Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area boundary and land use planning phase in 2001. The CAC was comprised of local Urban Growth Area residents and business owners and participated in developing the initial recommendations for the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area boundary and land use designations adopted in 2002. An Urban Growth Area Citizens Task Force was appointed in 2004, again comprised of local business owners and residents, to help LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–133 February 2021 the Planning Commission Urban Growth Area Subcommittee develop specific implementing regulations and capital facility development standards for the Urban Growth Area. Alternative Phasing Sewer Policy Within the UGA, the principal barrier to greater density is the lack of a sanitary sewer. Some communities in Washington State allow development activity on alternative wastewater treatment systems that do not preclude future hook-up to traditional sewer. For example, Kitsap County explored pocket plants, membrane bioreactor treatment systems, and community drain fields, and the Growth Management Hearings Board found these types of systems provided an urban level of service for new development (KCRP VI v. Kitsap County; Case 06-3-0007). Pierce County allows dry sewer lines to be installed; residential development up to the maximum density may be allowed, if lots in excess of the density permitted with on-site septic cannot be developed until the sewer line is extended and connected to all the lots. The City of Yakima allows urban development if there are either public sewer systems or approved community sewer systems. A policy is included allowing for alternative technologies and phasing to advance development in the Urban Growth Area, and meet community needs such as for housing variety and affordability. Land Use Map & Zoning Designations The Future Land Use and Zoning Map, adopted as a part of this element, is the graphic representation of the densities and intensities of use and the goals, policies and strategies contained within this plan. The Land Use and Zoning Maps were developed based on consistency with the GMA, community involvement, consideration of the 1995 Tri-Area Community Development Plan, the results of the Special Study, the Proposed Irondale/Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area: Dwelling Unit & Population Holding Capacity Analysis, Cascadia Community Planning Services, January 21, 2009, and the specific criteria contained within this element. Land use and zoning designations are as follows: ▶ The Urban Low Density Residential (UGA-LDR) zone will allow housing density from four (4) to six (6) dwelling units per acre. Moderate Density Residential (UGA-MDR) zoning will allow housing at a density of 7-12 units per acre. The High Density Residential (UGA-HDR) zone will allow housing at a density of 13-18 dwelling units per acre. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–134 February 2021 ▶ The Urban Commercial (UGA-UC) zone covers both the existing and planned future commercial development in the Port Hadlock core area and along Rhody Drive from Ness” Corner along the commercial strip fronting SR 19. The Visitor-Oriented Commercial (UGA-VOC) zone is applied to the tourism-oriented potential development area around the Old Alcohol Plant. ▶ The Urban Light Industrial (UGA-LI) zone in the UGA applies to a largely developed industrial area: all but 5 acres are already in light industrial use. These uses are in the southwest corner of the UGA well buffered from the bulk of the residential neighborhoods in the community. ▶ Public facilities (UGA-P) comprise 80 acres, including public park and open space areas, the Library and Chimacum Creek Elementary School, the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office and Jail, Jefferson County Public Works Department Maintenance Yard, and the JPUD’s Sparling Well facility along Rhody Drive and the Kivley Well in Port Hadlock. Rural zones apply until urban wastewater services are available, and then Urban zones apply. See Exhibit 1-21. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–135 February 2021 EXHIBIT 1-21 Transitional Rural Zoning Source: Jefferson County, 2009. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–136 February 2021 EXHIBIT 1-22 Irondale & Port Hadlock Urban Zoning Source: Jefferson County, 2009. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–137 February 2021 Dwelling Unit & Population Holding Capacity Analysis Planning analysis of the Urban Growth Area’s capacity was conducted in by Community Development staff for the 2018 Comprehensive Plan using the current population allocation from Resolution No. 38-15, and the methodology outlined in the 2009 Cascadia Community Planning Services analysis. The Comprehensive Plan population growth projections for 2018- 2038 indicate a 20-year projected growth of 1,516 residents for the Urban Growth Area. The capacity analysis prepared for the 2018 Periodic Update illustrates there is a capacity for new population of 1,518- 2,413. Thus, there is capacity to meet the 20-year growth projection. EXHIBIT 1-23 Estimated Total Dwelling Unit & Population Holding Capacity Dwellings Population Estimated Net Additional Capacity of Vacant & Underdeveloped Lands 723– 1,149 1,518– 2,413 Estimated Existing Dwelling Units & Population on Vacant & Underdeveloped Lands 1,380* 2,898 Estimated Holding Capacity Range at Build-Out 2,103–2,529 4,416–5,311 Source: Jefferson County, 2018. * 1,352 in 2016 x 1.06% growth rate from 2010 to 2016 = 1,380 (1261 in “developed areas; 119 in “underdeveloped” areas). Projected population 2038 = 5,394 5,311-5,394 = (83) Housing Variety & Affordability Aside from the extension of sewer, other obstacles to urban development include the size of older semi-rural lots and ownership that make redevelopment difficult. Some solutions could be to offer incentives such as fee reductions or permit fast-tracking for infill housing such as accessory dwelling units. Lot consolidation incentives could include: density bonuses, reduced yards, reduced parking, fee waivers and permit fast-tracking in exchange for implementing lot consolidation. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–138 February 2021 Urban Growth Area Goals & Policies The goals and policies of the Urban Growth Area element provide direction for the development of Jefferson County’s Port Hadlock / Irondale Unincorporated Urban Growth Area. They outline specific criteria for urban development, incorporating issues and opportunities identified by County residents in the public Urban Growth Area planning process. Goal LU-G-30 Provide for the orderly development of urban land uses in urban growth areas consistent with the provision of adequate and feasible urban levels of public facilities and services. Goal LU-G-31 Encourage a balance of commercial and industrial uses for urban-scale and regional- scale economic activities within Urban Growth Areas (Urban Growth Areas). Goal LU-G-32 Provide urban development design that promotes healthy communities through policies that promote healthy lifestyles. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.1 Encourage and facilitate urban regional-scale economic activities in unincorporated Urban Growth Areas which provide for County-wide goods, services, and employment opportunities. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.2 Direct new urban growth into areas that are already characterized by existing urban growth or adjacent to areas characterized by urban growth. Within the confines of the GMA, urban levels of services (capital facilities and infrastructure) should be scaled to the needs of urban growth areas and the ability of businesses, homeowners, workers, and the public to finance them. Examples of urban development design that promotes healthy lifestyles include: ▶Complete Streets planning; ▶Pedestrian friendly developments; and ▶Access to healthy foods, healthcare, and senior care services. Healthy Communities LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–139 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-32.3 Ensure future infrastructure improvements are appropriately sized and scaled to the planned population projections and development densities in the County. The level of urban infrastructure must serve the needs of the public, protect the environment and be affordable. Use Health Impact Assessments in the decision- making process of prioritizing capital projects, in order to make progress on healthy community goals. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.4 Encourage growth in the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area commensurate with the appropriate level of urban public facility and service capacities consistent with adopted plans, projections and interlocal agreements. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.5 Plan urban governmental services at urban levels of services prior to or concurrent with development. (See Capital Facilities and Utilities Element for a list of urban public facilities and their adopted levels of service). ▶ Policy LU-P-32.6 Consider Urban Growth Area development plans that allow urban development on septic systems or alternative wastewater treatment systems in a site design process, such as a binding site plan, subdivision or shadow— plat, that ensures future urban development will not be precluded, and develop regulations that facilitate urban infill in areas previously developed or platted at sub urban densities, including multiple accessory dwelling units. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.7 Provide incentives for affordable housing through planned urban densities initially on septic systems. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.8 Provide incentives for efficient development patterns such as lot consolidation. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.9 Consider developing an affordable housing incentives program for the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area per RCW 36.70a.540, as funding allows. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.10 Support legislative efforts to allow tax exemptions for housing in unincorporated Urban Growth Areas for rural counties like Jefferson County. Include support for multifamily tax credits such as federal low income housing tax credits (LIHTC) and project-based vouchers (Section 8). LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–140 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-32.11 Periodically review development regulations for potential affordable housing barriers with for-profit and non-profit housing providers and community members. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.12 Consider allowing tiny homes as accessory dwelling units or where mobile home parks are allowed. Adopt tiny home building standards such as Appendix Q, International Residential Code. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.13 Set a walkability standard (for example, a quarter mile) for residential access to daily retail and transit stops in urban areas. Adopt a service standard that can be applied to urban or rural village centers throughout the county. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.14 Incorporate physical activity measures into the design of project evaluation studies, such as multimodal transportation planning, community design, or community health studies.. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.15 Incorporate traffic calming measures where needed to increase pedestrian and bicycle safety. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.16 Facilitate non-motorized transportation and reduce the need for automobile parking in pedestrian use areas through development regulations in the Irondale / Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.17 Support farmer’s markets and farm stands in urban, rural residential, and commercial districts. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.18 Encourage small-scale urban community farming and gardening, consistent with urban plans. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.19 Maximize opportunities to incorporate urban home and community gardens in new development. Allow community gardens to count toward park and open space requirements. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.20 Promote equitable access to food growing opportunities. Identify neighborhoods that are underserved by open space and healthy-eating opportunities, including access to existing urban agriculture resources. Prioritize the development of new urban agriculture sites in low-income and underserved neighborhoods. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.21 Support and expand access to school gardens and safe multi-modal non-motorized transportation facilities around schools. Refer to the Housing Element, Policy HS-P-2.2, and the Housing Action Plan LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–141 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-32.22 Provide mixed use development strategies in the commercial centers of the Urban Growth Area to provide housing within walkable distance to services, food, transit, and parks; and to promote neighborhoods that foster interaction. Incentivize mixed-use developments to provide affordable housing. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.23 Identify non-motorized transportation connections that provide opportunities, such as sidewalks and bicycle lanes, for physical activity as key elements to mixed use center planning. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.24 Prioritize the placement of community services in neighborhood centers (i.e. health clinics, childcare centers, senior centers, libraries, educational facilities, etc.). ▶ Policy LU-P-32.25 Coordinate with the respective purveyor, special district, agency, or other entities delivering, or who are anticipated to deliver, urban public facilities and services to ensure that growth and development are timed, phased, and consistent with the provision of adequate urban level facilities and services. The County shall conduct the coordination with other providers during Comprehensive Plan periodic updates when growth allocations or levels of service are revisited, or during the development review process. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.26 Ensure the provision of adequate levels of service for urban public facilities and services. Where the County is not the urban public facility or service provider for the unincorporated Urban Growth Area, the County may adopt an Interlocal Agreement with the appropriate service provider. Such agreements, when utilized, shall include the level of urban public facilities and services. ▶ Policy LU-P-32.27 Recognizing that the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area has a limited amount of undeveloped commercial parcels suitable for attracting and accommodating regional commercial development, conduct periodic evaluation of commercial land needs to ensure the adequacy of commercial zones to provide community goods and services and to promote economic development. Refer to the Transportation Element, Non-motorized Trail & Standards, and Goal TR-G-4 LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–142 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-32.28 Provide for on-going review and evaluation of the Port Hadlock / Irondale Unincorporated Urban Growth Area to monitor the rate of development, land supply and availability, market conditions, infrastructure implementation and costs in order to identify constraints to growth in the Urban Growth Area and recommend corrective actions, where appropriate. Urban Level Capital Facilities Goal LU-G-33 Provide infrastructure for the needs of Urban Growth Areas, Master Planned Resorts, and Rural Village Centers, but limit the establishment or expansion of urban-level development and infrastructure to rural residential and small rural commercial crossroads. ▶ Policy LU-P-33.1 Ensure that expansion of urban infrastructure occurs in coordination with designated land uses based on projected growth or land supply needs and will be concurrent with amendments to the comprehensive plan. ▶ Policy LU-P-33.2 Ensure that where the County assumes maintenance responsibilities for infrastructure, the infrastructure is adequately designed to meet the area growth needs and to fulfill the functions the infrastructure is intended to perform. ▶ Policy LU-P-33.3 Require that development provide, plan, or mitigate for, an appropriate level of service for capital facilities including, but not limited to, potable water supply, fire flow, adequate sanitary sewerage treatment and disposal, stormwater management, and roads, including sidewalks where required by adopted urban road standards. ▶ Policy LU-P-33.4 Ensure the planning and implementation of transportation and stormwater management facilities in the unincorporated Urban Growth Area reflects consistency with the goals and policies in the Urban Growth Area Stormwater Management Plan and the Urban Growth Area Transportation Plan adopted as components of this Comprehensive Plan. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–143 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-33.5 Maintain consistency with the Capital Facilities and Utilities Element, as amended. All adopted Level of Service Standards (LOS) for Category A, B and C Public Facilities identified in the Element shall apply to the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area, except as may be modified by or provided for separately in an adopted Urban Growth Area-specific Capital Facility Plan, including the Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area Sewer Facilities Plan, Transportation Plan and Stormwater Management Plan. ▶ Policy LU-P-33.6 In addition to the LOS adopted for public facilities in the Capital Facilities and Utilities Element of this Comprehensive Plan, adopt Urban LOS standards for the following capital facilities and public services in the Port Hadlock / Irondale Unincorporated Urban Growth Area: a. On-Site Septic Sewage Treatment and Disposal: Per Jefferson County Code Chapter 8.15 (On-Site Sewage Disposal Systems) b. Sanitary Sewer: Per the adopted Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area General Sewer Plan and Port Hadlock Wastewater Facility Final Design. c. Stormwater Management: Per the Washington Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (DOE Manual), as amended. d. Transportation: Maintain Level of Service standard “D” or better on all road facilities within Urban Areas (Urban Growth Areas) as established by the Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization (PRTPO), based upon Average Annual Daily Trips. e. Jefferson County Public Utility District Urban Growth Area Public Water System Design Criteria Demand Average Daily Demand (466 GPD/ERU) Maximum Daily Demand (933 GPD/ERU) Fire Flow: The adopted Coordinated Water System Plan (CWSP) for Jefferson County establishes the Fire Flow level of service requirements for the Urban Growth Area Water System. The requirements are identified in Table 4-1 of the CWSP, as may be amended. Water Spout, Jefferson County LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–144 February 2021 Stormwater Management Goal LU-G-34 Minimize the adverse effects on ground and surface water quality and quantity and protect aquatic resources and habitats from stormwater runoff generated within the Irondale and Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area. ▶ Policy LU-P-34.1 Manage stormwater runoff in the Urban Growth Area in compliance with the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code. ▶ Policy LU-P-34.2 Use the technical standards from the Washington Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington to manage stormwater within the Irondale and Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area. ▶ Policy LU-P-34.3 Develop and implement an Irondale and Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area Stormwater Management Program. ▶ Policy LU-P-34.4 Increase the public’s knowledge of stormwater runoff issues and support public involvement in stormwater management by developing and implementing a Stormwater Management Public Education component of the Irondale and Port Hadlock Stormwater Management Program. ▶ Policy LU-P-34.5 Ensure the continued operation of stormwater management facilities by developing and implementing a Stormwater Management Facility Operation and Maintenance component of the Irondale and Port Hadlock Stormwater Management Program. ▶ Policy LU-P-34.6 Ensure that stormwater management activities are effective by developing and implementing a Water Quality Monitoring and Stream Gauging component of the Irondale and Port Hadlock Stormwater Management Program. ▶ Policy LU-P-34.7 Develop a stable and equitable revenue source to fund a Port Hadlock/Irondale Urban Growth Area Stormwater Management Program. ▶ Policy LU-P-34.8 Maintain an inventory of public and private stormwater management facilities within the Urban Growth Area. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–145 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-34.9 Join with State and local agencies and private landowners to plan, finance, and construct regional stormwater management facilities and to remediate existing stormwater management deficiencies. ▶ Policy LU-P-34.10 Minimize adverse stormwater impacts and preserve aquifer recharge by encouraging Low Impact Development design strategies. Transportation Goal LU-G-35 Encourage efficient multimodal transportation systems that are based on regional priorities and coordinated with county and city comprehensive plans, in order to connect people from where they live to where they work, learn and play. ▶ Policy LU-P-35.1 Encourage the use of roadway features that enhance urban qualities by applying urban standards as deemed appropriate in the Urban Growth Area. Make these facilities safe and accessible for all modes of transport, including pedestrians and cyclists. ▶ Policy LU-P-35.2 Require that subdivision and commercial project designs address the following issues: a. Cost effective transit and delivery of emergency services; b. Provisions for all transportation modes, including electric vehicle infrastructure; c. Dedication of rights of way for existing and future transportation needs; d. Motorized and nonmotorized access; e. Sidewalks and bicycle pathways; f. Compatibility between motorized vehicles, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users g. Inclusion of transit and bicycle friendly design elements h. Adequate parking for non-peak period; and i. Frontage improvements and roadway features to meet urban design standards within the Irondale-Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area. j. Freight access and mobility Refer to the Transportation Element, Goals TR-G-4 and TR-G-5. and Appendix C— Transportation Technical Appendix LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–146 February 2021 ▶ Policy LU-P-35.3 Develop a Complete Streets model to all new construction and redevelopment of roadways in the Urban Growth Area to make roadways accessible for all users, including vehicles, bicyclists, public transportation vehicles and riders, and pedestrians of all ages and abilities. Green Space Planning in Urban Growth Area Goal LU-G-36 Identify and protect open space corridors within and abutting the Urban Growth Area. ▶ Policy LU-P-36.1 Tie non-motorized transportation planning to urban open space planning, and consider connectivity of urban/rural greenways. Identify open space corridors and urban separators. Identify open space lands and corridors within Urban Growth Areas. Consider lands useful for recreation, wildlife habitat, trails, and connection of critical areas per RCW 36.70A.160. ▶ Policy LU-P-36.2 Identify implementation strategies and regulatory and non-regulatory techniques to protect the corridors. ▶ Policy LU-P-36.3 Develop innovative ways to apply gross residential density in areas that have planned greenspace or critical area protection areas. ▶ Policy LU-P-36.4 Develop Transfer of Development Rights program to create a market solution using Urban Growth Area density to protect rural lands and resource areas from conversion. ▶ Policy LU-P-36.5 Explore the potential to conserve an open-space corridor along Chimacum Creek, such as through transfer of development rights and on-site density transfer for properties along the creek. Coordinate efforts with Jefferson Land Trust, Jefferson Conservation District preservation and restoration efforts, and Public Works wastewater treatment facility access planning efforts. LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–147 February 2021 1.5 ACTION PLAN Exhibit 1-24 highlights key activities the County can use to implement the Land Use Element over the next eight years (prior to the next periodic update), several in partnership with other entities: EXHIBIT 1-24 Land Use Action Plan Action Description Implement Overlays Address Highway 20 View Corridor Overlay on Zoning Maps and UDC as appropriate. Work with economic development entities on a study and potential location for Highway/Commuter Corridor Overlay. Integrate healthy and active living into system plans and codes Implement goals and policies supporting active living and access to healthy foods, into development plans for UGA, Non-Motorized Transportation & Recreation Plan,, PROS Plan, and into the Unified Development Code. Encourage urban densities in UGAs Address innovative wastewater treatment facilities that do not preclude future urban services. Seek funding for Irondale/Port Hadlock Wastewater Facility Encourage legislative solutions to address needs of rural counties Support the Road Map initiative by the Ruckelshaus Center and other legislative initiatives that address needs of rural counties, particularly affordable housing and living wage jobs. Review LAMIRDS and add additional flexibility to boundaries and uses, meeting GMA requirements. Seek legislative amendments to GMA where appropriate. Economic Development Seek opportunities for additional economic development in Glen Cove. Prioritize Glen Cove and Irondale/Port Hadlock UGA as priority economic development areas. Source: Jefferson County, 2018. Refer to the Economic Development Element for additional information LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–148 February 2021 [ This page intentionally blank ] LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–149 February 2021 Remove prior intentionally blank page from PDF if needed— formatted as a placeholder to ensure each element starts on a right hand spread. Do not publish from this point forward. Remove pages from consolidated PDF. These sections should be updated and copied into their appropriate chapters (TOC, References) as needed. References Employment Security Department and PSRC. (2017, October). 2016 Covered Employment Estimates by Jurisdiction. Seattle, WA. Jefferson County. (1992). County-wide Planning Policies Resolution 128-92. Jefferson County. (2015, October 26). Resolution #38-15. Jefferson County GIS Department. (2018). Retrieved from http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/293/GIS Municipal Research & Services Center of Washington. (2000, March). Nuisance Regulation for Washington Cities and Counties. (MRSC Report No. 49). OFM. (2017). Population Density and Land Area Criteria Used for Rural Area Assistance and Other Programs. Retrieved from https://www.ofm.wa.gov/washington-data- research/population-demographics/population- estimates/population-density/population-density-and-land- area-criteria-used-rural-area-assistance-and-other- programs OFM. (2018). Growth Management Act Population Projections for Counties: 2010 to 2040. Retrieved from https://ofm.wa.gov/washington-data-research/population- demographics/population-forecasts-and-projections/growth- management-act-county-projections/growth-management-act- population-projections-counties-2010-2040-0 The William D. Ruckelshaus Center. (2017). Road Map to Washington's Future: Phase I Pre-Assessment Report. Retrieved April 2018, from http://ruckelshauscenter.wsu.edu/a-roadmap-to-washingtons- future/ LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–150 February 2021 U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). 2010 Census. Retrieved from https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xh tml U.S. Census Bureau. (2016). American Community Survey 2012-2016 5-Year Estimates. Retrieved from https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xh tml Washington State Legislature. (2018). Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Retrieved from http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/ Contents 1 LAND USE 1–1 1.1 Framework 1–1 Land Use Typologies 1–2 Population Projections 1–4 Land Use, Health, & Surface Water Analysis 1–8 Land Use Inventory & Analysis 1–8 Land Use & Public Health 1–10 Review of Surface Water Conditions & Existing Polluted Discharges 1–14 Land Use Strategy 1–16 Land Use & Zoning Designations 1–16 Rural Designations 1–20 Resource Land Designations 1–25 Master Planned Resort Designations 1–26 Urban Growth Area Designations 1–29 Public Designations 1–30 Major Industrial Development & Industrial Land Banks 1–31 Legal Nonconforming Uses & Lots 1–31 Establishing Allowed Uses & Regulations Within Land Designations 1–32 From Rural Character to Development Regulations 1–32 Rural Character & Review of Regulations for Land Uses, Development Patterns, & Nuisances 1–33 Community Planning Efforts 1–35 County-wide Planning Policies 1–38 Rural Areas Policies 1–38 Urban Growth Areas & Services 1–38 LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–151 February 2021 Overarching Land Use Goals & Policies 1–40 General Land Use 1–40 Land Use Consistency with Naval Base Kitsap 1–41 Industrial Development 1–44 Housing 1–44 Public Purpose Lands 1–45 Transportation 1–45 Environment 1–46 Drainage, Flooding, Stormwater Management, & Polluted Discharges 1–49 Flood Hazards 1–50 Groundwater 1–50 Legal Nonconforming Uses 1–53 Permit Processing 1–54 1.2 Rural 1–55 Rural Character 1–55 Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development 1–57 Rural Centers, Crossroads, & MPRs 1–58 Rural Commercial Areas: Centers & Crossroads 1–60 Master Planned Resorts 1–77 Evaluation of Rural Commercial Boundaries 1–81 Periodic Review of LAMIRDs & GMA Implementation Challenges in Rural Counties 1–85 Rural Industrial Lands 1–91 Forest Resource-Based Industrial Zones 1–102 Economic Activities Outside of Rural Commercial Areas 1–104 West Jefferson County 1–105 Rural Goals & Policies 1–107 Rural Character 1–107 Rural Centers, Crossroads, & MPRs 1–110 Rural Industrial Lands 1–115 Economic Activities Outside of Rural Commercial Areas 1–117 Capital Facilities in Rural Areas 1–119 1.3 Resource 1–121 Resource Lands of Long-Term Commercial Significance under the GMA 1–121 Forest 1–121 Mineral 1–121 Agriculture 1–122 Resource Conservation 1–122 Resource Lands Goals & Policies 1–123 1.4 Urban 1–124 Urban Growth Areas 1–124 LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–152 February 2021 Municipal & Unincorporated 1–124 Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area 1–125 History of Planning 1–125 Phased Implementation 1–131 Alternative Phasing Sewer Policy 1–133 Land Use Map & Zoning Designations 1–133 Dwelling Unit & Population Holding Capacity Analysis 1–137 Housing Variety & Affordability 1–137 Urban Growth Area Goals & Policies 1–138 Urban Level Capital Facilities 1–142 Stormwater Management 1–144 Transportation 1–145 Green Space Planning in Urban Growth Area 1–146 1.5 Action Plan 1–147 Exhibit 1-1 General Land Use Categories 1–3 Exhibit 1-2 Jefferson County & City of Port Townsend 20-year Population Projection & Distribution (2018-2038) 1–4 Exhibit 1-3 Population Shares 2010 & 2038 1–5 Exhibit 1-4 Employment: Quimper Peninsula Travel Demand Model Updated 2018 1–7 Exhibit 1-5 Current Land Use Map, 2018 Assessor Information 1–9 Exhibit 1-6 Current Land Use, 2018 Assessor Information 1–10 Exhibit 1-7 Recreation Trail Connections to Schools and Parks of the Irondale-Port Hadlock UGA and Chimacum 1–13 Exhibit 1-8 Land Use / Zoning Map 1–17 Exhibit 1-9 Land Use Designations / Zoning Districts & Acreage 1–18 Exhibit 1-10 Planned Residential Densities 1–19 Exhibit 1-11 Summary of Rural Land Use & Zoning Designations 1–20 Exhibit 1-12 Summary of Overlay Land Use & Zoning Designations 1–23 Exhibit 1-13 Summary of Resource Land Use & Zoning Designations 1–25 Exhibit 1-14 Summary of Master Planned Resort Land Use & Zoning Designations 1–27 Exhibit 1-15 Port Hadlock/Irondale Urban Growth Area Land Use & Zoning Designations 1–29 Exhibit 1-16 Public Land Use Designations & Zoning 1–30 LAND USE Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1–153 February 2021 Exhibit 1-17 Community Planning Areas 1–37 Exhibit 1-18 Location of Rural Commercial Areas & Master Planned Resorts 1–59 Exhibit 1-19 Rural Commercial Area Total Acreage & Infill Acreage 1–83 Exhibit 1-20 Location of Rural Industrial Lands 1–92 Exhibit 1-21 Transitional Rural Zoning 1–135 Exhibit 1-22 Irondale & Port Hadlock Urban Zoning 1–136 Exhibit 1-23 Estimated Total Dwelling Unit & Population Holding Capacity 1–137 Exhibit 1-24 Land Use Action Plan 1–147 Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–1 February 2021 8 Capital Facilities & Utilities 8.1 PURPOSE This Element addresses three essential components of the Comprehensive Plan that supports the community today and the future growth expected by 2038: ▶ Capital Facilities. This element and the Capital Facilities Technical Appendix D address requirements in RCW 36.70A.070(3) and WAC 365-196-415 to provide an inventory, forecast of needs, and plan addressing: water systems, sanitary sewer systems, stormwater facilities, reclaimed water facilities, schools, parks, and recreational facilities, police, and fire protection facilities. ▶ Essential Public Facilities. Essential public facilities are typically those difficult to site, such as airports, This element supports the Vision Statement by ensuring services and infrastructure are available to advance the quality of life for residents, including encouraging innovation in green infrastructure such as low impact development, access to education, adequate public safety services, and advanced utility networks for residents and businesses. Priorities also support mobility and access to community services for active and healthy living. Connection to the Vision Statement Jefferson County CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–2 February 2021 state education facilities, state or regional transportation facilities, state and local correctional facilities, solid waste handling facilities, and others identified in RCW 36.70A.200. ▶ Utilities. The Utilities component addresses the location, capacity, and proposals for utilities, including, but not limited to, electrical lines and telecommunication lines per RCW 36.70A.070(4) and WAC 365-196-420. There is no natural gas service to the county. The Technical Appendices portion of the Comprehensive Plan provides additional supporting details to this element, especially Appendix D, Capital Facility Plan Technical Document. 8.2 CAPITAL FACILITIES Overview The Capital Facilities section ensures that adequate facilities are available to serve existing residents and businesses and future growth as outlined in the Land Use Element. According to WAC 365-196-415(2)(a)(ii), the inventory and analysis of capital facilities must include, at a minimum, water systems, sewer systems, stormwater systems, schools, parks and recreation facilities, police facilities, and fire facilities. Note that utilities (electricity and telecommunications) are addressed in Section 8.4. This Element and the Capital Facility Plan Technical Appendix D addresses these capital facilities and services listed below. The Guiding Plans of service providers support this Element. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–3 February 2021 EXHIBIT 8-1 Capital Facilities & Public Services Provided Capital Facility & Service Topic Providers Serving Unincorporated Territory Guiding Plans Law Enforcement Jefferson County Sherriff Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office Strategic Plan, Comprehensive Version, 2018 Parks and Recreation Jefferson County Jefferson County Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan Update,2015, Jefferson County Parks and Recreation, Department of Public Works Public Administration Jefferson County Jefferson County Strategic Plan, County Administrator’s Office, 2018 Individual operations plans for community centers, maintenance facilities, and animal control facilities Sewer Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA – Jefferson County Port Ludlow – Olympic Water and Sewer Port Hadlock Wastewater System: Urban Growth Area Sewer Facility Plan, 2008 and Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update, 2020 Design Plans & Specifications, 2013 Solid Waste Jefferson County Jefferson County, Solid Waste Management Plan, September 2016 CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–4 February 2021 Capital Facility & Service Topic Providers Serving Unincorporated Territory Guiding Plans Stormwater Jefferson County Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area Stormwater Management Plan, May 2004 Jefferson County Surface Water Management Plan, November 2006 Transportation Jefferson County Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization Jefferson Transit Authority Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area Transportation Plan, May 2004 Quimper Peninsula Travel Demand Model, October 2008 Non-Motorized and Recreational Trails Plan, 2010 Quimper Peninsula Transportation Study, January 2012 Peninsula RTPO Regional Transportation Plan 2035, May 2013 Jefferson County Public Works Transportation Improvement Plan, 2017 Jefferson Transit, Transit Development Plan 2017-2022 & 2016 Annual Report, August 2017 Education Brinnon School District No. 46 Chimacum School District No. 49 Port Townsend School District No. 50 Queets-Clearwater School District No. 20 Quilcene School District No. 48 Individual Operational Plans CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–5 February 2021 Capital Facility & Service Topic Providers Serving Unincorporated Territory Guiding Plans Fire Protection Jefferson County Fire Protect District No. 1 – East Jefferson Fire & Rescue Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 2 – Quilcene Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 3 – Port Ludlow Fire and Rescue Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 4 – Brinnon Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 5 – Discovery Bay - Gardiner Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 6 – Cape George/Kala Point/Beckett Point - Merged Jefferson County Fire District No. 7 – Clearwater-Queets Individual Operational Plans Water Port Townsend Jefferson County Water District No. 1 – Paradise Bay Jefferson County Water District No. 2 – Brinnon Jefferson County Water District No. 3 – Coyle Port Ludlow Drainage District Port of Port Townsend Public Utility District No. 1 of Jefferson County Jefferson County Coordinated Water System Plan, June 1997 Pending Update: Jefferson County Public Utility District No. 1 Water System Plan 2011 Source: BERK Consulting, 2018. For each service, a summary of the conditions, level of service and demand, planning level revenue sources, and planned facilities are provided in the Capital Facilities Technical Appendix D. Levels of service are policy commitments to provide facilities and services within available revenue resources and are also included in the Capital Facilities policies in Section 8.6. In conjunction with its budget, the County may revise this Element, as needed, to add new projects needed to accommodate changing development circumstances, remove projects that have been built, and to reevaluate projects remaining in the inventory. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–6 February 2021 County-wide Planning Policies The County-wide Planning Policy (CWPP) includes many provisions that link the Capital Facility Plan to support for the Land Use plan and particularly the role of such facilities in supporting the growth in Urban Growth Areas (UGAs). EXHIBIT 8-2 Relationship of Capital Facilities Plan to County-wide Planning Policies County-wide Planning Policy Summary & Relationship to Capital Facility Plan Implement RCW 36.70A.110 Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) Use County-City of Port Townsend population forecasts to prepare capital facilities plans. Base designation and expansion of UGAs on the capacity to provide public capital facilities at adopted levels of service. Promotion of contiguous and orderly development and provision of urban services Condition urban development to meet adopted levels of service and contribute its proportionate share towards provision of those facilities. Do not extend urban public facilities beyond UGA boundaries (a requirement of GMA)., unless consistent with Policy CF-P-6.3 and the GMA. Joint County and City of Port Townsend planning within UGAs Coordinate County and City of Port Townsend plans for provision of County-wide capital facilities for public safety, transportation, solid waste, storm water management, and utilities. Siting essential public facilities of County or State-wide significance Do not extend urban public facilities to essential public facilities sited outside of UGAs. County-wide transportation facilities and strategies Guides development of the County’s Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan. Requires development of Levels of Service. County-wide economic development and employment Coordinate Economic Development Plan with the Capital Facilities Element. Rural Areas Include public facilities necessary to support the land use within rural centers. Fiscal impact analysis Conduct a fiscal impact analysis to ensure that the projected cost of public capital facilities can be reasonably supported. Summary of Trends & Opportunities Please see the Capital Facility Plan Technical Appendix D. Generally, County-owned capital facilities can be maintained at a CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–7 February 2021 level of service that requires limited additional facilities as the county grows, Exceptions are law and justice courtroom facilities, parks and recreation, solid waste, and transportation, where growth would require some additional capacity projects over time. See also the Environment Element for policy regarding placement of facilities with consideration of existing climate change mapping and data. 8.3 ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES Overview Essential Public Facilities include those facilities considered difficult to site because of potential adverse impacts related to size, bulk, hazardous characteristics, noise, or public health and safety. CWPP#4 stipulates that the County and its UGAs must identify appropriate land for essential public facilities that meets the needs of the community such as local waste handling and treatment facilities, landfills, drop-box sites and sewage treatment facilities, airports, state educational facilities, essential state public facilities, regional transportation and utility facilities, state and local correctional facilities, and in-patient facilities (including substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities and group homes). These facilities are difficult to site, serve regional or state requirements, or are part of a county-wide service system. RCW 36.70A.200(1) provides clarification as to what constitutes an essential public facility: The comprehensive plan of each county and city that is planning under RCW 36.70A.040 shall include a process for identifying and siting essential public facilities. Essential public facilities include those facilities that are typically difficult to site, such as airports, state education facilities and state or regional transportation facilities as defined in RCW 47.06.140, regional transit authority facilities as defined in RCW 81.112.020, state and local correctional facilities, solid waste handling facilities, and inpatient facilities including substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities, group homes, CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–8 February 2021 and secure community transition facilities as defined in RCW 71.09.020. Implementing rules by the Washington State Department of Commerce at WAC 365-196-550(4)(b)(i) suggest a broad view of what is considered an essential public facility: When identifying essential public facilities, counties and cities should take a broad view of what constitutes a public facility, involving the full range of services to the public provided by the government, substantially funded by the government, contracted for by the government, or provided by private entities subject to public service obligations. The OFM shall maintain a list of those essential state public facilities that are required or likely to be built within the next six years. The OFM may at any time add facilities to the list. (RCW 36.70a.200(4)). In addition to the list maintained by OFM, Jefferson County may identify other additional public facilities that are essential to providing services to residents and without which development cannot occur. Per the GMA, “[n]o local comprehensive plan or development regulation may preclude the siting of essential public facilities.” (RCW 36.70a.200(5)). Essential Public Facilities & Public Purpose Lands Confusion often arises as to the distinction between lands identified for public purposes and those identified for essential public facilities. Essential public facilities can be thought of as a subset of public purpose lands. The table below illustrates this distinction. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–9 February 2021 EXHIBIT 8-3 Distinguishing Public Purpose Lands from Essential Public Facilities Public Purpose Lands Essential Public Facilities FOCUS: Lands needed to accommodate public facilities. Lands needed to provide the full range of services to the public provided by government, substantially funded by government, contracted for by government, or provided by private entities to public service obligations. Examples: Utility Corridors Transportation Corridors Sewage Treatment Facilities Storm water Management Facilities Recreation Facilities Schools Other Public Uses FOCUS: Facilities needed to provide public services and functions that are typically difficult to site. Those public facilities that are usually unwanted by neighborhoods, have unusual site requirements, or other features that complicate the siting process. Examples: Airports Large-scale Transportation Facilities State Educational Facilities Correctional Facilities Solid Waste Handling Facilities & Landfills Inpatient Facilities (Substance Abuse Facilities, Mental Health Facilities & Group Homes). Source: Jefferson County, 2018. Many of the facilities identified in the table above as being “public facilities” located on public purpose lands are dealt with in other sections of this Comprehensive Plan. The facilities in the column on the right of the table are typical essential public facilities and are addressed in this section. Essential Public Facility Designations in Jefferson County Two facilities are designated as essential public facilities in Jefferson County and have unique zoning districts: ▶ County Waste Management Essential Public Facility (CWMEPF): This district addresses facilities needed to provide waste management public services and functions. It applies to the County’s Jacob Miller Solid Waste Facilities at 325 County Landfill Road in Port Townsend. Policy CF-P-7.7 addresses long-range planning for the contingency that Jefferson County may need to plan for a local landfill to respond to global, national, or regional waste management changes. Refer to Jefferson County’s Solid Waste Management Plan as the source for current details. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–10 February 2021 ▶ Airport Essential Public Facility (AEPF): This land use district consists of land owned by the Port of Port Townsend that directly and indirectly supports operations of the Jefferson County International Airport (JCIA) as an essential public facility. See additional information regarding Light Industrial/Manufacturing Overlay in the Land Use Element. It is intended to promote compatible land uses and the long-term economic viability of the JCIA consistent with County goals regarding essential public facilities, the preservation of rural character, and economic development. For each facility there is a management plan: ▶ Jefferson County Solid Waste Management Plan, September 2016 ▶ Jefferson County International Airport Master Plan Update, Reid Middleton and Barnard Dunkelberg Company, Final Report, July 2014 These plans address conditions, operations, facilities, future improvements, and measures to improve compatibility with other uses. As a system plan, the Solid Waste Management Plan also includes a reference to a Master Plan (under development; see page 7-8 Alternative B) and siting criteria for new facilities. County-wide Planning Policies Adopted CWPPs require the County and UGAs to develop a cooperative and structured process, including public involvement at an early stage, to consider the siting of public facilities of a regional, state-wide, or federal nature. Solid waste disposal, correctional, transportation, education, or human service facilities, or any other locally unpopular land uses are examples of those facilities. Any new facilities or major expansions of existing facilities must conform to these locally defined siting procedures described in the strategies section. A legislative (Type V) special use permit process for siting essential public facilities is outlined in Chapter 18.40 JCC. County-wide Planning Policy #4 outlines the County’s approach to the siting of essential public facilities: ▶ The County and incorporated UGAs will jointly develop specific siting criteria for siting essential public facilities. The proposed criteria will be considered in the drafting of comprehensive plan policy addressing this issue. Elements of siting criteria should include, but not be limited to the following: CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–11 February 2021 — proximity to major transportation routes and essential infrastructure. — land use compatibility with surrounding area. — potential environmental impacts. — effects on resource and critical areas. — proximity to UGA. — public costs and benefits including operation and maintenance. — current capacity and location of equivalent facilities. — the existence, within the community, of reasonable alternatives to the proposed activity. ▶ Comprehensive plans and development regulations will not preclude the siting of essential public facilities; however, standards may be generated to ensure that reasonable compatibility with other land uses can be achieved. ▶ Essential public facilities sited outside of UGAs should be self-supporting and not require the extension, construction, or maintenance of urban services and facilities unless no practicable alternative exists. Criteria will be established that address the provision of services when siting an essential public facility. Essential public facilities shall not be located in resource lands or critical areas if incompatible. Summary of Trends & Opportunities The County’s Solid Waste Management Plan (2016) proposes approaches to reducing waste and promoting reuse and composting to benefit the environment and local economy by creating local jobs and allowing residents to stretch budgets, as well as the long-term management of the solid waste system. The JCIA has developed a Master Plan as of 2014 and together with the County can help implement preferred aviation and allowable non-aviation uses to advance the county’s economy. The plan also includes recommendations regarding land use restrictions in general aviation areas and other land use matters. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–12 February 2021 8.4 UTILITIES Electric Utilities Providers Public Utility District #1 of Jefferson County (JPUD), provides electricity to over 90% of the residents of unincorporated Jefferson County. JPUD acquired the assets from Puget Sound Energy on the 1st of April 2013. Their electrical services territory includes Eastern Jefferson County, except for the Brinnon area. As the JPUD serves the vast majority of residents, it is the focus of this electrical utility analysis. Mason County PUD. is a public utility district that provides electricity to 1700 residents of the southeastern portion of Jefferson County in the Brinnon area. The Grays Harbor County PUD. is a public utility district that provides electricity to 172 residents of the southwestern portion of Jefferson County in the Queets/Clearwater and Quinault areas. The Clallam County PUD. is a public utility district that provides electricity to 200 residents of the northwestern portion of Jefferson County in the Hoh River area. Duty to Serve The State's mandated "duty of service" requires electrical utilities to furnish and supply service and facilities that are safe, adequate, efficient, and in all respects, just and reasonable. The JPUD Board of Commissioners applies this standard by reviewing and approving the terms and conditions under which electrical service is provided. These terms and conditions relate to both the cost and levels of service. A key principle underlying this regulatory structure is that utility facilities must be provided on a uniform basis to all customers and equitably recovered through uniform rates. Regulatory law therefore prohibits JPUD from differentiating among jurisdictions as to the cost or levels of service. Jefferson County CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–13 February 2021 JPUD Inventory Service Area and Communities: The JPUD electrical system serving eastern Jefferson County is geographically bounded in general by the Admiralty Inlet to the north, Puget Sound to the east, Hood Canal to the south, and the Olympic National Forest to the west. The JPUD planning subarea for Jefferson County contains approximately 250 square miles and includes the communities (from South to North) of Quilcene, Port Ludlow, Chimacum, Port Hadlock, Gardiner, Nordland, and Port Townsend. There is a wide range of service demand intensities, from undeveloped areas with no demand to areas of high demand commercial customers. System Acquisition: In 2013, JPUD acquired 8 substations, 26.4 miles of 115 kV transmission line, 380 miles of overhead distribution line along with 353 miles of underground distribution line and one operations building with materials storage yard from PSE. As of 2013, there were approximately 19,300 customers with approximately 322,750 megawatt hours sold. (Jefferson County PUD, 2010) Generation: There are no JPUD generation facilities within Jefferson County other than small capacity generation at the Port of Port Townsend. Only the utility transmission network and distribution substations support the JPUD service area. Transmission Network: JPUD purchases and uses Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) for its generation and transmission requirements. The BPA network transports electricity from generation resources to transmission substations, and from transmission substations and switching stations, to distribution substations. Electrical utility service is supplied to Jefferson County by JPUD through the larger regional transmission grid (interconnected system of electric lines and associated equipment) at 500 kV (500,000 volts) and 230 kV (230,000 volts) voltages from distant generating plants along the mid-Columbia River. The region's transmission grid lines carry this power from the generation facilities westerly to the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) Olympia Transmission Substation. From this point, a majority of the Olympic Peninsula, including JPUD's Jefferson County regional loads, are served to the north via the BPA Shelton Transmission Substation to the BPA Fairmount transmission substations. At the Fairmount transmission substation, the power is transformed down from 230 kV to 115 kV and 66kV for delivery to neighborhood distribution substations within the county. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–14 February 2021 Power transformed from 230 kV to 115 kV is provided by two transformers at the BPA Fairmount Transmission Substation. These voltages are used to serve specific Jefferson County distribution substations. BPA Power is also transformed from 230 kV to 115 kV at the JPUD’s Quilcene substation. Distribution Substations: Distribution substations within Jefferson County serve distribution feeder lines (circuits from a distribution substation to the customer, usually energized at 4, 12 or 34 kV). Distribution substations are located at Discovery Bay, Hastings Rd., Irondale, Kearney Street, Port Ludlow, and Quilcene. Current Usage: There are 16,683 residential customers1; average use is 12,000 kWh per customer per year, or 1,000 kWh per month. (EES Consulting, 2017) Per Exhibit 8-4, most of JPUD’s electrical income comes from residential customers. (Jefferson County PUD, 2018) EXHIBIT 8-4 JPUD Electrical Income by Customer Class Source: Jefferson County PUD, 2018. Note: “Int. Schools” refers to “Interruptible Rate for Schools,” a term originating with Puget Sound Energy. 1 This figure is assumed to be population in residential dwellings since 13,922 housing units are estimated County-wide in 2017 per the OFM. County-wide the population equals 31,360 (OFM 2017). Note: “int. Schools” means “Interruptible Rate for Schools,” a term originating with Puget Sound Energy. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–15 February 2021 Electricity: Future Capacity Needs & Requirements Siting of New Facilities: As development occurs within Jefferson County, a proportionate increase in area electrical service demand and resulting service load is anticipated. Due to the service on demand requirements of this utility, it is important that the County and utility providers maintain open lines of communication regarding siting of new facilities. The timing of construction of new and/or expanded facilities will be driven by the rate of growth and the need to improve reliability in an area. Capacity of Electrical Utility Facilities: As the local transmission system is designed as an integral component of a regional power system, development occurring outside the county may have local impacts on system capacity. At the same time, growth in the county will contribute to the electrical service load of the regional power system and the potential need for systems facilities outside the county. Building codes and utility facility siting policies affect the service loads and the capacity to upgrade existing facilities. Future Capacity Needs: Per the Land Use Element, a population increase of 7,816 persons is expected county-wide, with 352 in the future Master Planned Resort in Brinnon. Excluding the Brinnon resort area, which is served by Mason County PUD, the increase in population would be 7,464. Those customers would increase demand for electricity by about 31%. EXHIBIT 8-5 Residential Population Electricity Demand Customers kWh/year Annual kWh Share Current Residential Customers (Population) 16,683 12,000 200,196,000 69% Future Population Growth in Service Area (excluding Brinnon) 7,464 12,000 89,568,000 31% Total 24,147 289,764,000 100% Source: EES Consulting, 2017; BERK Consulting, 2018. In addition, there will be demand from commercial and industrial users. Energy Efficiency: JPUD has an energy efficiency program that includes incentives for conservation projects. From April 2013- April 2016, JPUD spent $1.6 million dollars on energy efficiency projects and incentives. This was estimated to result in 3.6 megawatt hours saved with savings almost equal in share by CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–16 February 2021 industrial, commercial, and residential customers. (Jefferson County PUD, 2016) Energy efficiency programs and trends towards renewable energy can further reduce demand. Future Facilities Requirements: Two capital investments are currently in planning stages: a service area wide meter replacement to a more advanced meter type and an upgraded operations facility. As development occurs, other investments in the distribution system may occur. (Jefferson County PUD, 2017) Telecommunication Utilities Telecommunications Systems Types & Regulations Telecommunications include a wide range of rapidly expanding services, including conventional telephone service, personal wireless services, and video delivery systems. Due to the rapid advances in telecommunications technologies, the subsequent changes in transmission equipment and capabilities, and federal legislation encouraging future development, it is important that the County and telecommunications services providers maintain open lines of communication. The Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC) regulates telecommunications utilities. Because of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, it is anticipated that telecommunications services regulations will continue to be developed and refined. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulates the telecommunications airwaves including radio frequency emissions standards, all antenna and dish structures used for telecommunications services, and is responsible for issuing licenses to operate wireless common carrier services (cellular telephone, personal communication services, mobile radio services, and other wireless common carriers). Local government involvement in regulation of the development of telecommunications services, particularly wireless common carriers, includes identifying systems facilities siting criteria and a permit review process on applications for the placement, construction, or modification of a wireless common carrier facility site. Local governments have been preempted by federal case law from regulating Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) covered facilities. The FAA reviews location and height of proposed CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–17 February 2021 towers to prevent interference with operations of airports and flight paths. The FAA regulates proposed towers that exceed 200 feet and smaller towers located within 20,000 feet of a major airport and 10,000 feet of general aviation airports. The FAA does not have the authority to deny a FCC construction permit, but it can cite a proposed tower as a hazard to navigation. Conventional Telephone CenturyLink (formerly QWest Communications International) provides the majority of conventional telephone service in the county. CenturyLink offers telecommunications services to 25 million customers in 14 western states. Telecommunications regulations require CenturyLink to provide adequate telecommunications services on demand. Cellular Service Cellular service is offered by several providers in the county. Cell towers are located throughout eastern Jefferson County. Facilities identified with potential leases include T-Mobile, Verizon, Cingular, and Monarch. Broadband JPUD and Northwest Open Access Network (NoaNet) installed a fiber optic and wireless network in 2013. The project was funded through the federal Broadband Technology Opportunity Program (BTOP) and the American Recovery Act (2010). The intent was to provide better and more affordable broadband to unserved and underserved “anchor institutions” such as federal, state, and local government, emergency services, education, and medical facilities. Many such facilities in Jefferson County are now connected with fiber or wireless drops, but most are not currently receiving service through the new network at this time for a variety of reasons (cost, existing contracts with service providers, etc.). CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–18 February 2021 EXHIBIT 8-6 Overhead & Underground Fiber Optic System Location Note: map may not show all current trunk lines of NOANET broadband service, and those areas that receive service through wireless connection. Source: Jefferson County PUD JPUD owns the network and has been utilizing it for electrical monitoring and operational purposes. NoaNet has been selling and managing business services on the network for the JPUD under an operations and maintenance agreement. Currently, the JPUD does not have the authority to provide services to end users and can only sell wholesale service to other Internet Service Providers (ISPs). CenturyLink provides digital subscriber line (DSL) services throughout the county across its fiber optic and copper service lines. Broadband DSL is not available everywhere there is conventional telephone service in Jefferson County. Several local ISPs resell CenturyLink DSL circuits. Telephone: Future Capacity Needs & Requirements Conventional Telephone: State law requires CenturyLink to provide adequate telecommunications services on demand. WAC 480-120- 071(3) requires establishment of a line extension policy, which is contained in Quest's tariff WNU-24 Schedule 9, filed with the State of Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC). Chapter 480-120 also contains performance standards. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–19 February 2021 The needs of its Jefferson County customers drive CenturyLink’s construction planning. As the county grows and telecommunications services evolve, facilities are upgraded to ensure adequate service levels. CenturyLink’s goal is to maintain routes at 85% capacity. When usage exceeds 85%, additional facilities will be planned, budgeted, and installed. Wireless Common Carriers (Including Cellular Phone Service): Unlike other utilities, the cellular phone industry does not necessarily conduct long-range strategic facilities planning. Market demand is analyzed to determine expansions into new service areas. Cellular phone service can be expanded in a given area to provide better service to cellular customers in two ways: ▶ Extending the coverage to new areas, or ▶ Increasing the capacity of the system within the current service area. A decision to expand the system depends on several factors. First, the number of current customers within the area and the capacity of the current system are analyzed to identify the need to expand. Second, the quality of service within the area is continually evaluated, both electronically, at the switching equipment, and through feedback from customers. If there are a significant number of service failures reported, including dropped calls, continuous busy signals, or an "all circuits are busy" message, the capacity of the system must be evaluated and usually improved to maintain consumer market share. Third, the FCC license granted to the cellular carrier requires that service be provided to 75% of its Cellular Geographical Service Area (CSGA) within five years from the date the license is granted. Maintaining a high quality, interference-free service is essential to comply with these FCC requirements. In general, it is anticipated that additional sites within the Jefferson County service area will be located responsive to customer service needs, generally following increases in population densities and high-volume traffic corridors. County-wide Planning Policies CWPPs address adequate utilities within UGAs (#3), and the coordination of the Economic Development Element with the Utility Element (#7). CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–20 February 2021 Summary of Trends & Opportunities Since 1998 with the founding of the Comprehensive Plan, service providers have changed and advanced with the JPUD purchasing the electrical power system from Puget Sound Energy, offering lower rates, and upgraded infrastructure. An ongoing and expanding opportunity in power service is conservation through energy efficiency and use of natural energy sources through solar, wind, and waves. Telecommunication services have expanded with the installation of broadband fiber optic cables, also under the heading of JPUD. These changes offer opportunities to improve the quality of life of Jefferson County residents and to attract businesses as identified in the Economic Development Element. As noted in the State of Washington’s Integrated Climate Response Strategy “Preparing for a Changing Climate,” climate change will affect infrastructure including “increased damage costs and disruptions from more frequent and severe flooding, wildfires, changes in energy supply and demand, and other climate impacts.” The strategy also notes that there could be increased maintenance and operations, travel delays and disruptions, as well as effects on emergency evacuation routes. (Washington State Department of Ecology, 2012) Some adaptation measures have been identified by state and local planners, including: ▶ Protecting infrastructure by strengthening dikes and levees and by using other hard or soft structural approaches. ▶ Strengthening infrastructure to better withstand climate impacts (such as flooding or extreme heat) through improved materials, design, and construction techniques. ▶ Raising or elevating infrastructure to protect it from flooding. ▶ Relocating, decommissioning or abandoning selected infrastructure where the costs of protection and maintenance outweighs the benefit. ▶ Adjusting Benefit-Cost Analysis to account for additional impacts of climate change to life cycle of infrastructure. ▶ Updating zoning to prohibit critical infrastructures in vulnerable coastal zones; relocate or protect critical assets such as railroads, major arterials, water treatment plants and power stations; consider recreational uses and habitat restoration for storm surge buffers. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–21 February 2021 (Washington State Department of Ecology, 2012) (American Planning Association Washington Chapter, 2015) 8.5 CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES PLAN Capital Facilities The Capital Facilities Plan Technical Appendix D provides a plan for future facilities and anticipated revenue to support new growth projected in the Land Use Element. Essential Public Facilities The policies of this element and the Unified Development Code provide the framework for the process for designating and siting Essential Public Facilities. Two facilities have been designated to date, and have plans that guide their long-term uses, activities, investments, and operations, including compatibility with surrounding uses: ▶ Jefferson County Solid Waste Management Plan, September 2016 ▶ Jefferson County International Airport Master Plan Update, Reid Middleton and Barnard Dunkelberg Company, Final Report, July 2014 Utilities Power and telecommunication service providers maintain plans for service, particularly JPUD, who is advancing a strategic facilities plan for its operational headquarters, new advanced electrical meters county-wide. JPUD is helping to manage electrical demand by offering incentives for increased efficiencies such as through rebates on documented expenses for approved home or commercial energy improvements. As of 2018, JPUD is evaluating expanding this high-speed open- access broadband network to residences in Jefferson County, to where there is demand to build broadband infrastructure. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–22 February 2021 The County can support JPUD energy conservation and broadband implementation with appropriate permit procedures, and potential development incentives (e.g. energy conservation above and beyond State Energy Code may receive some development incentives in UGAs). These efforts dovetail with Economic Development Element strategies to retain and attract a workforce and businesses. 8.6 GOALS & POLICIES Capital Facilities The Capital Facility Plan unites all the elements of this Comprehensive Plan. The function of the Plan is to establish a viable planning link between inventory, levels of service (LOS), and financing for future public facilities. The goals state the general growth management intentions of the County. The policies are guidelines for decisions on how goals will be achieved. Strategies describe specific programs or actions to implement policies. General Goal CF-G-1 Establish appropriate levels of service for public facilities. ▶ Policy CF-P-1.1 Levels of service for Public Facilities: Establish the following LOS for categories of public facilities and apply the standards as follows: Category A Public Facilities are the public facilities owned or operated by Jefferson County subject to concurrency. — Category A LOS: Maintain LOS C or better for rural road facilities based upon Average Annual Daily Trips. Maintain LOS D or better on all road facilities within Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) Master Planned Resorts, and Highways of Regional Significance as established by the Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization (PRTPO), based upon Average Annual Daily Trips. See Transportation Technical Appendix C. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–23 February 2021 Category A LOS will guide the County's capital budget and capital improvements program beginning with the 2018 fiscal year. Category B Public Facilities are the public facilities owned or operated by Jefferson County subject to LOS standards. — Category B LOS: ▪ Animal Control Shelter: 58 square feet per 1,000 pop. 2038 ▪ Community Centers: 1,005 square feet per 1,000 pop. 2038 ▪ Corrections Inmate Facilities: 1.48 beds per 1,000 pop. 2038 ▪ County Sheriff Facilities: 200 square feet per 1,000 pop. 2038 ▪ County Justice Facilities: 515 square feet per 1,000 pop. 2038 ▪ County General Administrative Facilities: 1,020 square feet per 1,000 pop. 2038 ▪ County Maintenance Shop Facilities: 825 square feet per 1,000 pop. 2038 ▪ Regional Parks: 19.07 acres per 1,000 pop. 2023 and 18.43 acres per 1,000 pop. 2038. ▪ Community Parks: 3.05 acres per 1,000 pop. 2023 and 2.94 acres per 1,000 pop. 2038 ▪ Neighborhood Parks: 0.16 acres per 1,000 pop. 2023 and 0.18 acres per 1,000 pop. 2038 ▪ Open Space: 4.85 acres per 1,000 pop. 2023 and 4.69 acres per 1,000 pop. 2038. ▪ Special Use: 3.24 acres per 1,000 pop. 2023 and 3.24 acres per 1,000 pop. 2038. ▪ Trails: base LOS 0.52 miles per 1,000 pop. 2023 and 2038; target LOS if funding allows, 1.83 miles per 1,000 pop. 2023 and 2038 ▪ Solid Waste, Garbage: 3.12 pounds per capita per day 2038 ▪ Solid Waste, Recycle: 2.8 pounds per capita per day 2038 ▪ Stormwater Management Facilities: Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington ▪ Water System Facilities: Pending ▪ Sewer Systems: Pending Category B LOS will guide the County's capital budget decisions including the capital improvements program beginning with the 2018 fiscal year. Category C Public Facilities are the following facilities owned or operated by the Federal or State government, independent districts, the City of Port Townsend (outside the incorporated limits), and private entities. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–24 February 2021 — Category C LOS: Roads: Same as for Category A above. Sanitary Sewer: ▪ City of Port Townsend: 260 gallons per day/ERU ▪ Port Ludlow (Ludlow Water Co., Inc.): 230 gallons per day/ERU ▪ Port Hadlock: 132 gallons per day/ERU Water: ▪ City of Port Townsend: 840 gallons per day/ERU ▪ Port Ludlow (Ludlow Water Co., Inc.):160 gallons per day/ERU ▪ PUD No.1: 200 gallons per day/ERU ▪ Tri-Area (City of Port Townsend): 800 gallons per day/ERU Airport: ▪ JCIA: Pursuant to JCIA Master Plan 2014 or successor. Fire and Emergency Medical Services: ▪ Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 1 - East Jefferson Fire and Rescue: 0.29 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 ▪ Fire District 2 (Quilcene): 2.0 fire units in service per 1,000 pop. and 1.4 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 ▪ Fire District 3 (Port Ludlow): 1.0 fire units in service per 1,000 pop. and 0.8 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 ▪ Fire District 4 (Brinnon): 1.25 fire units in service per 1,000 pop. and 0.5 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 ▪ Fire District 5 (Gardiner): 3.0 fire units in service per 1,000 pop. and 3.0 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 ▪ Fire District 7 (Clearwater): 2.0 fire units in service per 1,000 pop. and 0 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 ▪ Port Townsend Fire Department: 0.29 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 Hospital: ▪ Jefferson County Public Hospital District No. 2:: 0.75 beds per 1,000 population 2023 and 2038 Library: ▪ Jefferson County Library. 1:433 square feet per 1,000 population 2023 and 2038 School District facilities: ▪ Brinnon School District 46: K-8: Not to exceed 23 students/classroom CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–25 February 2021 ▪ Chimacum School District 49: K-12: Not to exceed 27 students/classroom ▪ Port Townsend School District 50: K-3: Not to exceed 26 students/classroom ▪ Port Townsend School District 50: 4-6: Not to exceed 30 students/classroom ▪ Port Townsend School District 50: 7-12: Not to exceed 34 students/classroom ▪ Queets/Clearwater School Dist.20: K-12: Not to exceed 26 students/classroom ▪ Quilcene School District 48: K-12: Not to exceed 26 students/classroom ▪ Quillayute School District 402: K-12: Not to exceed 26 students/classroom ▪ Sequim School District 323: K-12: Not to exceed 26 students/classroom Transit: ▪ Support the operational and comprehensive planning of Jefferson Transit Authority to reduce auto dependency and enhance regional trips by transit ridership and TDM. Jefferson County defaults to Jefferson Transit Authority’s definition and findings of transit levels of service, and will collaborate with Jefferson Transit Authority on the county’s transit system service needs. Misc.: In addition to the LOS standards outlined above, the policies of the Land Use Element relating to the development and financing of public facilities in rural and urban areas constitute additional LOS standards in accordance with the County-wide Planning Policies. Category C LOS guide the capital budget decisions and the capital improvements programs of the appropriate entities. ▶ Policy CF-P-1.2 Urban and Rural LOS: Jefferson County may create different Levels of Service for Urban Growth Areas and rural areas of the county. ▶ Policy CF-P-1.3 Level of Service in Unincorporated Urban Growth Areas: Levels of Service for public facilities in the unincorporated portion of Urban Growth Areas are the same as the County's adopted standards. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–26 February 2021 Goal CF-G-2 Implement a Six-Year Capital Facilities Concept Plan that ensures that County- owned public facilities meet the established Level of Service. ▶ Policy CF-P-2.1 Determining Public Facility Needs: Determine the quantity of capital improvements that are needed to eliminate existing deficiencies and to maintain the Level of Service standards for Category A and B public facilities. ▶ Policy CF-P-2.2 Priorities: Establish priorities among capital improvements projects through amendments to the Capital Facilities Element and the County’s Six-Year Capital Facilities Concept and Transportation Improvement Plans. ▶ Policy CF-P-2.3 Financial Feasibility: Ensure that the estimated cost of all capital improvements does not exceed a conservative estimate of available revenues. A conservative estimate need not be the lowest estimate, but does not exceed the most likely estimate. It does not include revenues that require approval by a referendum, if that referendum has been rejected. ▶ Policy CF-P-2.4 Budget Appropriation for Capital Improvements: Include an appropriation in the annual budget for all of the capital improvement projects listed in the Capital Facilities Element for that year. Omit from the budget capital improvements for which there is a binding agreement with another party to fund those capital improvements in the same fiscal year. ▶ Policy CF-P-2.5 Monitoring: Monitor the implementation of the capital improvement program and development to ensure that the Land Use, Transportation, and Capital Facilities Elements are coordinated and consistent, and that established Level of Service standards for public facilities are achieved. ▶ Policy CF-P-2.6 Financing Policies: Finance capital improvements and manage debt consistent with Capital Improvement Plans and the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan. ▶ Policy CF-P-2.7 Operating and Maintenance Costs: Provide public facilities or accept their provision by other entities only if Jefferson County or the other entity is able to pay for subsequent operating and maintenance costs CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–27 February 2021 ▶ Policy CF-P-2.8 Revenues Requiring Referendum: Revise the Level of Service standard for a public facility if either revenue for capital improvements for that facility requires approval by referendum and a referendum has not been held, or a referendum was held, and it did not meet the approval of the public. ▶ Policy CF-P-2.9 Financial Responsibility: Determine through a public process how to apportion the fair share of funding capital improvements for County-owned public facilities between existing and future developments. ▶ Policy CF-P-2.10 Contingent Revenue: Condition approval of private developments that require public facility capital improvements, which will be financed by contingent sources of revenue, upon acquisition of that revenue. An example of a contingent source of revenue is debt that requires approval by a referendum. Make provision in the approval conditions for substituting a comparable amount of existing revenue if the contingent funding sources are not approved. Goal CF-G-3 Ensure that public facilities are adequate to support proposed development at the adopted Level of Service. ▶ Policy CF-P-3.1 Adequate Public Facility Concurrency: Issue development approvals only after a permit decision has been made that there is sufficient capacity of Category A public facilities to meet the Level of Service for existing and proposed development concurrent with the proposed development. ▶ Policy CF-P-3.2 Planning Level of Service: If the Level of Service for Category B or C public facilities are not achieved, the funding will either be increased to achieve the Level of Service, or the Level of Service will be modified through amendment to the Plan, and/or other Comprehensive Plan Elements will be amended. ▶ Policy CF-P-3.3 Urban Growth Area Tiers: Designate "tiers" within designated Urban Growth Areas to discourage urban sprawl and leapfrog development and to encourage development of adequate public facilities and services concurrent with development as follows: — First Tier: Includes existing commercial centers and urbanized areas for which the Six-Year Capital Facilities Concept Plan provides urban services and facilities. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–28 February 2021 — Second Tier: Areas for which urban services and facilities are planned for years 7-20 of the 20-year planning period. Urban services and facilities will be provided by the developer concurrent with development, or by public providers by implementing all or a portion of an approved capital facilities plan. ▶ Policy CF-P-3.4 Financing: Providers of public facilities may require users of those facilities to pay for a portion of their cost and/or may require new development to pay impact fees, capacity fees, system distribution charges, special assessments, and/or mitigation payments allowed by law. ▶ Policy CF-P-3.5 Reserving Public Facility Capacity: Reserve public facility capacity for vested development approvals that were issued prior to the adoption of this Comprehensive Plan. Goal CF-G-4 Ensure that all capital improvements are made in conformance with the goals and policies of the other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. ▶ Policy CF-P-4.1 Consistency: Locate all Category A and B public facility capital improvements in conformance with the adopted land use map and the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. ▶ Policy CF-P-4.2 Integration and Implementation: Integrate land use planning and decisions with planning and decisions for public facility capital improvements. ▶ Policy CF-P-4.3 Consider potential effects of climate change when making siting decisions for capital facilities, also with consideration of the land use and environment goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. ▶ Policy CF-P-4.4 Implement inter-local agreements with municipalities and other entities to coordinate efficient provision of public facilities consistent with the Capital Facilities Element. ▶ Policy CF-P-4.5 Planning Coordination: Establish inter- local or joint planning agreements with municipalities and other providers of public facilities to coordinate planning for and development of Urban Growth Areas. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–29 February 2021 ▶ Policy CF-P-4.6 Fiscal Coordination: Coordinate funding of public facilities, including tax revenue sharing, the provision of regional services, and annexations through the development of inter-local agreements. Potable Water In addition to the following potable water goal and policies, the Environment Element contains further discussion of rural water service as well as supporting goals and policies. Goal CF-G-5 Promote coordination of water utility planning among purveyors, government agencies, and citizens to ensure an adequate potable water system, to protect the quality of the water supply, and to conform to the Comprehensive Plan. ▶ Policy CF-P-5.1 Ensure the creation and the extension of public water supply systems outside Urban Growth Areas is consistent with the rural densities specified in the Land Use Element and is financed by the benefited properties and not the general rate payer. ▶ Policy CF-P-5.2 Participate in and assist the facilitation of regional discussions and analyses on water quality and quantity issues, including water supply affects from climate change, through the Jefferson County Water Users Coordinating Committee (WUCC), the Water Resources Council and other regional forums. ▶ Policy CF-P-5.3 Periodically review and update the adopted Jefferson County Coordinated Water System Plan (CWSP) incorporating the adopted land use, population allocations, and pertinent policies identified in the Comprehensive Plan. ▶ Policy CF-P-5.4 Take an active role in reviewing and approving Satellite Management Agencies that are allowed to own and operate multiple water systems that are not physically connected (satellite systems). ▶ Policy CF-P-5.5 During periodic review of the Critical Areas Ordinance, analyze current data to identify and improve processes that may reduce the risk of salt water intrusion. Water Tanks at Kala Point, Jefferson County CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–30 February 2021 ▶ Policy CF-P-5.6 Work to implement a long-term ground water quantity and quality monitoring program for basins that provide domestic water supplies. ▶ Policy CF-P-5.7 Work with purveyors to promote the use of unaffected upland water sources and other alternative supplies, where appropriate, to supply new and existing development in affected areas. ▶ Policy CF-P-5.8 Support implementation of conservation strategies that reduce average annual and peak day water use for public and individual water systems. ▶ Policy CF-P-5.9 Recognize the authority of Public Utility District #1 pursuant to Title 54 RCW and other applicable statutes. The County will cooperate with Public Utility District #1 to develop final development regulations consistent with that authority. Sewer & Wastewater Goal CF-G-6 Promote sanitary sewer systems that accommodate growth, are cost-effective to construct and operate, and are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. ▶ Policy CF-P-6.1 Plan sanitary sewer system sizing, phasing, development, and expansion within urban growth areas to accommodate the allocated population and planned urban development to the greatest extent possible within the current planning period; while also planning implementation phases that provide service at the greatest cost- effectiveness. ▶ Policy CF-P-6.2 Encourage development of community septic systems in Rural Centers to protect public health, the environment, and foster a reliable, integrated collection system. In areas with water quality concerns that are or appear to be related to problems associated with individual septic systems, Jefferson County supports utilizing a range of sewage treatment options, including community drainfields and centralized systems, subject to State law. ▶ Policy CF-P-6.3 New urban public services sanitary sewer systems will only be provided within a UGA and will not be extended beyond a UGA unless: CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–31 February 2021 -It is a necessary response to protect basic public health, safety, and the environment; the sewer, extension, or connection is financially supportable at rural densities; and the sewer, connection, or extension does not permit urban development; -It is necessary to support a Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development (LAMIRD) consistent with the County-wide Planning Policies; -It is necessary to provide service to an essential public facility if no practicable alternative exists to site the essential public facility in an Urban Growth Area; or, -It supports a rural school serving both rural and urban student populations, consistent with state law. deemed to be an essential public service to mitigate a threat to public health, safety, or general welfare. Existing sanitary sewer treatment facility capacity will not be used as a justification for expansion of a sewer system or development inconsistent with County-wide Planning Policies and the Comprehensive Plan. ▶ Policy CF-P-6.4 Encourage the use of water-conserving fixtures with new systems or services. ▶ Policy CF-P-6.5 Consider the full range of actions that will enable urban development to occur in a UGA, including urban development initially on Large Onsite Septic Systems to accommodate growth, affordable housing, economic development, and environmental protection in advance of an operational sanitary sewer system. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–32 February 2021 Solid Waste Goal CF-G-7 Provide solid waste facilities and programs through guidance of a coordinated, comprehensive solid waste management plan meeting the requirements of the Solid Waste Management Act, Chapter 70.95 RCW, and as set forth in the Jefferson County Solid Waste Management Plan, as amended, and functioning within the frameworks of the Jefferson County and City of Port Townsend Comprehensive Plans. ▶ Policy CF-P-7.1 Implement, to the fullest extent possible, the prioritized waste reduction recommendations of the Jefferson County Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP, 2016, Chapter 3, as amended), including programs and education regarding reducing and reusing material before it enters the waste-stream, diverting, reusing and recycling materials to keep out of the waste stream, and/or pricing disincentives to reduce waste. ▶ Policy CF-P-7.2 Implement, to the fullest extent possible, the prioritized recycling recommendations of the Jefferson County Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP, 2016, Chapter 4, as amended), including programs and education to increase access to recycling services and increase recycling rates. ▶ Policy CF-P-7.3 Implement, to the fullest extent possible, the prioritized organics recommendations of the Jefferson County Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP, 2016, Chapter 5, as amended), including programs and education regarding composting, diversion from waste-stream, and other alternatives for handling residential and commercial food wastes and pet wastes. ▶ Policy CF-P-7.4 Implement, to the fullest extent possible, the recommendations of the Jefferson County Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP, 2016, Chapter 6, as amended) for solid waste collection, transfer, disposal, handling of special wastes, administration, and public education. Identify and implement appropriate measures to ensure mitigation of adverse environmental impacts associated with solid waste collection activities. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–33 February 2021 ▶ Policy CF-P-7.5 Maintain the Solid Waste Advisory Committee involving citizens, waste management providers, regulatory agency representatives, the County, and other affected interests to identify methods for efficient and practical solid waste management, including small and moderate-risk waste handling strategies. ▶ Policy CF-P-7.6 If incentive programs fail to reach the waste reduction goals identified in the Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP, 2016, as amended), consider mandatory programs to the extent allowable by State law. ▶ Policy CF-P-7.7 Identify and preserve for future use solid waste facility sites, including potential landfill sites, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Solid Waste Management Plan. ▶ Policy CF-P-7.8 Ensure reclamation of areas currently serving as solid waste disposal facilities to promote the recovery of such areas for future functional land uses. Surface Water Management Goal CF-G-8 Manage surface water consistent with the Jefferson County Surface Water Management Plan (2006, or as amended) and watershed management plans to minimize adverse impacts from development. ▶ Policy CF-P-8.1 Participate with other agencies to undertake joint planning, financing, and implementation of regional storm water management facilities. ▶ Policy CF-P-8.2 Coordinate with state, regional and local agencies to develop and implement policies for surface water and storm water management. ▶ Policy CF-P-8.3 Consider the use of storm water facilities, when appropriate, as meeting the requirements for open space or habitat conservation corridors. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–34 February 2021 Essential Public Facilities Goal CF-G-9 Regulate the siting of essential public facilities consistent with the GMA and to meet public service needs. ▶ Policy CF-P-9.1 Utilize the following siting criteria as the basis for siting new essential public facilities or for the expansion of existing essential public facilities: a. Proximity to major transportation routes and essential infrastructure; b. Land use compatibility with surrounding areas; c. Potential environmental impacts by the facility as well as to the facility, including siting considerations regarding effects of climate change; d. Effects on resource and critical areas; e. Proximity to Urban Growth Areas f. Public costs and benefits including operation and maintenance; g. Current capacity and location of equivalent facilities; and, h. The existence, within the community, of reasonable alternatives to the proposed activity. i. Other criteria as determined relevant to the specific essential public facility, or criteria developed with Port Townsend or the Port Hadlock/Irondale unincorporated Urban Growth Area community. ▶ Policy CF-P-9.2 Establish an interjurisdictional approach to siting essential public facilities. ▶ Policy CF-P-9.3 Identify and designate essential public facilities of state-wide, County-wide and local significance and incorporate into the County Comprehensive Plan and Map and the County-wide Planning Policy. ▶ Policy CF-P-9.4 Ensure that the Comprehensive Plan and implementing regulations do not preclude the siting of essential public facilities. ▶ Policy CF-P-9.5 Adopt and maintain development regulations that ensure that siting of essential public facilities is consistent with the elements of the Comprehensive Plans of both the County and City of Port Townsend, as well as, the siting criteria jointly established by the County and its Urban Growth Areas. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–35 February 2021 ▶ Policy CF-P-9.6 Adopt and maintain development regulations for essential public facilities in conjunction with the City of Port Townsend, which consider the following factors: a. Specific facility requirements including, but not limited to, acreage requirements, transportation needs, availability of alternative sites, and infrastructure and services required by the facility. 1. Minimum acreage 2. Accessibility 3. Transportation needs and services 4. Supporting public facility and public service needs and availability thereof 5. Health and safety 6. Site design 7. Zoning of the site 8. Availability of alternative sites 9. Community-wide distribution of facilities 10. Capacity and location of equivalent facilities 11. State and federal siting requirements b. Impacts of the facility including, but not limited to, compatibility with adjacent land uses, environmental impacts, and transportation. 1. Land use compatibility 2. Existing land use and development in adjacent and surrounding areas 3. Existing zoning of surrounding areas 4. Existing Comprehensive Plan designation for surrounding areas 5. Present and proposed population density of surrounding area 6. Environmental impacts and opportunities to mitigate environmental impacts 7. Effect on agricultural, forest or mineral lands, critical areas, and historic, archaeological, and cultural sites 8. Effect on areas outside of Jefferson County 9. Effect on the likelihood of associated development 10. Effect on public costs including operating and maintenance 11. Proximity to Urban Growth Areas 12. Proximity to major transportation routes and essential infrastructure 13. Current capacity and location of equivalent facilities 14. Public costs and benefits including operation and maintenance 15. The existence, within the community, of reasonable alternatives to proposed activity CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–36 February 2021 c. Impacts of the facility siting on Urban Growth Area designations and policies including, but not limited to, proximity to existing Urban Growth Areas, compatibility with existing Urban Growth Areas and their associated development and the urban characteristics of the proposed facility. 1. Urban nature of facility 2. Existing urban growth near facility site 3. Compatibility or urban growth with the facility 4. Compatibility of facility siting with respect to Urban Growth Area boundaries ▶ Policy CF-P-9.7 Adopt and maintain development regulations for essential public facilities which specify: a. The time required for construction b. Property acquisition c. Control of on-site and off-site impacts during construction d. Expediting and streamlining necessary government approvals and permits if all other elements of the County policies have been met. e. The quasi-public or public nature of the facility, balancing the need for the facility against the external impacts generated by its siting and the availability of alternative sites with lesser impacts. ▶ Policy CF-P-9.8 Adopt and maintain Unified Development Code updates for essential public facilities which include standards and criteria related to: a. Facility operations b. Health and safety c. Nuisance effects d. Maintenance of standards congruent with applicable governmental regulations, particularly as they may change and become more stringent over time. ▶ Policy CF-P-9.9 Ensure that new essential public facilities or the expansion of existing essential public facilities sited outside of Urban Growth Areas are self- supporting and do not require the extension or construction of urban services and facilities unless no practicable alternative exists. ▶ Policy CF-P-9.10 Ensure that Jefferson County's policies and regulations on essential public facility siting are coordinated with and advance other planning goals. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–37 February 2021 ▶ Policy CF-P-9.11 Ensure that where possible, essential public facility sites are used jointly for public benefit. ▶ Policy CF-P-9.12 Ensure that affected agencies and citizens, adjacent jurisdictions, and other interested parties are given adequate notice and opportunity for meaningful participation in decisions on siting essential public facilities. ▶ Policy CF-P-9.13 Establish a review body with specified procedures established to hear appeals of site selection for essential public facilities. ▶ Policy CF-P-9.14 Combine public hearings for permits required by federal and/or state law for essential public facilities with any public hearing required by County development regulations whenever feasible. ▶ Policy CF-P-9.15 Require any state essential public facility included on the list maintained by the Office of Financial Management (OFM) and proposed for siting within Jefferson County to be subject to the same siting process as identified in both the County Comprehensive Plan and development regulations. ▶ Policy CF-P-9.16 Develop standards to allow reclamation of waste disposal sites to other land uses. ▶ Policy CF-P-9.17 Evaluate whether the County can be waste disposal self-sufficient for the next twenty (20) years. Goal CF-G-10 Ensure the continued viability of the Jefferson County International Airport as a transportation hub. ▶ Policy CF-P-10.1 Promote uses which are clearly identified as aviation support facilities or aviation related development in conformance with the airport’s designation as an essential public facility. Other secondary uses may be allowed consistent with the Jefferson County International Airport Master Plan Update 2014 or its successor when endorsed by the County and implemented in development regulations. Jefferson County International Airport, Port of Port Townsend CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–38 February 2021 CF-P-10.1.1 Aviation Support Facilities are those uses which directly support the operation of the Jefferson County Airport. CF-P-10.1.2 Aviation Related Development are those uses which are reliant upon the airport for their business. ▶ Policy CF-P-10.2 Cooperate with the Port of Port Townsend to implement the Jefferson County International Airport Master Plan Update 2014 or its successor to guide future development at the Jefferson County International Airport. This sub-area plan and its implementing regulations may allow non-aviation uses and activities that are compatible with the airport facility and surrounding area. Consider the following criteria for all new uses and activities proposed for siting at the Jefferson County International Airport and all plans for facilities expansion in the plan and associated development regulations: a. Compatibility with airport operations as an essential public facility; b. Provision of infrastructure consistent with the requirements of the GMA; c. Land use compatibility with surrounding area; d. Potential environmental impacts; e. Availability of alternative sites; f. Public health and safety; and g. Sub-area plan amendment process for possible future acquisition of adjacent properties. Goal CF-G-11 Ensure continuation of the airport as a safe and efficient essential public facility. ▶ Policy CF-P-11.1 Develop and maintain an “Airport Overlay Zone” for Jefferson County International Airport which: — Discourages the siting of new, incompatible land uses adjacent to the airport; — Establishes a noise overlay zone; — Identifies and regulates land uses within a “runway protection zone;” — Identifies and regulates land uses within an “airport approach zone;” and, CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–39 February 2021 — Regulates obstacles in accordance with Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) 77 until the “Airport Overlay Zone” is established for the JCIA. ▶ Policy CF-P-11.2 Contingent upon the results of the “Glen Cove/Tri-Area Special Study,” review and, if necessary, amend the Jefferson County International Airport section of this Capital Facilities and Utilities Element. ▶ Policy CF-P-11.3 Limit and regulate all uses within the Jefferson County International Airport Runway Protection Zone, except for facilities and structures determined necessary to ensure the safe operation of aircraft. ▶ Policy CF-P-11.4 Prohibit any new use which involves release of airborne substances, such as steam, dust, and smoke which interfere with aircraft operations within the Airport Approach or Runway Protection Zones. ▶ Policy CF-P-11.5 Prohibit any new uses which emit light, direct or indirect (reflections), which may interfere with a pilot’s vision within the Airport Approach or Runway Protection Zones. ▶ Policy CF-P-11.6 Install facilities which emit electrical currents in a manner that does not interfere with communication systems or navigational equipment. ▶ Policy CF-P-11.7 Prohibit any new uses that attract concentrations of birds or waterfowl (i.e., mixed solid waste landfill disposal facilities, waste transfer facilities, feeding stations, and the growth of certain vegetation) in the Airport Approach or Runway Protection Zones. ▶ Policy CF-P-11.8 Encourage the Port of Port Townsend to continue its efforts to mitigate noise conflicts at JCIA. ▶ Policy CF-P-11.9 Encourage the commitment between Jefferson County and the Port of Port Townsend to coordinate individual planning documents to preclude the occurrence of future noise conflict areas. Coordinate with the Port of Port Townsend to explore options in flight patterns to mitigate noise events, as long as options preserve safe aeronautical regulations and procedures. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–40 February 2021 Utilities General Capacity & Conservation Goal CF-G-12 Provide adequate utility capacity for future growth consistent with the requirements of the Growth Management Act. ▶ Policy CF-P-12.1 Identify where infrastructure is not adequate to support future growth, initiate planning for the development of infrastructure required for future growth and ensure that utility infrastructure is adequate to support projected population growth and economic development. ▶ Policy CF-P-12.2 Allow extension and sizing of facilities based on the Land Use Element. In those cases where engineering standards are in excess of the requirements for the immediate development but are required to meet established levels of service for proposed uses and future needs, the excess capacity will not be a reason to allow growth out of sequence with the Land Use Element. ▶ Policy CF-P-12.3 Require that adequate public facilities and services are available prior to, or concurrent with, development. ▶ Policy CF-P-12.4 Support efficient permit and application processing for utility systems projects to facilitate timely completion of utility development to meet growth demands. ▶ Policy CF-P-12.5 Ensure that all citizens served by an expanding public water supply or other utility are represented by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC) or otherwise maintain representative and elected leadership to help ensure that long term decisions are made in the best interests of rate payers. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–41 February 2021 Goal CF-G-13 Coordinate planning and provision of utility services among Jefferson County, the State of Washington, local governments, and utility service providers. ▶ Policy CF-P-13.1 Provide coordination between Jefferson County, agencies, and utility providers to ensure consistency between utility systems development and the growth plans of the County. ▶ Policy CF-P-13.2 Require utility providers to consistently utilize the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element in utility systems planning. ▶ Policy CF-P-13.3 Assist in making multiple use of utility corridors, easements, and areas for utilities, whenever possible, provided that such shared use is consistent with limitations prescribed by applicable law and prudent utility system practice. ▶ Policy CF-P-13.4 Coordinate and cooperate with other jurisdictions when transmission facility additions or improvements cross jurisdictional boundaries. Coordination to include maximizing efforts to achieve consistency between jurisdictions in efficient permitting. ▶ Policy CF-P-13.5 Coordinate and consolidate public service or public facility districts, where feasible, to distribute public services and facilities more efficiently. ▶ Policy CF-P-13.6 Require that utility infrastructure associated with new development, which the County will assume maintenance/ownership, will be constructed to comply with Jefferson County growth projections and standards. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–42 February 2021 Goal CF-G-14 Minimize adverse environmental impacts of utility systems development through proper utility design, siting, regulation, ongoing monitoring, and education. ▶ Policy CF-P-14.1 Support utility planning that takes precautionary actions to prevent importation and distribution of noxious weeds; implements the most environmentally sensitive and effective approaches to eradicate noxious weeds in utility corridors; and implements quick-action plans to eradicate new infestations. Discourage recurring use of herbicides to control general vegetative growth around utility facilities and encourage alternative methods, such as mowing or selective treatment. ▶ Policy CF-P-14.2 Participate in regional comprehensive watershed planning processes and incorporate appropriate elements of watershed agreements between the County, state, federal, tribal, local governments and other stakeholders into local ordinances and utility plans. ▶ Policy CF-P-14.3 Incentivize communications conduit installation for fiber optic cable at the same time and in the same trench alongside electrical cable installation as part of new building construction. ▶ Policy CF-P-14.4 Encourage siting and installation of locally owned and operated renewable energy sources, power production and storage systems, consistent with land use development regulations. Goal CF-G-15 Promote the conservation and preservation of resources, through the use of renewable energy and new technology to provide reliable utility services. ▶ Policy CF-P-15.1 As appropriate, support implementation of resource conservation technologies in all areas of new construction, large scale renovation of public facilities, and other changes that improve utility services and provide enhanced conservation and waste reduction. ▶ Policy CF-P-15.2 Maintain operating efficiency of existing resource consuming facilities in Jefferson County. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–43 February 2021 Telecommunication & Internet Utilities Goal CF-G-16 Accommodate telecommunication and internet technologies and service providers by allowing systems development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. ▶ Policy CF-P-16.1 Promote the widespread availability of telecommunications, broadband internet access, and similar technologies in cooperation with other public and private entities, to facilitate communication among members of the public, public institutions, and businesses. ▶ Policy CF-P-16.2 Require consolidation of antenna siting, transmission media, utility pole, fiber optic cable and trenching placement to minimize adverse aesthetic and environmental impacts. Electrical Utilities Goal CF-G-17 Encourage innovative and renewable forms of electricity, conservation of electricity, and efficient siting of electrical utilities infrastructure, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. ▶ Policy CF-P-17.1 Accommodate additions and improvements to electric utility facilities which improve capacity and reliability of regional electrical utility services, particularly when multiple jurisdictional benefits within the region can be achieved. ▶ Policy CF-P-17.2 Accommodate electrical distribution facilities as a permitted use in appropriate locations to ensure that land is available for the siting of electrical facilities. ▶ Policy CF-P-17.3 Support PUD energy conservation implementation with appropriate permit procedures, and potential development incentives as they are affordable. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–44 February 2021 8.7 ACTION PLAN Exhibit 8-7 highlights key activities the County can use to implement the Capital Facilities and Utilities Element over the next eight years (prior to the next periodic update), several in partnership with other entities: EXHIBIT 8-7 Capital Facilities, Essential Public Facilities, & Utilities Action Plan Action Description Capital Facility Plan Maintain a fiscally constrained Capital Facility Plan for the 6-year period; conduct planning level reviews of facility needs and future revenues. Update it as needed at the time of budget. Implement guidance and action strategies for capital facility projects per the Capital Facility Plan Technical Appendix D. Essential Public Facilities Review the JCIA Master Plan 2014 for implementing land use regulations, e.g. height, non-aviation supporting uses, etc. Utilities Support JPUD energy conservation and broadband implementation with appropriate permit procedures, and potential development incentives as they are affordable (e.g. energy conservation above and beyond State Energy Code may receive some development incentives in Urban Growth Areas). Pursue state and federal funds as they may become available. Source: Jefferson County, 2018. CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–45 February 2021 [ This page intentionally blank ] CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–46 February 2021 Remove prior intentionally blank page from PDF if needed— formatted as a placeholder to ensure each element starts on a right hand spread. Do not publish from this point forward. Remove pages from consolidated PDF. These sections should be updated and copied into their appropriate chapters (TOC, References) as needed. References American Planning Association Washington Chapter. (2015, November). Address Climate Change: Planning for Climate Change Adaptation. Retrieved from American Planning Association Washington Chapter: https://www.washington- apa.org/assets/docs/2015/Ten_Big_Ideas/October_Revisions/p lanning_for_climate_change_adaptation_11.10.15.pdf EES Consulting. (2017, January). Jefferson County PUD Electric Cost of Service and Rate Study. Retrieved from Jefferson County PUD : http://www.jeffpud.org/wp- content/uploads/Jefferson_PUD_COSA_Report_Final.pdf Jefferson County Public Utility District. (2018). Infrastructure Improvement Program. Retrieved from Jefferson County Public Utility District: http://www.jeffpud.org/infrastructure-improvement-program/ Jefferson County PUD. (2010, June). Utility Development Plan. Retrieved from Jefferson County PUD: http://www.jeffpud.org/wp- content/uploads/2014/04/Utility_Development_Plan_06082010_ final.pdf Jefferson County PUD. (2016, April 11). Jefferson County Energy Efficiency Program. Retrieved from Jefferson County PUD: http://www.jeffpud.org/wp- content/uploads/JPUD_Conservation_CAB.pdf Jefferson County PUD. (2017, October). Infrastructure Improvement Program. Retrieved from Jefferson County PUD: http://www.jeffpud.org/infrastructure-improvement-program/ Jefferson County PUD. (2018, March 1). Current JPUD Rates for Electrical Services: Effective March 1, 2018. Retrieved from Jefferson County PUD: http://www.jeffpud.org/rate- schedule/ CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–47 February 2021 Washington State Department of Ecology. (2012, April). Preparing for a Changing Climate: Washington State’s Integrated Climate Response Strategy: Publication No. 12-01-004. Retrieved from State of Washington Department of Ecology: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/documents/1201004 .pdf Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office. (2018). Strategic Plan, Comprehensive Version. Jefferson County Administrator’s Office. (2018). Jefferson County Strategic Plan, Jefferson County Public Utility District. (2011). Water System Plan. Contents 8 CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES 8–1 8.1 Purpose 8–1 8.2 Capital Facilities 8–2 Overview 8–2 County-wide Planning Policies 8–6 Summary of Trends & Opportunities 8–6 8.3 Essential Public Facilities 8–7 Overview 8–7 Essential Public Facilities & Public Purpose Lands 8–8 Essential Public Facility Designations in Jefferson County 8–9 County-wide Planning Policies 8–10 Summary of Trends & Opportunities 8–11 8.4 Utilities 8–12 Electric Utilities 8–12 Providers 8–12 Duty to Serve 8–12 JPUD Inventory 8–13 Electricity: Future Capacity Needs & Requirements 8–15 Telecommunication Utilities 8–16 Telecommunications Systems Types & Regulations 8–16 CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8–48 February 2021 Conventional Telephone 8–17 Cellular Service 8–17 Broadband 8–17 Telephone: Future Capacity Needs & Requirements 8–18 County-wide Planning Policies 8–19 Summary of Trends & Opportunities 8–20 8.5 Capital Facilities & Utilities Plan 8–21 Capital Facilities 8–21 Essential Public Facilities 8–21 Utilities 8–21 8.6 Goals & Policies 8–22 Capital Facilities 8–22 General 8–22 Potable Water 8–29 Sewer & Wastewater 8–30 Solid Waste 8–32 Surface Water Management 8–33 Essential Public Facilities 8–34 Utilities 8–40 General Capacity & Conservation 8–40 Telecommunication & Internet Utilities 8–43 Electrical Utilities 8–43 8.7 Action Plan 8–44 Exhibit 8-1 Capital Facilities & Public Services Provided 8–3 Exhibit 8-2 Relationship of Capital Facilities Plan to County-wide Planning Policies 8–6 Exhibit 8-3 Distinguishing Public Purpose Lands from Essential Public Facilities 8–9 Exhibit 8-4 JPUD Electrical Income by Customer Class 8–14 Exhibit 8-5 Residential Population Electricity Demand 8–15 Exhibit 8-6 Overhead & Underground Fiber Optic System Location 8–18 Exhibit 8-7 Capital Facilities, Essential Public Facilities, & Utilities Action Plan 8–44 1 Capital Facility Plan Technical Document December 2018 1 Introduction ......................................................................... 5 1.1 Background & Purpose ............................................................ 5 1.2 Fiscal Policies ................................................................ 10 1.3 Level of Service Effects ....................................................... 11 1.4 Reassessment Policy ............................................................ 14 2 Fiscal Analysis ..................................................................... 14 2.1 Background & Purpose ........................................................... 14 2.2 Dedicated Capital Revenues ..................................................... 15 2.3 General Capital Revenues ....................................................... 16 2.4 Notes, Bonds, & Grants ......................................................... 17 2.5 Six-Year Projected Funding & Cost Comparison .................................. 18 3 Capital Facilities Assessment ....................................................... 19 3.1 Law Enforcement ................................................................ 19 3.2 Parks & Recreation ............................................................. 23 3.3 Public Administration .......................................................... 27 3.4 Sewer .......................................................................... 32 3.5 Solid Waste .................................................................... 35 3.6 Stormwater ..................................................................... 37 3.7 Transportation ................................................................. 38 3.8 Education ...................................................................... 45 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 2 3.9 Fire Protection ................................................................ 60 3.10 Water .......................................................................... 72 Capital Facilities Element Strategies .................................................. 81 Exhibit List Exhibit 1-1 Capital Facilities & Services Addressed ................................... 5 Exhibit 1-2 County-wide Population Growth Assumptions ................................. 7 Exhibit 1-3 Capital Facilities & Public Services Provided to Unincorporated Jefferson County 7 Exhibit 1-4 Levels of Service for County-owned Facilities ............................ 11 Exhibit 1-5 Infrastructure Needs & Capacity Projections, 2018-2037 ................... 12 Exhibit 2-1 Real Estate Excise Tax Revenue 2009-2017 (Year of Estimate $) ............ 17 Exhibit 2-2 Estimated Capital Project Costs by Category (2018$) ...................... 18 Exhibit 3-1 Inmate Correction Facilities Inventory ................................... 20 Exhibit 3-2 Sheriff's Administration, Investigation, Patrol Inventory ................ 20 Exhibit 3-3 Justice Facilities Inventory ............................................. 20 Exhibit 3-4 Inmate Correction Facilities Capacity Analysis ........................... 21 Exhibit 3-5 Sheriff's Administration, Investigation, Patrol Capacity Analysis ........ 21 Exhibit 3-6 Justice Facilities Capacity Analysis ..................................... 22 Exhibit 3-7 Law Enforcement: Project List & Funding Source (Cost in Thousands 2018$) . 23 Exhibit 3-8 Law Enforcement Summary of Capital Costs (2018$) ......................... 23 Exhibit 3-9 Law Enforcement Summary of Capital Revenues (2018$) ...................... 23 Exhibit 3-10 Jefferson County Parks ................................................... 24 Exhibit 3-11 Parks Levels of Service Analysis ......................................... 25 Exhibit 3-12 Parks Levels of Service Alternative ...................................... 26 Exhibit 3-13 PROS Plan Parks Project List & Funding Source (Cost in Thousands 2018$) .. 27 Exhibit 3-14 Animal Control Shelter Current Facilities Inventory ...................... 28 Exhibit 3-15 Community Centers Current Facilities Inventory ........................... 28 Exhibit 3-16 General Administrative Offices Current Facilities Inventory .............. 28 Exhibit 3-17 Maintenance Shop Facilities Current Facilities Inventory ................. 29 Exhibit 3-18 Animal Control Shelter Capacity Analysis ................................. 29 Exhibit 3-19 Community Centers Capacity Analysis ...................................... 30 Exhibit 3-20 General Administrative Offices Capacity Analysis ......................... 30 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 3 Exhibit 3-21 Maintenance Shop Facilities Capacity Analysis ............................ 31 Exhibit 3-22 Public Administration Project List & Funding Source (Cost in Thousands $) 31 Exhibit 3-23 Public Administration: Summary of Capital Costs (2018$) .................. 32 Exhibit 3-24 Public Administration: Summary of Capital Revenues (2018$) ............... 32 Exhibit 3-25 Growth & Potential Sewer Demand .......................................... 34 Exhibit 3-26 Solid Waste Facilities Current Facilities Inventory ...................... 35 Exhibit 3-27 Potential Solid Waste Demand ............................................. 36 Exhibit 3-28 Funding Strategies for Recommendations ................................... 37 Exhibit 3-29 County Road Miles by Functional Class (Thru Lane Surface) ................ 38 Exhibit 3-30 Transportation Capital Facilities Projects, 2018-2023 .................... 40 Exhibit 3-31 Transportation Funding Sources, 2018-2023 ................................ 40 Exhibit 3-32 Port Hadlock/Irondale Area Improvement Projects .......................... 43 Exhibit 3-33 SR 19/SR 20 Corridor Plan Intersection Improvement (2009$ in Millions) ... 44 Exhibit 3-34 School Districts Serving Jefferson County ................................ 45 Exhibit 3-35 School Districts Map ..................................................... 46 Exhibit 3-36 Brinnon District Student to Teacher (S-T) Ratio .......................... 47 Exhibit 3-37 Brinnon District Facility Information .................................... 47 Exhibit 3-38 Chimacum District Student to Teacher (S-T) Ratio ......................... 48 Exhibit 3-39 Chimacum District Facility Information ................................... 48 Exhibit 3-40 Port Townsend District Student to Teacher (S-T) Ratio .................... 49 Exhibit 3-41 Port Townsend District Facility Information .............................. 49 Exhibit 3-42 Queets-Clearwater District Student to Teacher (S-T) Ratio ................ 50 Exhibit 3-43 Queets-Clearwater District Facility Information .......................... 50 Exhibit 3-44 Quilcene District Student to Teacher (S-T) Ratio ......................... 50 Exhibit 3-45 Quilcene District Facility Information ................................... 51 Exhibit 3-46 Quillayute Valley District Student to Teacher (S-T) Ratio ................ 51 Exhibit 3-47 Quillayute Valley Facility Information ................................... 52 Exhibit 3-48 Sequim District Student to Teacher (S -T) Ratio ........................... 52 Exhibit 3-49 Sequim District Facility Information ..................................... 53 Exhibit 3-50 Washington State General Education Average Class Size .................... 54 Exhibit 3-51 Brinnon School District Level of Service ................................. 54 Exhibit 3-52 Chimacum School District Level of Service ................................ 55 Exhibit 3-53 Port Townsend School District Level of Service ........................... 55 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 4 Exhibit 3-54 Queets-Clearwater School District Level of Service ....................... 56 Exhibit 3-55 Quilcene School District Level of Service ................................ 56 Exhibit 3-56 Quillayute Valley School District Level of Service ....................... 57 Exhibit 3-57 Sequim School District Level of Service .................................. 57 Exhibit 3-58 Fire Districts Serving Jefferson County, 2017 ............................ 60 Exhibit 3-59 Fire Districts Map ....................................................... 61 Exhibit 3-60 Jefferson County Fire Districts & Stations ............................... 62 Exhibit 3-61 East Jefferson Fire & Rescue Inventory of Apparatus ...................... 63 Exhibit 3-62 District No. 2—Quilcene Inventory of Apparatus ........................... 64 Exhibit 3-63 District No. 3—Port Ludlow Inventory of Apparatus ........................ 65 Exhibit 3-64 District No. 4—Brinnon Inventory of Apparatus ............................ 66 Exhibit 3-65 District No. 5—Discovery Bay—Gardiner Inventory of Apparatus ............. 66 Exhibit 3-66 District No. 7—Clearwater Inventory of Apparatus ......................... 67 Exhibit 3-67 East Jefferson Fire & Rescue Level of Service ............................ 68 Exhibit 3-68 District No. 2—Quilcene Level of Service ................................. 68 Exhibit 3-69 District No. 3—Port Ludlow Fire & Rescue Fire District Level of Service .. 69 Exhibit 3-70 District No. 4—Brinnon Fire District Level of Service .................... 69 Exhibit 3-71 District No. 5—Discovery Bay—Gardiner Level of Service ................... 70 Exhibit 3-72 District No. 7—Clearwater Level of Service ............................... 70 Exhibit 3-73 Potable Water System Current Facilities Inventory ........................ 72 Exhibit 3-74 Department of Health Water System Compliance ............................. 73 Exhibit 3-75 Individual Water Current Capital Inventory Serving More Than 100 People .. 73 Exhibit 3-76 Group A Water Systems .................................................... 75 Exhibit 3-77 1997 Population Projection for 20-year Planning Horizon .................. 76 Exhibit 3-78 Growth & Potential Water Demand .......................................... 77 Exhibit 3-79 Port Townsend Water System Project List & Funding Source ................. 77 Exhibit 3-80 Public Utility District #1 Project List & Funding Source (2011$) ......... 78 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 5 1 Introduction 1.1 BACKGROUND & PURPOSE The Growth Management Act (GMA) specifies that the capital facilities plan (CFP) element should consist of a) an inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities; b) a forecast of the future needs for capital facilities; c) the proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities; d) a six-year capital facilities plan that will finance capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes; and e) a requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of existing needs. (RCW 36.70a.070 (3)) Recent Growth Management Hearings Board cases have placed more importance on the preparation and implementation of CFPs. The key points include: ▶ Capital facilities plans should address the 20-year planning period and be consistent with growth allocations assumed in the Land Use Element. ▶ Capital facilities plans should also demonstrate an ability to serve the full urban growth area (UGA). ▶ Financial plans should address at least a six-year period and funding sources should be specific and committed. Counties and cities should provide a sense of the funding sources for the 20-year period, though it can be less detailed than for the six -year period. Key Facilities According to WAC 365-196-415, the inventory and analysis of capital facilities must include, at a minimum, water systems, sewer systems, stormwater systems, schools, parks and recreation facilities, police facilities, and fire facilities. This CFP Technical Document addresses the capital facilities and services listed below. Note that utilities (electricity and telecommunications) are addressed in Element 8, Capital Facilities & Utilities, beginning at Section 8.4. EXHIBIT 1-1 Capital Facilities & Services Addressed Capital Facility & Service Topic Description Law Enforcement Policing and Sheriff services Court systems Corrections facilities December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 6 Capital Facility & Service Topic Description Parks and Recreation Owning and maintaining public parks and recreation facilities Public Administration Government Administrative Offices Community Centers Maintenance Shop Facilities Animal Control Facilities Sewer County sewer plans for Port Hadlock/Irondale Special district sewer system for Port Ludlow Solid Waste County solid waste system Stormwater County stormwater system Transportation County road and transportation facilities Education Special district educational facilities Fire Protection Special district fire protection facilities Water Special district distribution and treatment of potable water Source: Jefferson County 2018; BERK, 2018. Agencies providing services have physical assets – buildings, land, infrastructure, equipment, and this CFP identifies what level of demand for these assets may occur as the Land Use Element is implemented and the population grows. Agencies may identify projects that ensure the demand for their services can be met over time. For the purposes of this CFP, a capital facility project is defined as: ▶ Projects to create, expand or modify a capital facility that have a minimum cost of $15,000 and have a life expectancy of at least five years. Study Area Jefferson County is in the north-central portion of Washington’s Olympic Peninsula. The county is bounded on the west by the Pacific Ocean, and on the east by the waters of the Admiralty Inlet and Hood Canal. Clallam County and the Strait of Juan de Fuca define the northern border, while the southern bounda ries are defined by Mason and Grays Harbor Counties. Jefferson County comprises 1,808 square miles. The Olympic National Park and National Forest, which bisect the county into western and eastern halves, comprise approximately 65% of the county’s 1.16 million acres of land. About another 20% of land is under the jurisdiction of federal and state agencies. The county is rural with a population density in 2017 at 17.39 per sq. mi. Most of the county’s population, nearly 96%, resides in eastern Jefferson County. Jefferson County has one incorporated city, Port Townsend—the largest community. There are two Master Planned Resorts, Port Ludlow and the designated —yet undeveloped—Pleasant Harbor. The bulk of the county’s population is located primarily in the northeast portion of the county, in the communities of Port Townsend, the Tri-Area (Irondale, Port Hadlock and Chimacum), and Port Ludlow. Quilcene and Brinnon are the largest communities in the southern portion of the county. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 7 Population Growth Assumptions Consistent with the Land Use Element, the CFP is based on the following population growth data through the six-year (2018-2023) and 20-year (2018-2038) planning period. EXHIBIT 1-2 County-wide Population Growth Assumptions Year Projected Population 2018 31,667 2019 31,978 2020 32,291 2021 32,608 2022 32,927 2023 33,250 2038 39,221 Source: Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM) and Jefferson County Resolution #38-15 on October 26, 2015. Responsibilities Providers of capital facilities and services are listed in the table below, with a focus on those who serve unincorporated Jefferson County. Many agencies by law or by choice prepare system plans containing detailed inventories, levels of service, and capi tal projects. These system plans are hereby incorporated by reference as amended. EXHIBIT 1-3 Capital Facilities & Public Services Provided to Unincorporated Jefferson County Service Topic Providers Guiding Plans Law Enforcement Jefferson County Sherriff Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office Strategic Plan, Comprehensive Version, 2018 Parks and Recreation Jefferson County Jefferson County Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan Update, 2015, Jefferson County Parks and Recreation, Department of Public Works Public Administration Jefferson County Jefferson County Strategic Plan, County Administrator’s Office, 2018 Individual operations plans for community centers, maintenance facilities, and animal control facilities December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 8 Service Topic Providers Guiding Plans Sewer Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA – Jefferson County Port Ludlow – Olympic Water and Sewer Port Hadlock Wastewater System: Urban Growth Area Sewer Facility Plan, 2008 Design Plans & Specifications, 2013 Port Hadlock Sewer Facility Plan Update, 2020 Solid Waste Jefferson County Jefferson County, Solid Waste Management Plan, September 2016 Stormwater Jefferson County Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area Stormwater Management Plan, May 2004 Jefferson County Surface Water Management Plan, November 2006 Transportation Jefferson County Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization Jefferson Transit Authority Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area Transportation Plan, May 2004 Quimper Peninsula Travel Demand Model, October 2008 Nonmotorized Transportation Plan, 2010 Quimper Peninsula Transportation Study, January 2012 Peninsula RTPO Regional Transportation Plan 2035 (May 2013) Jefferson County Public Works Transportation Improvement Plan, 2017 Jefferson Transit, Transit Development Plan 2017-2022 & 2016 Annual Report, August 2017 Education Brinnon School District No. 46 Chimacum School District No. 49 Port Townsend School District No. 50 Queets-Clearwater School District No. 20 Quilcene School District No. 48 Port Townsend School District No. 50 Individual Operational Plans December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 9 Service Topic Providers Guiding Plans Fire Protection Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 1—East Jefferson Fire and Rescue Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 2—Quilcene Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 3 – Port Ludlow Fire and Rescue Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 4—Brinnon Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 5—Discovery Bay—Gardiner Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 6 – Cape George/Kala Point/Beckett Point – Merged Jefferson County Fire District No. 7 – Clearwater-Queets Individual Operational Plans Water Port Townsend Jefferson County Water District No. 1 – Paradise Bay Jefferson County Water District No. 2 – Brinnon Jefferson County Water District No. 3 – Coyle Port Ludlow Drainage District Port of Port Townsend Public Utility District No. 1 of Jefferson County Jefferson County Coordinated Water System Plan, June 1997. Pending update Jefferson County Public Utility District #1 Water System Plan 2011 Source: BERK, 2018. In conjunction with its budget, the County may revise this Element, as needed, to add new projects needed to accommodate changing development circumstances, remove projects that have been built, and to reevaluate projects remaining in the inventory. In 2020, Jefferson County revised the 2008 Port Hadlock Wastewater System: Urban Growth Area Sewer Facility Plan and 2013 Design Plans & Specifications for the Port Hadlock UGA with technical design updates to provide for a more cost -effective system. The 2020 Sewer Facility Plan Update is currently und er review by the Washington State Department of Ecology and is incorporated by reference, as it may be amended, into the Comprehensive Plan. Connections to Other Elements This CFP Technical Document supports the Comprehensive Plan Facilities and Utilities Element, which contains goals and policies per the GMA requirements for the CFP element. This Appendix also supports watershed goals and policies in the Environment Element. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 10 The CFP is consistent with the Land Use Element. The CFP also integrates inventories, service demand, and potential improvements from the Transportation Element and the Open Space, Parks & Recreation, Historic & Cultural Preservation Element. The CFP incorporates by reference more detailed County system plans. The CFP analysis responds to the Land Use Element proposals for growth and development. The CFP analyzes fiscal impacts of growth and land use must be re-assessed if probable funding falls short. The CFP may also adopt other policies, such as lowering its level of service standards, to keep the CFP and Land Use Element compatible. The CFP also describes principles or prioritization to assist with balancing needs, costs revenues, and public input. Timeline The CFP addresses a short-term six-year period and a 20-year period consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The six-year timeframe is more detailed and incorporates more detailed fiscal analysis. The 20-year horizon is more visionary and is driven by goals/policies, has broader conceptual fiscal analysis, and may change more over time as context and priorities change. 1.2 FISCAL POLICIES The CFP uses sound fiscal policies to provide adequate public facilities consistent with the Land Use Element. In Chapter 2, the CFP presents revenue projections and compares revenues to identified capital costs. The revenue analysis identifies the potential ability to fill potential gaps with other funding sources. In Chapter 3, the CFP identifies funding sources for each capital project. As part of the annual budget, the County adopts a more detailed capital improvement program implementing the CFP. Additionally, the County adopts the six-year transportation improvement program. These more detailed improvement programs draw from this broad er and longer-term CFP as well as other plan elements. The County operates in a fiscally prudent manner. It has established minimum fund balance requirements for most of its funds. The County uses a five -year General Fund balance projection model to evaluate the impact of various potential decisions on the fiscal health of the General Fund. This technique has enabled the County to take appropriate fiscal actions well in advance to ensure minimum fund bal ance requirements are met. The County also manages its debt very responsibly in accordance with its adopted Debt Policy. Borrowing is kept to the absolute minimum and is only used for essential facilities. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 11 1.3 LEVEL OF SERVICE EFFECTS County Facilities Levels of Service (LOS) are established in the CFP and represent quantifiable measures of capacity. They are minimum standards adopted by the County to provide capital facilities and services to the community at a certain level of quality and within the financial capacity of the County. For example, acres of parks per 1,000 population. LOS and the need for County facilities are inversely proportional. The higher the established LOS, the more of the related facilities will be required. The reverse is also true: reducing the LOS reduces the need for related facilities. There is a range of service levels that meet the needs of a growing community. Service levels that are two low will fail to meet the demand. Service levels that are too high may cause a community to add facilities that aren’t needed. The table below identifies currently adopted levels of service, and how they are proposed for adjustment in the six-year or 20-year planning period with this 2018 Periodic Update to balance service quality, demand, and financial capability. EXHIBIT 1-4 Levels of Service for County-owned Facilities County Facility Type 2017 Adopted LOS 2018 Plan Adjusted LOS through 2023 2018 Plan Adjusted LOS through 2038 Law Enforcement Corrections Facility 1.9 beds/k residents 1.75 beds/k residents 1.48 beds/k residents County Sheriff Facilities 244.5 sq. ft./k residents 240 sq. ft./k residents 200 sq. ft./k residents County Justice Facilities 732.4 sq. ft./k residents 610 sq. ft./k residents 515 sq. ft./k residents Parks and Recreation Per 2015 PROS Plan Per 2015 PROS Plan Amend PROS Plan Regional 19.07 acres /k residents 19.07 acres /k residents 18.43 acres /k residents Community 3.05 acres /k residents 3.05 acres /k residents 2.94 acres /k residents Neighborhood 0.16 acres /k residents 0.16 acres /k residents 0.18 acres /k residents Open Space 4.85 acres /k residents 4.85 acres /k residents 4.69 acres /k residents Special Use 3.24 acres /k residents 3.24 acres /k residents 3.24 acres /k residents Trails: Base LOS 0.52 miles/k residents 0.52 miles/k residents 0.52 miles/k residents December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 12 County Facility Type 2017 Adopted LOS 2018 Plan Adjusted LOS through 2023 2018 Plan Adjusted LOS through 2038 Trails: Target LOS if funding allows 1.83 miles /k residents 1.83 acres /k residents 1.83 acres /k residents Public Administration Animal Control Shelter 74.9 sq. ft./k residents 69 sq. ft./k residents 58 sq. ft./k residents Community Centers 1,277.6 sq. ft./k residents 1,185 sq. ft./k residents 1,005 sq. ft./k residents Administrative Facilities 1,509.7 sq. ft./k residents 1,200 sq. ft./k residents 1,020 sq. ft./k residents Maintenance Shop Facilities 1,078.9 sq. ft./k residents 975 sq. ft./k residents 825 sq. ft./k residents Sewer & Water System Port Headlock / Irondale UGA Sewer Pending 132 gallons per day/ERU Pending 132 gallons per day/ERU Pending 132 gallons per day/ERU Solid Waste Waste 4.20 pounds per capita per day 3.12 pounds per capita per day 3.12 pounds per capita per day Recycling 0.80 pounds per capita per day 2.8 pounds per capita per day 2.8 pounds per capita per day Stormwater Standard Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Transportation Rural Roads C C C UGA Roads, MPR Roads, Highways of Regional Significance D D D Source: Jefferson County Given the LOS adjustments in the table above, there are minimal deficiencies, consisting of trails as documented in the 2015 PROS Plan. Regarding other park classifications, to avoid deficiencies in 2038 the plan would need to be amended. EXHIBIT 1-5 Infrastructure Needs & Capacity Projections, 2018-2037 County Facility 2023 2038 Population Projected 33,250 39,221 Law Enforcement County Corrections Inmate Facilities No Deficiency—Adjusted No Deficiency—Adjusted County Sheriff Facilities No Deficiency—Adjusted No Deficiency—Adjusted December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 13 County Facility 2023 2038 County Justice Facilities No Deficiency—Adjusted No Deficiency—Adjusted Parks & Recreation Facilities Regional Parks No Deficiency No Deficiency—Adjusted Community Parks No Deficiency No Deficiency—Adjusted Neighborhood Parks No Deficiency No Deficiency—Adjusted Open Space No Deficiency No Deficiency—Adjusted Special Use No Deficiency No Deficiency Trails Deficiency (33.7) Deficiency (44.6) Public Administration Animal Shelter No Deficiency—Adjusted No Deficiency—Adjusted Community Centers No Deficiency—Adjusted No Deficiency—Adjusted County General Administrative Facilities No Deficiency—Adjusted No Deficiency—Adjusted County Maintenance Shop Facilities No Deficiency—Adjusted No Deficiency—Adjusted Sewer System Facilities Sewer System Facilities Pending Pending Solid Waste Facilities Solid Waste Facilities No Deficiency—Adjusted No Deficiency—Adjusted Stormwater Facilities* Stormwater Management Pending Pending Flood Control Facilities Pending Pending Transportation: County Roads** Rural Roads No Deficiency No Deficiency Urban Growth Areas (UGA) No Deficiency No Deficiency Master Planned Resort (MPR) No Deficiency No Deficiency Designated Highways of Regional Significance No Deficiency No Deficiency *The County has adopted standards from the Washington Department of Ecology "Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington." **The County Public Works department maintains a County Road Inventory; that inventory does not include Streets in the City of Port Townsend or State Highways. The capacity analysis and traffic forecasts indicate that at the planning horizon year of 2038, all County roads are expected to operate at or above the adopted level of service (LOS) standard. A few State Route segments will exceed their estimated capacity based on the level of service standards established by WSDOT and the PRTPO, and the roadway LOS methodology adopted by the County. Concurrency applies to County roads as well as intersections in the Tri-Area. See 3.7 for additional information, as well as Appendix C Transportation Technical Appendix. Levels of Service Non-County Facilities Level of service standards for non-county public services are evaluated including: ▶ Education: students per classroom ▶ Fire Protection: fire units and emergency service units per 1,000 population December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 14 ▶ Water: gallons per day/equivalent residential unit These standards were established in prior CFP elements. Where there are differences with adopted standards, options are noted for adjustments. 1.4 REASSESSMENT POLICY Those facilities and services necessary to support growth should have LOS standards and facilities. The County must reassess the land use element and other elements of the comprehensive plan if the probable funding falls short of meeting the need for facilities that are determined by a county or city to be necessary for development. Growth, LOS standards, and a funded capital improvement program are to be in balance. In the case where the LOS cannot be met by any service or facility, the jurisdiction could do one of the following: 1) add proposed facilities within funding resources, 2) reduce demand through demand management strategies, 3) lower LOS standards, 4) phase growth, or 5) change the land use plan. In the case of transportation, the County would have to deny development that would cause LOS to decline below the adopted standards unless transportation facilities can be implemented at the time of development or within six years: “concurrent with the development" means that improvements or strategies are in place at the time of development, or that a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies within six years.” (RCW 36.70A.070(6)) The County should assess its ability to ensure adequate facilities are provided with growth no less frequently than at the time of its Comprehensive Plan periodic review or during regular reporting under Capital Facilities Element Strategies attached to this Technical Document. 2 Fiscal Analysis 2.1 BACKGROUND & PURPOSE Overview This section introduces the County’s capital facilities revenues for County provided facilities and services. This analysis is intended to assist in project planning and where values are provided are not intended as a precise forecast. Exact funding levels are subject to external circumstances and context which creates uncertainty. This analysis primarily looks at future funding for capital facilities planning as follows: December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 15 ▶ Dedicated capital revenues: These revenues are required by law to be used for specific types of capital expenditures. ▶ General capital revenues: These revenues are required by law to be used for capital, but the types of capital projects are not restricted. ▶ Potential Policy Options and Other Funding Sources : This section covers other ways the County could fund its capital project costs, including policy choices and other sources such as notes, bonds, and grants. Many of these other policy options are identified in supporting system plans. Limitations Annexation and incorporation of land into cities can have significant impacts on the County’s revenues by decreasing the taxable base. No large annexations or incorporations are imminent, and this Capital Facility Plan does not adjust costs or revenues for that situation. If incorporation or annexations are proposed, fiscal analysis would be performed to inform the decision for the community and the County. 2.2 DEDICATED CAPITAL REVENUES Several sources of revenues are required by law to be used for specific types of capital expenditures, as summarized below. Transportation Potential sources of dedicated capital revenue for transportation projects include: Motor vehicle fuel tax, road levy, federal and state grants and appropriations, and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) mitigation fees if applicable. As noted in the Transportation Improvement Program 2018-2023, the County’s largest source is from State and Federal funds. About $3.5 Million of the almost $17 million funds are secured. The T.I.P. is strongly influenced by the availability of funding, and many of the projects listed do not, as yet, have secured funding. Historically, projects on Jefferson County’s T.I.P. have averaged more than 70% funding from State and Federal sources. Many non-local transportation revenue sources however only fund certain types of improvements on certain types of roads, and as such Federal and State priorities can strongly influence what actually gets accomplished. Lack of available local match funds limits the number and size of grants that can be utilized. Local funds available for this proposed 6-year capital program average only $277,000 per year. Jefferson County has a limited ta x base with transportation revenues among the lowest in western Washington when measured in December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 16 terms of dollars available per road mile. The county road fund has seen a 25% overall reduction in annual operating revenue due to loss of federal land timber revenue in recent years. Parks Per the 2015 PROS Plan, parks capital projects can be funded by General Funds, Grants, and Donations. Also, if large developments increase demand, SEPA Mitigation measures may result in funds for, or development of, parks. The 2018 Budget Hearing presentation noted: “Parks & Rec is short by over $100,000/yr. in funding to maintain existing facilities and programs. In addition to the sources described above, the 2015 PROS Plan indicated the following sources of funds may be considered: ▶ Conservation Futures – 2002 Program in Place: Funds may be used for open space acquisition and some limited parks and recreation facilities. The 2015 PROS Plan indicates the fund source results in annual tax revenues of $220,000. ▶ Levy lid lift – Potential, Not in Place: Taxing jurisdictions with a tax rate of less than their statutory taxing rate may ask the voters to “lift” the levy lid by increasing the tax rate to some amount equal to or less than their statutory maximum rate. It was estimated that if instituted this source could bring between $459,000 - $734,000 funds annually. ▶ Bonds – both general obligation bonds (Board of County Commissioner appro ved) and unlimited tax general bonds (voter approved). Solid Waste Solid waste service charges cover operational costs and include a capital component. Revenues collected can be used to finance capacity expansions as growth occurs. Revenues streams are predictable and reliable allowing for solid capital facilities planning. The 2016 Jefferson County Solid Waste Management Plan identified several funding strategies including: garbage rates, tipping fees, special user fees, grants, and other funding as available. 2.3 GENERAL CAPITAL REVENUES Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) revenues are collected upon the sale of real property can be applied to a wide variety of capital projects. REET is the principal revenue source used to build or acquire general administrative facilities for the County REET revenues have been healthy in recent years and have been trending upwards. However, REET revenues December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 17 are heavily dependent on a healthy real estate market and can fall substantially during recessions. EXHIBIT 2-1 Real Estate Excise Tax Revenue 2009-2017 (Year of Estimate $) Source: Jefferson County 2018 A substantial portion of the County’s REET revenues have been dedicated to making debt service payments. Two bonds will mature soon, one in 2018 and one in 2022. Revenues freed up when those bonds mature will be available to service new debt that could be used to finance the construction of a new law and justice facility in the 7-20-year planning period. 2.4 NOTES, BONDS, & GRANTS Other sources of funds may be considered for projects, including notes, bonds, and grants. Grants are preferred, when available and appropriate for the work needed, because the monies can be leveraged and do not impact revenue or debt capacity. Borrowing through notes or bonds is sometime the only option for large capital projects. However, bor rowing entails risk—will the County’s revenue streams be adequate to service the debt? In the past the General Fund could contribute funds for capital projects. Recently however, the General Fund has struggled to meet ongoing operational demands and hasn’t been able to contribute to the capital program. 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total $559,398 $426,058 $443,450 $549,121 $707,883 $704,385 $1,196,934 $1,237,774 $1,285,270 $0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000 $1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 18 2.5 SIX-YEAR PROJECTED FUNDING & COST COMPARISON The purpose of this section is to compare Jefferson County’s dedicated capital facilities revenue sources with its planned project costs for the six -year planning horizon of 2018- 2023 to understand the difference between near -term future dedicated capital revenues and planned future costs. In Jefferson County, future capital costs are generally larger than future dedicated capital revenues. This trend is seen in most counties and cities throughout Washington State, given the structural and legal limitations on capital funding sources. Understanding the magnitude of this difference can help the County plan for ways to fill in the gap through other funding methods, such as operating transfers or bonds. EXHIBIT 2-2 Estimated Capital Project Costs by Category (2018$) Facility Costs: 2018-2023 Revenues: 2018-2023 Local Funding Strategies Law Enforcement/ Justice $1,090,492 $1,090,492 $1,090,492 REET, Rates, Bonds, Grants, Etc. Parks and Recreation2 $501,500 $501,500 $501,500 General Fund, donations & grants. Seek additional grants and donations for unmet goals in periods prior to 2018 and update phasing. Public Administration1 $3,372,750 $3,372,750 $3,372,750 REET, Fleet Services Fund Balance Sewer $0 $25,900,138* 2018-2023 $27,099,138* 2021-2026 $0 $25,900,139* 2018-2023 $27,099,138 2021-2026 $0 $11,903,121* 2018-2023 $13,102,121* 2021-2026 Seek funding: grants, low interest infrastructure loans, local improvement district, connection charges, and revenue from service rates. Local funding: Local improvement district, connection charges, local borrowing, and revenue. Outside funding: WA Legislature appropriations, WA Dept of Ecology Combined Water Quality Program grant funding, USDA grant funding, and US Economic Development Administration Public Works Program grant funding. Solid Waste3 $0 $0 $0 Rates per 2016 Solid Waste Management Plan. Stormwater $0 $0 $0 See Transportation. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 19 Facility Costs: 2018-2023 Revenues: 2018-2023 Local Funding Strategies Transportation $23,311,966 $25,434,621 $1,662,875 Federal and State Funding at over 70%, Developer Fair Share Contribution, and Local Funds. Total $28,276,708 $54,176,846 $30,399,363 $54,176,846 $6,627,617 $18,530,738 Principally Transportation: seek Federal and State Funds. Notes: 1 Public Administration includes the Animal Shelter, Community Centers, Administrative Facilities, and Maintenance Shops. 2 Funds projected for 2018-2023 would meet the original PROS Program costs for the period, and partially cover some uncompleted projects in prior years, which may require alternative phasing. 3 Regarding solid waste, assessments are planned for two County solid waste handling facilities, which may need capital repairs. When studies are complete projects may be added to the 2018-2023 period or phased in 2024-2038 period. 4 Includes 6-year financing costs for the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer from 2018-2023 (period of last full update) and 2021-2026 (current update to sewer costs and financing). Source: Jefferson County 2018 3 Capital Facilities Assessment 3.1 LAW ENFORCEMENT Overview Jefferson County Law Enforcement facilities include the Correctional Facility, the Sheriff’s administration, investigation and patrol building, the Sheriff’s Clearwater Annex on the west end, and the Courthouse (Prosecuting Attorney, Clerk, Juvenile Services, and District and Superior Courts. Inventory of Current Facilities The Correctional Facility, located in Port Hadlock, was constructed in 1984 with a major addition in 1999. This facility serves both unincorporated and incorporated populations of the County. The current inventory of inmate beds in the corrections inmate facility totals 58. The facility also includes the Emergency Operations Center for the county . The table below lists each facility as well as their current capacities and location. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 20 EXHIBIT 3-1 Inmate Correction Facilities Inventory Name Location Capacity # Beds Correction Facility Port Hadlock 58 Clearwater Annex Clearwater 0 Total 58 Source: Jefferson County 2018 The Sheriff Administrative Facility in Port Hadlock was constructed in 2003 and early 2004 with occupancy occurring in April 2004. EXHIBIT 3-2 Sheriff's Administration, Investigation, Patrol Inventory Name Location Capacity Net Sq. Ft. Administrative Facility Port Hadlock 8,000 Clearwater Annex Clearwater 4,072 Total 12,072 Source: Jefferson County 2018 The current inventory of Justice Facilities includes a total of 20,367 square feet including Superior Court, District Court/Probation, Juvenile Services/Family Court, and the Prosecuting Attorney’s offices. EXHIBIT 3-3 Justice Facilities Inventory Name Location Capacity Net Sq. Ft. Jefferson County Courthouse Port Townsend Superior Court 8,846 District Court/Probation 4,077 Juvenile Services/Family Court 2,934 Prosecuting Attorney 4,510 Total 20,367 Source: Jefferson County 2018 Level of Service Analysis Jefferson County is proposing to lower levels of service in two phases, one reduction for the 6-year planning period and a second reduction for the 7-20-year planning period. The December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 21 existing levels of service are unnecessarily high and falsely indicate that the county needs additional facilities to meet the demands of an increasing population. The proposed lower levels of service eliminate facility deficits in al l cases, eliminating the need to add capacity. The proposed LOS right sizes the jail for the duration of the planning period. Average daily jail population in 2017 was 35 inmates. It is anticipated that if a bed deficit occurs, the deficit will be addressed by transferring inmates to a county with excess capacity or by adjusting sentencing guidelines. EXHIBIT 3-4 Inmate Correction Facilities Capacity Analysis Year Service Area Population Population Change Beds Required # Beds Change Available Beds Reserve Or (Deficit) County Proposed LOS Equals = 1.75 Beds Per 1,000 population 2018 31,667 55 58 2019 31,978 311 56 1 58 2 2020 32,291 313 57 1 58 1 2021 32,608 317 57 0 58 1 2022 32,927 319 58 1 58 0 2023 33,250 323 58 0 58 0 County Proposed LOS Equals = 1.48 Beds Per 1,000 population 2038 39,221 5,971 58 0 58 0 Total Proposed 58 0 Source: Jefferson County 2018 The proposed LOS for Sheriff's Administration facilities creates adequate capacity at the end of the planning period. No capacity projects are required. Since the Clearwater Annex is staffed by a single officer, it was not included in the LOS calculation. EXHIBIT 3-5 Sheriff's Administration, Investigation, Patrol Capacity Analysis Year Service Area Population Population Change Square Feet Required Square Feet Change Available Square Feet Reserve Or (Deficit ) County Proposed LOS Equals = 240 Square Feet Per 1,000 population 2018 31,667 7,600 8,000 400 2019 31,978 311 7,675 75 8,000 325 2020 32,291 313 7,750 75 8,000 250 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 22 Year Service Area Population Population Change Square Feet Required Square Feet Change Available Square Feet Reserve Or (Deficit ) 2021 32,608 317 7,826 76 8,000 174 2022 32,927 319 7,902 77 8,000 98 2023 33,250 323 7,980 78 8,000 20 County Proposed LOS Equals = 200 Square Feet Per 1,000 population 2038 39,221 5,971 7,844 -136 8,000 156 Total Proposed 8,000 156 Source: Jefferson County 2018 The proposed LOS for Justice Facilities yields a small reserve at the end of the planning period. No capacity projects are required. EXHIBIT 3-6 Justice Facilities Capacity Analysis Year Service Area Population Population Change Square Feet Required Square Feet Change Available Square Feet Reserve or (Deficit ) County Proposed LOS Equals = 610 Square Feet Per 1,000 population 2018 31,667 19,317 20,367 1,050 2019 31,978 311 19,507 190 20,367 860 2020 32,291 313 19,698 191 20,367 669 2021 32,608 317 19,891 193 20,367 476 2022 32,927 319 20,085 195 20,367 282 2023 33,250 323 20,283 197 20,367 85 County Proposed LOS Equals = 515 Square Feet Per 1,000 population 2038 39,221 5,971 20,199 (84) 20,367 168 Total Proposed 20,367 168 Source: Jefferson County 2018 Capital Projects & Funding Because there are no projected facility deficits capital spending on facilities will be confined to capital maintenance, repairs, and replacements. While no deficit is projected for law and justice facilities the County is considering constructing a new law and justice center for the Prosecuting Attorney, Clerk, Juvenile Services and District and December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 23 Superior Courts in the 7-20-year planning period to better meet operational needs and requirements. EXHIBIT 3-7 Law Enforcement: Project List & Funding Source (Cost in Thousands 2018$) Project / Type Revenue Sources Cost: 2018-23 Cost: 2024-38 Total Capacity Projects (Projects Required to Meet LOS) Law and Justice Center REET, Rates, Bonds, Grants, Etc. $0 $15,000 $15,000 Non-Capacity Projects (Other Projects Needed for Maintenance and Operations) Various Facilities Improvements/Equipment REET, Rates, Bonds, Grants, Etc. $1,117 $8,000 $1,917 Source: Jefferson County 2018 EXHIBIT 3-8 Law Enforcement Summary of Capital Costs (2018$) Category Summary Cost: 2018-2023 Cost: 2024-2038 Total Cost Capacity Projects $0 $15,000,000 $15,000,000 Non-Capacity Projects $1,117,492 $800,000 $1,917,492 Total $1,117,492 $15,800,000 $16,917,492 Source: Jefferson County 2018 EXHIBIT 3-9 Law Enforcement Summary of Capital Revenues (2018$) Revenue Source Revenue: 2018-2023 Revenue: 2024-2038 Total Revenue LTGO Bond $0 $15,000,000 $15,000,000 REET $1,117,492 $800,000 $1,617,492 Total $1,117,492 $15,800,000 $16,917,492 Source: Jefferson County 2018 3.2 PARKS & RECREATION Overview This section addresses parks and recreation facilities operated by Jefferson County based on the Jefferson County Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (PROS) Plan, which was updated in 2015. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 24 Inventory of Current Facilities Parks owned and managed by Jefferson County are summarized in the table below. A detailed inventory of parks and recreation facilities, including parks, trails, community centers, and open space is contained in the 2015 PROS Plan. EXHIBIT 3-10 Jefferson County Parks Parks Acres Location Neighborhood Parks 7.0 County Courthouse Park 2.0 Port Townsend Irondale Community Park 3.0 Port Hadlock Quilcene River & Bay Park East 2.0 Quilcene County/Community Parks 115.5 Bob Bates Field 12.0 Port Hadlock Cape George Trailhead 43.0 Port Townsend Chimacum County Park 14.0 Chimacum East Beach County Park 1.0 Marrowstone Island Hicks County Park in Shine 1.0 Port Ludlow Irondale Beach County Park 12.5 Port Hadlock Lake Leland County Park 9.0 Quilcene North Beach County Park 1.0 Port Townsend Quilcene County Park 8.0 Quilcene Quilcene Sports Park/ Smackman Field 14.0 Quilcene Regional Parks 723.0 Beausite Lake County Park & NW Kiwanis Camp 30.0 Chimacum Gibbs Lake County Park & Trails 601.0 Chimacum H.J. Carroll County Park & Trail 50.0 Chimacum Larry Scott Trail 7.0 (8.5 mi) Port Townsend Oak Bay County Park Lower 30.0 Port Ludlow Oak Bay County Park Upper 5.0 Port Ludlow Natural Open Space 183.8 Indian Island County Park & Trail 140.0 Port Hadlock Broad Spit County Park 43.8 Quilcene Special Use Areas 165.8 Jefferson County Memorial Athletic Field 5.0 Port Townsend Jefferson County Fairgrounds 27.7 Port Townsend Jefferson County Equestrian Park 80.0 Quimper Jefferson Co. Sportsman Assn. Shooting Range 43.0 Quimper Port Townsend Community Center 1.0 Port Townsend Brinnon Community Center NA Brinnon Coyle Community Center (Laurel B. Johnson) 1.0 South Toandos December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 25 Parks Acres Location Gardiner Community Center 2.0 Gardner Tri-Area Community Center 2.0 Port Hadlock Quilcene Community Center 4.1 Quilcene Total Jefferson County Parks 1,195.2 Source: Jefferson County Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Plan, 2015; Jefferson County, 2018. Level of Service Analysis The table below shows the application of adopted levels of service to the expected population of 33,250 by 2023, the six-year planning period. The PROS Plan was adopted in 2015 with a horizon year of 2035. It assumed a 2035 county-wide population of 37,914. In addition to reviewing 2035, the table below carries out the adopted levels of service to 2038, the Comprehensive Plan horizon, and a population of 39,221. At 2023 there is only a deficit of trails, and a surplus of park acres. At 2035 there is effectively a balance between demand and supply of parks, though a continued deficit of trails. To address the deficit of trails, the County has applied a base LOS that is achievable at 0.52 miles per 1,000 population; should funding allow, such as through grants, a target LOS of 1.83 miles of trail per 1,000 population is established. EXHIBIT 3-11 Parks Levels of Service Analysis LOS per 1,000 residents Existin g 2023 2035 2038 Park Class Num. Unit Supply Demand Surplus (Deficit) Demand Surplus (Deficit) Demand Surplus (Deficit) Regional 19.07 Acres 723 634.0 88.92 723.0 (0.02) 747.9 (24.9) Community 3.05 Acres 115.5 101.4 14.01 115.6 (0.14) 119.6 (4.1) Neighborhood 0.16 Acres 7 5.3 1.67 6.1 0.93 6.3 0.72 Open Space 4.85 Acres 183.8 161.2 22.5 183.89 (0.08) 190.2 (6.4) Special Use 3.24 Acres 165.8 107.7 58.1 122.84 43.0 127.1 38.7 Trails: Target LOS 1.83 Miles 27.2 60.9 (33.7) 69.4 (42.2) 71.8 (44.6) Trails: Base LOS 0.52 Miles 27.2 17.29 9.91 19.72 7.48 20.39 6.81 Source: Jefferson County 2015, BERK, 2018. Carrying out the adopted level of service to 2038, some deficits would be found not only in trails but also with parks. The County’s park capital improvement program focuses on trial extension and addition, and park maintenance and capital replacement. If the County wishes to continue a focus on trails and avoiding addition of park acreage, the levels of service would need to be reduced for those facilities. This can be reflected in the Facilities and Utilities Element with corresponding changes in the PROS Plan, or the December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 26 current levels of service can be retained and future parks capital projects added in a subsequent PROS Plan to address the addition of parks acreage. EXHIBIT 3-12 Parks Levels of Service Alternative Park Classification Existing Park Acres or Miles PROS Plan 2015 & 2023 LOS Alternative LOS 2038 Regional Parks 723 19.07 18.43 Community Parks 115.5 3.05 2.94 Neighborhood Parks 7 0.16 0.18 Open Space 183.8 4.85 4.69 Special Use 165.8 3.24 3.24 Trails (Miles) Target LOS 27.2 1.83 1.83 Trail (Miles) Base LOS 27.2 0.52 0.52 Source: Jefferson County 2015, BERK, 2018. Capital Projects & Funding The 2015 PROS Plan identifies projects from 2015 through 2035. Planning level park and trail cost estimates for the period 2018-2035 are provided in the table below; since some projects may not have been completed in the 2015-2017 timeframe, the totals are listed below as well. Based on 2015-2017 Budget information regarding Fund 175, County Parks Improvement Fund, the County expended about $241,000 during that period, less than the $901,600 anticipated in the PROS Plan. Considering spending over the slightly longer 2015-2018 period based on budgets, the County would average over $98,000 per year, and for six years the total funds could equal $591,440, which could cover the 2018-2023 PROS Plan estimate of $501,500 plus make up in part for less spending in 2015-2017. It is likely that projects incomplete in the 2015-2017 years would carry into 2018-2023 and 2024-2038 periods. The County could seek higher grants and donations to make up the difference as well . The projects that would add capacity for new population include trail projects. Non - capacity projects include facility capital maintenance or replacement projects at parks across the system. See the 205 PROS Plan for more detail. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 27 EXHIBIT 3-13 PROS Plan Parks Project List & Funding Source (Cost in Thousands 2018$) Project / Type Revenue Sources Cost 2015-17 Cost: 2018-23 Cost: 2024-38 Total 2018-38 Adjusted Total 2018-23 with 2015- 17 Carryover Capacity Projects (Projects Required to Meet LOS) New Trail Network General Fund, donations & grants $16.00 $12.0 $0 $12.0 $28.0 Non-Capacity Projects (Other Projects Needed for Maintenance and Operations) Capital Maintenance and Replacement General Fund, donations & grants $885.60 $489.50 $2,450.00 $2,939.50 $3,492.40 Total $901.60 $501.50 $2,450.00 $2,951.50 $3,522.40 Source: Jefferson County 2015; BERK, 2018. 3.3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Overview Public Administration Facilities include the Animal Control Shelter, Community Centers, General Administrative Offices in the County Courthouse, two General Administrative Buildings on Castle Hill and Maintenance Shop Facilities in various locations. Inventory of Current Facilities Animal Control Shelter The County-owned Animal Control Shelter was constructed at Critter Lane in 1994. The Animal Control Shelter is available to residents of both the unincorporated and incorporated areas of the county. The table below identifies the current facility capacity and location. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 28 EXHIBIT 3-14 Animal Control Shelter Current Facilities Inventory Name Location Capacity Net Sq. Ft. Animal Shelter Critter Lane, Jefferson County 2,313 Total 2,313 Source: Jefferson County 2018 Community Centers The Brinnon Community Center was constructed during the 1960’s with a major remodel during 1986. The Gardiner Community Center was constructed in 1978 with a major remodel in 1999. The Port Townsend Community Center was remodeled in 1991. The Quilcene Community Center was constructed in 1976 with a major addition in 1999. The Tri-Area Community Center was constructed in 1981. The Coyle Community Center is not owned by the County; it is owned and managed by a special Park & Recreation Distr ict. The table below identifies the County’s current facility capacity and locations. EXHIBIT 3-15 Community Centers Current Facilities Inventory Name Location Capacity Net Sq. Ft. Brinnon Community Center Brinnon 4,820 Gardiner Community Center Gardiner 5,000 Port Townsend Community Center Port Townsend 17,708 Quilcene Community Center Quilcene 4,970 Tri Area Community Center Chimacum 6,975 Total 39,473 Source: Jefferson County 2018 The current inventory of County government administrative offices includes four County- owned facilities (Courthouse, Courthouse Annex, Castle Hill Building West, and Castle Hill Building east). The Table below lists the facilities and associated square foo tages. EXHIBIT 3-16 General Administrative Offices Current Facilities Inventory Name Location Capacity Net Sq. Ft. Jefferson County Courthouse Port Townsend Administrative Offices 15,420 Storage Building 2,112 Castle Hill Building-west Port Townsend 14,512 Castle Hill Building-east Port Townsend 8,000 Total 40,044 Source: Jefferson County 2018 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 29 The current inventory of County Maintenance Shop facilities totals 32,440 square feet, and includes five (5) County-owned facilities: Brinnon Storage/Shop, Clearwater Road Maintenance Shop, Quilcene Road Maintenance Shop, Hoh River Road Maintenance Shop, and the Port Hadlock Main Shop. EXHIBIT 3-17 Maintenance Shop Facilities Current Facilities Inventory Name Location Capacity Net Sq. Ft. Brinnon Storage Shop Brinnon 1,800 Clearwater Road Maintenance Shop Clearwater 8,400 Quilcene Road Maintenance Shop Quilcene 4,240 Hoh River Maintenance Shop West End 6,000 Port Hadlock Main Shop Port Hadlock 12,000 Total 32,440 Source: Jefferson County 2018 Level of Service Analysis Jefferson County is proposing to lower levels of service in two phases, one reduction for the 6-year planning period and a second reduction for the 7-20-year planning period. The existing levels of service are unnecessarily high and falsely indicate that the County needs additional facilities to meet the demands of an increasing population. The proposed lower levels of service eliminate facility deficits in all cases, eliminating the need to add capacity. The proposed Animal Control Shelter LOS yields a capacity reserve at the end of the planning period. No capacity projects are required. EXHIBIT 3-18 Animal Control Shelter Capacity Analysis Year Service Area Population Population Change Square Feet Required Square Feet Change Available Square Feet Reserve or (Deficit) County Proposed LOS Equals = 732 Square Feet Per 1,000 population 2018 31,667 2,185 2,313 128 2019 31,978 311 2,206 21 2,313 107 2020 32,291 313 2,228 22 2,313 85 2021 32,608 317 2,250 22 2,313 63 2022 32,927 319 2,272 22 2,313 41 2023 33,250 323 2,294 22 2,313 19 County Proposed LOS Equals = 58 Square Feet Per 1,000 population 2038 39,221 5,971 2,275 (19) 2,313 38 Total Proposed 2,313 38 Source: Jefferson County 2018 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 30 The proposed Community Center LOS will yield a small reserve at the end of the planning period. No capacity projects are required. EXHIBIT 3-19 Community Centers Capacity Analysis Year Service Area Population Population Change Square Feet Required Square Feet Change Available Square Feet Reserve or (Deficit) County Proposed LOS Equals = 1,185 Square Feet Per 1,000 population 2018 31,667 37,525 39,473 1,948 2019 31,978 311 37,894 369 39,473 1,579 2020 32,291 313 38,265 371 39,473 1,208 2021 32,608 317 38,640 376 39,473 833 2022 32,927 319 39,018 378 39,473 455 2023 33,250 323 39,401 383 39,473 72 County Proposed LOS Equals = 1,005 Square Feet Per 1,000 population 2038 39,221 5,971 39,417 16 39,473 56 Total Proposed 39,473 56 Source: Jefferson County 2018 The proposed General Administrative Offices LOS will yield a small reserve at the end of the planning period. No capacity projects are required. EXHIBIT 3-20 General Administrative Offices Capacity Analysis Year Service Area Population Population Change Square Feet Required Square Feet Change Available Square Feet Reserve or (Deficit) County Proposed LOS Equals = 1,200 Square Feet Per 1,000 population 2018 31,667 38,000 40,044 2,044 2019 31,978 311 38,374 373 40,044 1,670 2020 32,291 313 38,749 376 40,044 1,295 2021 32,608 317 39,130 380 40,044 914 2022 32,927 319 39,512 383 40,044 532 2023 33,250 323 39,900 388 40,044 144 County Proposed LOS Equals = 1,020 Square Feet Per 1,000 population 2038 39,221 5,971 40,005 105 40,044 39 Total Proposed 40,044 39 Source: Jefferson County 2018 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 31 The proposed Maintenance Shop LOS will yield a small reserve at the end of the planning period. No capacity projects are required. EXHIBIT 3-21 Maintenance Shop Facilities Capacity Analysis Year Service Area Population Population Change Square Feet Required Square Feet Change Available Square Feet Reserve or (Deficit) County Proposed LOS Equals = 975 Square Feet Per 1,000 population 2018 31,667 30,875 32,440 1,565 2019 31,978 311 31,179 304 32,440 1,261 2020 32,291 313 31,484 305 32,440 956 2021 32,608 317 31,793 309 32,440 647 2022 32,927 319 32,104 311 32,440 336 2023 33,250 323 32,419 315 32,440 21 County Proposed LOS Equals = 825 Square Feet Per 1,000 population 2038 39,221 5,971 32,357 (62) 32,440 83 Total Proposed 32,440 83 Source: Jefferson County 2018 Capital Projects & Funding Because there are no projected facility deficits capital spending on facilities will be confined to capital maintenance, repairs, and replacements. Should the County build a new law and justice center substantial additional administrative space will become available when law and justice functions move out of the Courthouse. EXHIBIT 3-22 Public Administration Project List & Funding Source (Cost in Thousands $) Project / Type Revenue Sources Cost: 2018-23 Cost: 2024-38 Total Capacity Projects (Projects Required to Meet LOS) None Not applicable $0 $0 $0 Non-Capacity Projects (Other Projects Needed for Maintenance and Operations) Various Facilities Improvements/Equipment REET, Fleet Services Fund Balance $3,373 $1,000 $4,373 Source: Jefferson County 2018 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 32 EXHIBIT 3-23 Public Administration: Summary of Capital Costs (2018$) Category Summary Cost: 2018-2023 Cost: 2024-2038 Total Cost Capacity Projects None None $0 Non-Capacity Projects $3,372,750 $1,000,000 $4,372,750 Total $3,372,750 $1,000,000 $4,372,750 Source: Jefferson County 2018 EXHIBIT 3-24 Public Administration: Summary of Capital Revenues (2018$) Revenue Source Revenue: 2018-2023 Cost: 2024-2038 Total Revenue REET 2,872,750 800,000 3,672,750 Fleet Services fund balance 500,000 200,000 700,000 Total 3,372,750 1,000,000 4,372,750 Source: Jefferson County 2018 3.4 SEWER Overview Jefferson County currently does not provide sewer services. However, the County has plans for providing sewer services to the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area as the area urbanizes. The potential service area is located approximately six miles south of the City of Port Townsend. Information about these service plans are detailed in the 2008 Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan. In 2020, Jefferson County revised the 2008 Port Hadlock Wastewater System: Urban Growth Area Sewer Facility Plan and 2013 Design Plans & Specifications for the Port Hadlock UGA with technical design updates to provide for a more cost-effective system. No changes to the service area, phasing, or level -of-service are planned. The 2020 Sewer Facility Plan Update is currently under review by the Washington State Department of Ecology and is incorporated by reference, as it may be amended, into the Comprehensive Plan. Jefferson County Public Health is responsible for permitting and programs related to onsite sewage systems in rural areas. Non-county sewer service providers include the City of Port Townsend, which provides sewer services to its residents, and the Olympic Water and Sewer District, which provides services to the designated Port Ludlow Master Planned Resort. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 33 The City of Port Townsend serves the city limits and has adopted its 2000 Wastewater Facilities Plan. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan also provides information about city sewer service. Inventory of Current Facilities The County currently does not own or operate sewage collection or treatment facilit ies. Because of the Port Hadlock / Irondale UGA designation, facility planning was undertaken to determine the specific capacity needs, potential ownership and operations scenarios, and funding requirements. The Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan, dated September 2008, has been accepted by the State Department of Health and State Department of Ecology as an engineering plan-level document. The Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan, dated September 2008 and Sewer Facility Plan Update, dated August 2020, as it may be amended, is hereby incorporated by reference into this Capital Facility Plan Technical Document and the associated Comprehensive Plan. The City of Port Townsend’s Comprehensive Plan lists an inventory of sewer facilities that includes a wastewater treatment plant, a secondary treatment facility, a compost facility, 70 miles of gravity sewer, 3 miles of force mains, seven sewage lift stations, and 1,250 maintenance holes. Olympic Water and Sewer maintains a treatment plant for its sewer services. Level of Service Analysis The County has not adopted a level of service for sewer services since service is pending in the future when funding is available. However, the UGA sewer plan projected an effective level of service for projected flow, shown in Exhibit 3-25. The sewer plan projects an area population of 5,776 by 2030, which is higher than this Plan’s population projections by 2038. For the effective level of service standards, the sewer plan notes peak hour flows as the target service to be met. Jefferson County is currently revising the 2008 Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan to focus on a more cost -effective system. No changes to the service area or phasing are anticipated. Once adopted by Jefferson County and approved by the Department of Ecology, Jefferso n County will update its Comprehensive Plan to incorporate level of service standards from the revised plan. The 2008 Jefferson County―Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan 2020 Sewer Facility Plan Update estimated population in the potential service area through 20308, which included an effective level of service based on assumed flow projections per equivalent residential unit. The 2020 Sewer Facility Plan Update used a 2038 population projection of 5,394 residents which is slightly lower than the 5,776 re sidents projecte in the 2008 Jefferson County Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan. The 2038 population projections are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s population projections. The previous sewer plan analyzed service levels with population projections through 2030, where it assumed 5,776 residents in the service area. Those projections are slightly higher than current projections from the 2018-2038 Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, which projects a 2038 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 34 population of 5,394. Thus, the ability to meet proposed level of services for future sewage systems remains the same. EXHIBIT 3-25 Growth & Potential Sewer Demand System Projected Wastewater Flows (Million gallons per day) Annual Average Maximum Monthly Peak Day Peak Hour Gravity Collection System 0.70 784,844 0.96 1,154,922 1.28 1,651,448 2.59 3,359,568 STEP Collection System 0.63 626,783 0.82 870,412 1.05 1,177,265 2.26 2,664,100 Grinder Pump Collection System 508,238 657,029 821,629 2,142,499 Source: Port Hadlock Sewer Facility Plan, 2009, BERK, 2018.Port Hadlock Sewer Facility Plan Update, 2020. The City of Port Townsend is responsible for its own level of service standards and is regulated by the Department of Ecology. Olympic Water and Sewer Inc. serves Port Ludlow and follows a Development Agreement approved by Jefferson County in 2000 which capped development at 2, 250 residential "Measurement Equivalent Residential Units" (MERU' s). One residential MERU equates to one residential unit and equals 200 gallons per day of sewer waste water flow. In 2015, 1, 544 residential dwelling units had been constructed, leaving 706 dwelling units remaining. (Jefferson County Resolution 38 -15) The Master Plan and associated utilities were sized for this growth. County plans assume mo st but not all the remaining 706 dwelling units would be built. Capital Projects & Funding The Port Hadlock Sewer Facility Plan for the area considered seven alternatives, which would include capital projects if selected. The first capital projects for sewer service would likely be a treatment facility and a collection system. The County anticipates continuing to secure funding in the six-year period of 2018-2023; implementation is not anticipated until after 2023. To allow urban density pending the development of the full treatment system, the County may allow alternative wastewater treatment systems that do not preclude future hook-up to traditional sewer. The County has considered grants, a local improvement district, and revenue collected from service ra tes to provide funding. The City of Port Townsend maintains a Capital Improvement Plan it adopts annually. The most recent CIP includes capital projects for sewer services within its 2017 -2022 planning period. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 35 3.5 SOLID WASTE Overview Jefferson County provides solid waste services, which includes collection of recyclables and disposal of solid waste, programs for waste reduction, recycling, organics, and special wastes disposal. The County’s 2016 Solid Waste Management Plan, is hereby incorporated by reference. Inventory of Current Facilities As described in the Solid Waste Management Plan (2016), t he primary solid waste and recycling facilities are co-located at 325 County Landfill Road, which is near Port Townsend about 0.75 miles west of Highway 20, and is referred to as the Jacob Miller Solid Waste Facilities. The property is zoned as an Essential Public Facility. The Jacob Miller Solid Waste Facilities include a closed landfill, the Jacob Miller transfer station, the recycling facility operated by Skookum Contract Services, and the City of Port Townsend’s Biosolids Compost Facility. There is one other facility open to the public in Jefferson County for solid waste disposal, which is the Quilcene Drop Box at 295312 Highway 101. That site accepts residential solid waste, recyclables, and a limited range of moderate-risk waste (MRW). The MRW Facility at the Port of Port Townsend accepts a wider range of hazardous waste materials. The inventory of Jefferson County solid waste facilities can be seen in Exhibit 3-26. The County also coordinates with other waste services providers, and will transfer materials to other providers as necessary. EXHIBIT 3-26 Solid Waste Facilities Current Facilities Inventory Name Capacity (Net Sq. Ft.) Location SW Transfer Station – Buildings 12,050 Co. Landfill Road, Jefferson County SW TS—Working Lot Area 51,290 Co. Landfill Road, Jefferson County Solid Waste Drop Box Facility 30,320 Highway 101, Quilcene Recycle Center—Buildings 10,900 Co. Landfill Road, Jefferson County Recycle Center—Working Lot Area 58,100 Co. Landfill Road, Jefferson County Moderate Risk Waste Facility 8,202 Port of Port Townsend Total Net Square Feet 170,862 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 36 Name Capacity (Net Sq. Ft.) Location Solid Waste Management Facility Co. Landfill Road, Jefferson County Actively Operated/Maintained Areas 35 acres Buffer Area 66 acres Total SW Facility Area 101 acres Level of Service Analysis The Solid Waste Management Plan projects population to 2035 up to 37,914, which is consistent with the OFM 2012 Medium Forecast adopted by Jefferson County, just for the horizon year of the system plan. Thus, it would be similar to the trajectory of the 20 18 Comprehensive Plan. The County effective level of service standards and demand projections for waste services are shown in the table below. The effective level of service is based on 2016 figures from the Solid Waste Management Plan and projected growth to 2038. The estimated demand generated by 2038 of garbage and recycling waste is over 46,000 pounds per day collectively. Waste management programs and policies are intended to reduce the amount of waste generated per capita, and these projections are conservative. EXHIBIT 3-27 Potential Solid Waste Demand Service Estimated Growth (2018-2038) Net Demand Generated Solid Waste, Garbage Effective LOS = 3.12 pounds per capita per day Solid Waste, Recycling Effective LOS = 2.8 pounds per capita per day Solid Waste, Garbage 7.916 24,698 Solid Waste, Recycle 7,916 22,165 Source: Jefferson County Solid Waste Management Plan, 2016, BERK, 2018. Capital Projects & Funding The County Solid Waste Management Plan is updated regularly and projects capital projects over a six-year planning period. The plan does note that assessments are planned for the two-county solid waste handling facilities, which may result in capital planning changes when completed. Those will be addressed in a separate study. The plan also anticipates that programs and facilities in Jefferson County will generally be able to stay on the course established by this SWMP for the next twenty years through 2035. Plans must be reviewed every five years and revised if necessary; the next review is anticipated in 2021. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 37 The County’s funding strategies include the following: EXHIBIT 3-28 Funding Strategies for Recommendations Project or Activity Garbage Rates Tipping Fees Special Waste Fees Grants Other Funding as Available Waste Reduction X X X Recycling and Organics X X X Solid Waste Collection X Transfer and Disposal X Special Wastes X X X Administration and Education X X X Source: Jefferson County 2016 3.6 STORMWATER Overview Jefferson County applies regulations that require development to manage runoff and pollutions. The County’s stormwater infrastructure is largely associated with its road system. The County has planned for urban stormwater infrastructure in the Port Hadlock/Irondale Urban Growth Area. Inventory of Current Facilities Most of the stormwater management facilities owned by Jefferson County serve County roads. In addition, there are facilities to collect, treat, convey, and dispose of stormwater runoff from County-owned buildings, including the County road maintenance facility, Community Centers, Sheriff’s office, and jail. There is also a storm sewer system in the area around the main intersection in Port Hadlock that collects runoff from Irondale Road, Chimacum Road, SR 116, and private properties and discharges it to Port Townsend Bay. This system does not have a treatment facility. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 38 Level of Service Analysis Jefferson County has adopted the standards of the Washington Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington as its level of service for designing stormwater management facilities. The County has also adopted the Washington State Department of Transportation Highway Runoff Manual as its LOS for stormwater management facilities for County roads. Capital Projects & Funding Jefferson County has prepared two plans that govern stormwater management, and future capital investment such as in the Urban Growth Area, and are hereby incorporated by reference: ▶ Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area Stormwater Management Plan, May 2004 ▶ Jefferson County Surface Water Management Plan, November 2006 Apart from investments in facilities that are associated with roads, no additional capital projects are planned in the six-year period. Implementation of the Urban Growth Area infrastructure would occur as urban development is approved, and as funding allows, over the 20-year planning horizon. 3.7 TRANSPORTATION Overview This section addresses transportation facilities and infrastructure in the County and supports both the Transportation Element and Capital Facilities and Utilities Element. Inventory of Current Facilities The County road inventory consists of 399.285 miles of County roads, with most roadways being local rural access roads; see Exhibit 3-29. There are also 32 County-owned bridges. EXHIBIT 3-29 County Road Miles by Functional Class (Thru Lane Surface) Functional Classification Miles Major Rural Collectors 36.35 Minor Rural Collectors 102.13 Local Rural Access 255.67 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 39 Functional Classification Miles Urban Collectors 5.14 Total 399.29 Source: Jefferson County Level of Service Analysis For roadways, LOS is typically described in terms of congestion, which may be measured by average travel speed or vehicular density. Six levels of service are defined from A to F with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F the worst. Jefferson County’s adopted level of service (LOS) standards are consistent with the standards established by the Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization (PRTPO) and the Washington State Department of Transportation. These standards are as follows: ▶ Rural Roads (roads outside an urban boundary line) = LOS C ▶ Urban Roads (roads within an urban boundary line) = LOS D ▶ Master Planned Resort Roads (roads within an MPR boundary line) = LOS D ▶ Highways of Regional Significance (rural corridors carrying an urban level of traffic) = LOS D The capacity analysis and traffic forecasts indicate that at the planning horizon year of 2038, all County roads are expected to operate at or above the adopted LOS standard. A few State Route segments will exceed their estimated capacity based on the level of service standards established by Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and the PRTPO, and the roadway LOS methodology adopted by the County. These LOS standards are based on roadway classification. State highways that are forecast to not meet LOS standards within the planning period include: ▶ SR 104 (Paradise Bay Road to Jefferson/Kitsap County Line) ▶ SR 19 (SR 116 to SR 20) The LOS analysis performed utilized a roadway capacity analysis that evaluated classified roadways throughout the County. Individual intersections were only analyzed within the County’s Tri-Area UGA, and the results of the analysis are presented in the UGA Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. The PRTPO utilized a similar methodology and process for evaluating traffic forecasts and levels of service. However, it differed from the County as it utilized direct ional PM peak hour roadway capacities instead of total daily volume capacities. The differences in LOS methodology resulted in the following additional state highway segments exceeding capacity: ▶ SR 104 (Eastbound direction from SR 19 to Paradise Bay Road) ▶ US 101 (Both directions from SR 104 to SR 20) December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 40 ▶ SR 20 (Thomas Street to Kearney Street) The state highway system is owned and maintained by WSDOT and serves regional and statewide travel needs. While several roadway segments of the state highway system through Jefferson County are expected to exceed adopted state LOS standards, further widening of the corridors to accommodate future demand would require significant investments in capital dollars, impact adjoining property owners, and would be beyond the financial capacity of Jefferson County. Capital Projects & Funding County-wide Annually, Jefferson County prepares a six-year transportation improvement program. Road and intersection improvements, and non-motorized improvements make up most of the proposed program. EXHIBIT 3-30 Transportation Capital Facilities Projects, 2018-2023 Capital Investment Type Cost Percent Engineering Assessments & County-wide Programs $584,000 3% Non-Motorized Transportation $4,671,000 28% Culvert & Bridge Replacement/Repair $3,670,000 22% Road & Intersection Improvements $7,495,000 44% Permanent Repairs and Mitigation for Emergency Projects $524,000 3% Total $16,944,000 100% Source: (Jefferson County Public Works, 2017) The six-year transportation improvement program is used to help seek federal and state funds. Historically, projects have averaged more than 70% funding from State and Federal sources. Local funds available for this proposed 6 -year capital program average only $277,000 per year. EXHIBIT 3-31 Transportation Funding Sources, 2018-2023 Funding Source Amount Percent Local $1,662,875 10% Other $0 0% State $10,120,150 60% December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 41 Funding Source Amount Percent Federal $5,160,975 30% Total $16,944,000 100% Source: (Jefferson County Public Works, 2017) Port Hadlock/Irondale Urban Growth Area Per Appendix C of the Comprehensive Plan Update, levels of service in the Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA and vicinity have been evaluated for the 2018 -2038 period. See that appendix for State Route segment analysis; as improvements to state highways are not under County control, they are not included in the County’s Capital Facility Plan Technical Document. However, several intersections of County roads and State Routes are addressed in the analysis below. Under existing conditions, roadway capacity on SR 19, SR 116, and all roadways in the Irondale-Port Hadlock UGA are adequate. However, there are several unfinalized intersections along SR 19 in the Irondale, Port Hadlock and Chimacum areas that experience long delays as vehicles wait for gaps in traffic on SR 19. To accommodate the minor street delays while also maintaining mobility on SR 19, a minimum number of interruptions to traffic flow (traffic signals or roundabouts) should be pursued. The most appropriate way to avoid excessive traffic control is to minimize the number of locations of traffic access onto SR 19 as well as control turn movements onto SR 19. The intersection of SR 19 and SR 116 (Ness's Corner) currently experiences the greatest side - street delay, and is therefore the most immediate need for signalization or roundabout installation. If traffic control is installed, traffic could be redirected to this intersection by way of further road improvements to facilitate traffic circulation and mobility. The benefits of this would include the following: ▶ Limited access to SR19 would increase the mobility along SR19 ▶ Minimize impacts of growth to the neighborhoods along Irondale Rd. ▶ Greater control of turn movements onto SR19 ▶ Reduce existing delays on the minor leg of the intersection ▶ Provide safe, efficient route through the UGA for freight and other commercial traffic Improved traffic control of the SR 19/SR 116 intersection would create sufficient gaps in traffic along SR 19 to allow safer, more comfortable turn movements onto SR 19. To reduce this delay, relieve congestion and enhance safety, this intersection should be signalized or have a roundabout installed per Appendix C. Several intersections experience similar problems to those of the SR19 /SR 116 intersection, such as SR 19 and Irondale Road, SR 19 and Prospect Avenue, and SR 19 and Four Corners Road. Excessive minor leg delays should be reduced by improved traffic control at these intersections. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 42 Under GMA and SEPA, new development and growth would not be required to mitigate existing deficiencies. The County could require new development to mitigate condition s back to existing levels of service, if traffic conditions worsen due to development. As growth and development continues in the Irondale-Port Hadlock UGA as planned over the next 20 years, further improvements to the road system will be required to main tain adopted level of service standards. Based on projected volumes, intersection improvements will be required at the following intersections by 2038: ▶ SR 19 & SR 116 ▶ Chimacum Road and SR 116 ▶ SR 19 & Irondale Rd. ▶ SR 19 & 4 Corners Rd. ▶ SR 116 & Cedar Ave ▶ SR 19 & Woodland Dr. ▶ SR 19 & Prospect Ave. The locations of improvements are shown in the Exhibit 3-32 below. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 43 EXHIBIT 3-32 Port Hadlock/Irondale Area Improvement Projects Source: Transpo Group, 2018 Costs of many of these improvements have been identified in a study of the SR 19/SR 20 Corridor. See Exhibit 3-33. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 44 EXHIBIT 3-33 SR 19/SR 20 Corridor Plan Intersection Improvement (2009$ in Millions) Project Cost Range: Low Cost Range High Partners/Resources SR 19 & SR 116 Intersection Control $3.6 $4.8 State Chimacum Road and SR 116 Pending Pending State and Jefferson County SR 19 & Irondale Rd. Intersection Control $1.5 $2.0 State and Jefferson County SR 19/Four Corners Rd Channelization $0.5 $0.7 State and Jefferson County SR 19/Four Corners Rd Intersection Control Pending Pending State and Jefferson County SR 116 & Cedar Ave Pending Pending State and Jefferson County SR 19/ Airport Woodland Drive Intersection Control $2.2 $3.0 State and Jefferson County SR 19/Prospect Ave. Intersection Control $1.2 $1.5 State and Jefferson County Total All Projects $9.00 $12.00 Total (Excluding SR 19 & SR 16) $5.4 $7.2 Source: (Transpo Group, 2012) If adjusted for inflation roughly to the Consumer Price Index, the Total (excluding the state intersection of SR 19 & 2916) would equal $6.4 to $8.5 million. (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2018) New development could be required to pay for these improvements through new construction, or pro-rata payments to defined improvements. A Transportation Impact Analysis would be needed for new developments to distinguish between existing deficiencies (not growth funded) and deficiencies caused by the new development (growth funded). December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 45 3.8 EDUCATION Overview Public education in Jefferson County is provided by seven school districts. An inventory of each district’s schools is provided in this section. Inventory of Current Facilities The table below lists each district and the population in its service area. The Port Townsend and Chimacum School Districts contain the most population in their boundaries. A map of each district follows. EXHIBIT 3-34 School Districts Serving Jefferson County Name District Population 2017 Brinnon School District No. 46 1,326 Chimacum School District No. 49 11,894 Port Townsend School District No. 50 14,996 Queets-Clearwater School District No. 20 645 Quilcene School District No. 48 1,851 Quillayute Valley School District No. 402 258 Sequim School District No. 323 390 Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, Office of Financial Management, BERK, 2018 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 46 EXHIBIT 3-35 School Districts Map Source: Jefferson County, 2018. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 47 Each district is further detailed with information about its number of students, teachers, building space, and building condition. The building condition score definitions are below: Building Condition Score Definitions Excellent (range 95-100%) – New or easily restorable to “like new” condition. Only minimal routine maintenance is required. Good (range 85-94%) – Preventative maintenance and/or corrective repair(s) is/are required. Fair (range 62-84%) – Fails to meet code and functional requirements in some cases. Failure(s) are inconvenient and extensive corrective maintenance and repair is required. Poor (range 30-61%) – Consistent substandard performance. Failure(s) are disruptive and costly – fails most code and functional requirements. Requires constant attention, renovation, or replacement. Major correction, repair or overhaul required. Unsatisfactory (range 0-29%) – Non-operational or significantly substandard performance. Replacement required. Source: OSPI, BERK, 2018. Brinnon School District The Brinnon School district serves the unincorporated Brinnon area with one elementary district. Building condition is scored as in the fair range. EXHIBIT 3-36 Brinnon District Student to Teacher (S-T) Ratio School Grade Span Students 2016-17 Teachers S-T Ratio Address Brinnon School District 46 62 5 12 Brinnon Elementary K-8 62 5 12 46 Schoolhouse Rd, Brinnon Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. EXHIBIT 3-37 Brinnon District Facility Information School Square Feet Instructiona l Square Feet Classrooms Building Condition Score Brinnon School District 46 13,737 13,737 4 Brinnon Elementary 13,737 13,737 4 71.88 Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 48 Chimacum School District The Chimacum School District operates six schools spanning grades K -12. EXHIBIT 3-38 Chimacum District Student to Teacher (S-T) Ratio School Grade Students 2016-17 Teachers S-T Ratio Address Chimacum School District 49 1,064 82 13 Chimacum Creek Primary School K-2 242 16 15 313 Ness Corner Rd Port Hadlock Chimacum Elementary School 3-5 198 20 10 91 West Valley Rd Chimacum Chimacum Middle School 6-8 211 15 14 91 West Valley Rd Chimacum Chimacum High School 9-12 322 20 16 91 West Valley Rd Chimacum Open Doors Reengagement Program 9-12 19 3 6 91 West Valley Rd Chimacum PI Program K-12 72 8 9 91 West Valley Rd Chimacum Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. The building condition scores are generally fair to good except for some buildings at Chimacum Elementary that are poor. EXHIBIT 3-39 Chimacum District Facility Information School Square Feet Instructiona l Square Feet Classrooms Building Condition Score Chimacum School District 49 216,025 214,597 53 Chimacum Creek Primary School 29,739 29,739 16 88.24 Chimacum Elementary School 49,212 47,784 6 Bldg. 300-63.49 Bldg. 400-51.02 MP-79.77 Chimacum High School 77,186 77,186 14 68.02 Chimacum Middle School 59,888 59,888 17 Bldg. 100-72.34 Bldg. 200-80.22 Open Doors Reengagement Program PI Program Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 49 Port Townsend School District The Port Townsend district operates four schools spanning grades K through 12. It serves Port Townsend, the sole incorporated city in Jefferson as well as other adjacent territory. EXHIBIT 3-40 Port Townsend District Student to Teacher (S-T) Ratio School Grade Students 2016-17 Teachers S-T Ratio Address Port Townsend School District 50 1,184 88 13 Grant Street Elementary K-5 376 33 11 1637 Grant St Port Townsend Blue Heron Middle School 4-8 402 28 14 3939 San Juan Ave Port Townsend Port Townsend High School 9-12 338 24 14 1500 Van Ness St Port Townsend OCEAN K-12 68 3 23 3939 San Juan Ave. Port Townsend Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. Buildings are rated fair to good. EXHIBIT 3-41 Port Townsend District Facility Information School Square Feet Instructiona l Square Feet Class- rooms Building Condition Score Port Townsend School District 50 206,597 206,597 34 Blue Heron Middle School 60,124 60,124 3 88.29 Grant Street Elementary 35,702 35,702 17 76.34 OCEAN Port Townsend High School 110,771 110,771 14 Main-67.71 Gym-75.94 Stuart-71.07 Math-72.78 Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. Queets-Clearwater School District The Queets-Clearwater district operates one school serving grades K through 8. It has a small enrollment of 33 students. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 50 EXHIBIT 3-42 Queets-Clearwater District Student to Teacher (S-T) Ratio School Grade Students 2016-17 Teachers S-T Ratio Address Queets-Clearwater School District 20 33 3 11 Queets-Clearwater Elementary K-8 33 3 11 146000 Hwy 101 Forks Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. Building are rated fair to good. Discussions with school staff indicated that their main building is likely past its useful life. EXHIBIT 3-43 Queets-Clearwater District Facility Information School Square Feet Instructional Square Feet Classrooms Building Condition Score Queets-Clearwater School District 20 28,849 28,849 5 Queets-Clearwater Elementary 28,849 28,849 5 Main-72.26 Playshed-90.00 Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. Quilcene School District The Quilcene district operates three schools with grades Pre-Kindergarten through 12. EXHIBIT 3-44 Quilcene District Student to Teacher (S-T) Ratio School Grade Students Teachers S-T Ratio Address Quilcene School District 48 309 33 9 Crossroads Community School 9-12 5 1 5 294715 US Highway 101 Quilcene PEARL K-8 100 13 8 294715 US Highway 101 Quilcene Quilcene High and Elementary PK-12 204 19 11 294715 Highway 101 Quilcene Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 51 The Quilcene district has buildings rated fair to good. EXHIBIT 3-45 Quilcene District Facility Information School Square Feet Instructional Square Feet Classrooms Building Condition Score Quilcene School District 48 54,099 53,829 20 Crossroads Community School PEARL Quilcene High and Elementary 54,099 53,829 20 Elem-74.06 MS-76.87 HS-78.08 MP-87.41 Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. Quillayute Valley School District The Quillayute district operates six school spanning grades Pre-Kindergarten 12. EXHIBIT 3-46 Quillayute Valley District Student to Teacher (S-T) Ratio School Grade Students Teachers S-T Ratio Address Quillayute Valley School District 402 3,079 74 14a District Run Home School K-12 21 1 21 382 South Forks Avenue Forks Forks Alternative School 9-12 32 1 32 161 East E Street Forks Forks Elementary School PK-3 328 25 13 301 South Elderberry Ave Forks Forks Intermediate School 4-6 242 21 12 121 S Spartan Ave Forks Forks Junior-Senior High School 7-12 440 26 17 261 South Spartan Avenue Forks Insight School of Washington 9-12 2,016 N/A N/A 411 South Spartan Ave Forks a Calculated using only teaching locations with students and teacher counts available. Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 52 Building conditions are fair to excellent. EXHIBIT 3-47 Quillayute Valley Facility Information School Square Feet Instructiona l Square Feet Classrooms Building Condition Score Quillayute Valley School District 402 229,515 176,784 69 District Run Home School Forks Alternative School 2,205 2,205 2 84.68 Forks Elementary School 68,570 68,570 28 Main-74.14 Playshed1-81.21 Playshed2-76.98 Forks Intermediate School 52,784 53 14 Main-76.11 Gym-87.14 Playshed-89.38 Forks Junior-Senior High School 105,956 105,956 25 Main-81.12 2000 Add-90.05 2012 Add-98.77 Auto-84.49 CTE-97.85 Insight School of Washington Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. Sequim School District The Sequim district operates five school spanning grades P re-Kindergarten through 12. EXHIBIT 3-48 Sequim District Student to Teacher (S-T) Ratio School Grade Span Students Teachers S-T Ratio Address Sequim School District 323 2,866 177 16 Greywolf Elementary School K-5 552 34 16 171 Carlsborg Rd. Sequim Helen Haller Elementary School K-5 621 43 14 350 W. Fir Street Sequim Sequim Community School PK-12 140 9 16 220 W. Alder Sequim 98382 Sequim Middle School 6-8 637 38 17 301 W. Hendrickson Rd. Sequim Sequim Senior High 9-12 916 53 17 601 N. Sequim Ave. Sequim Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 53 Building rate from poor to good; poor buildings are found at the Sequim Community School and Sequim Senior High. EXHIBIT 3-49 Sequim District Facility Information School Square Feet Instruction al Square Feet Classrooms Building Condition Score Sequim School District 323 399,897 345,369 105 Greywolf Elementary School 43,659 43,659 23 80.77 Helen Haller Elementary School 48,617 48,617 29 A-70.46 B-73.82 C-71.78 D-77.45 Sequim Community School 71,135 34,248 5 Main-59.88 Gym-55.78 Sequim Middle School 88,669 88,669 26 89.69 Sequim Senior High 147,817 130,176 22 A-67.79 B-58.07 C-62.89 D-68.75 E-61.59 F-86.60 G-65.74 H-89.46 L-81.57 Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. Level of Service Analysis This section compares Adopted level of service standards and effective level of service. Adopted level of service standards are measurements of t he minimum level of service provided to meet community needs as adopted in Jefferson County’s Comprehensive Plan, while effective level of service is what level of service is provided. Future student generation is developed by estimating the number of future households and apply student generation rates. The student generation rates are derived from current base year (2016-17) students reported by district by Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, and the State of Washington Office of Financia l Management (OFM) small area estimates of households in each district. Growth allocations identified in the Land Use Element were assumed in determining future households. UGA and Master Planned Resort developments were considered in the appropriate school district. Rural population was divided by the share of county-wide population by each school district. State laws to lower student to teacher ratios have passed since the last Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. The Table below shows class size standards for Washington State prototypical schools. Laws regarding class size reduction standards have had December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 54 implementation delays and has been subject to on-going revisions regarding requirements, and some districts will not be required to meet the same stand ards depending on district need. This State average class size standard could be used as a universal level of service in County policies, but since some districts have implementation delays this analysis assumes application of the County’s current policies and effective levels of service. EXHIBIT 3-50 Washington State General Education Average Class Size Grade Level Class Size K through 3 17.00 4 through 5 27.00 7 through 8 28.53 9 through 12 28.74 Source: RCW 28A.150.260. Brinnon School District No. 46 The adopted level of service standards for the Brinnon School District does not exceed 23 students per classroom for grades K through 8. The table below shows the effective level of service standard of students to classroom at well below the standard. The number of new students due to growth is almost 50% above the small enrollment the school has now. Depending on the rate of growth more classrooms may be needed; need may be temporarily met through portables. EXHIBIT 3-51 Brinnon School District Level of Service Adopted Level of Service Standard = K 8: not to exceed 23 students/classroom Effective Level of Service = 15.5 students/classroom District Students May 2017 Classrooms Students per Classroom 2017 Occupied Dwelling Units District Student Generation Factor New Households 2038 New Students Classroom Need @ effective LOS Brinnon School District No. 46 62 4 15.5 646 0.10 282 27 2 Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK. 2018. Chimacum School District No. 49 The adopted level of service standards for the Chimacum School District is not to exceed 27 students per classroom for grades K through 12. The table below shows the effective level of service standard of students to classroom at less than that standard. New December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 55 households in the district would include those moving into the Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA and Port Ludlow as well as rural households. New classrooms may be needed depending on the rate of growth; alternatively, the school may use portables, adjust school attendance areas, or other management. EXHIBIT 3-52 Chimacum School District Level of Service Adopted Level of Service Standard = K 12: not to exceed 27 students/classroom Effective Level of Service = 20 students/classroom District Students May 2017 Classrooms Students per Classroom 2017 Occupied Dwelling Units District Student Generation Factor New Households 2038 New Students Classroom Need @ effective LOS Chimacum School District No. 49 1,064 53 20.1 5,388 0.20 1,707 337 17 Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK. 2018. Port Townsend School District No. 50 The adopted level of service standards for the Port Townsend School District is not to exceed 26 students per classroom for grades K through 3, not to exceed 30 students per classroom for grades 4 through 6, and not to exceed 34 students per classroom for grades 7 through 12. Tabular data below shows the effective level of service s tandard of students to classrooms to be above the K-3 number but below others. Given planned growth, over 300 new students would be expected. These may need new classrooms. Depending on the rate of growth, portables or other management measures may be needed. EXHIBIT 3-53 Port Townsend School District Level of Service Adopted Level of Service Standard = K 3: not to exceed 26 students/classroom Grades 4 6: not to exceed 30 students/classroom Grades 7 12: not to exceed 34 students/classroom Effective Level of Service = 27.5 students/classroom District Students May 2017 Classrooms Students per Classroom 2017 Occupied Dwelling Units District Student Generation Factor New Households 2038 New Students Classroom Need @ effective LOS Port Townsend School District No. 50 1,184 43 27.5 7,298 0.16 1,899 308 11 Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK. 2018. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 56 Queets-Clearwater School District No. 20 The adopted level of service standards for the Queets -Clearwater School District is not to exceed 26 students per classroom for grades K through 12. The table shows the effective level of service standard of students to classroom below that policy. Future growth would increase the need for classrooms potentially, depending on the rate of growth. Portables or other management measures may be needed. EXHIBIT 3-54 Queets-Clearwater School District Level of Service Adopted Level of Service Standard = K 12: not to exceed 26 students/classroom Effective Level of Service = 24 students/classroom District Students May 2017 Classrooms Students per Classroom 2017 Occupied Dwelling Units District Student Generation Factor New Households 2038 New Students Classroom Need @ effective LOS Queets-Clearwater School District No. 20 338 14 24.1 82 4.11 23 94 4 Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK. 2018. Quilcene School District No. 48 The adopted Quilcene level of service standards is not to exceed 26 students per classroom for grades K through 12. The table following shows the effective level of service standard of students to classroom at below that standard. Relatively few households are expected over the 20-year period generating about 24 students, and potentially needing two classrooms though rate and timing of growth would determine that need. Portables may be used. EXHIBIT 3-55 Quilcene School District Level of Service Adopted Level of Service Standard = K 12: not to exceed 26 students/classroom Effective Level of Service = 15 students/classroom District Students May 2017 Classrooms Students per Classroom 2017 Occupied Dwelling Units District Student Generation Factor New Households 2038 New Students Classroom Need @ effective LOS Quilcene School District No. 48 309 20 15.5 843 0.37 65 24 2 Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 57 Quillayute Valley School District No. 402 The adopted level of service standards for the Quillayute Valley School District are to not exceed 26 students per classroom for grades K through 12. The effective level of service standard of students to classroom is less than that. Growth is expected to be minimal over the 20-year planning period and no additional classrooms are projected . EXHIBIT 3-56 Quillayute Valley School District Level of Service Adopted Level of Service Standard = K 12: not to exceed 26 students/classroom Effective Level of Service = 15.4 students/classroom District Students May 2017 Classrooms Students per Classroom 2017 Occupied Dwelling Units District Student Generation Factor New Households 2038 New Students Classroom Need @ effective LOS Quillayute Valley School District No. 402 1,063 69 15.4 3,042 0.35 9 3 0 Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. Sequim School District No. 323 The adopted level of service standards for the Sequim School District are to not exceed 26 students per classroom for grades K through 12. The table below shows the effective level of service standard of students to classroom is a little higher, though this is district-wide including the neighboring county . Based on the minimal planned growth in the portion of the district within Jefferson County, few students are expected to be added to current classrooms. EXHIBIT 3-57 Sequim School District Level of Service Adopted Level of Service Standard = K 12: not to exceed 26 students/classroom Effective Level of Service = 27 students/classroom District Students May 2017 Classrooms Students per Classroom 2017 Occupied Dwelling Units District Student Generation Factor New Households 2038 New Students Classroom Need @ effective LOS Sequim School District No. 323 2866 105 27.3 14,573 0.20 14 3 0 Source: Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, BERK, 2018. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 58 Capital Projects & Funding This section identifies if there are any known and planned improvements for schools within the seven districts. Brinnon School District No. 46 The Brinnon School District has no capital project list available currently. Previous capital projects have been funded by the District through its capital projects fund. The District recently passed a levy to fund maintenance and operations 1. Chimacum School District No. 49 The Chimacum School District has no known capital projects list available currently. The District School Board has voted on a resolution to authorize a levy for capital projects, which if passed will include funds available for capital projects. The proposition would fund renovation, upgrades, and modernization of District facilities 2. Port Townsend School District No. 50 The Port Townsend School District has no capital project list available currently. Currently, the District uses approved bond capacity and to fund capital projects, and education levy to fund maintenance and operations. The approved bond was to fund the Grant Street Elementary School3. Queets-Clearwater School District No. 20 The Queets-Clearwater School District has no capital project list available currently. The District recently passed a levy to fund maintenance and op erations4. In the past, the District has funded capital projects with special purpose grants. Quilcene School District No. 48 The Quilcene School District has no capital project list available currently. The District recently passed a levy to fund maintenance and operations5. 1 Source: http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/politics/brinnon-queets-clearwater-initial-results-approve-school-levies/ 2 Source: http://www.csd49.org/userfiles/181/my%20files/resolution%202018-1.pdf?id=6436 3 Source: http://www.ptschools.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_154927/File/Bond%20Info/Draft%20Res.15-12.pdf 4 Source: http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/politics/brinnon-queets-clearwater-initial-results-approve-school-levies/ 5 Source: https://www.quilcene.wednet.edu/ December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 59 Quillayute Valley School District No. 402 The Quillayute Valley School District has no capital project list available currently. The District recently passed a levy to fund maintenance and operations 6 Sequim School District No. 323 The Sequim Valley School District has no capital project list available currently, however the District is current considering its capital project plans. The District recently passed a levy to fund maintenance and operations 7. 6Source: http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/news/success-story-for-port-angeles-quillayute-valley-school-levies/ 7Source: http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/news/sequim-school-district-considering-changes-to-capital-project-plans/ December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 60 3.9 FIRE PROTECTION Overview Fire protection service in Jefferson County is provided by seven fire districts8, one of which also serves the City of Port Townsend. Fire District 7 also serve a population of 19 near Forks and does not have publicly available information about the Distri ct. EXHIBIT 3-58 Fire Districts Serving Jefferson County, 2017 Name Population in Service Area Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 1 - Operating as East Jefferson Fire and Rescue - Serves City of Port Townsend - Merged with Fire District 6: Cape George/Kala Point/Beckett Point Area 21,385 Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 2—Quilcene 2,007 Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 3—Port Ludlow Fire & Rescue 4,763 Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 4—Brinnon 1,324 Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 5—Discovery Bay— Gardiner 531 Jefferson County Fire District No. 7—Clearwater—Queets 19 Source: Municipal Research & Services Center, Office of Financial Management, BERK, 2018. 8 The Jefferson County online GIS mapping identifies District 8 in eastern and District 9 in western Jefferson County. However, other Municipal Research Services Center and Office of Financial Management data does not list information about these districts. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 61 EXHIBIT 3-59 Fire Districts Map Source: Municipal Research & Services Center, BERK, 2018. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 62 Jefferson County Fire Protection Districts work with JeffCom for 911 dispatching services. The JeffCom dispatch services provide communications for the County Sheriff, Port Townsend Police, County Emergency Management, in addition to five fire districts. While dispatch services are not directly involved in fire department organization, they do play an important role in fire protection, especially regarding turnout time performance. A small dispatch organization serving a relatively large number of public service agencies may strain the ability of service providers to perform their duties. Inventory of Current Facilities Each district’s stations and locations are inventoried in the chart below. More information about each District’s apparatus is provided in subsections on following pages. EXHIBIT 3-60 Jefferson County Fire Districts & Stations Districts and Stations ADDRESS FPD No. 1—Operating as East Jefferson Fire & Rescue Station 1-1 The Wally Westergaard Station 9193 Rhody Drive, Chimacum Station1-5 The Henry Miller Station 35 Critter Lane, Port Townsend Station 1-6 The Uptown Station 701 Harrison St., Port Townsend Station 1-2 The Marrowstone Island Station 6693 Flagler Rd., Nordland Station 1-3 The Airport Station 50 Airport Rd., Port Townsend Station 1-4 The Cape George station 3850 Cape George Rd., Port Townsend FPD No. 2—Quilcene Station 2-1 70 Herbert St., Quilcene Station 2-2 30 Whitney Road, Quilcene Station 2-3 3281 Dabob Road, Quilcene FPD No. 3—Port Ludlow Fire & Rescue Station 3-1 Headquarters 7650 Oak Bay Road, Port Ludlow Station 3-2 121 West Alder Street, Port Ludlow Station 3-3 101 South Point Road, Port Ludlow FPD No. 4—Brinnon Station 4-1 Headquarters 272 Schoolhouse Road, Brinnon FPD No. 5—Discovery Bay—Gardiner Station 5-1 12 Bentley Place, Port Townsend Station 5-2 2000 Old Gardiner Road, Gardiner FPD No. 7—Clearwater Source: Municipal Research & Services Center, Fire District 2 and 4, BERK, 2018. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 63 Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 1—East Jefferson Fire & Rescue Fire District 1 operates 6 stations total, with 3 unstaffed stations. The unstaffed stations are available for volunteers who may use the station and apparatus in part of their duties as volunteer fire responders. EXHIBIT 3-61 East Jefferson Fire & Rescue Inventory of Apparatus Apparatus / Unit Id Year Built Make and Model Capabilities / Description 1-1 The Wally Westergaard Station Engine 11 2013 Spartan Engine 1500 GPM pump, 750 Gallon tank Medic 11 2010 Ford/Braun E-450 ALS Medic Unit Aid 11 2003 Ford/Braun F-350 4X4 BLS Aid Unit Air 11 1992 Chevrolet 1-ton 4wd/Becker Utility Truck Articulating Light Tower and breathing air cascade system Tender 11 1993 International 6X6 2500 Gallon Water Tender Brush 11 2008 Ford F-450 4X4 350 Gallon Brush Engine 1-5 The Henry Miller Station Engine 15 2012 Crimson Engine 1500 GPM pump 750 Gallon Tank Engine 152 2000 Pierce Reserve Engine 1500 GPM pump 750 Gallon Tank Aid 15 2008 Ford/Braun E-450 BLS Aid Unit Medic 15 2010 Ford/Braun E-450 ALS Medic Unit Brush 15 2006 Ford F-450 4X4 350 Gallon Brush Engine / Snow Plow Medic 152 2002 Ford/Braun E-450 Reserve ALS Medic Unit 1-6 The Uptown station Engine 16 2012 Crimson Engine 1500 GPM, 750-gallon tank Ladder 16 1988 Suphen Quint 90' aerial, 1500 GPM, 300-gallon tank Battalion 16 2003 Ford 4x4 Excursion Command vehicle Medic 16 2014 Ford E-450 ALS Medic Unit Aid 16 2008 Ford/Braun F-350 4x4 BLS Unit 1-2 The Marrowstone Island station Engine 12 2001 Ford/E-One Engine 1250 GPM pump 750 Gallon tank Aid 12 2000 Ford/Braun E-450 BLS Aid Unit Antique Engine 1955 Ford Antique Engine Not applicable 1-3 The Airport Station Engine 13 1988 Sutphen Engine 1500 GPM pump, 750-gallon tank Tender 13 1992 White / E-One 2500-gallon Water Tender December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 64 Apparatus / Unit Id Year Built Make and Model Capabilities / Description MSU-13 1999 Ford/Medtec E-450 BLS Mass Casualty Unit 1-4 The Cape George station Antique Engine 1941 Chevrolet Pumper Not applicable Source: BERK, 2018. Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 2—Quilcene District 2 operates two stations with multiple apparatus listed below. EXHIBIT 3-62 District No. 2—Quilcene Inventory of Apparatus Apparatus / Unit Id Year Built Make and Model Capabilities / Description Station 21 CMD 201 2008 Ford SUV Chief Command Rig CMD 202 2005 Chevy Deputy Chief’s Rig Aid 212 2005 Ford E450 Second out Aid Unit Aid 21 2016 GMC First out Aid Unit E21 2005 Freightliner Engine 21 E21 1986 International First out tender Support 21 1996 Ford Support Van Utility 21 2005 Chevy 2500 Utility truck Utility 212 2005 Ford Escape Utility vehicle Station 22 E22 1986 Ford First Out Engine B22 1995 Ford 350 Brush Truck Station 23 A22 1994 Ford 350 Third out aid car Source: Personal communication, J. Morris, QVFD Secretary, 2018. Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 3—Port Ludlow Fire & Rescue Fire Protection District 3 protects the Port Ludlow area. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 65 EXHIBIT 3-63 District No. 3—Port Ludlow Inventory of Apparatus Apparatus / Unit Id Year Built Make & Model Capabilities / Description Station 31 (Headquarters) Duty Chief 2008 Chevy Tahoe Duty Officer/Reserve Unit 2006 GMC Envoy Medic 31 2016 International TerraStar Ambulance Engine 31 2010 Darley/Spartan Fire Engine 1250 GPM Pump w/ CAFS, 750-gallon tank Tender 31 2003 Freightliner FL- 112 Class A Pumper/Tender, 1250 GPM pump, 2500 Gallon tank Aid 31 2003 Ford F-350 BLS Ambulance (Back up ALS Ambulance) Rescue 31 1997 Ford E-450 SuperDuty Technical Rescue Unit (Back up ALS/BLS transport Unit) Marine 31 29' Life Timer Boat via partnership with North Kitsap Fire Pickup 31 2000 Ford F-250 Utility Pickup Trailer 31 2010 Bull Ex Fire Safety Trailer KitchenFire Training, Natural Disaster, Home Escape Drills, Kids Fire Safety Station 32 Brush 32 1994 Ford F700 Wildland Unit Station 33 Aid 33 2009 Ford E-450 ALS Ambulance Tender 33 2003 Freightliner FL- 112 Class A Pumper/Tender, 1250 gpm pump, 2500 Gallon tank Source: District website; BERK, 2018 Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 4—Brinnon District 4 apparatus is listed. The District recently has sold two of its station properties, what were previously stations 4-2 and 4-3. Those stations were being used as storage at the time they were sold, and equipment that was kept there has been moved to station 4-1. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 66 EXHIBIT 3-64 District No. 4—Brinnon Inventory of Apparatus Apparatus / Unit Id Year Built Make & Model Capabilities / Description Headquarters—Station 4-1 Engine 4-1 Aid 4-1 Tender 4-1 Tender 4-4 Brush 4-1 Utility Vehicle Engine 4-2 Aid 4-2 Source: Personal communication, T. Manly, Fire Chief, 2018. Note: Apparatus details were not available at the time of final publication. Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 5—Discovery Bay—Gardiner District 5 apparatus is listed below. EXHIBIT 3-65 District No. 5—Discovery Bay—Gardiner Inventory of Apparatus Apparatus / Unit Id Year Built Make & Model Capabilities / Description Station 51 Station 52 Fort Gary Engine 1,000 gallons water, Injectable Foam Extrication Equipment E-One Engine 10,000 gallons water, Injectable Foam, Extrication Equipment International 6x6 water tender 2,800 gallons water International Wild Land Brush Truck 1,000 gallons water North Star BLS Ambulance Med-Tech BLS Ambulance Ford Expedition Command Vehicle Ford Expedition Command Vehicle Ford Bronco Utility Vehicle December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 67 Source: Fire District 5 website, retrieved April 2018 Note: Apparatus details and location were not available at the time of final publication. Jefferson County Fire Protection District No . 7—Clearwater District 7 apparatus is shown below. The district does not have a headquarters, and its equipment is stored at an old courthouse in Clearwater. EXHIBIT 3-66 District No. 7—Clearwater Inventory of Apparatus Apparatus / Unit Id Year Built Make & Model Capabilities / Description Stored at Old Courthouse Tanker Engine Source: Personal communication, C. Hay, Fire Commissioner, 2018 Note: Apparatus details were not available at the time of final publication. Level of Service Analysis Adopted level of service standards for fire protection services are set by appropriate legislative bodies, however Fire Districts are required to establish service delivery standards, as detailed in RCW Chapter 52.33. Fire department service delivery objectives include specific response time objectives to be met, which may be set by legislative bodies or Fire Departments. Response and turnout time levels of service are influenced by many factors unique to each provider. For consistent comparisons of fire services provides by districts with different needs, the County has adopted fire and EMS apparatus units per 1,000 capita. Fire suppression units includes fire engines, water tenders, and other emergency units. Life support units include vehicles equipped with advance life support or basic life support systems. Base year (2017) population estimates are from the State of Washington Office of Financial Management small area estimates by fire district boundaries. Future ye ar population estimates are consistent with Resolution #38-15; urban and master plan resort populations are assumed in the appropriate district; rural growth shares were divided based on each district’s current share of 2017 population. Where fire and emergency units per 1,000 population LOS policies are not met, use of the effective level of service could be employed in policy amendments. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 68 Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 1—Operating as East Jefferson Fire & Rescue Fire District 1 tracks turnout time but has not adopted it as a level of service standard.: The District’s results show: ▶ 3 staffed stations average: average turnout time is 1 minute 23 seconds. ▶ Station 1-1: Fire response turnout time is 1 minute 48 seconds. EMS turnout time is 1 minute 30 seconds. ▶ Station 1-5: Fire response turnout time is1 minute 50 seconds. EMS turnout time is 48 seconds. ▶ Station 1-6: Fire response turnout time is 2 minutes 8 seconds. EMS turnout time is 1 minute 18 seconds. The District appears to be exceeding emergency medical service apparatus rates applying the Port Townsend Fire Department Level of Service (the District serves the City and other districts have been absorbed). As population grows, additional apparatus may be needed or may require replacement. EXHIBIT 3-67 East Jefferson Fire & Rescue Level of Service Unit Type Apparatus Number Population Served Effective LOS Estimated Growth (2018-2038) Need with Effectiv e LOS Adopted level of service standard = 0.29 EMS units in service per 1,000 population. Fire Suppression Units 12 21,385 0.56 4,330 2.43 Life Support Units 9 21,385 0.42 4,330 1.82 Source: Fire District 1, BERK, 2018. Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 2—Quilcene Currently, Fire Protection District 2 does not appear to meet the fire level of service adopted in the Comprehensive Plan, but does meet the emergency medical level of service policy. As population grows, additional apparatus may be needed. EXHIBIT 3-68 District No. 2—Quilcene Level of Service Unit Type Apparatus Number Population Served Effective LOS Growth (2018-2038) Need with Effectiv e LOS Adopted level of service standard = 4.1 fire units in service per 1,000 population and 1.4 EMS units in service per 1,000 population. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 69 Unit Type Apparatus Number Population Served Effective LOS Growth (2018-2038) Need with Effectiv e LOS Fire Suppression Units 4 2,007 2.0 375 0.75 Life Support Units 3 2,007 1.5 375 0.56 Source: Personal communication, J. Morris, QVFD Secretary, BERK, 2018. Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 3—Port Ludlow Fire & Rescue Currently Fire Protection District 3 does not appear to meet the fire level of service adopted in the Comprehensive Plan, but does meet the emergency medical level of service policy. As population grows, additional apparatus may be needed. EXHIBIT 3-69 District No. 3—Port Ludlow Fire & Rescue Fire District Level of Service Unit Type Apparatus Number Population Served Effective LOS Growth (2018- 2038) Need Adopted level of service standard = 1.25 fire units in service per 1,000 population and 0.5 EMS units in service per 1,000 population. Fire Suppression Units 5 4,763 1.0 789 0.83 Life Support Units 4 4,763 0.8 789 0.66 Source: Fire District 3, BERK, 2018. Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 4—Brinnon Fire District 4 is meeting both the fire protection and emergency medical level of service policies, and appear to have sufficient apparatus for planned growth. EXHIBIT 3-70 District No. 4—Brinnon Fire District Level of Service Unit Type Apparatus Number Population Served Effective LOS Growth (2018- 2038) Need Adopted level of service standard = 1.25 fire units in service per 1,000 population and 0.5 EMS units in service per 1,000 population. Fire Suppression Unit 5 1,324 3.8 352 1.33 Life Support Unit 2 1,324 1.5 352 0.53 Source: Fire District 4, BERK, 2018. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 70 Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 5—Discovery Bay—Gardiner Fire District 5 is meeting the fire protection and emergency medical levels of service and appear to have sufficient apparatus for planned growth. EXHIBIT 3-71 District No. 5—Discovery Bay—Gardiner Level of Service Unit Type Apparatus Number Population Served Effective LOS Estimated Growth (2018- 2038) Need Adopted level of service standard = 3.0 fire units in service per 1,000 population and 3.0 EMS units in service per 1,000 population. Fire Suppression Unit 4 531 7.5 99 0.75 Life Support Unit 2 531 3.8 99 0.37 Source: Fire District 5, BERK, 2018. Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 7—Clearwater Fire District 7 is meeting the fire protection and emergency medical levels of service and appear to have sufficient apparatus for planned growth. EXHIBIT 3-72 District No. 7—Clearwater Level of Service Unit Type Apparatus Number Population Served Effective LOS Estimated Growth (2018- 2038) Need Adopted level of service standard = 2.0 fire units in service per 1,000 population and 0 EMS units in service per 1,000 population. Fire Suppression Unit 2 19 105 0 0 Life Support Unit 0 19 0 0 0 Source: Fire District 7, BERK, 2018. Capital Projects & Funding This will address if there are any known and planned improvements for fire protection facilities or equipment. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 71 Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 1—Operating as East Jefferson Fire & Rescue The Fire District has no capital project list available currently. While the Fire District considers an annexation of Port Townsend, it is assumed that if passed the Fire District will begin a process to assess its capital facilities and inventory and determine if it has any needs. Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 2—Quilcene The Fire District is in process of requesting grant money for a new tender and ambulance, for $260,000 and $180,000. If acquired, each is expected to be located at Station 21. Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 3—Port Ludlow Fire & Rescue The Fire District has no capital project list available currently. Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 4—Brinnon The Fire District is seeking a new fire response vehicle through grant money and will continue to do so. The District has also been evaluating the Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort, and the District has assessed it will require new equipment to serve the resort. The resort proponent has agreed to fund some equipment if necessary, however development plans are on-going and no formal agreements exist at the time. The District’s assessment is that serving the resort as currently planned will require a 2,500-gallon pumper tender, an aid car, and a rescue boat.9 Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 5—Discovery Bay—Gardiner The Fire District has no capital project list available currently. While there are no specific projects, the District is considering a bond that would provide for capital facilities and capital equipment10. Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 7—Clearwater The Fire District has no capital project list available currently and is not pursuing any new capital equipment. 11 9 Personal communication, T. Manly, District Fire Chief, 2018 10 http://www.ptleader.com/news/election/fire-district-bond-would-create-fire-hall-community-center/article_5651dbcc-bf09-11e5-be7c- 4b7a204bf1ab.html 11 Personal communication, C. Hay, Fire Commissioner, 2018 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 72 3.10 WATER Overview The water section addresses current law regarding acquisition and delivery of water and the available water supply. Group A water systems, Port Townsend and planned subareas are addressed in more depth. Non-county water service providers include Olympic Water and Sewer, which provides services to the designated Port Ludlow master planned resort. Inventory of Current Facilities Jefferson County has an inventory of 60 Group A Water Systems which serve about two thirds of the population. Most of the water systems maintain a green permit, which means it meets requirements for substantial compliance with regulations, and additional service connections up to the approved connection is possible. The permit color information for regulation compilations and service use is below the exhibit. For the remaining one-third of residents who rely on private wells, the status of water rights and watershed planning is addressed in the Environment Element and summarized at the end of this section. EXHIBIT 3-73 Potable Water System Current Facilities Inventory System Count Population Served Connections Group A Water Systems 60 25,057 14,130 Green Permit 50 24,999 13,926 Yellow Permit - - - Blue Permit 10 58 204 Red Permit - - - Group B Water Systems 122 625 484 Source: Department of Health, BERK, 2018 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 73 EXHIBIT 3-74 Department of Health Water System Compliance Category Compliance DOH Views this system as Green Substantially in compliance with regulations. Adequate for existing uses and for additional service connections up to the number of approved connections. Yellow Substantially in compliance with all requirements. But it: Was notified to submit a legally compliant water system plan and has not satisfied this planning requirement. Is under a compliance agreement to address the system’s status as a state significant non-complier and is also acting in accordance with that agreement. Adequate for existing uses and for additional service connections up to the number approved by the Department in a water system plan or modified by the Department in a compliance document. Blue Substantially in compliance with requirements. However, the system does not have a Department-approved water system design or is no longer operating consistently with that design, or the system has exceeded the number of Department- approved connections. Adequate for existing uses, but not adequate for adding new connections. Red Substantially out of compliance with requirements. Inadequate for existing uses and no additional connections are allowed. This may result in denial of home loans, building permits, on-site sewage disposal permits, food service permits, liquor licenses, and other permits or licenses for properties the system serves. Source: Department of Health, BERK, 2018. Group A water systems that serve more than 100 people are shown below. Overall, these individual systems serve more than two thirds of the County, the Port Townsend water system alone serving about one third of the County. All systems below maintain a green permit and can accommodate more connections up to the number of approved connections. EXHIBIT 3-75 Individual Water Current Capital Inventory Serving More Than 100 People System Connections Water Use System Capacity System Name Pop. Served Existing Approved Water Produced and Purchased Authorized Consumption Storage Distributio n Capacity All Maintain Green Permits Count Count Count Annual Volume Annual Volume Gallons and 3-year Average Leakage Percent Gallons # Sources, Total Gallons Per Minute Port Townsend 10,124 5,844 5,844 330,866,614 317,430,415 (5.9% leakage) 6,000,000 2 sources: 17,800 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 74 System Connections Water Use System Capacity System Name Pop. Served Existing Approved Water Produced and Purchased Authorized Consumption Storage Distributio n Capacity Quimper 8,155 3,462 3,4621 218,343,530 207,900,810 (4.3% leakage) 4,369,500 17 sources: 2,290 Olympic Water & Sewer Inc 2,613 1,586 1,5861 105,980,776 96,441,106 (8.7% leakage) 882,225 8 sources: 824 Cape George Colony Club 1,010 525 665 23,073,867 21,531,612 (6.6% leakage) 207,452 5 sources: 853 Bridgehaven Community Club 501 211 350 12,503,800 11,839,807 (5.4% leakage) 255,000 3 sources: 508 Bywater Bay 400 215 272 16,761,640 16,218,110 (3.3% leakage) 215,000 3 sources: 240 Olympic Corrections Center 380 28 582 22,556,302 17,363,780 (30% leakage) 675,000 4 sources: 720 Jefferson County Water Dist #1 280 205 282 7,085,047 6,574,924 (6.2% leakage) 180,000 2 sources: 100 Gardiner LUD 1 275 131 350 9,253,300 7,451,290 (7.5% leakage) 220,000 1 source: 300 Lazy C 250 119 240 3,448,400 3,357,250 (3.2% leakage) 120,285 3 sources: 130 Olympus Beach Tracts 123 72 90 3,722,041 3,461,521 (8.0% leakage) 44,270 4 sources: 50 Discovery Bay Village 102 55 134 7,065,727 6,910,292 (2.4% leakage) 57,600 2 sources: 75 Subtotal 24,213 12,453 13,857 760,661,044 716,480,917 (5.8% leakage) 13,226,332 43,890 1 Note: approved connection information was not available; the number of existing conditions was used. Source: Department of Health, BERK, 2018. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 75 EXHIBIT 3-76 Group A Water Systems Source: Jefferson County, BERK, 2018. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 76 Level of Service Analysis The 1997 Jefferson County Coordinated Water System Plan (CWSP) used the following anticipated population and assumptions when making its 20 -year level of service projections; in 1996 the future 2016 population estimate was 39,389 very similar to the 2038 projection at 39,221. Thus, county-wide at a planning level, available rights and capacity demand can be met by the service providers. Also, the CWSP projected a demand of 14.6 million gallons per day (MGD), which did not take into account water efficiencies which have been met since the original plan. EXHIBIT 3-77 1997 Population Projection for 20-year Planning Horizon Area Population 1996 Population Projection 2016 Change Port Townsend 8,366 13,867 5,501 Quimper Peninsula 2,927 4,076 1,149 Marrowstone Island 839 1,015 176 Tri-Area 4,324 5,489 1,165 Discovery bay 1,085 1,470 385 Center/Inland Valleys 1,351 1,759 408 Port Ludlow/Oak Bay 1,985 4,901 2,916 Shine/paradise bay 897 1,471 574 Coyle/Toandos Peninsula 411 596 185 Quilcene 1,308 1,797 489 Brinnon 1,299 1,943 644 West End 962 1,005 43 Total 25,754 39,389 13,635 Source: Jefferson County Coordinated Water System Plan, 1997, BERK, 2018. Overall, while the county has enough total water capacity to continue to meet forecasted demand, future developments, e.g. master planned developments, and development in UGAs as well as rural growth, may impact specific water systems. The following table shows planned developments and demand generated. Average daily demand for water was used as an effective level of service. Other service demands may include peak daily demand, or instantiations flow (for fire suppression). December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 77 EXHIBIT 3-78 Growth & Potential Water Demand Planned Development Projected Growth (2018- 2038) Demand Generated (gallons/capita/day) Metered Consumption Per Day = 1,961,618 Group A Systems Population (that serve over 100 people) = 24,213 Effective Level of Service Standard = 81 gallons per capita per day 2016 Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort 2,814 227,976 Port Ludlow Master Planned Resort 1,516 122,819 Port Hadlock/Irondale 789 63,921 Port Townsend UGA 352 28,517 Total 5,471 443,233 Note: For each individual water system, there is a water use efficiency annual performance report. The metered consumption is the total amount for all Group A water systems that have a population of great than 100. The total consumption per day totaled 1,961,618 gallons; the population using Group A systems totaled 24,213. This results in 81.02 gallons per capita per day. The data is from 2016. Source: Department of Health, BERK, 2018. Capital Projects & Funding About two thirds of the county residents in areas served by Group A water systems, and largely operated by either Port Townsend or Public Utility District #1. Known projects under development by Port Townsend are listed below. EXHIBIT 3-79 Port Townsend Water System Project List & Funding Source Project / Type Revenue Sources Cost: 2018-23 Cost: 2024-38 Total City of Port Townsend Water Projects Capacity Projects (Projects Required to Meet LOS) None identified Non-Capacity Projects (Other Projects Needed for Maintenance and Operations) Water Street Enhancement Project TIB grant, PUD funds, utility funds, city bond $2.7 M $ $ Big Quilcene Diversion Dam Repair Total $2.7 M $ $ Source: City of Port Townsend, BERK, 2018. Jefferson County Public Utility District #1 (JPUD) operates the following systems: ▶ Bywater Bay ▶ Coyle (formerly Jefferson County Water Dist #3) ▶ Gardiner December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 78 ▶ Kala Point ▶ Lazy C ▶ Mats View ▶ Quilcene ▶ Quimper ▶ Snow Creek ▶ Triton Cove ▶ Valiani JPUD adopted a 2011 Water System Plan, hereby incorporated by reference. A summary of projects scheduled for 2017-2020, 2021-2025 and 2026-2035 are shown. EXHIBIT 3-80 Public Utility District #1 Project List & Funding Source (2011$) Project / Type Revenue Sources Cost: 2017-2025 Cost: 2026-35 Total Public Utility District #1 Water Projects Capacity Projects (Projects Required to Meet LOS) B-1 Extensions Developer $30,000 $15,000 $45,000 B-3 New Reservoir Rates/ System Development Charges (SDC) $150,000 $150,000 G-2 Add'l Source Revenue $40,000 $40,000 G-4 East/ west End Loops Developer $40,000 $40,000 Quilcene New Storage Grants, Developer $600,000 $600,000 Quilcene Extend mains Developer $60,000 $60,000 SC-6 Booster Pump Station SDC $15,000 $15,000 MV-2 Additional Source Revenue $40,000 $40,000 Subtotal Capacity $785,000 $205,000 $990,000 Non-Capacity Projects (Other Projects Needed for Maintenance and Operations) B-4 Paradise intertie Rates $15,000 $15,000 G-5 Back-up Power Revenue $10,000 $10,000 Quimper System Line Replacement Rates $270,000 $300,000 $570,000 SC-2 Pump House Upgrade Revenue $5,000 $5,000 December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 79 Project / Type Revenue Sources Cost: 2017-2025 Cost: 2026-35 Total SC-3 Back-up Power SDC $5,000 $5,000 SC-5 Replacement Revenue $10,000 $5,000 $15,000 SC-6 Backup Power Revenue $20,000 $20,000 MV-3 Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Revenue $10,000 $10,000 Subtotal Non-capacity $345,000 $305,000 $650,000 Total $1,130,000 $510,000 $1,640,000 Source: Jefferson County Public Utility District 2011, BERK, 2018. Olympic Water and Sewer, Inc., a private development corporation, provides water and sewer service to the Port Ludlow Master Planned Resort. See the Sewer section for a description of the development agreement and cap on units meant to manage the delivery of water and sewer service. Private Wells The 2016 Washington State Supreme Court decision in Whatcom County v. Hirst, Futurewise, et al. (the “Hirst decision”) changed how counties decide to approve or deny building permits that use wells for a water source. The court ruled that Whatcom County failed to comply with Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements to protect water resources, and required the county to make an independent decision about legal water availability – in other words, local jurisdictions planning under GMA have a duty to determine legal and physical water availability for development and cannot simply defer to Department of Ecology adopted rules when making these determinations. This decision changed how counties approve or deny building permits that use permit -exempt wells for a water source. To address the Hirst decision, the Washington State legislature passed a new streamflow restoration law (ESSB 6091) in early 2018. ESSB 6091 allows local governments to rely on Department of Ecology instream flows rules to satisfy their obligations unde r GMA for demonstrating water availability based on Water Resource Inventory Areas (WRIAs), or geographic areas used to establish instream flow and other water resource -related rules. The law focuses on 15 WRIAs with pre-2001 instream flow rules that were impacted by the Hirst decision, and establishes standards for rural residential permit -exempt wells in the rest of the state. There are four WRIAs with a major portion within Jefferson County, and three in which the County takes an active role: ▶ WRIA 16: Skokomish/Dosewallips (active role) December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 80 ▶ WRIA 17: Quilcene/Snow (active role) ▶ WRIA 20: Soleduck/Hoh (active role) ▶ WRIA 21: Queets/Quinault Under ESSB 6091, Jefferson County may continue to issue permits consistent with RCW 90.44.050 in WRIA 16, WRIA 20, and WRIA 21, all of which are not regulated by an instream flow rule. No further action is required by ESSB 6091 to modify WRIA 17, which has a post-2001 instream flow rule that regulates permit -exempt well withdrawals, and thus complies with GMA. The 2009 Water Resource Management Program for WRIA 17 allocates an amount of water available for future use by reserve management areas (WAC 173 -517-150). These reserves are available to a user only if the conditions set forth in WAC 173 -517-150 are met, as well as any applicable requirements of law, including, but not limited to, all water resource laws and regulations. When each reserve is fully appropriated, the applicable reserve management areas are closed to any further consumptive appropriation. Under such circumstances water for new uses may be available in accordance with WAC 173-517-110. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 81 Capital Facilities Element Strategies Draft September 2018 Jefferson County will use the following strategies for implementing the Capital Facilities and Utilities Element. These strategies are both action items and detailed guidance for developing implementing ordinances and the County’s Capital Improvement Program. A. Strategy for Determining Quantities and Priorities for Capital Improvement Projects B. Strategy to Finance the Six-Year Capital Facilities Concept Plan and Manage Debt C. Strategy to Review and Update the Capital Facilities and Utilities Element D. Strategy to Ensure Adequate Public Facility Capacity Concurrent with Development E. Strategy for Monitoring Adequate Public Facility Capacity Concurrent with Development A. STRATEGY FOR DETERMINING QUANTITIES AND PRIORITIES FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Jefferson County will use the following strategies to determine the quantity and types of capital improvements and to set priorities for capital improvements. 1. The quantity of capital improvements needed to eliminate existing deficiencies and to meet future demand will be determined for each public facility using the following calculation: Q = (S x D) – I where Q is the quantity of capital improvements needed, S is the LOS, D is the demand (such as the population), and I is the inventory of existing facilities. The estimates of demand will account for demand that is likely to occur from previously issued development approvals as well as future growth. 2. The LOS will not determine the need for a capital improvement in the following circumstances: A. Repair, remodeling, renovation, and replacement of obsolete or worn out facilities; or B. Capital improvements that provide LOS in excess of the standards adopted in the Comprehensive Plan provided the following conditions are met: December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 82 1) The capital improvement does not make financially infeasible any other capital improvement that is needed to achieve or maintain the LOS standards adopted in this Comprehensive Plan, and 2) The capital improvement does not contradict, limit or substantially change the goals and policies of any element of this Comprehensive Plan, and 3) One of the following conditions is met: a. The excess capacity is an integral part of a capital improvement that is needed to achieve or maintain LOS (i.e., the minimum capacity of a capital project is larger than the capacity required to provide the LOS); or b. The excess capacity provides economies of scale making it less expensive than a comparable amount of capacity if acquired at a later date; or c. The asset acquired is land that is environmentally sensitive or designated by Jefferson County as necessary for conservation or recreation; or d. The excess capacity is part of a capital project financed by general obligation bonds approved by referendum. 3. All facilities scheduled for construction or improvement in accordance with this strategy will be evaluated to identify any plans by State or local governments or districts that affect, or will be affected by, the proposed County capital improvement. Project evaluation may also involve additional criteria that are unique to each type of public facility, as described in other elements of this Compre hensive Plan. 4. The priorities for capital improvements among types of public facilities were established during the development of the Capital Facilities and Utilities Element by adjusting the LOS and the available revenues until the resulting public f acilities became financially feasible. 5. Jefferson County will direct its capital improvements within types of public facilities to: A. Address current deficiencies; B. Provide new or expanded capital facilities and services currently enjoyed by County residents; C. Eliminate actual or potential threats to public health and safety; and D. Retain the attractiveness of Urban Growth Areas as suitable for new residential development. 6. The priorities for capital improvements within a type of County-owned public facility will be in the following order: December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 83 A. Reconstruction, rehabilitation, remodeling, renovation, or replacement of obsolete or worn out facilities that contribute to achieving or maintaining adopted LOS standards. B. New or expanded facilities that reduce or eliminate deficiencies in LOS for existing demand. Expenditures in this category include equipment, furnishings, and other improvements necessary for the completion of a public facility. C. New facilities and improvements to existing public facilities that eliminate public hazards. D. New or expanded facilities that provide the adopted LOS for new development and redevelopment during the next six fiscal years. E. New facilities that exceed the adopted LOS for new growth during the next six fiscal years by providing either: 1) Excess public facility capacity that is needed by future growth beyond the next six years; or 2) Higher quality public facilities than are contemplated in the County's normal design criteria for such facilities. F. Facilities not described in the above priorities, but which Jefferson County is obligated to complete, provided that such obligation is evidenced by a written agreement the County executed prior to the adoption of this Comprehensive Plan. 7. In the event that the planned capacity within a type of County-owned public facility is insufficient to serve all proposed development and redevelopment, capital improvements for new and expanded public facilities of that type will be scheduled in the following order of priority to serve: A Previously approved redevelopment, B. Previously approved development, C. New approved redevelopment, and D. New approved new development. 8. The County may acquire land or right-of-way in advance of the need to develop a public facility. B. STRATEGY TO FINANCE SIX-YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES CONCEPT PLAN AND MANAGE DEBT Jefferson County will use the following strategies to finance capital improvements and fund debt, including financing debt, funding excess capacity, adjusting for rejected December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 84 referenda, and apportioning the cost of capital improvements between existing and future development. 1. Capital improvements financed by County enterprise funds (i.e., solid waste) will be financed by: A. Debt repaid by user fees, charges, and excise taxes, and/or connection or capacity fees for enterprise services; or B. Current assets (i.e., reserves, equity or surpluses, and current revenue, including grants, loans, donations and inter-local agreements); or C. Formation of a taxing district; or D. A combination of debt, current assets, and taxes. 2. Capital improvements financed by non-enterprise funds will be financed by: A. Current assets (i.e., current revenue, fund equity and reserves), or B. Debt, or C. A combination of debt and current assets. 3. Financing decisions will consider which funding source will be: A. Most cost effective, B. Consistent with prudent fiscal, asset and liability management, C. Appropriate to the useful life of the project(s) to be financed, and D. The most efficient use of the County's ability to borrow funds. 4. Debt financing will not be used to provide more capacity than is needed within the schedule of capital improvements for non -enterprise public facilities unless the excess capacity: A. Is an integral part of a capital improvement that is needed to achieve or maintain LOS (i.e., the minimum capacity of a capital improvement is larger than the capacity required to provide the LOS); or B. Provides economies of scale, making it less expensive than a comparable amount of capacity if acquired at a later date; or C. Is land that is environmentally sensitive or designated by the County as necessary for conservation or recreation; or D. Is part of a capital project financed by general obligation bonds approved by referendum. December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 85 5. When a referendum, which is intended to finance capital improvements, is unsuccessful, adjustments for lack of revenues may include, but are not limited to, the following: A. Reduce the LOS for one or more public facilities; B. Increase the use of other sources of revenue; C. Decrease the demand for and subsequent use of capital facilities; or D. A combination of the above alternatives. 6. The Board of Commissioners will determine whether impact fees, as allowed by law, are necessary to maintain LOS. If adopted, impact fee ordinances will require the same LOS as is required by Capital Facilities Policy 1.1 and may include standards for other types of public facilities not addressed under Capital F acilities Policy 1.1. 7. Payments by existing development to fund capital improvements may take the form of user fees, charges for services, special assessments and taxes. Payments by future development to fund capital improvements may take the form of, but are not limited to, voluntary contributions for the benefit of any public facility, impact fees, mitigation payments, capacity fees, dedications of land, provision of public facilities, and future payments of user fees, charges for services, special assessments, and taxes. Future development will not pay impact fees for capital improvements to any public facility that reduces or eliminates existing deficiencies. 8. Both existing and future development may have part of their costs paid by grant entitlements or public facilities from other levels of government and independent districts. C. STRATEGY TO REVIEW AND UPDATE THE CAPITAL FACILITIES AND UTILITIES ELEMENT The following strategy provides guidance for updating the Capital Facilities and Utilities Element, for funding scheduled capital improvements, for monitoring implementation of the Capital Facilities and Utilities Element, and for making minor corrections and modifications to the Six-Year Capital Facilities Concept Plan. 1. The Capital Facilities and Utilities Element will be reviewed and updated regularly in conjunction with the County budget process and the release of the official population estimates and projections by the Office of Financial Management of the State of Washington. The update will include the following: A. Revise population projections; B. Update inventory of public facilities; December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 86 C. Update cost of providing public facilities; D. Review the LOS; E. Update capacity of public facilities (actual LOS compared to adopted standards); F. Update revenue forecasts; G. Revise and develop capital improvement projects for the next six years; H. Update analysis of financial capacity; I. Amend the Capital Facilities and Utilities Element, including amendments to the LOS standards, capital projects, and/or the financing plan sources of revenue. 2. Jefferson County’s annual budget will include capital appropriations for all projects identified in the Six-Year Capital Facilities Concept Plan that are necessary to maintain the LOS standards during that fiscal year. 3. Jefferson County will prepare regular evaluation reports to monitor the implementation of the goals and policies of the Capital Facilities and Utilities Element. The evaluation will include: A. Regular reports of the Concurrency Implementation and Monitoring System. B. Regular updates of the Capital Facilities and Utilities Element, including updated supporting documents as appropriate. 4. The Six-Year Capital Facilities Concept Plan may be adjusted by ordinance not deemed to be an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for corrections, updates, and modifications concerning costs; revenue sources; acceptance of facilities pursuant to dedications which are consistent with the Element; non -capacity projects which do not affect scheduling of capacity projects; or the date of construction (so long as it is completed within the 6-year period). D. STRATEGY TO ENSURE ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITY CAPACITY CONCURRENT WITH DEVELOPMENT The following strategy provides guidance for developing implementi ng ordinances, including an ordinance to determine if there is adequate public facility capacity concurrent with development. 1. Jefferson County will adopt an ordinance, which will establish policies and procedures for determining if there is adequate public facility capacity concurrent with development. 2. For all public facilities, except roads, in order to determine that capacity is available to serve development: December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 87 A. The facilities will be in place when a development approval is issued; or B. The facilities will be under construction at the time a development approval is issued and will be in place when the impacts of the development occur; or C. Development approvals may be issued subject to the condition that the facilities will be in place when the impacts of the development occur. 3. For Rural and Designated Tourist Road Facilities, in order to determine that capacity is available to serve development: A. Any of the three provisions listed in Strategy D.1. may apply; or B. The County will have in place a binding financial commitment to provide the capacity within six years. 4. Jefferson County will issue preliminary development approvals, which are subject to concurrency if the applicant complies with one of the following: A. The applicant receives a determination of the capacity of Category A public facilities as part of preliminary development review and approval; or B. The applicant requests preliminary development approval without a determination of capacity of Category A public facilities, provided that any such approval is issued subject to requirements in the applicable land development regulation or to specific conditions contained in the preliminary development approval that: 1) Final development approval for the subject property is subj ect to a determination of capacity of Category A public facilities, and 2) Neither rights to obtain final development approval nor any other rights to develop the subject property have been granted or implied by the County's preliminary development approval without determining the capacity of public facilities. 5. The following conditions will apply to development approvals subject to concurrency: A. The determination that facility capacity is available will apply to specific uses, densities and intensities based on information provided by the applicant and included in the development approval. B. The determination of public facility capacity and the validity of the capacity for the same period of time as the development approval, including any extensions. If the development approval does not have an expiration date, the capacity will be valid for a period not to exceed two years. 6. County Development Regulations will address the circumstances under which public facilities may be provided by applicants for development approvals at the December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 88 applicant's own expense in order to ensure sufficient capacity of public facilities. 7. Development applications, which require the provision of public facilities by the applicant, may be approved subject to the following: A. Jefferson County and the applicant enter into an enforceable development agreement, which will provide, at a minimum, a schedule for construction of the public facilities and mechanisms for monitoring to ensure that the public facilities are completed concurrent with the impacts of the development, or that the development will not be allowed to proceed. B. The public facilities to be provided by the applicant may be contained in the Six-Year Capital Facilities Concept Plan of the Capital Facilities and Utilities Element, and will achieve and maintain the adopted LOS. 8. Jefferson County will adopt policies and procedures for reserving capacity of public facilities needed to serve vested development approvals. 9. Jefferson County will reserve capacity of public facilities in order to serve approved development at the adopted LOS. 10. In the event that there is not sufficient capacity to serve the development, which would use future public facility capacity, Jefferson County will develop criteria for determining which applications will be deferred to a future fiscal year because of insufficient capacity of public facilities during the current fiscal year. E. STRATEGY FOR MONITORING ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITY CAPACITY CONCURRENT WITH DEVELOPMENT The following strategy provides guidance for a monitoring system. 1. Jefferson County will establish and maintain a regular Monitoring System, which will include the following components: A. A regular report on the capacity and LOS of public facilities, B. A review of public facility capacity for development applications, C. A review of changes to planned capacity of public facilities. 2. Report on the Capacity and LOS of Public Facilities: This report will summarize t he actual capacity of public facilities compared to the LOS adopted in the Capital Facilities and Utilities Element. The report will also forecast the capacity of public facilities for each of the six succeeding fiscal years. The forecast will be based on the most current schedule of capital improvements in the Six -Year Capital Facilities Concept Plan. The report will provide the initial determination of the capacity and LOS of public facilities for reviewing development permit applications December 2018 Jefferson County | Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 89 during the following 12 months. Each application will be analyzed separately for concurrency, as described below. 3. Public Facility Capacity Review of Development Applications: Jefferson County will review applications for developments in the unincorporated areas of the County to determine whether there is adequate capacity of public facilities concurrent with development. Records of all development approvals will be kept to indicate the cumulative impacts on the capacity of public facilities. Review will be conducted according to the terms of inter-local agreement(s) between the County and municipalities.) 4. Review of Changes to Planned Capacity of Public Facilities: Jefferson County will review each amendment to this Capital Facilities and Utilities Element in order to ensure that the schedule of capital improvements is adequate to maintain the established LOS.