HomeMy WebLinkAbout040521_ra01Regular Agenda
JEFFERSON COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
AGENDA REQUEST
TO: Board of County Commissioners
Philip Morley, County Administrator
FROM: Austin Watkins, Interim Planning Manager, Community Development
David Wayne Johnson, Associate Planner, Community Development
DATE: April 5, 2021
SUBJECT: BoCC Deliberation and Action on the Planning Commission
Recommendations re: 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Final Docket
Proposals and Proposed HEARING NOTICE re: 2020 Comprehensive Plan
Amendment Final Docket Proposals with Hearing Scheduled for April 19,
2021 at 11:00 am
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
The Department of Community Development ("DCD") requests that the Board of
County Commissioners ("BoCC") take action modifying or accepting the Planning
Commission's recommendations on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Final Docket Proposals
("2020 Docket Proposals"), as required by JCC 18.45.080(2)(b).
If the BoCC determines that a modification is necessary to the Planning Commission's
recommendations or that a modification is necessary to the Planning Commission's
recommended text of the proposed amendments for the 2020 Docket Proposals, then the BoCC
must hold a public hearing on the 2020 Docket Proposals. DCD staff recommends that the
BoCC modify the Planning Commission's recommended text on the 2020 Docket Proposals to
align MLA20-00102 (Text Amendments to Support the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility
Plan Update) with the recently approved Ecology Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan
Update. If the BoCC votes to modify the Planning Commission recommendation, then DCD
staff recommends that the BoCC hold the public hearing on Monday, April 19, 2021 at 11 am.
In the alternative, if the BoCC accepts the Planning Commission's recommendations
on the 2020 Docket Proposals without a modification, then the BoCC may adopt the 2020
Docket Proposals without a public hearing, at a later date.
BACKGROUND:
On October 26, 2020, the BoCC established the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Final Docket ("2020 Docket"). The 2020 Docket includes potential amendments to the
Page 1 of 5
Regular Agenda
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and the Unified Development Code. The BoCC
included the following items on the 2020 Docket:
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.
The 2020 Docket was delayed due to the on -going COVID-19 pandemic. Pursuant to
BoCC Resolution #69-20, the Planning Commission reviewed DCD staff recommendations on
the 2020 Docket Proposals, conducted a public hearing, deliberated, and completed the
Planning Commission recommendations by the established deadline of February 26, 2021.
Pursuant to JCC 18.45.080(1), the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on
February 10, 2021 to receive public testimony and written comments during the comment
period from January 31, 2021 through the close of business Friday, February 12, 2021. On
February 17, 2021, the Planning Commission concluded its deliberations and voted to
recommend approval of the 2020 Docket amendments and that their recommendation be
transmitted to the BoCC.
On March 22, 2021, the Planning Commission transmitted their review, findings,
conclusions, and recommendations on the 2020 Docket Proposals to the BoCC. Also, on
March 22, 2021, DCD staff held a workshop with the BoCC providing an overview of the
2020 Docket Proposals, staff recommendation, and Planning Commission recommendations.
No action was taken at the March 22, 2021 BoCC meeting regarding the Planning
Commission's recommendations on the 2020 Docket Proposals.
With the record that has been developed from the reviews and recommendations of the
planning agency, including public testimony and comments, the BoCC now considers and
deliberates on the Planning Commission's recommendation re: 2020 Docket Proposals
pursuant to JCC 18.45.080(2)(b).
ANAINSTS:
DCD's Staff Report analyzed the 2020 Docket Proposals, State Environmental Policy
Act ("SEPA") compliance, as well as the Growth Management Indicators used by the Planning
Commission in their recommendation and DCD staff recommended approval of all 2020
Docket Proposals.
The Planning Commission reviewed the DCD Staff Report, public comments, Growth
Management Indicators, and draft findings to recommend approval of the three suggested test
Page 2of5
Regular Agenda
changes. The Planning Commission's findings, conclusions, and recommendations are found
in their February 26, 2021 transmittal letter. The proposed amendments in line in and line out
format are attached as Appendix 1, 2, and 3.
The Planning Commission reviewed the DCD Staff report, public comments, Growth
Management Indicators, and draft findings to recommend approval of the site -specific
amendment. The Planning Commission deliberated on the appropriateness of the proposed
RR1:5 zoning, the need for the zoning change, the future effect of this and potential future
zoning changes on the environmental conditions of the immediate area, and whether
development regulations are sufficiently protective of the site under consideration. The
Planning Commission concluded that the proposed zoning of Rural Residential 1:5 is most
appropriate because of the surrounding development density, existing development patterns,
and infill nature of the parcel.
On February 24, 2021, DCD staff submitted the 2020 Docket Proposals, as presented
in Appendix 1, 2, and 3, the DCD Staff Report, SEPA Addendum, and supporting documents
to the Washington State Department of Commerce ("Commerce") for their required 60-day
review under RCW 36.70A.106 and WAC 365-196-630. The BoCC must wait until the
conclusion of the 60-day review period, which ends on April 25, 2021, before the BoCC can
formally adopt any of the 2020 Docket Proposals. Per Resolution 69-20, the BoCC must take
final action on the 2020 Docket Proposals no later than April 30, 2021, unless the deadline is
extended by the BoCC.
In order to meet the deadline of April 30, 2021 and be consistent with Commerce's
review period, the date for final adoption of the 2020 Docket Proposals is anticipated for
Monday, April 26, 2021, unless extended by the BoCC.
Today, the BoCC should determine if a modification is needed to the Planning
Commission's recommendations, including the suggested text of the 2020 Docket Proposals. If
the BoCC deems a modification is needed to the Planning Commission's recommendation, the
change shall not be incorporated until the BoCC holds its own public hearing. Should the
BoCC choose to conduct a public hearing, the public hearing notice must be published at least
10 days prior to the BoCC public hearing.
DCD staff recommends that the BoCC modify the Planning Commission's
recommendation and hold a public hearing on Monday, April 19, 2021 at 11:00am regarding
the 2020 Docket Proposals, consistent with JCC 18.45.080(2)(b). On March 30, 2021, the
Washington State Department of Ecology ("Ecology") approved the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer
Facility Plan Update. When DCD staff drafted the suggested text amendments supporting
docket item MLA20-00102 (Text Amendments to Support the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer
Facility Plan Update), the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update was in draft form
and had not received approval from Ecology. DCD staff recommends changes to the suggested
text of MLA20-00102 to align the suggested text amendments with the Ecology approved
plan. Proposed changes to MLA20-00102 are anticipated to be minor in nature, including
updated plan date and narrative revisions indicating Ecology's approval. Attached is a
proposed hearing notice for an April 19, 2021 11:00 am public hearing. If the hearing notice is
Page 3 of 5
Regular Agenda
approved and the public hearing occurs on April 19, 2021, DCD recommends that final action
on the 2020 Docket Proposals occur at the April 26, 2021 BoCC meeting.
The record can be accessed at the web link below, and includes the following:
• Planning Commission's Review, Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations on the
2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Final Docket;
• DCD Staff Report;
• Proposed text amendments in line in and line out format, as Appendix 1, 2, 3;
• SEPA Environmental Checklists, Addendum, and Notice of Adoption / DS;
• Comment and hearing record;
• Draft Adopting Ordinance; and,
• Proposed hearing notice for April 19, 2021 BoCC public hearing on the 2020 Docket
Proposals.
http://test.co jefferson.wa.us/weblinkextemal/0/fol/2753021/Rowl.aspx
Attached:
• Planning Commission's Review, Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation on the
2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Final Docket;
• DCD Staff Report;
• Appendix 1, 2, and 3 (proposed line in / line out text amendments); and,
• Proposed hearing notice for April 19, 2021 BoCC public hearing on the 2020 Docket
Proposals.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Cost of work associated with the County's Comprehensive Plan and related activities
under the Growth Management Act are largely supported by the County's general fund. The
site -specific amendment is supported by application fees.
RECOMMENDATION:
Deliberate on the Planning Commission's review, findings, conclusions, and
recommendations and the record on the 2020 Docket Proposals and either:
1. Make a motion to modify the Planning Commission's recommendations on the 2020
Docket Proposals and make a motion to approve a hearing notice scheduling a BoCC
public hearing for the 2020 Docket Proposals on April 19, 2021 at 11:00 am; or,
2. Make a motion to accept the Planning Commission's recommendation and direct DCD
to draft an ordinance adopting the Planning Commission's recommendations for action
by the BoCC on April 26, 2021, or no later than April 30, 2021 by special meeting, or
as extended by the BoCC.
Page 4 of 5
Regular Agenda
DCD staff recommends that the BoCC modify the Planning Commission's
recommendations and approve a hearing notice scheduling a BoCC public hearing for the 2020
Docket Proposals on Monday, April 19, 2021 at 11:00 am, as a staff -initiated change is
proposed to the Planning Commission's recommendations. The proposed staff -initiated change
is to ensure that MLA20-00102 (Text Amendments to Support the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer
Facility Plan Update) is consistent with the recent Ecology approval of the Port Hadlock UGA
Sewer Facility Plan Update.
REVIEWED BY:
Philip Mor , County A ministrator Date
Page 5 of 5
SON coC2 JEFFERSON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
621 Sheridan Street I Port Townsend, WA 98368
360-379-4450 1 email:dcd@co.jefferson.wa.us
I] NO http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/260/Community-Development
To: Peninsula Daily News
Please Publish: Two (2) times, Thursday, April 8, 2021 and Thursday April 15, 2021
Bill: Jefferson County Department of Community Development
PO Box 1220
Port Townsend, WA 98368
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE
JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REGARDING PROPOSED
2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROPOSALS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Jefferson Board of County Commissioners will hold a
virtual/on-line public hearing on Monday, April 19, 2021 at 11:00 AM. The purpose of the
hearing is to consider changes to the Planning Commission recommendation regarding the four
proposed Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code Amendments on the 2020 Final
Docket:
• MLA19-00019 — Text Amendment to Marijuana Related Development Regulations.
• MLA20-00116 — Text Amendment to Support Sewering the Brinnon Limited Area of More
Intensive Rural Development.
• MLA20-00102 — Text Amendments to Support the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan
Update.
• 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.
Public Comment Period and Method to Provide Comment: The public may view the Planning
Commission's proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code,
staff proposed modifications, and supporting documents by visiting
http://test.co.Jefferson.wa.us/webIinkexterna1/0/fol/2753021 /Row1.aspx.
The public is invited to give oral testimony on the Planning Commission's proposed amendments
and staff proposed modifications at the April 19th public hearing, as described below. You may also
submit written testimony before the public hearing via email at leffbocc _co.jefferson.wa.us or by
U.S. mail to the Jefferson County Commissioners, PO Box 1220, Port Townsend, WA 98368,
provided all written testimony is received before the close of the public hearing.
COVID-19 NOTICE: NO IN-PERSONATTENDANCE ALLOWED (Per the May 29, 2020 Jefferson
County Public Health Officer Order) You can join this meeting by using the following methods: (1)
Zoom Meeting: https://zoom.us/m/93777841705. This option will allow you to join the meeting live.
You will need to enter an email address. This option will allow you to join the meeting live. You will
need to enter an email address. If you wish to provide public comment, click on the hand icon
at the bottom of the screen to "raise your hand." Participation will be up to the Chair and/or
Clerk of the meeting. (2) Website: www.co.lefferson.wa.us Follow the links under "Quick links,"
"Videos of Meetings," and click on "Streaming Live."
This option will allow you to watch the meeting live -streaming, with no participation. (3) Audio -
only: Dial: 1-253-215-8782 and use Webinar ID: 937-7784-1705#. This option will allow you to
listen to the meeting live. If you wish to provide public comment, press *9 to "raise your hand."
Participation will be up to the Chair and/or Clerk of the meeting. Access for the hearing impaired
and others can be accommodated using Washington Relay Service at 1-800-833-6384.
In the event of technical difficulties, at least one of the methods above will be accessible to the
public. Please try all methods first before calling 360-385-9100 to report any issues. Agenda items
are listed on our website at: www.co.jefferson.wa.us Follow the links under "Quick links," "Videos
of Meetings," and click on "Recorded," "Streaming Live," or "Upcoming" to find this meeting and
view agenda items.
Information regarding the Amendments, including the staff report can be at
http://test.co-Nefferson.wa.us/weblinkexternal/0/fol/2753021/Row1.aspx. Foradditional information,
please contact David Wayne Johnson at dwjohnson .co.jefferson.wa.us 360-379-4465.
Approved this 5th day of April, 2021
Jefferson County Board of Commissioners
Kate Dean, Chair
2
SO IN rr� JEFFERSON COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION
621 Sheridan Street I Port Townsend, WA 98368
360-379-4450 1 email: PlanComm@co.jefferson.wa.us
http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/580/Planning-Commission
To: Board of County Commissioners: Chair Kate Dean, Greg Brotherton, and Heidi
Eisenhour
From: Jefferson County Planning Commission
Cc: Jefferson County Department of Community Development and Interested Public
Date: February 26, 2021
Subject: Jefferson County Planning Commission's Review, Findings, Conclusions and
Recommendation on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Final Docket
Overview
On October 26, 2020, the Board of County Commissioners ("BoCC") established the 2020
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Final Docket ("2020 Docket"). The 2020 Docket includes potential
amendments to the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and the Unified Development Code. The
BoCC included the following items on the 2020 Docket:
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 RRl:5, Parcel ID No.
001281002, Located at Airport Cutoff Road (SR19) and Romans Road.
The 2020 Docket was delayed due to the on -going COVID-19 pandemic. Pursuant to BoCC
Resolution #69-20, the Planning Commission has reviewed Jefferson County Department of Community
Development ("DCD") staff recommendations on the 2020 Docket items, conducted a public hearing,
deliberated, formulated its findings, conclusions and recommendations, and transmitted its
recommendations by the established deadline of February 26, 2021.
Page 1 of 9
Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations re: 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Docket
Findines.Conclusions, and Recommendations
The Planning Commission recommends approval of the 2020 Docket items, as outlined in
MLA 19-00019, MLA20-00116, MLA20-00102, and MLA20-00039. In support of the Planning
Commission's recommendation, the Planning Commission enters the following findings and
conclusions:
1. On July 15, 2020, the Planning Commission held a meeting to discuss the 2020 Preliminary
Docket, which included DCD suggested text amendments and Planning Commission suggested
text amendments, in addition to one site -specific rezone. The site -specific rezone is automatically
included in the final docket.
2. On August 19, 2020, the Planning Commission held a public hearing accepting testimony on
which suggested amendments from the Preliminary Docket to include in its recommendation on
- the Final Docket to the BoCC.
3. On September 28, 2020, the Planning Commission recommended that five suggested text
amendments be placed on the 2020 Final Docket.
4. On October 19, 2020, the BoCC held a public hearing accepting testimony on which suggested
amendments from the Preliminary Docket should be placed on the Final Docket, including the
Planning Commission's recommendations.
5. On October 26, 2020, the BoCC adopted the final 2020 Docket (MLA19-00019, MLA20-00116,
MLA20-00102, and MLA20-00039).
6. On November 9, 2020, the BoCC approved Resolution No. 69-20 giving the Planning
Commission until February 26, 2021 to make their recommendations on the 2020 Docket to the
BoCC. Resolution No. 69-20 also established a final BoCC action date of April 30, 2021 for the
2020 Docket.
7. On January 20, 2021, DCD held an informational briefing with the Planning Commission to
provide an overview of 2020 Docket.
8. On February 5, 2021, DCD published its "Staff Report and Recommendations on the 2020
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket" which recommended approval or action on all 2020
- Docket items.
9. On February 10, 2021, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to receive oral and
written testimony relating to the 2020 Docket items. Written comments were accepted until
Friday, February 12, 2021 at 4:30pm.
10. The Planning Commission received 49 written comments and 3 oral comments all in support of
MLA 19-00019.
11. The Planning Commission began deliberations on the 2020 Docket on February 17, 2021.
12. Incorporated by reference in this recommendation report are the meeting minutes and audio
recordings from Planning Commission meetings held on February 17, 2021, during which
deliberations took place and the recommendations were formulated.
Page 2 of 9
Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations re: 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Docket
13. In support of the Planning Commission's recommendations and pursuant to Chapter 18.45 JCC,
the Planning Commission enters the following findings and conclusions:
A) Growth Management Indicators 18.45.050(4)(b)(i) through (4)(b)(vii)
i Whether growth and development as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan is occurring Faster or
slower than anticipated, or is failing to materialize.
Jefferson County is growing consistent with the growth population projections in the
Comprehensive Plan. 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. 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 a 1.05% growth rate between 2019
and 2020.
(ii) Whether the capacity of the County to provide adequate services has diminished or increased.
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.
iii Whether sufficient urban land is designated and zoned to meet projected demand and need.
Sufficient urban land is designated and zoned to meet projected demand and need. 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 2,103-2,529 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.
(iv) Whether any assumptions upon which the Comprehensive Plan is based are no longer found to be
valid.
The assumptions made as part of the Comprehensive Plan continue to be valid. In 2018, the
Comprehensive Plan 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.
Page 3 of 9
Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations re: 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Docket
(v) Whether changes in countywide attitudes necessitate amendments to the goals of the Plan and the
basic values embodied within the Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement.
The Comprehensive Plan's goals and vision statement continue to be consistent with current
countywide attitudes. In the 2018, Periodic Review and Update, the Comprehensive Plan articulated and
updated vision statement and goals, which are consistent with the countywide attitudes.
(vi) Whether changes in circumstances dictate a need for amendments.
Changes in circumstance dictate a need for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Unified
Development Code ("UDC").
With a newly reviewed and revised Comprehensive 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 are
required to ensure continued community compatibility and environmental protection.
As the area surrounding the site -specific rezone (MLA20-00039) has been fully developed at
densities higher than RR1:10, the area has changed and the changes warrant a site -specific amendment.
The area surrounding the site -specific rezone continues to develop at residential and commercial
densities higher than the current assigned zoning of RR1:10. The surrounding development patterns
include commercial and institutional development. Surrounding residential development patterns include
substantial development of 5-acre home sites and development of smaller pre-existing lots of legal
record.
(vii) Whether inconsistencies exist between the Comprehensive Plan and the Growth Management Act
or the Comprehensive Plan and the Countywide Planning Policy for Jefferson County.
There are no inconsistencies between the Comprehensive Plan and the Growth Management Act
or the Comprehensive Plan and the Countywide Planning Policies.
B) Required Findings: l 8.45.080(1)(b)(i) through (iii)
(i) Whether circumstances related to the proposed amendment and/or the area in which it is located have
substantially changed since the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan.
Changes in circumstance dictate a need for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and UDC.
Page 4 of 9
Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations re: 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Docket
With a newly reviewed and revised Comprehensive 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 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 are required to ensure continued community compatibility and environmental
protection.
As the area surrounding the site -specific rezone (MLA20-00039) has been fully developed at
densities higher than RR1:10, the area has changed, and the changes warrant a site -specific amendment.
The area surrounding the site -specific rezone continues to develop at residential and commercial
densities higher than the current assigned zoning of RR1:10. The surrounding development patterns
include commercial and institutional development. Surrounding residential development patterns include
substantial development of 5-acre home sites and development of smaller pre-existing lots of legal
record.
ii Whether the assumptions ul2on which the Comprehensive Plan is based are no longer valid or
whether new information is available which was not considered during the adoption process or any
annual amendments to the Jefferson Coun Comprehensive Plan.
The assumptions upon which the Comprehensive Plan is based, and upon the goals and policies
which this recommendation is based, are still valid. However, there is new information which was not
considered during the adoption process, annual amendment, and periodic review and update process.
New information relating to the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer, including revisions to the Port
Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan are now available. New information, including a capacity study of
the Dosewallips State Park Sewer system and updates to sewering provisions of the Growth
Management Act is now available. New information related to the environment, land use, and
community capability impacts from marijuana production and processing facilities is now available.
Finally, new information relating to the development patterns near the site -specific amendment have
been brought to the attention of DCD and the Planning Commission through the site -specific
amendment application package.
(iii) Whether the proposed amendment reflects current widely held values of the residents of Jefferson
County.
Yes, the proposed amendments in the 2020 Docket reflect the widely held values of the residents
of Jefferson County. During the February 10, 2021 public hearing on the 2020 Docket, 49 written and 3
oral comments were received in support of MLA 19-00019. Further, the proposed amendments are
Page 5 of 9
Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations re: 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Docket
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's Vision Statement, which focuses on environmental
sustainability, rural economy, and affordable housing. The Comprehensive Plan's Vision Statement was
extensively updated, in coordination with public outreach, during the 2018 Periodic Review and Update.
C) Site -Specific Required Findings: 18.45.080(1)(c)(i) through (Viii) - Site Specific Findings for
MLA20-00039
i The Rroposed site -specific amendment meets concurrency requirements for transportation and does
not adversely affect adopted level of service standards for other public facilities and services.
The Planning Commission finds that the proposed site -specific amendment meets concurrency
requirements for transportation. The proposed site -specific amendment does not adversely affect
adopted level of service standards for other public facilities and services.
{ii]_The proposed site -specific amendment is consistent with the og als, policies, and implementation
strategies of the various elements of the Comprehensive Plan,
The Planning Commission finds that the proposed site -specific amendment is consistent with the
goals, policies, and implementation strategies of the various elements of the Comprehensive Plan. This
includes consistency with LU-G-18, LU-G-20, LU-P-20.1, and LU-P-20.2. These goals and policies
encourage parcel sizes and zoning classifications which protect the rural character, are compatible with
surrounding land uses, minimize infrastructure needs, and protect environmentally sensitive areas.
(iii) The proposed site -specific amendment will not result in probable significant adverse impacts to the
count 's transportation network, capital facilities, utilities, parks, and environmental features that cannot
be mitigated, and will notl2lace uncompensated burdens upon existing or planned service capabilities.
The Planning Commission finds the site -specific amendment will not result in probable
significant adverse impacts to the county's transportation network, capital facilities, utilities, parks, or
environmental features and that the site -specific amendment will not place uncompensated burdens upon
existing or planned service capabilities. The Planning Commission has reviewed the DCD staff report,
including probable transportation impacts, county department comments, and the applicant's State
Environmental Policy Act Environmental Checklist in support of this finding.
(iv} In the case of a site -specific amendment to the land use map, that the subject parcels are physically
suitable for the requested land use designation and the anticipated land use development, including but
not limited to access, provision of utilities and compatibility with existing and planned surrounding land
uses.
The Planning Commission finds that the subject parcel is physically suitable for the requested
RRl :5 zoning classification. The Planning Commission finds that the area surrounding the subject parcel
is developed, including commercial and institutional development and that surrounding residential
development is at the requested or a higher density. The Planning Commission also finds that the two
proposed access point off of Romans Road and Parkridge Drive are sufficient for the RR1:5 zoning
classification. Finally, the Planning Commission finds that adequate utilities are available to the site,
including public water supply and electric service.
Page 6 of 9
Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations re: 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Docket
Lv) The proposed site -specific amendment will not create a pressure to change the land use designation
of other properties, unless the char ge of land use desi gnation for other pronertics is in the lop -terin best
interests of the county as a whole.
The Planning Commission finds that the site -specific amendment will not create a pressure to
change the land use designation of other properties and that the site -specific amendment is in the long-
term best interests of the county. The area surrounding the subject parcel is developed and the subject
parcel is an infill parcel. The surrounding existing development is at a density equal to or higher than the
requested density. As this is an infill parcel and is consistent with existing development patterns, this
will not create any development pressure for land use changes in the area.
(vi) The proposed site -specific amendment does not materially affect land use and population growth
projections that are the basis of the Comprehensive Plan.
Planning Commission finds that this individual proposed zoning change will not materially affect
growth projections and comprehensive land use plans. The additional four single-family residences and
potential for four accessory dwelling units will assist Jefferson County in meeting its projected growth
rate of 0.98%. Jefferson County's estimated 2019 growth rate was 0.90%, which is slightly less than the
projected 0.98% growth rate. An additional 4 lots will not materially affect the land use and growth
populations.
(vii) irwithin an unincorporated urban growth area (UGA), the proposed site -specific amendment does
not affect the adequacy or availability of urban facilities and services to the immediate area and the
overall T TG A -
The proposed site -specific amendment is not within an urban growth area.
(viii) The proposed amendment is consistent with the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A). the
Countywide Planning Policies for Jefferson County, any Other applicable inter jurisdictional policies or
agreements, and any other local, state or federal laws.
The Planning Commission finds that the site -specific amendment is consistent with the Growth
Management Act, the Countywide Planning Commission, applicable inter jurisdictional policies or
agreements, and other local, state, or federal laws. The site -specific amendment proposes RR1:5 zoning
classification, which generally allows one single-family home (plus accessory uses and dwellings) per 5
acres. The proposed density is consistent with this finding.
C) Findings Regarding the Record
1. The Planning Commission's recommendation is based upon the record, including the
guidance provided by GMA, the Countywide Planning Policies, the Jefferson County
Comprehensive Plan, Jefferson County Code, February 3, 2021 Staff Report, and hearing
records. The Planning Commission asks the Board of County Commissioners to please
make note of the public comments specific to individual docket items.
2. The Planning Commission finds that assertions in the record can be confirmed by
information from other sources.
Page 7 of 9
Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations re: 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Docket
3. The Planning Commission finds that the recommendation satisfies legal criteria.
4. The Planning Commission finds that the recommendation is limited to the specific
amendments at issue.
Planning Commission Conclusions & Recommendation
The Jefferson County Planning Commission submits this recommendation for consideration by
the Board of County Commissioners:
Based on these findings and conclusions, upon guidance from the Growth Management Act, the
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, submitted written material by the applicants and staff, written
and oral public testimony, and formal deliberation concerning the proposals within the 2020 Docket, the
Planning Commission recommendation is as follows:
1. MLA19-00019 — Text Amendments to Marijuana Related Development Regulations.
Recommendation: Approval. Suggested text amendments proposed in Appendix 1.
The Planning Commission recommends that the marijuana related development regulations be
revisited by the county during the next periodic review and update to the Comprehensive Plan
and its development regulations or earlier if needed. The Planning Commission notes that the
county's marijuana related development regulations are still in their infancy and that new
information relating to community compatibility and environmental impacts may necessitate
future amendments.
Planning Commission Vote Totals: 6 in favor, 1 opposed, and 1 abstention.
2. MLA20-001I6 — Text Amendments to Support Sewerine the Brinnon Limited Area of
More Intensive Rural Development.
Recommendation: Approval.- Suggested text amendments proposed in Appendix 2. -
Planning Commission Vote Totals: 8 in favor and 0 opposed.
3. MLA20-00102 — Text Amendments to Support the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility
Plan Update.
Page 8 of 9
Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations re: 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Docket
Recommendation: Approval. Suggested text amendments proposed in Appendix 3
Planning Commission Vote 'Totals: 8 in favor and 0 opposed.
4. MLA20-00039 — Seton 'Site -specific Rezone from RR1:10 to RRI:S, Parcel ID No.
001281002, Located at Airport Cutoff Road (SR19) and Romans Road.
Recommendation: Approval.
Planning Commission Vote'Fotals: 8 in favor and 0 opposed.
Respectfully submitted by:
Richard Hull, Planning Commission Chair
Z 4.14 i an 2- f,
Date
Page 9 of 9
Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations re: 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Docket
Appendix 1
MLA19-00019 — Draft Proposed Text Amendments to Marijuana
Related Development Regulations
Jefferson County Code
DRAFT FEB 17, 2021 V2
18.20.295 Recreational marijuana/cannabis.
Page 115
(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 ayes use in agricultural zoning district, rural industrial, and urban industrial zoning
districts. "', a4-R-e
fe.,f504,Fe&2Z4B1}i;•,bd' :T"•-r�ehii ki-fur4feEsii.�;� ". `:, Wn_'_'iH1;
iitYlHil- `crii4ic�ii"!rnHrr "`.$pro'; "rrtc;r"ai: vl3kFH y-M1F{�5k-N}•11iftg0 811* e!;901110111 ptibli F., ml_; . 1C%V&A1:DM gAd Ri
4o was i"
d;a�ts. Prohibited in all other 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. A44owed as emiditimiai disc iiewiaFy WZ(4)
The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020.
Jefferson County Code
DRAFT FEB 17, 2021 V2
Page 2/5
with..k� --;II fbFer! P.s.-,..••.ee I.,,..a........I ,..wal veqide-.F..:..F
rrnn) amid hair_ 1_.,dlam, ..y tep. pan ert zaniaigdis!Fieii. Prohibited in all
other 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. Mowed as e... ..deed diseFeIi.._wy �C-(d)
I,�., I ..A ., . , .�. I.... r m . ,Iisir:.... Probibited in all
miter zoning districts.
(4) The following standards shall apply for all recreational marijuana activities:
�ativastsrs�sa�
tiit(i-tC)L�lta I msl�Hf1' :�� fellv-.r:Ft�'-';tfmd `fnrcr, in add appiifciibiv-seutie•li►st,f
I waI- te."detlSial4-p-Ay-ei+Veifii"i- Perm iriici`a Gr tieY SO Li e!. Fe t.: m Th .I1owed e
g '
(13 Five`Pereeta-i pfer� ; ,i :e is unre fee rP tca �► r a► � 4A 9fir feet gro
goof: Hive.
(4)-Rtirel--ReskkwHal—l- t4"id-4 220 and fore 0 1 F A Temper-af:y-ef
4cowc[a a'iii'nzic%['- its cri"Inimrtrc
Flo 3
rrvmz[Fcir.
(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.
_ _rural . ide. ial .l:�i..:.. �..: ..13........E ..�i.:.�el ..... Hdil:......3 .1:...,..e.•: ellafy
*eerea�iofml--timrkmui iia. l�-fik1+i1%ifll.*..ie) i e 11i" i4mu....,.r.,..eture sire of 5,000 .,....e..o fee! x ......•.[]�,.q„i�,rt.,
} f�' ag�jidditi[am -gr +wffig
Pro i5-'ee}ioty.
(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 eotrage industry. All
recreational marijuana activities are subject to the applicable requirements of Chapters 18.20 and 18.30 JCC.
t"i"CAWkieS ill ....1 r :.leniial and fl rest ialles Shall 1_..ye-E
WilimFi,.ennopyoutdoor-do _ elloutdoor ed.•iietivities1"i li
Hari ti+iFiiied taiiid+efillopy Wk
The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020.
Jefferson County Code
DRAFT FEB 17, 2021 V2
Page 3/5
(g d) Landscape Screening. All recreational marijuana activities shall have Type A landscape screening from
adjacent parcels, per JCC 18.30.130, development standards.
(# e) Setbacks. All recreational marijuana structures and activities in agriculture, ^Efflimel-ei ' f FeSt ROM
forest, or rural commercial OF -•f-a' resodo.,.: ' 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.
(+ 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.
(t 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.
(I 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 8 5 (Att. D)]
(i) Minimum Buffer Requirements. All recreational marjjua++a activities and Facilities must be located at least a
1,000 feet from the perirneter of tile Fo1l0Wi11g locations or ttses: (I 1 rlenuntary or secondary schools, [21
playgrounds: (3) recreation centers or Facilities; (4) childcare center1L L) public parks: 161 public transit
centers; (7) libraries; or (3) 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;
The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020.
Jefferson County Code Page 4/5
DRAFT FEB 17, 2021 V2
(i) Real estate sales office;
0) Small equipment repair;
(k) Woodworking shop;
(1) 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—,
(h) €Marijiaiia ri:Cr alioii;!
(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.
The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020.
Jefferson County Code
DRAFT FEB 17, 2021 V2
(i) No business may provide drive -through service.
Page 5/5
0) 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.
(1) 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]
The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020.
M
ao
Uoo
.r 7T.=C�
=
G
Y
a
c
eo �-
Y
{
w�
w
� e
t=
d
ev
meU
U
�V
u 9
;YE
y��
�
a
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
a
C7
C7;j
z
Z
U
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
,q
e•v
U
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
V
f
z
z
z
Z
z
z
z
Z
z
z
2
�
u
R a
—
=
u o
U
'e'
i.i
O
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Y
= A
Y
aU
a
z
z
U
z
z
2
z
z
z
Z
z
c ,
ry Y
o
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
�-
a
o
u
_o
2
Z
2
z
Y
m
z
z
Z2
V
0
0
0
v
z
0
0
0
0
o
y y m 7 C
Lz,
O
'o
�E`e�a
=
o r
0
0
0
0
0
v
>-
w
_
� a
� o
Y
°' u
C7
Uo
Uo
Uo
Uo
.�
raj
2
2
'O
C
N
O
C o+ �
O
•O
O
itl
C
� ^C
�
C L
C
5 c.
3
3 6
N
U
0.
Y
c
u a
a
w
aa`
v
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
u
x
C
N
}
N
r
O
z
N
r
o
O
z
N
r}
N
v
r
O
z
O
z
0
w�
,w
m�9
�
a��
a
t
a a
.1
.1
z
z
z
A
O
ai
o
u
s;
'E C7
.
z
r
z
z
'w
mow=
a
4
R �
i �
p
U
ri
y
O
O
z
O
z
O N
z r
O
z
O
z
O
z
O
z
O
z
N
O
z
ro
p
•�
o_y
v
0
y, U
o
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
o
m
o
z
z
z
zr
z
z
z
z
z
r
z
o
u e
U
G
U
cju
o
z
0
z
0
z
0
z
o
z
O
z
o
z
0
z
0
z
0
z
0
z
U
z
z
z
r
z
z
z
z
r
O
z
O
zcz
O
z�
u
o
d
o
a
z
z
z
z
zz
❑
Cd
z
z
z
u
v
w ea
v
z
z
z
z
O
u
o
z
z
r
o
i
01 u
C7
Uo
U
u
U�
uo
U�
u o
N
N
°O
A
N O ^E
h0 y
,y O
SO
id.^O.
,u
o o>
^
E
`tl o
o
a
02
nA
3.2
c
o
o
a
..n
ac
E o
ai
y
v ❑>
� � �
� �
O C
�
rpj
U 0
� .? t
Q.
Q a
J w A
a
z
U w
Appendix 2
MLA20-00116 - Draft Proposed Text Amendments to Support
Sewering- the Brinnon Limited Area of More Intensive Rural
Development
CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES -0
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.
U 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 thatareor
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 pUbliE sees 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
no# ermit urban development;
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8-30
January 2021
CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES
-It is necessary to support a Limited Area of More
Intensive Rural Development (LAMIRo) consistent with the
County -wide Planning Policies,
-It is necessary to provide service to an essential public
,facility if nopracticable 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.
de ed- to be an essential .L..7 , .k to mitigate tc._..eat
te- ub ire he'", safety, genepal el4ap
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.
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan
January 2021
(I
8-31
V(D
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 Jefferson County
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 af+public
health and environmental problem, does not induce spFawltig urban development, and
is affordable by the community that it serves 2 it is necessary to su ort a LAMIRD
and it is consistent with the County -wide Planning Policies: or f31 supports a school
located In the rural area 5ervinit both rural and urban students.
Jefferson County is investmatine sewerine the Brinnon tAMIRD using the existing
Dosewallips State Park sewer system. The Dosewallips State Park sewer treatment plant
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1-79
January 2021
LAND USE — - -- 0
is located in the Brinnon I.AMIRD and its fines run through the LAM IRD to the
Dosewallips State Park. Sewering Brinnon would alleviate known and potential
environmental problems associated with on -site sewage �ysterns. considering that the
Brinnon I.AMIRD Is located within the 100-year floocizone and is adjacent to the Hood
Can@l.
T rEatmen of this allm1:
being lnye __t_.! 6 whe-4ffnn..if . Rural iagje
Center, ddjaeent-W-DesewaNias-Stag a•^�.ment,,,464%:: T4e4ebmAy
0s w Aron to address requifemews of GM -wl4L—allow ng4imited-sefvac�y4he
DasewaHips-Stake-pa 5.11 gently finnan-rs served ent+�ely� .- _, .c..._..
Th a s_ 'wc�y� ate,, ; ,'�" ^«� ,n��oter ial Prt�l�le+ fs arm s+�rt�esyst ar e
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 Comprehensive Plan 1-80
January 2021
Jefferson County Code
DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V 1
18.30.040 Sewage disposal.
Page 1 /2
(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 Lange on -site sewage systems (LOSS) and community drainfields are not considered a sanitary sewer system as
applied under the Growth Management Act. Jcil`erson Count • considers theses stems a rural governmental service.
(4) New construction of a sanitary sewer s}astem, extension, or connection to a sanitary sewer system located_ outside
of an urban growth area may only occur if:
a The new sanitaij 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 systein extension, or connection is necessa , to support a Limited Area of
More Intensive aural Development (LAMIRD): the sewer is needed to mitigate a threat to the public
health, welfare, or to }nnntect ;in arca of environmental sensitivity caused by existing development; and the
sewer is limited to those properks or facilities needed to mini ate the threat to the imblic health. welfare or
to protect an area OfCTIVlrerninental Sensft[Vinr,
c The new sanitary sewer system, extension, or connection is necessary to provide sei-Oce to an essential
public facility if no practicable alternative exists to site the essential public facility in an Urban Growth
Area; or,
(i) The new sanitartsewer 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 Jeft"crson County Comprehensive
Elan, R(`W 36.70A213 and the tbilowing requirements:
W The app]irabie 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. than 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 go area nneets those
requirements;
iii The county and affected cities agree_to [lie 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)(H),;
iyj Any-im pacts associated with the siting orthe school are miti gated as required by the State
Environmewal Policy Act Chapter 43.21 C RCW and
(v) Anv extension of the sewer beyond the urban growth area is subigm to the following
The Jeferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020.
Jefferson County Code Page 2/2
DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V 1
( l ) Must only serve the applicable school and the casts of the extension must be borne by
the applicable School district based on a reasonable nexus to the impacts of the school.
Any exception from subsection a d v , when consistent with RCW 36.70A.1 10 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 comity and affected cities akree with the
request and provided that the no further front the sewer thalt the
distance that, if the property were within the urban growth area, the Property would be
required to connect to the sewer.
3 11 a ImMerty ownerconnects to tilt sewer under subsection d v 2 , the school
district may, foe a period of time nail to exceed 24 years, re wire reimbursement from a
requesting iro ert : owner for a proportional share of the construction costs irtCurred b
the school district for the extension of the sewer.
The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020.
Appendix 3
MLA20-00102 — Draft Proposed Text Amendments to Support the Port
Hadlock Sewer
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
Inside the Puget Sound Iron Company, Jefferson County,
from the CoLLection of the Jefferson County Historical
Societv
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, arAthe
Port HadLock Urban Growth Area Sewer System/Water Reclamation
FaciLity and InfLuent PipeLine Design PLons & Specifications
dated December 2013., and_ the Port HadLock UGA Sewer FaciLity
PLan Update.
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1-124
February 2021
LAND USE - 0
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 ]CC. 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 Undate, 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.
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1-131
February 2021
LAND USE �
r�
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 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
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1-132
February 2021
CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES
EXHIBIT 8-1 Capital Facilities & Public Services Provided
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
Jefferson County
Jefferson County Strategic
Administration
Plan, County Administrator's
Office, 2018
Individual operations plans
for community centers, _
maintenance facilities, and
animal control facilities
Sewer
Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA - Jefferson
Port Hadlock Wastewater
County
System: Urban Growth Area
Sewer Facility Plan, 2008 3rid
Port Ludlow - Olympic Water and Sewer
Port Hadlock UGA Sewer
Facility Plan Uodate, 2020
Design Plans & Specifications,
2013
Solid Waste
Jefferson County
Jefferson County, Solid Waste
Management Plan, September
2016
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8-3
February 2021
CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES ——
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 eallons ner day/ERU
Water:
City of Port Townsend: 840 gallons per day/ERU
■ Port Ludlow (Ludlow Water Co., Inc.):16O gallons per
day/ERU
• PUD No.l: 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
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8-24
February 2021
Sewer
Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA - Jefferson
Port Hadlock Wastewater
County
System: Urban Growth Area
Port Ludlow - Olympic Water and Sewer
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
Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban
Peninsula Regional Transportation
Growth Area Transportation
Planning Organization
Plan, May 2004
Jefferson Transit Authority
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
Individual Operational Plans
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
December 2018 Jefferson County I CopitoL FociLity PLan TechnicoL Document 1 8
TopicService . .- Plans
Fire Protection Jefferson County Fire Protection Individual Operational Plans
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
Water Port Townsend Jefferson County Coordinated
Jefferson County Water District No. 1 Water System Plan, June 1997.
- Paradise Bay Pending update
Jefferson County Water District No. 2 Jefferson County Public
- Brinnon Utility District #1 Water
System Plan 2011
Jefferson County Water District No. 3
- Coyle
Port Ludlow Drainage District
Port of Port Townsend
Public Utility District No. 1 of
Jefferson County
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 Svstew: 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
Ecologv 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 I CopitaL FociLity PLon TechnicoL Document 11 9
Trails: Target LOS if
1.83 miles
/k
1.83 acres /k
1.83 acres /k
funding allows
residents
residents
residents
Public Administration
Animal Control Shelter
74.9 sq. ft./k
69 sq. ft./k
58 sq. ft./k
residents
residents
residents
Community Centers
1,277.6 sq.
ft./k
1,185 sq. ft./k
1,005 sq. ft./k
residents
residents
residents
Administrative
1,509.7 sq.
ft./k
1,200 sq. ft./k
1,020 sq. ft./k
Facilities
residents
residents
residents
Maintenance Shop
1,078.9 sq.
ft./k
975 sq. ft./k
825 sq. ft./k
Facilities
residents
residents
residents
Sewer & Water Sy -stem -
Port Headlock /
Pending
Pending
Ai_ndi-n
Irondale UGA
Sewer
132 gallons
per
132 gallons per-
132 gallons per
da ERU
da ERU
da ERU
Solid Waste
Waste
4.20 pounds
per
3.12 pounds per
3.12 pounds per
capita per
day
capita per day
capita per day
Recycling
0.80 pounds
per
2.8 pounds per
2.8 pounds per capita
capita per
day
capita per day
per day
Stormwater
Standard
Transportation
Rural Roads
UGA Roads, MPR Roads,
Highways of Regional
Significance
Source: Jefferson County
Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington
C C C
D D D
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
Population Projected
Law Enforcement
County Corrections Inmate Facilities
County Sheriff Facilities
33,250
39,221
No Deficiency —Adjusted No Deficiency —Adjusted
No Deficiency —Adjusted No Deficiency —Adjusted
December 2018 ]efferson County I Copitat Facility Plan Technical Document 1 12
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$)
Law Enforcement/
Justice
Parks and
Recreation
Public
Administration'
Sewer
$1,090,492 $1,090,492 $1,090,492
$501,500 $5011500 $S011500
$3,372,750 $3,372,750 $3,372,750
$19 _0 $0
$25,900,138* $25,900,139* $11,903,121*
2018-2023 2018-2023 2018-2023
$_27,099,138* $27,099,138 $13,102,121*
2021-2026 2021-2026 2021-2026
Solid Waste $0 $0 $0
Stormwater $0 $0 $0
REET, Rates, Bonds, Grants,
Etc.
General Fund, donations &
grants. Seek additional
grants and donations for
unmet goals in periods prior
to 2018 and update phasing.
REET, Fleet Services Fund
Balance
Seek funding: grants, low
epest 1-1-s-1-..,
loans, lera ,�aemewt
distrie eenneetien
*kia,pges, and Pevenwe �Fp_
Pates.
Local funding: Local
improvement district,
connection charges, local
borrowing, and revenue,
Outside funding: WA
Legislature appropriations,
WA Dept of Ecology Combined
Water Ouality Program grant
funding, USDA grant funding,
and US Economic Development
Administration Public Works
Program grant fundinp,.
Rates per 2016 Solid Waste
Management Plan.
See Transportation.
December 2018 JeFferson County I Capital Facility PLan TechnicoL Document I 18
Transportation $23,3113966 $253434,621 $13662,875 Federal and State Funding at
over 70%, Developer Fair
Share Contribution, and
Local Funds.
Total $28 27C 708 $6 r27 G77 Principally Transportation:
$S4,176,846 $54,176,846 $18,530,738 seek Federal and State
Funds.
Notes: 1 PubLic Administration incLudes the AnimoL Shelter, Community Centers,
Administrative Facilities, and Maintenance Shops.
2 Funds projected for 2018-2023 wouLd meet the originaL PROS Program costs for the
period, and portioLLy cover some uncompleted projects in prior years, which may require
aLternative phasing.
3 Regarding soLid waste, assessments are planned for two County soLid waste handLing faciLities, which may
need copitaL repairs. When studies are complete projects may be added to the 2018-2023 period or phased in
2024-2038 period.
4 rnciades 6-year f1pancing costs or the Port HadLock UGA Sewer from 2019-2023(period of Last faU
update) and 2021-2026 (current update to sewer costs and financing).
Source: Jefferson County 2018
3 Capital Facilities Assessment
3.1 LAW ENFORCEMENT
Overview
Jefferson County Law Enforcement facilities include the Correctional Facility, the
Sheriff's administration, investigation and patrol building, the Sheriff's Clearwater
Annex on the west end, and the Courthouse (Prosecuting Attorney, Clerk, Juvenile
Services, and District and Superior Courts.
Inventory of Current Facilities
The Correctional Facility, located in Port Hadlock, was constructed in 1984 with a major
addition in 1999. This facility serves both unincorporated and incorporated populations
of the County. The current inventory of inmate beds in the corrections inmate facility
totals 58. The facility also includes the Emergency Operations Center for the county. The
table below lists each facility as well as their current capacities and location.
December 2018 Jefferson County I CopitaL FaciLity PLan Technical Document 1 19
EXHIBIT 3-23 Public Administration: Summary of Capital Costs (2018$)
Capacity Projects None None $0
Non -Capacity Projects $3,372,750 $1,000,000 $4,372,750
Total $3,372,750 $1,000,000 $4,372,750
Source: Jefferson County 2018
EXHIBIT 3-24 Public Administration: Summary of Capital Revenues
(2018$)
REET 2,872,750 800,000 3,672,750
Fleet Services fund 500,000 200,000 700,000
balance
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 Pont
Hadlock Wastewater-Svstem: Urban Growth Area Sewer Facility Plan and 2013 Desien 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
Washineton State Department of Ecoloev 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 I CopitoL Facility PLan TechnicoL Document 32
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_FacUity 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 Geunty has not adopted a level of sepylee ;1lop sewer.,C-e sepylEe I 5-pen
i-athe fu tiw,e,he.Lfunding ; jail =. 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 04 rCou.ty-i�Qpt: H-Ad-lack eir_A Sewer ac-ii y P12R 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 ppevieus
plaA aAalyzed seawiee 1pplls p^"7-t`ions through 2030, where it a6601 d
Peside"ts in thee sip4dice pea. -These projertians 3F�slightly 4.i..hep ha _ +
p.,. jpr=,-z,..,c ;r. the 2@18 3ef#nor €o''" 4wehensive plaA, ;ghiEh prej&ts�8
December 2018 Jefferson County I Capital FaciLity PLan TechnicoL Document U 33
qop .' *�^ ef5,394. Thus, the ability to meet proposed level of services for future
sewage systems remains the same.
EXHIBIT 3-25 Growth & Potential Sewer Demand
Gravity Collection System 0.70 0.96 i.2215
784,844 1,154,922 1,651,448 3,359,568
STEP Collection System 0.63 0.82 3 05 226
626,783 870,412 1,177,265 2,664,100
Grinder Pump Collection System 508,238 657,029 821,629 2.142,499
Source: n.- cTiz e_ ck .,� �,;�.�„.... cc^- � tT 40,1, Hadlork Seiner Fac4Lity Nor) Vpdote 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.
December 2018 Jefferson County I CapitaL FociLity PLon TechnicoL Document 34
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT DOCKET
March 3, 2021
David Wayne Johnson, Associate Planner — Lead, Department of Community
Development
Austin Watkins, Consultant, Department of Community Development
Page 1 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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. WA19-00019 —Text Amendments to Marijuana Related Development
Regulations...................................................................................................................... 9
B. MLA20-00116 - 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
FacilityPlan 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 2 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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 narrative, 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 3 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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 30, 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.
On February 10, 2021, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the
2020 Docket items. The Planning Commission accepted a total of 49 oral and 3 written
comments in support of MLA19-00019. After deliberations, the Planning Commission
voted to recommend approval/adoption of all 2020 docket items. The Planning
Commission's findings, conclusions, and recommendations will be transmitted to the
BoCC on March 22, 2021.
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 4 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
B. Heariniz Dates QCD Staff Contact and Other Introducto
Information.
Proponent: Jefferson County BoCC for text amendments and on behalf of
the applicant for the site -specific rezone amendment.
Planning Commission The Planning Commission Held on Wednesday,
Hearing Date: February 10, 2021.
Location of Staff Report The Staff Report and all supporting material may be found
and Supporting Material: online at
https://test.co.iefferson.wa. us/Webl inkExtemal/O/fol/2 7 104 8 8
/Bowl .aspx
Date Public Hearing No public hearing is currently scheduled. If an additional
Comments are Due: public hearing is scheduled, information relating to comment
submission will be inserted here.
DCD Staff Contact: David Wayne Johnson, Associate Planner — Lead
J ohnsonAco. i efferson.wa.us
(360) 379-4450
Notice and Posting: If an additional public hearing is required, notice and posting
information will be inserted here.
Tentative Adoption April 30, 2021.
Date:
Page 5 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
C. Growth Management Indicators
Jefferson County Code ("JCC") 18.45.080(l)(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
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.
Page 6 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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.
(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
Page 7 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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.
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.
Page 8 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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
("1-502") 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. I 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
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:
WAC 314-55-020(11). See also Wa. Att'y Gen. Op. 2014 No. 2 (January 16, 2014).
z Jefferson County Ordinance No. 04-0608-15 re: Production, Processing, and Retailing of Recreational Marijuana
in Jefferson County at pg 5.
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
Page 9 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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.'
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
in the Rural Residential and Forest Resource zoning districts. The processing facility size
limitation is independent of the production (grow) size limitations.
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.
41d. 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 10 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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.
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
Page 11 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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 12 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
Figure 1 — Map of WSLCB Licensced Facilities in Unincorporated Jefferson County
Page 13 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
Figure 2 — Mao of WSLCB Licensced Facilities in Unincomorated Jefferson Count
Glen Cove Industrial Area
,Y .r
Glen Cove 21.1,1
State licensed marijuana
producers or processors
Licensed Tax Parcel
h,
N
A
Y�
Gl9Y1 COVE
i.
� d 5
... �t r. K.F7r M'I ir.ii.l. 4s �•
� s.-rwr w1
f iA1 :rf 1i. �6F��i'HI R+J
Page 14 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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%
Jeff Co Marijuana Production and Processing Facilities 2020 YTD Sales
$103,022
4 , )l 0 •1 $1489.263
., Rural Residential Forest Resource a Agrlculutral Light Industrial
Page 15 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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.' 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
Mari ivana Producers and Processors in the Rural Residential Lonina 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.'
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 littps:11502data.com and WSLCB Frequently Requested Lists available at
hitps://1-cb.wa.i,rov/records/freq uent Iy-requested-lists.
Id.-
5 /d
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 16 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
(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;
0) 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
(1) 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.
to JCC 18.40.530(1).
Page 17 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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." From lOpm until lam, the noise level must be 50 dBA or less.12 For example, a
11 wAC 173-60-040(2)(a).
12 Id.
Page 18 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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). la
13 Decibel Level Comparison Chart available at ].i�i,I:��:'felts. ale.ed«Isteslc4efauEs..riles/f=iles/decibel-level-cltart..pdf.
14 RCW 69.50.331(8).
Page 19 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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 IndustKy 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."" 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"." The cottage
industry requires that the applicant prove their full-time residency on the parcel by the time
of the application approval.'$ 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).
'$ 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 20 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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.21 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 littps://leh wa.eov/n1'license/niariju;iii�i-licensinL, and his://leb.wn.eov�'miiicense/ni licensing�faq.
24 RCW 36.70A.020(8).
21 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 21 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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.2' 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 p o�rting 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 1-00
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.
"See MCC 17.17.005.
Page 22 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
Figure 3 — Vacant Rural and Urban Industrial "Zoned Properties
Jefferson County, WA
All properties in Zoning Districts lo;,neer.r
LI, LI/C, LI/M, Hl, R81, and
Land Use Code = 9100 - Vacant Land
little gllrq, %recw,b
i. LAL LA KI
Ical
LIIM -Light Industrial/Manufacturing
RBI - Resource -Based Industrial
0 County bdundary
J C'LA
t7ain,o��
beale4
4ndmn
"rid rF;nIUN
Fb it Iwk=A
Ian.......
Beppu,
Na l
SO—,eu
Baer
Banpo,
Nnvpl
Ro x,telon
r'nri L„l k-n
Page 23 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
roilcto
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 24 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
Figure 4 Vacant Rural Industrial Zoned Properties in the Glen Cove Industrial Area
Glen Cove
Properties in Zoning Districts Ll, LI/C, and
Land Use Code = 9100 - Vacant Land
I.
LI - Light Industrial
LI/C - Light Industrial/Commerical
Gla,i Cove
A I
Page 25 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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
RRl :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 26 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
figure S — Vacant RR1:10 Parcels At Least 10 Acres in Size
Jefferson County, WA
Map 5.3: All properties w/ RR-10 Zon,
at least 10 acres in size and
Land Use Code = 9100 - Vacant Lanc
1
unu a
�a Wiu�,m
C L ALL AI,1
Big Vbllerva /per
ar
0�
+ Rk 4f
Page 27 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
Figure.6 — Vacant RRI:20 Parcels At Least 20 Acres in Size
'Jefferson County, WA
Map 5.4: All properties wl RR-20 Zoning
at least 20 acres in size and
Land Use Code = 9100 - Vacant Land k-,M ftNb,
NFLL V N NN A Ir Ik"I IWW.
110
Mh
%jilt*
1: 1-I L A L LA?.I n
519 Quil'o..
■
Row
0-6
■
bed as Vacant Land
County boundary
Page 28 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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 amendments, in line in and line out format, are in Appendix 1.
Planning Commission Recommendations:
On February 17, 2021, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of
MLA19-00019. The Planning Commission included one amendment, clarifying that
marijuana production and processing facilities are prohibited in all other zoning
classifications, unless expressly listed. DCD concurs with this amendment.
Consistency with the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan
DCD staff recommended amendments, as contained in 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
Page 29 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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.
B. MLA20-00116 - 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 GNU 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
Page 30 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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
LAMIRD to hookup to the existing Dosewallips Sewer as a part of the 2020
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 County permits sewer
connections for properties within the Brinnon LAMIRD to the Dosewallips Sewer, does
the Comprehensive Plan have to be amended?
" 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
March 3, 2021
RR-5
RR-5
RR-20
Figure 7 — Map of Brinnon LAMIRD
RR-5
RR-5
Beffinon, LAMIRD
RVC
RWG RVC
RVC
4
F
RR-20
RR-20
N
PPR fi
SoXrce Esfl
JS. USDA USGS.Aer 113i, ;IOC GM�� Lr,
r i.Am i r; i i o,
, ,
IV. Urn t . , - .3tes rnf,
so datri are ;v, v Wrt on
an AS -is" bas4s, without Dosewallips
Sewer Location and Lines
O
VjON
ffarianty of any type,
axwes,';ed or implied, InGILIding
Wt not fin,ded to any warranty
totheir performance.
baitv, or fitness for )KIrchmta
9. 0_2 8 l Date: 1/27/2021
:-Ily J) as r(bckj or pu rpoY 4:I
; I , . ;.�
Page 32 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
RR-5
Figure 8 — Location of Dosewallips Sewer and Routing of Sewer Lines
MIE
RR-20
-5
h
a,
Sewer Line
"1 RR-20
RR-5 or
t• .
rl :,
Sewer Line +�
t.
RVC '�sY
KV
RVC
rr
t t �
RR,
N,_. !RR
Source Esri, ht37f3f, GC e. aiUk epgrjpnlcs.
t`. r�tE�+Aufiliy
DS, USDA, tinCa A01' lP1
JOferson County NIA'' 4VCy{Rales. Or
fFres 3 data are Ixr,wleri 01
.m -IS" basis, without
osewallips Sewer Location and Lines
"' {r.
vrrrr:anty of any type,
{1 oS,ed or implied, inClUding
1
wt not limited to any warranty
to their
s performance,
rll?rrharltaUdity, of fihlessfor
1:9,028 Date: 1/27/2021
' 7s
Rnf nry�r+r.x .+%wetix. bn �r��� � in�y a:�+.�err�,,..,tine: unt s+y �xc.e 3efwef
.111y i2llt P::ll la! Lxupose
Page 33 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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).
" 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 34 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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).
4s RCW 36.70A.110(4). (emphasis added).
46 RCW 36.70A.030(24). (emphasis added).
Page 35 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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)."
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 36 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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.
Exce tion 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 I - 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 septic 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 Iow-density sprawl and the
prohibition of urban governmental services in rural areas.58
51 RCW 3 6.70A. 110(4).
"RCW 36.70A.213.
53 RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d).
"Thurston Cty. v. Cooper Point Assn, 148 Wn.2d 1, 13, 57 P.3d 1156, 1162 (2002). ("Cooper Point").
55 Id.
56 Id. at 5.
57Id. 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 37 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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 by 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 38 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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 ofLAAHRDs 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 — Sewerin 7 Schools in Rural Areas Serviiig 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 39 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
GMHB Decisions Expressly Allow LAMIRDs to Be Sewered if Necessaryto-Support o Support the
T.AMIRI)
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 GALA, "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 GM4.67
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 GNM 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).
161d. at 5.
61 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 If')
691d.
70 Tacoma H at 9 (quoting Gain v. Pierce County, CPSGMHB, 99-3-0019, Final Decision and Order (April 18,
2000)).
Page 40 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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."
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 41 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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."
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.71
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.
"Jefferson County Washington, Resolution No.128-92 at 7, December 21, 1992. (emphasis added).
78 Id. at 21-22.
Page 42 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
The Necessitv Test Under Exception 4 is Lower than the Strict Necessity Test in Coo er
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 Amened 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 43 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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 GNU 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." 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.S2 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).
81 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 44 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
Sewerinp- 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:
a 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)." 81 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 systems 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).
8s Id. at 8-6.
Page 45 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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 in
Appendix 2.
Planning Commission Recommendations:
On February 17, 2021, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of
MLA20-00116.
86Id. at 1-80.
Page 46 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
C. MLA20-00102 — Text Amendments to Sunnort 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.jeffersOlICOLliltypublielicalth.org1158/Port-fladlock-
Wastewater-S stem.
Capital facilities planning is a stated GMA planning goal, and a capital facilities
element is a required element." 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."
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 47 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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 refence 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 / estimated
residential unit.
• 6-year financing plan — The GNU 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 in
Appendix 2.
Page 48 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
Planning Commission Recommendations:
On February 17, 2021, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of
MLA20-00102.
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 commercial land uses with impacts to
ground water and residential development using community managed sewage systems, LOSS, and planned rural
residential developments).
Page 49 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
001211003 001214005
.9999001d7
C
In y3 CD
001251006
o ti
N � via emp .�+• � and r
m �qC.1
. Q F
19 b
g9�t) 999900152 1358300153 �r 9gg0
a 399300155� 9g@ s'9 _
OQ12a2017 •
a�0t9262022 l �..f • f g,Plo 999900139 i
,
lar,•p ! '007 2023_ ��ti _ 999900,159
OD1281002 �A"' �_' 999900136 -
it 001 82 4 j
i �999940558 9999OD160 _ $�®AAA
001262015 U Qpf28 , e
Air
:ur�["' S��� .'�`..-�' � °yam �' `"� ,.�" e�if �a�'. -. $a°��• ,r•—.
� �� r "4' � '�•� 001283A�6� ` cs _ �'' �f �.-- 1 , Y'`'t�
o:
env 0012E70f73 pYS9 �ti�r �t �0�i6� *4j
w lop alb ^ex 0 q0*
�'
1 o 999900131
. IL
F
G w ;, G i6C1 m
tlo126ao11
m
Otl1263005 r4! dOq'f29d(f0 °y °! � �' i m
m
0012$3901 0 Qa+�`
ry
r 1n°
a i Rr�iri s� a�il�rir �I �1=ns p C •, irr?
--777
9:sssnolaa 9996D146 999904s
R#{p 999900144
1999900151
w i 999900152,
r 9$ 0 154
d
0
0012 02 017
aa'1252022
t T
O L. 7
999900157
OD1231002
i
J
999900158
1
99990 88
2
1
9999A. d`
!1a :1'sfo9" ? 'Rid. d ka[rY}r0 th r�l F.-�Id is
a9or
Figure 11 — MLA20-00039 Current Zoning
a svi, hlaxwl G s.n Ep sr. Eno tr� luxG
:>. kqr C43R IC IGN arj Hr90S User
Jest&AssOdata, Ira
hese data are provided on
AS -IS" basis, without
Na rsaniy of any type,
epressed or implied irnowlny
t not linited to any warranty
to their performance,
M LA20-00039 Zoning
hbti
1»
�1
k JJ
1:9,028 Date: 1/2$/2021
rcharkayWy, or fitness for
VirticWar urpo9e.
sSHrA[.�O
8, r ,.. , w u,?, c ----- ra r. 0
Page 52 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
r i 001211003 001214005
999900147
" c low
prpf 0012010115
n
exe
v
CD
Ile
Oo
O Y o
. l
9Qpr/99900152 =- 999900163
...$T 5[.g-- -._ Nab
d'� ci d,J �OQ
w 9999OQ155 go�°> i
0 ��,•', #=•d r` ; � x
- Od1252022 f '. �s' ggg l
r'dr� , "001�wen23 os� .99990d15 i�M ,�_. �_
99990[713R
Q81282 24 6
99B900159�1 9394i0b18 r ���� �
001282015 o�y` ,012a2023
40 g l
h I I
q r R
001253 29 ' ° + e �h� .4 %
W 001264B3' ss,�
w
i 1 03 15 ; , �� ~ 9 i98dd131 g ry
0012 1+„ A
r'�� .{ a-•i' .I py' Vim
C G + it
1257005 ci
gat,
'tIA.A$Wit'a1n
Figure 13 — MLA20-00039 Potential Building Locations and Access
Page 54 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
Figure 14 — MLA20-00039 Potential Lot La out
Page 55 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
Page 56 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
Fi re_17 — MLA20-00039 View of Adjacent Development (west) of Property from
Analysis:
Review and Analysis of Surrounding Uses and Zonin
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 57 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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".9' 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).
Al2plicable 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."
• 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
9' Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan at 1-19.
" Id. at 1-34.
92 Id. at 1-98.
93 Id. at 1-99.
94 Id.
Page 58 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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.15
DCD staff has analyzed the applicable Comprehensive 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 14,000.91 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 59 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
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.
Planning Commission Recommendation:
On February 17, 2021, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of
MLA20-00039.
Page 60 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
III. State Environment Policy Act Compliance
The County published a SEPA Addendum on February 28, 2021. The SEPA Addendum
and supporting SEPA Environmental Checklists provide additional information relating to the
Jefferson County Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS), May 27, 1998 and associated
SEPA documents. These SEPA documents were adopted and the additional information was
determined not to involve significant new impacts. Jefferson County prepared a SEPA
Environmental Checklist for the text amendments (MLA19-00019, MLA20-00116, and MLA-
00120) and reviewed an applicant prepared SEPA Environmental Checklist for the site -specific
amendment (MLA20-00039).
An agency may use previously prepared environmental documents to evaluate proposed
actions, alternatives, or environmental impacts. The proposals may be the same as or different than
those analyzed in the existing documents (WAC 197-11-600[2]). These documents are listed in
response to Question 8 of the SEPA Environmental Checklist and in the Addendum and were
adopted in association with the Comprehensive Plan and development regulations. See the
Determination of Significance and Notice of Adoption published on February 28, 2021.
Page 61 of 61
DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
March 3, 2021
a —
c wEEE
AA
a W
U
ry
v
_E
c
N
E
H
o
o o
�0
yym.
m
O'
N 9 OG
o
w«
yy
v
c
<
<
e
v
Q
W ry�ry
6
N
LC
U
j_
m
L
U L
U
C W
N w N
U
E
LD
o�n
3
U o` �
i7 a
l7
l7
l7 n l7 n
0
vi m
O tg
w
o
N$
o N
N =- C C C E
5 v
1 d E E
`
" z S
" p'9
xw `r
Y zw'F.
z 12
o m
O
m U
U
3 E�
m
z° z°O3,Pa3 J„
m o 0
V U N �
K C
N
o
O
N
ry
eal
o
~
m m
m N ry
O
w N N
N
o
M
m
N
m
3
n
v
m
Oml O O
O O
m m
O
O
O
O
nm
m a
m a m
a m
J. a
3
m
m
U c
to
m
>n
m
o 3
O
c c
e o N
u 3 o N
O
a 3
o d ry
m m
O c a
m
o
�n m
N¢
v3
ryo m
am
n o o a m N o
n m o
rvr Nam rvF
o
owm
a m
a
m
N
ti
N
N
ri
ry
a
N
a
n
v
m
ey
m N oN0
w a ry
a a a
N rl
N
O
�
a
N
\
o
ry
a
'1
0
H
u
1-
o a
z H
w
H
w
H
u
H
u_ o o
F z z
w
F= u
Y
>
> >
}
Y
Y
> Y Y
N
> pp
ry c C
= w
O C L y 19
V N
c Y c
J
c —p c
"
c m 3 a a n N
u•
o
C m E P
o r N c t F
z =oiLu
ai xx=Ui
z
u3 imo U�iz�
$
in
'o_
L N
c
EE
m
. u c o
s
m
6
g
C
3
m
W
o
C
�[
g
u
C
a m r
vl
mo`
to
ry
m
xw i73
a
ww
m
a
n
N
'o
m
¢' iio a
m o
�
ry