Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout042621_ra02Regular Agenda JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REQUEST TO: Board of County Commissioners Philip Morley, County Administrator FROM: Austin Watkins, Interim Director, Community Development David Wayne Johnson, Associate Planner, Community Development DATE: April 26, 2021 SUBJECT: Continued Deliberation and Potential Action regarding the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Final Docket STATEMENT OF ISSUE: The Jefferson Board of County Commissioners (`BoCC") will continue its deliberation and potentially take legislative action regarding the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Final Docket ("2020 Docket"). The 2020 Final Docket includes four proposed amendments to the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code. BACKGROUND: On October 26, 2020, the BoCC established the 2020 Docket. The 2020 Docket includes the following four proposed amendments ("2020 Docket Proposals") to the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and the Unified Development Code: • 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; and, • 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 Page 1 of 4 Regular Agenda Planning Commission recommendations by the established deadline of February 26, 2021. The Planning Commission recommended approval of all 2020 Docket Proposals. On February 24, 2021, DCD Staff submitted the 2020 Docket Proposals, the DCD Staff Report, State Environmental Policy Act ("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. 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. On April 5, 2021, DCD Staff recommended that the BoCC modify the Planning Commission's recommendation and hold a public hearing on the 2020 Docket Proposals so that staff proposed amendments to MLA20-00102 (Text Amendments to Support the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update) could be incorporated into the BoCC deliberations. DCD Staff recommended this course of action so that the Washington State Department of Ecology approved version of the 2021 Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update could be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan instead of the 2020 Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update draft version, which was included in the Planning Commission's recommendations. The staff proposed revisions were minor and aligned the recently approved 2021 Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update with the proposed amendments. On April 5, 2021, the BoCC voted to modify the Planning Commission's recommendations on the 2020 Docket Proposals. As the BoCC voted to modify the Planning Commission's recommendation, a BoCC public hearing on the 2020 Docket Proposals was required, per JCC 18.45.080(2)(b). On April 19, 2021, after a presentation by DCD Staff, the BoCC held their public hearing taking testimony on the 2020 Docket Proposals and proposed modifications to the Planning Commission's recommendation. The BoCC received two written comments and one oral comment during the public hearing. After the close of the public hearing, the BoCC began its deliberation on the 2020 Docket, as required by JCC 18.45.080(2)(c). The BoCC now continues its deliberations on the 2020 Docket, including the required and additional findings, per JCC 18.45.080(2)(c). The BoCC may take final legislative action after deliberation. Page 2 of 4 Regular Agenda ANALYSIS: DCD's Staff Report analyzed the 2020 Docket Proposals, SEPA compliance, as well as the Growth Management Indicators used by the Planning Commission in their recommendation. 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 changes. The Planning Commission's findings, conclusions, and recommendations are found in their February 26, 2021 transmittal letter. 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. During the April 19, 2021 BoCC public hearing one comment letter with 33 signatures was received in support of MLA19-00019 (Text Amendment to Marijuana Related Development Regulations). One comment letter regarding water quality was received for MLA20-00102 (Text Amendments to Support the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update) and the one oral comment related to this comment letter. No other public testimony was received. DCD Staff has prepared draft required and additional findings, per JCC 18.45.080(2)(c), which are contained in the draft adopting ordinance. These draft findings are to be used by the BoCC during deliberation of the 2020 Docket. 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; and, • Draft Adopting Ordinance; and, http://test.co.ieffers n.wa.us/weblinkextemal/O/fol/275 3 02 1 /Row1.aspx Page 3 of 4 Regular Agenda Attached: • DCD Staff Report; • Draft adopting ordinance; • Appendix 1, 2, and 3 (proposed line in / line out text amendments). 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: Complete deliberations on the hearing record and adopt the Adopting Ordinance for the 2020 Docket, as proposed by the Department of Community Development. REVIEWED BY: Philip Mor y, oun+y-Attrntn sTrator Date Page 4 of 4 COUNTY OF JEFFERSON STATE OF WASHINGTON An Ordinance Adopting Four Comprehensive } ORDINANCE NO. Plan Amendments, File Numbers: } MLA19-00019 [Text Amendments to } Marijuana Related Development Regulations]; } MLA20-00116 [Text Amendments to Support } Sewering the Brinnon LAMIRD]; MLA20-00102 } [Text Amendments to Support the Port Hadlock } Sewer]; and, MLA20-00039 [Seton Site -specific } Rezone from RR1:10 to RR1:51 } WHEREAS, Jefferson County is required under the Growth Management Act ("GMA") and Chapter 18.45 of the Jefferson County Code ("JCC") to annually accept suggested text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and development regulations, along with site -specific amendments [rezones]; WHEREAS, Jefferson County annually accepts applications for suggested text amendments to its Comprehensive Plan and development regulations, along with site -specific amendments until March I". Timely applications are placed on the preliminary comprehensive plan amendment docket, along with staff suggested amendments; WHEREAS, the Jefferson County Department of Community Development ("DCD") staff analyze the preliminary docket and make recommendations to the Jefferson County Planning Commission on which docket items should be included in the final docket; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the preliminary docket, including DCD staff recommendations, held a public hearing on the preliminary docket, and on September 28, 2020 made recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners ("BoCC") for the final 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket list; WHEREAS, the BoCC considered the recommendations of the Planning Commission, held a public hearing on the preliminary docket, and adopted a final 2020 Comprehensive Plan Docket list ("2020 Docket") on October 26, 2020; WHEREAS, the final 2020 Docket items includes: MLA19-00019 — text amendments to marijuana related development regulations; MLA20-00116 — text amendments to support sewering the Brinnon LAMIRD; MLA20-00102 — text amendments to support the Port Hadlock sewer; and MLA20-00039 — Seton site -specific rezone from RR1:10 to RR1:5; WHEREAS, the adoption of the 2020 Docket was delayed due to the on -going COVID- 19 pandemic; WHEREAS, on November 9, 2020, the BoCC adopted Resolution No. 69-20 extending the timeline for final action on the 2020 Docket until April 30, 2021; Page 1 of 9 WHEREAS, on February 10, 2021, the Planning Commission held a public hearing accepting oral and written testimony on the 2020 Docket items; WHEREAS, on February 17, 2021, the Planning Commission deliberated on the 2020 Docket record, including public testimony, and voted to recommend approval of all 2020 Docket items; WHEREAS, on March 22, 2021, the BoCC considered the Planning Commission's recommendation and after applying the required growth factors and findings, the BoCC decided to modify the Planning Commission's recommendations; WHEREAS, the BoCC, after timely notice, held a public hearing on April 19, 2021 receiving oral and written comments; and, WHEREAS, on April 26, 2021, the BoCC deliberated regarding the 2020 Docket items; WHEREAS, the text amendments (MLA19-00019, MLA20-00116, and MLA20-00102) amending the Comprehensive's Plan Land Use Element, Capital Facilities and Utilities Element, and Capital Facility Plan Technical Appendix and Chapter 18.15 JCC, Chapter 18.20 JCC, and Chapter 18.30 JCC are contained in Appendix 1, 2, and 3 attached to this Ordinance; WHEREAS, the 2020 Docket included a SEPA review through a staff issued Addendum to the 1998 Draft and Final Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Statements ("EIS") and subsequent Supplement EISs, and a SEPA Checklist and Addendum that addressed the 2020 Docket items, including the proposed revisions to the Comprehensive Plan, Unified Development Code, and site -specific amendment; WHEREAS, the BoCC finds the 2020 Docket text amendments, as reflected in Appendix 1, 2, and 3 and the site -specific amendment (MLA20-00039) serve to benefit the health, welfare, safety, and lifestyle of the residents of Jefferson County; WHEREAS, the BoCC finds that the 2020 Docket text amendments, as reflected in Appendix 1, 2, and 3 and the site -specific amendment (MLA20-00039) are consistent with the county -wide planning policies and consistent with the comprehensive plans of other counties and cities with which Jefferson County has a common border or regional issues; WHEREAS, the BoCC finds that the 2020 Docket text amendments, as reflected in Appendix 1, 2, and 3 and the site -specific amendment (MLA20-00039) are consistent with the GMA; WHEREAS, JCC 18.45.080(2)(c) requires that BoCC to analyze the 2020 Docket items and make the following findings on the full and complete record: Growth Management Indicators, JCC 18.45.050(4)(b)(i) through (4)(b)(vii): Page 2 of 9 (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. (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. Page 3 of 9 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. Required Findings, JCC 18.45.080(1)(b)(i-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. Page 4 of 9 Changes in circumstance dictate a need for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and 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 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 RRI: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 RRI: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 upon which the Comprehensive Plan is based are no longer valid, or whether new information is available which was not considered during the adoption process or any annual amendments to the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. 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 the County. (iii) Whether the proposed amendment reflects current widely held values of the residents of Jefferson County. Page 5 of 9 Yes, the proposed amendments in the 2020 Docket reflect the widely held values of the residents of Jefferson County. The proposed amendments are 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. Site -Specific Findings (MLA20-00039), JCC 18.45.080(1)(c)(i-viii): (i) The proposed site -specific amendment meets concurrency requirements for transportation and does not adversely affect adopted level of service standards for other public facilities and services. The BoCC 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 goals, policies, and implementation strategies of the various elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The BoCC 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 county's transportation network, capital facilities, utilities, parks, and environmental features that cannot be mitigated, and will not place uncompensated burdens upon existing or planned service capabilities. The BoCC 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 BoCC has reviewed the DCD staff report and Recommendations of the Planning Commission, including probable transportation impacts, county department comments, and the applicant's SEPA 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 BoCC finds that the subject parcel is physically suitable for the requested RR1:5 zoning classification. The BoCC finds that the area surrounding the subject parcel is developed, Page 6 of 9 including commercial and institutional development and that surrounding residential development is at the requested or a higher density. The BoCC 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 BoCC finds that adequate utilities are available to the site, including public water supply and electric service. (v) The proposed site -specific amendment will not create a pressure to change the land use designation of other properties, unless the change of land use designation for other properties is in the long-term best interests of the county as a whole. The BoCC 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. The BoCC 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) If within an unincorporated urban growth area (UGA), the proposed site -specific amendment does not affect the adequacy or availability of urban facilities and services to the immediate area and the overall UGA. The proposed site -specific amendment 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 BoCC 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. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED, by the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners as follows: Page 7 of 9 Section 1. Findings. The BoCC hereby adopts the recitals (the WHEREAS statements) as findings in support of this Ordinance. Section 2. MLA19-00019 Adopted. MLA19-00019 [text amendments to marijuana development regulations] is adopted. Chapter 18.15 JCC and Chapter 18.20 JCC is hereby amended to include text additions and changes as indicated by strikethrough and underline text in Appendix 1. Section 3. MLA20-00116 Adopted. MLA20-00116 [text amendments to support sewering the Brinnon LAMIRD] is adopted. The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, as adopted in Ordinance No. 14-1210-18, is hereby amended to include text additions and changes as indicated by strikethrough and underline text in Appendix 2. Chapter 18.30 JCC is hereby amended to include text additions and changes as indicated by strikethrough and underline text in Appendix 2. Section 4. MLA20-00102 Adopted. MLA20-00102 [text amendments to support the Port Hadlock Sewer] is adopted. The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, as adopted in Ordinance No. 14-1210-18, is hereby amended to include text additions and changes as indicated by strikethrough and underline text in Appendix 3. Section 5. MLA20-00039 Adopted. MLA20-00039 [Seton site -specific rezone from RR1:10 to RR1:5] is adopted. The map of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations / Zoning is hereby amended to reflect that parcel of real property with ID number 001281002, described as S28 T30 RIW GOV LOT 2 (LESS PLATTED), shall be given in its entirety an underlying land use designation/zoning of Rural Residential 1:5. Section 6. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or section of this Ordinance or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this Ordinance or its application to other persons or circumstances shall be fully valid and shall not be affected. Section 7. SEPA 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. 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. Section 8. Effective Date. This Ordinance becomes effective upon adoption by the BoCC. Approved and adopted this of 2021 at Page 8 of 9 SEAL: ATTEST Carolyn Gallaway Clerk of the Board JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Kate Dean, Chair Greg Brotherton, Member Heidi Eisenhour, Member APPROVED AS TO FORM: Philip C. Hunsucker, Date Chief Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Page 9 of 9 Appendix 1 MLA19-00019 — Draft Proposed Text Amendments to Mariju� ana 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 TUC concentration greater than 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant, its seeds or resin. The term does not include the mature stalks of the plant, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of the plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the mature stalks (except the resin extracted therefrom), fiber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed of the plant which is incapable of germination. (b) Marijuana processor means a person licensed by the State Liquor Control Board to process marijuana into useable marijuana and marijuana -infused products, package and label useable marijuana and marijuana -infused products for sale in retail outlets, and sell useable marijuana and marijuana -infused products at wholesale to marijuana retailers. Marijuana processing for the purpose of this section may or may not include drying, trimming and bagging of a recreational marijuana product. (c) Marijuana producer means a person licensed by the State Liquor Control Board to produce and sell marijuana at wholesale to marijuana processors and other marijuana producers. Marijuana producing for the purpose of this section shall include drying, trimming and bagging of a recreational marijuana product when done in conjunction with producing. (d) Marijuana -infused products means products that contain marijuana or marijuana extracts and are intended for human use. The term marijuana -infused products does not include useable marijuana. (e) Marijuana retailer means a person licensed by the State Liquor Control Board to sell useable marijuana and marijuana -infused products in a retail outlet. (f) Plant canopy means the square footage dedicated to live plant production, such as maintaining mother plants, propagating plants from seed to plant tissue, clones, vegetative or flowering area. Plant canopy does not include areas such as space used for the storage of fertilizers, pesticides, or other products, quarantine, office space, etc. (3) Use Zones. Three categories of recreational marijuana activities are recognized by rules of the state of Washington as follows: production, processing, and retailing; and each category of such use shall be allowed in the following comprehensive plan zones and as further shown in JCC 18.15.040, Table 3-1, and JCC 18.18.040, Table 3A-1: (a) Production. Allowed as a yes use in agricultural zoning district, rural industrial, and urban industrial zoning districts. ,a: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. Allowed as eopAitioHal dicer tioHan (G(d)) 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 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. Allowed as ,,,a4ioH ' this -etio f (G(d)) .. " Prohibited in all other zoning districts. (4) The following standards shall apply for all recreational marijuana activities: (h 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. (d �) Processing and retail in the agricultural zoning district is allowed as conditional discretionary (C(d)) and shall be subject to the standards in JCC 18.20.030(3), agricultural performance standards, and this section, recreational marijuana performance standards. (e c) No recreational marijuana operation may be permitted as a home business or cottage industry. All recreational marijuana activities are subject to the applicable requirements of Chapters 18.20 and 18.30 JCC. 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 4) Landscape Screening. All recreational marijuana activities shall have Type A landscape screening from adjacent parcels, per JCC 18.30.130, development standards. (h e) Setbacks. All recreational marijuana structures and activities in agriculture, eommer-eial f fe^+ .dfa €e�� or rural commercial zones that abut residential zoned land shall be a minimum 25 feet setback from all property lines including front road setbacks. Setback requirements for other zone combinations are as stated in JCC 18.30.050, development standards, Table 6-1, Density, Dimension and Open Space Standards. In the event of conflict, the more restrictive measures shall apply. (i D Cameras. Any security cameras proposed for a recreational marijuana facility shall be positioned so as to not intrude on the privacy of adjacent parcels. 4 g) Any fence eight feet or taller shall be located a minimum 25 feet from all parcel property lines. (k W 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 B 5 (Att. D)] (j) Minimum Buffer Requirements. All recreational marijuana activities and facilities must be located at least a 1,000 feet from the perimeter of the following locations or uses: (1) elementary or secondary schools; (2) playgrounds; (3) recreation centers or facilities; (4) childcare centers; (5) public parks; (6) public transit centers; (7) libraries; or (8) any game arcades (where admission is not restricted to persons age 21 or older). 18.20.170 Cottage Industry. (1) Purpose. To provide for small-scale economic development activities on residential parcels, subordinate to the primary residential use, if the administrator finds that such activities can be conducted without substantial adverse impact on the residential environment and rural character in the vicinity. The scale and intensity of cottage industries are typically greater than could be accommodated as a home business, but less than would require a land use district designation of commercial or industrial. (2) The following list of uses allowable as cottage industries include, but are not necessarily limited to: (a) Sales of antiques and collectibles; (b) Art or photography studios; (c) Computer software development; (d) Handicrafts; (e) Ironworking or blacksmith shop; (f) Construction office; (g) Furniture repair or refinishing; (h) Pottery shop; 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-; and, (b) Marijuana recreational processor. (5) All cottage industries shall be subject to the following standards, except as provided for in the West End Planning Area and Brinnon Planning Area — Remote Rural overlay districts as specified in Article VI-L of Chapter 18.15 JCC, Remote Rural Overlay Districts for the West End Planning Area and the Brinnon Planning Area: (a) The cottage industry shall be operated by at least one full-time, bona fide resident in a single-family residence of the parcel on which the proposed use is being requested. (b) The cottage industry may not employ more than four employees on the site who reside off the subject property. Auto and truck repair shall only employ two persons on the site who reside off the subject property. (c) Only those buildings or areas as specifically approved by the county may be utilized in the conduct of business. (d) Any business requiring customers to visit the site shall provide adequate on -site parking spaces, in addition to one for each full-time equivalent employee who resides off the subject property, and two for the owners of the property. All parking spaces shall meet the standards of JCC 18.30.100. (e) All structures and outside activities shall be so located or screened from adjacent properties to avoid disturbances through glare, noise, dirt or other nuisances or hazards. (f) All activity related to the conduct of the business or industry, except for activities related to the growing and storing of plants, shall be conducted within an enclosed structure or be sufficiently screened from view of adjacent residences. (g) All cottage industry activities shall be sufficiently screened from view of adjacent residences, using site location, topography, landscaping, fencing, the retention of native vegetation, or a combination thereof necessary to meet the Type A screening requirements of JCC 18.30.130. (h) Traffic generated by the cottage industry shall not exceed the level of service adopted for the public roadway which accesses the use, nor generate significant traffic in excess of that normally generated by typical uses found within the particular district. 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 515 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. Jefferson County Code DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V 1 18.15.040 Categories of land use. Page 1/2 Table 3-1. Allowable and Prohibited Uses Resource Lands Rural Residential Rural Commercial Rural Industrial Public UGA Forest — Irondale Agricultural Commercial, 1 1 1 Rural Neighborhood/ Resource- Light Light Light Parks, and Port — Prime and Rural DU/5 DU/10 DU/20 Village Convenience Visitor General Based Industrial/Commercial Industrial Industrri ial/Manufactung Heavy Preserves Hadlock Local and Acres Acres Acres Center Crossroad Crossroad Crossroad Industrial (Glen Cove) (Glen (Quilcene and Eastview) Industrial and Urban Inholding Cove) Recreation Growth Area RR RR RR Specific Land Use AG CF/RF/IF 1:5 1:10 1:20 RVC CC NC GC RBI LI/C LI LUM HI PPR UGA Industrial Uses Bulk plant or terminal facilities No No No No No No No No No No C C C C No Asphalt and concrete batch No C No No No No No No No No No No No Yes No plants Heavy equipment sales and No No No No No C(a) No No C(a) No Yes Yes Yes No No rental services Heavy industrial, resource- No No No No No No No No No C(a) No No No Yes No based Light industrial/manufacturing See JCC No No No No No No No No C(a) Yes Yes Yes No No (not including recreational 18.20.030 marijuana processing) Food or beverage bottling See JCC No No No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No See and/or packaging 18.20.030 Chapter 18.18 JCC Outdoor storage yards See JCC No No No No No No No No C(a) Yes Yes Yes Yes No 18.20.030 Recycling center See JCC No No No No No No No/CS No/CG No Yes Yes Yes No No 18.20.030 Marijuana recreational C(d) 4d4 Lo 4d4 4d4 4d4 No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No processor No No No Mineral extraction activities Yes Yes C C C No No No No No No No No No No (without MRL overlay) Mineral extraction activities Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No No No No No (w/MRL overlay) (10-acre min. lot size) The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020. Jefferson County Code DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 V 1 Page 2/2 Resource Lands Rural Residential Rural Commercial Rural Industrial Public UGA Forest — Irondale Agricultural Commercial, 1 1 1 Rural Neighborhood/ Resource- Light Light Light Parks, and Port — Prime and Rural DU/5 DU/10 DU/20 Village Convenience Visitor General Based Industrial/Commercial Industrial Industrri ial/Manufactung Heavy Preserves Hadlock Local and Acres Acres Acres Center Crossroad Crossroad Crossroad Industrial (Glen Cove) (Glen (Quilcene and Eastview) Industrial and Urban Inholding Cove) Recreation Growth Area RR RR RR Specific Land Use AG CF/RF/IF 1:5 1:10 1:20 RVC CC NC GC RBI LI/C LI LUM HI PPR UGA Mineral processing accessory C C C C C No No No No Yes C C C Yes No to extraction operations (without MRL overlay) Mineral processing accessory Yes Yes C C C No No No No Yes No No No Yes No to extraction operations (w/MRL overlay) Warehouse/wholesale See JCC No No No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No distribution center 18.20.030 (Automobile) wrecking yards No No No No No No No No/ No/ No No No Yes Yes No and junk (or salvage) yards Yes' Yes" Unnamed industrial uses No No No No No No No No No D D D D D No Agricultural and Forestry Uses Agricultural activities and See JCC 18.20.030 accessory uses Aquacultural uses and Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No No No No No See activities (outside of shoreline Chapter jurisdiction) 18.18 JCC Aquatic plant and animal See JCC No No No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No processing and storage 18.20.030 Lumber mills and associated See JCC C(a) No No No No No No No Yes No No No Yes No forestry processing activities 18.20.030 and uses Marijuana Recreational Yes 4d4 Lo 4d4 4d4 4d4 No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Producer No No No Nurseries Yes Yes C(d) C(d) C(d) Yes No Yes Yes No No No No No No Unnamed agricultural and D D D D D No No No No No No No No No No forestry uses The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020. Appendix 2 MLA20-00116 — Draft Proposed Text Amendments to Support Sewerin2 the Brinnon Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES (&� e ® Policy CF-P-5.7 Work with purveyors to promote the use of unaffected upland water sources and other alternative supplies, where appropriate, to supply new and existing development in affected areas. Policy CF—P-5.8 Support implementation of conservation strategies that reduce average annual and peak day water use for public and individual water systems. ® Policy CF—P-5.9 Recognize the authority of Public Utility District #1 pursuant to Title 54 RCW and other applicable statutes. The County will cooperate with Public Utility District #1 to develop final development regulations consistent with that authority. Sewer & Wastewater Goal CF-G-6 Promote sanitary sewer systems that accommodate growth, are cost-effective to construct and operate, and are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Q Policy CF-P-6.1 Plan sanitary sewer system sizing, phasing, development, and expansion within urban growth areas to accommodate the allocated population and planned urban development to the greatest extent possible within the current planning period; while also planning implementation phases that provide service at the greatest cost- effectiveness. Policy CF-P-6.2 Encourage development of community septic systems in Rural Centers to protect public health, the environment, and foster a reliable, integrated collection system. In areas with water quality concerns that are or appear to be related to problems associated with individual septic systems, Jefferson County supports utilizing a range of sewage treatment options, including community drainfields and centralized systems, subject to State law. Policy CF-P-6.3 New upbaR paali{ 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 Drotect basic Dublic health, safety, and the environment; the sewer, extension, or connection is financially supportable at rural densities: and the sewer. connection. or extension does not permit urban development; Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8-30 January 2021 CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES (&� e -It is necessary to support a Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development (LAMIRD) consistent with the Countv-wide Plannine Policies: -It is necessary to provide service to an essential public facility if no practicable alternative exists to site the essential public facility in an Urban Growth Area; or, -It supports a rural school serving both rural and urban student Donulations, consistent with state law. deemed to be ^sseRtialpublic service to mitigate +hr at to public health, sa:�ety, er generall lf,�e. 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. 6d 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 8-31 January 2021 LAND USE 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 # abates afr public health and environmental problem, does not induce SpFaWling urban development, and is affordable by the community that it serves: (2) it is necessary to support a LAMIRD and it is consistent with the County -wide Planning Policies: or (3) supports a school located in the rural area serving both rural and urban students. Jefferson County is investigating sewering the Brinnon LAMIRD, using the existing Dosewallips State Park sewer system. The Dosewallips State Park sewer treatment plant Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1-79 January 2021 LAND USE is located in the Brinnon LAMIRD and its lines run through the LAMIRD to the Dosewallips State Park. Sewering Brinnon would alleviate known and potential environmental problems associated with on -site sewage systems, considering that the Brinnon LAMIRD is located within the 100-year floodzone and is adjacent to the Hood Canal. 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 VI 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) Large on -site sewage systems (LOSS) and community drainfields are not considered a sanitary sewer system as applied under the Growth Management Act. Jefferson County considers these systems a rural governmental service. (4) New construction of a sanitary sewer system, extension, or connection to a sanitary sewer system located outside of an urban growth area may only occur if: (a) The new sanitary sewer system, extension, or connection is a necessary response to protect basic public health, safety, and the environment the sewer is financially supportable at rural densities; and, the sewer, extension, or connection does not permit urban development; (b) The new sanitary sewer system, extension, or connection is necessary to support a Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development (LAMIRM); the sewer is needed to mitigate a threat to the public health, welfare, or to protect an area of environmental sensitivity caused by existing development and the sewer is limited to those properties or facilities needed to mitigate the threat to the public health, welfare, or to protect an area of environmental sensitivity; (c) The new sanitary sewer system, extension, or connection is necessary to provide service to an essential public facility if no practicable alternative exists to site the essential public facility in an Urban Growth Area; or, (d) The new sanitary sewer system, extension, or connection supports schools sited in a rural area that serve students from a rural area and an urban area, when consistent with the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, RCW 36.70A.213, and the following requirements: (i) The applicable school district has adopted a policy addressing the school service area, facility needs, and educational program requirements; (ii) The applicable school district has made a finding, with the concurrence of the county legislative authority and the legislative authorities of any affected cities, that the proposed site is suitable to site the school and any associated recreational facilities that the applicable district has determined cannot reasonably be collocated on an existing school site, taking into consideration the extent to which vacant or developable land within an urban growth area meets those requirements, The countv and affected cities aeree to the extension of sewer to serve the school sited in a rural area that serves urban and rural students at the time of concurrence of subsection (4)(d)(ii): (iv) Any impacts associated with the siting of the school are mitigated as required by the State Environmental Policy Act Chapter 43.21C RCW; and, (v) Any extension of the sewer beyond the urban growth area is subject to the following: The Jefferson County Code is current through Ordinance 08-20, passed November 16, 2020. Jefferson County Code Page 2/2 DRAFT JAN 26, 2021 VI (1) Must only serve the applicable school and the costs of the extension must be borne by the applicable school district based on a reasonable nexus to the impacts of the school. (2) Any exception from subsection (4)(d)(v), when consistent with RCW 36.70A.110(4), shall allow the sewer to serve a property or properties in addition to the school if the property owner so requests, provided that the county and affected cities agree with the request and provided that the property is located no further from the sewer than the distance that, if the property were within the urban growth area, the property would be required to connect to the sewer. (3) If a property owner connects to the sewer under subsection (4)(d)(v)(2), the school district may, for a period of time not to exceed 20 years, require reimbursement from a requesting property owner for a proportional share of the construction costs incurred by the school district for the extension of the sewer. 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 LAND USE Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area History of Planning Designation Detailed planning for the designation of a Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area in compliance with the requirements of the GMA has been on- going since the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan was originally adopted in 1998. Specific policy language in the Comprehensive Plan indicated the joint city/county intent to pursue future Urban Growth Area planning for the "Tri-Area" (including Irondale, Port Hadlock and Chimacum). As part of the on -going joint City/County urban growth area planning, the Tri-Area Provisional Urban Growth Area (Urban Growth Area) was designated by Jefferson County on October 5, 1999 as an interim step in the Urban Growth Area planning process. In 2000, the boundary of the Interim Urban Growth Area was established, and included the Irondale and Port Hadlock communities. In-depth analysis and environmental impact review of the land use, population, capital facilities and public services, natural systems and critical area constraints, open space, housing, and non-residential land use needs for a Tri-Area Urban Growth Area are incorporated in the Tri Area/GLen Cove SpeciaL Study conducted from 1998-2002. Public Facilities & Services Specific planning for public facilities and services in the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area is referenced in this section and in the Capital Facilities Element, as well as supporting appendices of the Comprehensive Plan, the Tri Area/GLen Cove SpeciaL Study, the Jefferson County Port HadLock Urban Growth Area Sewer FaciLity Plan of September 2008, a44the Port HadLock Urban Growth Area Sewer System/Water RecLamation FaciLity and InfLuent PipeLine Design PLans & Specifications dated December 2013—, and the Port HadLock UGA Sewer FaciLity Plan Update dated February 2021. Inside the Puget Sound Iron Company, Jefferson County, from the Collection of the Jefferson County Historical Society Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan April 2021 1-124 LAND USE 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 3CC. This phase also included completion of the capital facility plans needed to implement the full range of urban services required in CWPP 2.1, including the adoption of urban level of service standards for Urban Growth Area transportation improvements, storm water management facilities, and a new sanitary sewer system. These capital facility plans are adopted herein by reference and are included as appendices to the Comprehensive Plan. The Urban Growth Area functional capital facility plans as adopted herein are available under separate cover and include: Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area Sewer Facility Plan, September 2008 and Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update, February 2021. 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 April 2021 LAND USE ! 0 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 ce.mmun-ity dpaiR :ields, 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 April 2021 CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES (&� e EXHIBIT 8-1 Capital Facilities & Public Services Provided Law Enforcement Jefferson County Sherriff Parks and Recreation Jefferson County Public Jefferson County Administration Sewer Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA - Jefferson County Port Ludlow - Olympic Water and Sewer Solid Waste Jefferson County Jefferson County Sheriff's Office Strategic Plan, Comprehensive Version, 2018 Jefferson County Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan Update,2015, Jefferson County Parks and Recreation, Department of Public Works Jefferson County Strategic Plan, County Administrator's Office, 2018 Individual operations plans for community centers, maintenance facilities, and animal control facilities Port Hadlock Wastewater System: Urban Growth Area Sewer Facility Plan, 2008 and Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update, 2021 Design Plans & Specifications, 2013 ......................................................................................................................................................... Jefferson County, Solid Waste Management Plan, September 2016 Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan April 2021 8-3 CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES (&� e Sanitary Sewer: City of Port Townsend: 260 gallons per day/ERU Port Ludlow (Ludlow Water Co., Inc.): 230 gallons per day/ERU Port Hadlock: 132 gallons per day/ERU Water: City of Port Townsend: 840 gallons per day/ERU Port Ludlow (Ludlow Water Co., Inc.):160 gallons per day/ERU PUD No.1: 200 gallons per day/ERU Tri-Area (City of Port Townsend): 800 gallons per day/ERU Airport: JCIA: Pursuant to JCIA Master Plan 2014 or successor. Fire and Emergency Medical Services: Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 1 - East Jefferson Fire and Rescue: 0.29 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 Fire District 2 (Quilcene): 2.0 fire units in service per 1,000 pop. and 1.4 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 Fire District 3 (Port Ludlow): 1.0 fire units in service per 1,000 pop. and 0.8 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 Fire District 4 (Brinnon): 1.25 fire units in service per 1,000 pop. and 0.5 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 Fire District 5 (Gardiner): 3.0 fire units in service per 1,000 pop. and 3.0 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 Fire District 7 (Clearwater): 2.0 fire units in service per 1,000 pop. and 0 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 Port Townsend Fire Department: 0.29 EMS units in service per 1,000 pop. 2038 Hospital: Jefferson County Public Hospital District No. 2:: 0.75 beds per 1,000 population 2023 and 2038 Library: Jefferson County Library. 1:433 square feet per 1,000 population 2023 and 2038 School District facilities: Brinnon School District 46: K-8: Not to exceed 23 students/classroom Chimacum School District 49: K-12: Not to exceed 27 students/classroom Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 8-24 April 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, 2021 ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 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 April 2021 Jefferson County I Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 11 8 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 2021. Jefferson Countv revised the 2008 Port Hadlock Wastewater Svstem: 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. In March 2021, the 2021 Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facilitv Plan Update was aooroved by the Washineton State Department of Ecolo 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. April 2021 Jefferson County I Capital Facility Plan Technical 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 System .. .. ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Port Headlock / PeRdiRg PeRdiRg PeRdiRg Irondale UGA Sewer 132 gallons per 132 gallons per 132 gallons per day/ERU day/ERU day/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 April 2021 Jefferson County I Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 11 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/ $1,090,492 $1,090,492 $1,090,492 REET, Rates, Bonds, Grants, Justice Etc. Parks and Recreation Public Administration' ........................................................................... Sewer $501,500 $5011500 $3,372,750 $3,372,750 $501,500 $3,372,750 $49 $49 $49 $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 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 i+tepest leans, lec-al imppeypmPnt disariE , EeRRectien c h ages, and r-evenue—fpem spPyiep Patpq. Local funding: Local improvement district, connection charges, local borrowing, and revenue. Outside funding: WA Legislature appropriations, WA Dept of Ecology Combined Water Quality Program grant funding, USDA grant funding, and US Economic Development Administration Public Works Program grant funding. ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Solid Waste3 $0 $0 $0 Rates per 2016 Solid Waste Management Plan. ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Stormwater $0 $0 $0 See Transportation. April 2021 Jefferson County I Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 11 18 Transportation $23,311,966 $25,434,621 $1,662,875 Federal and State Funding at over 70%, Developer Fair Share Contribution, and Local Funds. Total $28 "G 708 $go goo g« $6 627617 Principally Transportation: $54,176,846 $54,176,846 $18,530,738 seek Federal and State Funds. Notes: 1 PubLic Administration includes the Animal Shelter, Community Centers, Administrative Facilities, and Maintenance Shops. 2 Funds projected for 2018-2023 would meet the original PROS Program costs for the period, and partially cover some uncompleted projects in prior years, which may require alternative phasing. 3 Regarding solid waste, assessments are planned for two County solid waste handling facilities, which may need capital repairs. When studies are complete projects may be added to the 2018-2023 period or phased in 2024-2038 period. 4 Includes 6-year financing costs for the Port HadLoch UGA Sewer from 2018-2023 (period of Last full update) and 2021-2026 (current update to sewer costs and financing). Source: Jefferson County 2018 3 Capital Facilities Assessment 3.1 LAW ENFORCEMENT Overview Jefferson County Law Enforcement facilities include the Correctional Facility, the Sheriff's administration, investigation and patrol building, the Sheriff's Clearwater Annex on the west end, and the Courthouse (Prosecuting Attorney, Clerk, Juvenile Services, and District and Superior Courts. Inventory of Current Facilities The Correctional Facility, located in Port Hadlock, was constructed in 1984 with a major addition in 1999. This facility serves both unincorporated and incorporated populations of the County. The current inventory of inmate beds in the corrections inmate facility totals 58. The facility also includes the Emergency Operations Center for the county. The table below lists each facility as well as their current capacities and location. April 2021 Jefferson County I Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 11 19 EXHIBIT 3-23 Public Administration: Summary of Capital Costs (2018$) 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 2021, Jefferson County revised the 2008 Port Hadlock Wastewater Svstem: Urban Growth Area Sewer Facilitv Plan and 2013 Desien Plans & Specifications for the Port Hadlock UGA with technical design updates to provide for a more cost-effective system. In March 2021, the 2021 Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update was approved by the Washington State Department of Ecology. 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. 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. April 2021 Jefferson County I Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 11 32 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 Port HadLock UGA Sewer FaciLity Plan Update, dated February 2021, is hereby incorporated by reference into this Capital Facility Plan Technical Document and the associated Comprehensive Plan. The City of Port Townsend's Comprehensive Plan lists an inventory of sewer facilities that includes a wastewater treatment plant, a secondary treatment facility, a compost facility, 70 miles of gravity sewer, 3 miles of force mains, seven sewage lift stations, and 1,250 maintenance holes. Olympic Water and Sewer maintains a treatment plant for its sewer services. Level of Service Analysis The County has net adopted a level of service for sewer services since service _cpending ie the f�+�^ w��YRdi R g i S a V @ J',"I^, Heweve^^, 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. The 2021 Port HadLock 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 2021 Sewer Facility Plan Update used a 2038 population projection of 5,394 residents which is slightly lower than the 5,776 residents projected in the 2008 Jefferson County Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan. The 2038 population projections are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's population projections. 3#e previews sewerplan analyzed service levels with ..,.pu tion pp +_,...S thPOUgh 2030, whieppit ssu,.ed 5,"�^^sides in the—sPPviEP—p,. Theseppejectionc; ere—cAightly which ppe}ect s a 2038 population of 5,394. Thus, the ability to meet proposed level of services for future sewage systems remains the same. April 2021 Jefferson County I Capital FaciLity Plan TechnicaL Document 11 33 EXHIBIT 3-25 Growth & Potential Sewer Demand Gravity Collection System A :79 0-9A I 28 2.59 784,844 1,154,922 1,651,448 3,359,568 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. STEP Collection System A AR Q.Q7 I Aq 626,783 870,412 1,177,265 2,664,100 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Grinder Pump Collection System 508,238 657,029 821,629 2,142,499 Source: Pert u i ti elve ,,Gikit o�h 2999,_g�COT�(� 2g1�,Port HadLoch Sewer UGA Facility Plan Update, 2021. 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 and implementing once funding is available; i lement-azien Is Ret antleipated n it aftpp 2W3. 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. April 2021 Jefferson County I Capital Facility Plan Technical Document 11 34 d` I DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT DOCKET April 8, 2021 David Wayne Johnson, Associate Planner — Lead, Department of Community Development Austin Watkins, Interim Planning Manager, Department of Community Development Page 1 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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......................................................................................... 7 II. Staff Analysis and Recommendations on 2020 Docket Items ..........................10 A. MLA19-00019 — Text Amendments to Marijuana Related Development Regulations... 10 B. MLA20-00116 - Text Amendments to Support Sewering the Brinnon Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development.......................................................................................... 31 C. MLA20-00102 — Text Amendments to Support the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility PlanUpdate ............................................................................................................................... 48 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 ................................ 50 III. State Environment Policy Act Compliance...................................................63 Page 2 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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 1 St 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 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 B. Heariny, Dates, DCD Staff Contact, and Other Introductory Information. Proponent: Jefferson County BoCC for text amendments and on behalf of the applicant for the site -specific rezone amendment. Planning Commission The Planning Commission Held on Wednesday, Hearing Date: February 10, 2021. Board of County The Board of County Commissioners will hold a public Commissioners hearing on Monday, April 19th at 11:00 am via zoom. Hearing Date: Zoom Instructions: (1) Zoom Meeting: https://zoom.us/j/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.jefferson.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. Page 5 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Location of Staff Report The Staff Report and all supporting material may be found and Supporting Material: online at http://test.co.jefferson.wa.us/weblinkextemal/0/fol/2753021/ Row l.aspx. Public Comments You may submit written testimony before the public hearing via email at jeffbocc e,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. Comments will be accepted from April 8, 2021 until the close of the public hearing on April 19, 2021, unless extended by the Board of County Commissioners. DCD Staff Contact: David Wayne Johnson, Associate Planner — Lead di ohnsonkco.j 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 or earlier. Date: Page 6 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 C. Growth Management Indicators Jefferson County Code ("JCC") 18.45.080(1)(b) requires that all Comprehensive Plan amendments include an inquiry into the seven growth management indicators ("GMIs") listed in JCC 18.45.050(4)(b). The GMI address the following: • Growth and development rates; • Ability to provide services; • Availability of urban land; • Whether assumptions upon which the Comprehensive Plan is based are still valid; • Community -wide attitudes towards land use; • Whether changes in circumstances dictate a need for amendment; and, • Consistency between state law and the Comprehensive Plan, or the Comprehensive Plan and local agreements. The GMIs are not necessarily amendment -specific, but rather are designed to provide a snapshot of Jefferson County's status during this 2020 Docket cycle. This section serves to promote consideration and inquiry into these GMIs and is intended to be a starting point for broader community consideration before the Planning Commission and BoCC. Growth Management Indicators — JCC 18.45.050(4)(b) (1) Whether growth and development as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan is occurring faster or slower than anticipated, or is failing to materialize. Discussion: The Office of Financial Management ("OFM") is the State agency responsible for compiling population projections under the GMA. The April 1, 2020 population for Jefferson County was 32,190. The official population on April 1, 2019 was 31,900, with an estimated growth of 290 persons. This is a 0.90% growth rate. In 2019, it was estimated that the growth rate was 0.98%. The Comprehensive Plan estimates a 0.98% growth rate over the 2018-2038 planning horizon. The majority of the estimated 2020 population growth occurred in the unincorporated areas. Unincorporated areas grew by 235 persons from 22,290 to 22,525 or 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 7 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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 8 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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 9 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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 ("I-502") which legalized recreational marijuana at the state level. In 2013, Washington finalized I-502 administrative rules and began accepting recreational marijuana applications on November 13, 2018. While I-502 authorized recreational marijuana, it did not preempt local government's zoning authority under its police powers for the siting, location, and operation of recreational marijuana facilities.' 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). 2 Jefferson County Ordinance No. 04-0608-15 re: Production, Processing, and Retailing of Recreational Marijuana in Jefferson County at pg 5. s 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 10 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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.' Processing: Allowed as a yes use in Rural Industrial and Urban Industrial zoning districts. Allowed as a Conditional Discretionary C(d) with a cottage industry permit in Forest Resource Lands and Rural Residential zoning districts. Prohibited in all other zoning districts.5 The 2015 Ordinance adopted performance standards on recreational marijuana facilities, including size limitations on permanent and temporary producing (grow) structures in the Rural Residential and Forest Resource Lands zoning districts. All permanent or temporary production (grow) facilities in Rural Residential 1:5 ("RR1:5") zoning district are limited to 5% of the gross parcel size up to a maximum of 10,890 gross square feet. In the Rural Residential 1:10 ("RR1:10"), Rural Residential 1:20 ("RR1:20"), Commercial Forest 80 ("CF80"), Rural Forest 40 ("RF40"), and Inholding Forest 20 ("IF20") the production (grow) structure is limited to 5% of the gross parcel size up to a maximum of 21,780 gross square feet. There was no size limitation for outdoor production (grow) facilities in the RR1:5, RR1:10, RR1:20, CF80, RF40, and IF20 zoning districts. The 2015 Ordinance also required recreational marijuana processing facilities in the Rural Residential and Forest Resource zoning districts to obtain a cottage industry permit. Consistent with Jefferson County cottage industry performance standards, the 2015 Ordinance established a 5,000 gross square foot size limitation on any processing facilities 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. 4 Id. Marijuana Producer is defined as "a person licensed by the state liquor control board to produce and sell marijuana at wholesale to marijuana processors and other marijuana producers. Marijuana producing for the purpose of this section shall include drying, trimming and bagging of a recreational marijuana product when done in conjunction with producing." 5 Id. Marijuana Processor is defined as "a person licensed by the state liquor control board to process marijuana into useable marijuana and marijuana -infused products, package and label useable marijuana and marijuana -infused products for sale in retail outlets, and sell useable marijuana and marijuana -infused products at wholesale to marijuana retailers. Marijuana processing for the purpose of this section may or may not include drying, trimming and bagging of a recreational product. Page 11 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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. Page 12 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 • Forest Resource o The High Point (a/k/a Pen Air), 4429 Coyle Rd, Quilcene, WA. Zoning CF- 80. Approximately 99.31 acres. ■ Tier 3 producer with processing. ■ A CUP and cottage industry permit was granted in 2016 for the processing facility. Production facility is likely a non -conforming use. Page 13 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Figure 1 — Map of WSLCB Licensced Facilities in Unincorporated Jefferson County Jefferson County, WA State licensed marijuana producers or processors Licensed Tax Parcel County boundary = B UNkT k+dd MALL FR PEN,,, iLA ;JJK ��;nKour „,dL "I'LER P rnsuda Eamon [r.d GMY tr � frvW 6eey �. jai rqs C lye �O G�frY Page 14 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Figure 2 — Map of WSLCB Licensced Facilities in Unincorporated Jefferson County Glen Cove Industrial Area LuRire 5l Jlh St u' ' yW aY Glen Cove 2rr151 State licensed marijuana producers or processors Rd r ;4 E 6 4 - Licensed Tax Parcel .. '.' 'Vncade Ter O y it +n N N r N Rd "amine st Ge 0 ��� a ■ Gxrun Aye Glen Cov. 17 C a Loop Reynolds Rd O G.- x c r3 A W F Mks st LL' Fredencks sl cougar Ridge Rd n f3a s^eiew St a Balsa way Seton Rd 4? Al 1� 3rrR Q Old Fari To wnse,I Rd Timberlim Rd Slaler Ln p Whiskey Rd N Page 15 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Analysis: Economic Impact from Marijuana Producers and Processors in Unincorporated Jefferson Coun 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 $3,743,254 $1,089,263 V ■ Rural Residential ■ Forest Resource ■ AgriculutraI + Light Industrial Page 16 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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.' Washington levies a 37% tax on the retail sales of marijuana within the state. This tax is collected by the state with a share going to jurisdictions, based upon a formula, which includes the amount of marijuana retail sales. Jefferson County ranks 19 out of 39 counties for amount of excise tax returned to the county. The excise tax is not levied on producers or processors. Unsuccessful Conditional Use Permit and Cottage Industry Permit Applications for Marijuana Producers and Processors in the Rural Residential Zoning Districts Since the 2015 Ordinance, Jefferson County has conducted four public hearings, through the Office of the Hearing Examiner, determining whether or not to grant a CUP and cottage industry permit for marijuana production and processing facilities in the Rural Residential zoning districts. Three of the four applications were denied (three applications were received, with one application being heard twice by the Hearing Examiner). The only application to be approved was for Auntie Onolicious, 144 Milo Curry Rd, Port Townsend, WA. Auntie Onolicious is a Tier 1 Producer (the smallest) and processor.9 The primary test for approval of marijuana production or processing facility in the Rural Residential zoning district is the CUP approval criteria. The JCC requires CUP applicants to demonstrate that their application is consistent with the following approval criteria: (a) The conditional use is harmonious and appropriate in design, character and appearance with the existing or intended character and quality of development in the vicinity of the subject property and with the physical characteristics of the subject property; (b) The conditional use will be served by adequate infrastructure including roads, fire protection, water, wastewater disposal, and stormwater control; (c) The conditional use will not be materially detrimental to uses or property in the vicinity of the subject parcel; 6 Source 502data.com available at https:H502data.com and WSLCB Frequently Requested Lists available at https:Hlcb.wa. )4ov/records/frequently-requested-lists. Id. 8 Id. 9 A tier 1 producer is a producer with less than 2,000 square feet; A tier 2 producer has 2,000 square feet but less than 10,000 square feet; and a tier 3 producer has 10,000 square feet but less than 30,000 square feet. Page 17 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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; (1) 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." While the CUP approval criteria are stringent, they provide applicants flexibility in meeting their burden of proving compliance. During the recent Williamson production and processing marijuana application (MLA18-00102), the Hearing Examiner found that the applicant failed to carry their burden of proof on several of the CUP approval criteria, including: (1) noise; (2) odor management; (3) on -site residency; (4) compatibility with other allowable uses, such as forest resource, residential, and agricultural uses; and (5) failure to prove compliance with all JCC sections, such as traffic, wastewater, and lighting. In another example, the Hearing Examiner found that Austin Smith (MLA17- 00019) failed to carry his burden of proof on several of the CUP approval criteria, such as: (1) noise; (2) odor management; (3) community compatibility; (4) water and wastewater; and (5) on -site residency. The Austin Smith application was heard twice by the Hearing Examiner, as the Hearing Examiner denied the first application without prejudice. Both hearings were denied. 10 JCC 18.40.530(1). Page 18 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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 19 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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).14 13 Decibel Level Comparison Chart available at https:Hehs.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/decibel-level-chart.pdf. 14 RCW 69.50.331(8). Page 20 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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 Industry Performance Standards Require an On -site Full -Time Bona Fide Resident. "The WSLCB will not approve any marijuana license for a location where law enforcement access, without notice or cause, is limited. This includes a personal residence."15 However, the 2015 Ordinance requires that processing facilities located on Rural Residential or Forest Resource zoned lands must have a "at least one full-time, bona fide resident in a single-family residence of the parcel on which the proposed use is being requested."16 Under the 2015 Ordinance, marijuana processing is classified as a cottage industry. The purpose of a cottage industry is "to provide for small-scale economic development activities on residential parcels, subordinate to the primary residential use".17 The cottage industry requires that the applicant prove their full-time residency on the parcel by the time of the application approval." The full-time residency requirement has been a primary factor in the Hearing Examiner denying at least two CUP and cottage industry permit applications for marijuana production and processing facilities on Rural Residential zoned properties. Cottage industry uses on rural parcels are a form of a limited area of more intensive rural development ("LAMIRD").19 Counties "may allow isolated small-scale businesses and cottage industries that are not principally designed to serve the existing and projected rural population and nonresidential uses, but do provide job opportunities for rural residents".20 Cottage industry requirements must be consistent with the county's rural character. The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, through its goals and policies reinforces the requirement that cottage industries are an accessory use to the primary use of single- family residency. 15 WAC 314-55-015(5). (emphasis added). 16 JCC 18.20.170(5)(a). 17 JCC 18.20.170(1). 18 JCC 18.20.170(5)(a); JCC 18.40.530(1). 19 RCW 36.70a.070(5)(c)(i)(C)(iii); WAC 365-196-425(6)(c)(iii); Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 1-50. 20 WAC 365-196-425(6)(c)(iii). Page 21 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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.25 Counties "shall adopt development regulations ... to assure the conservation of agricultural, forest, and mineral resource lands designated under RCW 36.70A.170."26 21 Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan at 1-106. 1 See Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan at 1-48 — 49; 1-106. 23 See https://Icb.wa.gov/mjlicense/marijuana-licensing and https:Htcb.wa.gov/mjlicense/mLlicensingfag. 24 RCW 36.70A.020(8). 25 Richard L. Settle, Washington's Growth Management Revolution Goes to Court, 23 Seattle U.L. Rev. 5, 22 (1999). 26 RCW 36.70A.060. Page 22 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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 Co1m1y Treatment of Marijuana Production and Processing Facilities Kitsap County is the strictest nearby county in terms of allowable zoning districts for marijuana production and processing. Kitsap County generally allows marijuana production and processing in industrial and business park zoning only.28 Kitsap County does not permit any production or processing in rural residential. Clallam County generally permits marijuana production and processing in industrial, forest resource, and some commercial zones with a conditional use permit.21 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.3o Land Availability Analysis Supporting Recommendations To ensure that there is adequate land available for future marijuana production and processing facilities, DCD staff analyzed vacant land within the Rural and Urban Industrial (RBI, LI, LI/C, HI, and ULI) zoning districts. The analysis demonstrates that there are 100 vacant Rural and Urban Industrial zoned properties in the County. The parcels total 184.97 acres, with an average of 1.85 acres per parcel. Further, this does not include properties with existing improvements. Often marijuana production and grow facilities in the Rural Industrial zoning district changes the use of existing structures. Below is a map of the vacant Rural and Industrial zoned properties in the County. 27 See Lake Cavanaugh Improvement Association v. Skagit County, WWGMHB, 04-2-011, Order on Dispositive Motion (September 21, 2004) (holding that the construction of a gun range, including parking lots and supporting structures, was the improper conversion of forest resource lands). 28 See KCC 17.520.030. 29 See CCC 33.52.030. so See MCC 17.17.005. Page 23 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Figure 3 — Vacant Rural and Urban Industrial Zoned Properties Jefferson County, WA All properties in Zoning Districts L1, L11C, L11M, H1, RBI, and Land Use Code = 9100 - Vacant Land Sc q ,I M FY Bay Ra WILLER NINSUtA SURNT H-LL ical LUM - Light Industrial/Manufacturing RBI - Resource -Based Industrial OCounty boundary PQrt Tcom+riol I, F 10 T Ind- 15b rl7 rj,,, L,i PIHI IIAl wk Chinxum Flak Bay Bangor Naval Submarne 81nwr Naval R.—aw. M LuJl,,,. S11".t.j."j- Page 24 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 The majority of the vacant Rural and Industrial zoned parcels are in the Glen Cove industrial area. Of the 100 vacant Rural and Industrial zoned parcels in the County, 87 are in the Glen Cove industrial area with a total of 59.35 of the 184.97 vacant acres. While the parcel average is smaller in the Glen Cove industrial area at 0.68 acres compared to 1.84 acres for the County as a whole, there appears to be ample available land for reasonable expansion of future marijuana production and processing facilities on these parcels. Further, marijuana businesses aren't limited to vacant land. Existing marijuana businesses in the Glen Cove industrial area often lease existing space and modify the space to their needs. Below is a map of vacant Rural Industrial zoned parcels in the Glen Cove industrial area. Page 25 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 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 LI - Light Industrial LI/C - Light Industrial/Commerical Gien� n,sn way N A Ir , 1W Fc 11 1",, m wi )r, e Grm I Avq Gian Cove 54re re Ax S� a FilpineyA S1 Page 26 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 -n tilt luurgary� kj Allowing Marijuana Production and Processing Facilities on Vacant Conforming RR1:10 and RR1:20 Will Not Add Significant Amounts of Available Land All of the CUP and cottage industry permit applications requesting marijuana production or processing on Rural Residential zoned lands that DCD has received since the 2015 Ordinance have been on vacant parcels. While the property has been vacant, the applicants did or had plans to establish full-time bona fide residency on the properties. Since the application trend has been on vacant Rural Residential zoned properties, DCD staff analyzed how much additional lands would be available if marijuana production and processing was allowed as a CUP and cottage industry permit on vacant conforming (meeting the minimum zoning lot size requirements) Rural Residential 10 and 20 zoned properties. The analysis found that there are 58 RR1:10 and 67 RR1:20 vacant conforming parcels in the unincorporated County. While these vacant conforming RR1:10 and RR1:20 properties represent 125 additional parcels, there are still significant community compatibility, noise, and RCW and WAC compliance issues if marijuana production and processing were allowed on these properties as a CUP and cottage industry. Below is a map showing vacant conforming RR1:10 and RR1:20 parcels within the County. For these reasons, DCD staff recommends against allowing marijuana production or processing on these RR1:10 and RR1:20 parcels. Page 27 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Figure 5 —Vacant RR1:10 Parcels At Least 10 Acres in Size Jefferson County, WA Ad,,, .. Map 5.3: All properties w/ RR-10 Zoning Pori Tawn2 rd at least 10 acres in size and Land Use Code = 9100 - Vacant Land Ii ar For FMglrr -- Sea um Part Tvwr.[6enA �P'aciFc-rtoast-Sr. u4 ., ,4dr: Y Se-4ufn Bay O 1513 d Pk ?Id G717t AJ1tli=lt -NINSULA Fbrl HAt-P 61URN'f HIL.t _ ?r29 tr (,. �chil— nl Pik m� [SI• r dI is LitI L.4.LILAF.1 t;i4 QuiPFlne q,� CuWc.�Ir� e� F'o-tl Wlknr Banger 1 j suhmnrut. ....��,,. /fJ saes -a 6argor Rrrrron kfatal Rr cerWlOrt .. xyypa 8 fi Hpod rarnl 'S SIIt•e[:]alc as V cant Land N County boundary A Page 28 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Figure 6 — Vacant RR1:20 Parcels At Least 20 Acres in Size Jefferson County, WA _ Map 5.4: All properties w/ RR-20 Zoning at least 20 acres in size and Land Use Code = 9100 - Vacant Land ._8. MI L,LPR 13 ENINSL:,A BURNT HILL 2r2s+r i - - � raanium Oak t i `+ay aw M l - qow Gra'N r i Port Lwlor, ALL 04 1,a1Oe � eve, �rb�� �9 4rlee[d - r @r0 QvirCana Rirh �rnb:te ■ i ■ Naval Fh ulstio S.O.— Gb�t1 P Rau Rs .. banger I-i Naval R.m♦tglbn ■ P r - I., d f bed as Vacant Land nN County boundary A Page 29 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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 30 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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 GMA may allow sewers in LAMIRDs if it can be demonstrated that the sewer is necessary to support the LAMIRD and the extension is consistent with the Countywide Planning Policies. In 2016, the Dosewallips State Park, located in Brinnon, WA, opened a wastewater treatment plant ("Dosewallips Sewer") replacing its aging on -site sewage (septic) system. The Dosewallips Sewer was constructed to improve the ecological functions and environmental quality of the Hood Canal and Puget Sound Watershed. The Dosewallips Sewer was purposefully designed to allow for future hookup of properties within the Brinnon LAMIRD. The Dosewallips Sewer was constructed north of the Brinnon LAMIRD with its sewer lines running through the core of the Brinnon LAMIRD, south to the Dosewallips State Park. During the planning of the Dosewallips Sewer, Jefferson County investigated the feasibility of allowing properties within the Brinnon LAMIRD to hookup to the Dosewallips Sewer. After community outreach and feasibility analysis, Jefferson County decided not to take action allowing properties within the Brinnon LAMIRD to hookup to the planned Dosewallips Sewer. In 2019, Washington State Parks commissioned a study, with partial Jefferson County funding, analyzing available capacity of the Dosewallips Sewer. The 2019 study demonstrated a capacity of 130 ERUs in the Dosewallips Sewer, assuming the installation Page 31 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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? 31 Approximately 130 ERUs is based up the projected availability of 31,962 GPD with an average of 245 GPD/ERU. The average of 245 GPD/ERU is based upon the average of Port Townsend's 260 GPD/ERU and Port Ludlow's 230 GPD/ERU. Page 32 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Figure 7 — Map of Brinnon LAMIRD RR-5 RR-5 p RR-5 Q h �v Brinnon LAMIRD RV C j. RR-2 0 RR-5 'r RR-20 ri RVC RVf_ L ;. RVC ' AL i N PPR PPR s ource sinUPJa%a,r,Greb e. Earth eogrSphies, CNESrAid)W USAS6SID,IGN, the,aUserCornmunicy. Jefferson County. WA.,,tr -West & A fates, Inc. These data are provided on As-lS"basis, without osewallips Sewer Location and Lines rranty of any type, ?� pressed orimplied, including t rot limited to any warranty totheir performance, t� $ rchantability, or fitness for 1:9,028 Date:1127/2021 �t#ING lmy articular purpose_ This map s nrA a sub stilUe foray mleIeldwiveys orforli—trig ache al pm Petty Ines and a try a 1—it Features_ Page 33 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Figure 8 — Location of Dosewallips Sewer and Routing of Sewer Lines RR-5 Dosewallips State y Park Sewer RR-5 IR-5 0 aSewer Line RVe: �. RR 20 RR-5 6 RR 20 r Sewer Line r \ RVr RVC: �. A RVC L. s x 1 � iLi tid r N PPR PPR Source: Esu, Maxar, Gee :e, \EwIthGpugraphics, CMESiAirbu5 DS, USDA. USGS.Aerd - ID,e GIs User C©mmunrty, Jefferson CountyWA.,f�- Waces, Inc These data are provided on n"AS-IS"basis, without osewallips Sewer Location and Lines �6 warranty of any type, 2 expressed or implied, including but not limited to any warranty s to their performance, It 1:9,028 Date: tl2712021 merchantability, orfitness for �S'l�1�U,'0 jany particular purpose- Thisrt p s sca a subs8tute tar accumtefelds—eysarfa laaa6ny actual pmireRy has and any adlaeeM teens Page 34 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Analysis: tion 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.31 "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.31 Under GMA, development within rural areas is limited to "a variety of uses and residential densities ... at levels that are consistent with the preservation of rural character and the requirements of the rural element. ,37 The GMA limits rural development, in part, to concentrate urban development and prevent sprawling, low -density development of rural areas.38 Washington recognizes the need for commercial development and a stable job base in rural areas.39 To this end, the GMA authorizes three types of LAMIRDs in rural areas, which allows for more intensive development than what would otherwise be authorized in 32 WAC 246-272A-0320(d). 33 Large on -site septic systems are considered a septic system and a rural governmental service. See ARD/Diehl v. Mason County, W WGMHB, 06-2-0006, Order Finding Non -Compliance at 12 (November 14, 2007). 34 Resource lands is a distinct planning group; however, resource lands are usually included within the rural land planning group. 35 RCW 36.70A.110(1). 36 RCW 36.70.A.070(5)(b). 37 RCW 36.70A.030(21). 38 RCW 36.70A.020(1-2). 39 RCW 36.70A.011. Page 35 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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.41 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.41 The GMA defines rural governmental services as: [T]hose public services and public facilities historically and typically delivered at an intensity usually found in rural areas, and may include 40 RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d). 41 RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(v). 42 RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(iv). 43 WAC 365-196-425(6)(c)(ii). 44 WAC 365-196-425(6)(c)(iii). 45 RCW 3 6.70A. 110(4). (emphasis added). 46 RCW 36.70A.030(24). (emphasis added). Page 36 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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: (1) Domestic water system; (n) 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 ions 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).5o Second, new sewers or connections are allowed in rural areas when: (1) it is necessary to protect public health and the environment; (2) the sewer services are financially 47 RCW 36.70A.030(22). (emphasis added). 48 Chapter 165-196 WAC. 49 WAC 365-196-425(4). (emphasis added). 50 RCW 36.70A.070(3). Note sewers within a master planned resort or major industrial development will not be discussed in this analysis. Page 37 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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. Exception 2 — Necessary for Protection of the Public Health and Environment RCW 36.70A.110(4) and WAC 365-196-425(4) adopt a three-part test which allows new sewer or connections in rural areas under very limited circumstances. As described in detail below, it is unlikely that Jefferson County can prove with the data required that sewering the Brinnon LAMIRD is necessary to protect basic public health and safety of the environment. Factor 1 - Necessary to Protect Basic Public Health and Safety of the Environment The Washington Supreme Court has adopted a "strict necessary to protect standard" when extending sewer connections in rural areas. 54 In Thurston County v. Cooper Point Ass'n ("Cooper Point"), the court held that Thurston County did not meet the requirement that the sewer extension to the rural area was "necessary to protect basic public health and safety of the environment."55 The court noted that of the 998 septic systems in the proposed service area, only 96 of them had failed and that all of the failing 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 low -density sprawl and the prohibition of urban governmental services in rural areas.58 51 RCW 3 6.70A. 110(4). 52 RCW 36.70A.213. 53 RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d). 54 Thurston Cty. v. Cooper PointAss'n, 148 Wn.2d 1, 13, 57 P.3d 1156, 1162 (2002). ("Cooper Point"). 55 Id. 56 Id. at 5. 57 Id. at 13-15. 58 Id.; See also Campbell, et al. v. San Juan County, WWGMHB, 05-2-0022c, Compliance Order and Final Decision Order (June 20, 2006). (holding that extension of sewer line and connections in rural area, which was planned to be a LAMIRD, violated RCW 36.70A.110(4) because the county failed to prove any that there were any failing septic systems and that it was necessary for the protection of public health and the environment). Page 38 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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. 19 The information provided by Jefferson County Environmental Public Health was preliminary and further study may demonstrate compliance with the strict necessity test. 60 Parametrix, Engineering Report: Dosewallips Design Criteria and Capacity Rerating 3, 10 (November 2019). Approximately 130 ERUs is based up the projected availability of 31,962 GPD with an average of 245 GPD/ERU. The average of 245 GPD/ERU is based upon the average of Port Townsend's 260 GPD/ERU and Port Ludlow's 230 GPD/ERU. Page 39 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Factor 3 - Sewer Services do not Permit Urban Develobment 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 ofLAMMDs is to allow the more intensive rural uses to continue and to expand through infill development but stay within their existing boundaries. Jefferson County's Comprehensive Plan and development regulations limit the development of the Brinnon LAMIRD to that of a rural area through the Rural Village Center ("RVC") zoning classification. Further, the RVC zoning district is tightlined to the logical outer boundaries as of July 1, 1990. Given the tightlined RVC zoning and limitation of sewering only the Brinnon LAMIRD, it is likely that this extension will not permit urban development in the rural area. Exception 3 — Sewering Schools in Rural Areas Serving Both Urban and Rural Student Populations In 2017, the Legislature enacted amendments to the GMA allowing schools in rural areas, serving both rural and urban student populations, to be sewered under limited circumstances.63 The plain text of the statute appears to only authorize sewering of schools that serve both rural and urban students, as opposed to a school that only serves rural students. Given this limitation, it is unlikely that the amendment authorizes schools which only serve rural students, such as Brinnon Schools, to be sewered. However, this amendment may be helpful for the Chimacum High School, which is located in a rural area and serves both rural and urban student populations. For this reason, DCD staff recommends including the 2017 GMA amendment in the County's Comprehensive Plan and UDC. Exception 4 — Necessary Public Facility to Support a LAMIRD LAMIRDs may be sewered if the sewer is a "necessary public facility" supporting the LAMIRD. "[T]he rural element may allow for limited areas of more intensive rural development, including necessary public facilities and public services to serve the limited area".64 61 RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(iv). 62 RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(v). 63 RCW 36.70A.213. 64 RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d). See also WAC 365-196-425(6)(c) ("Counties may allow for more intensive uses in a LAMIRD than would otherwise be allowed in rural areas and may allow public facilities and services that are appropriate and necessary to serve LAMIRDs subject to the following requirements"). Page 40 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 GMHB Decisions Expressly Allow LAMIRDs to Be Sewered if Necessary to Support the LAMIRD The view that LAMIRDs may be sewered as a "necessary public facility" has been endorsed by the GMHB in two cases. In Gain v. Pierce County, the Central Puget Sound GMHB dismissed a petition for review with prejudice which, in part, challenged Pierce County's Comprehensive Plan policies allowing LAMIRDs to be sewered finding it consistent with the GMA.65 The comprehensive language at issue in Gain was whether "sewer service will serve only a rural area of more intensive development in accordance with the County -Wide Planning Policies."66 The GMHB held that: Petitioners argue that "RAIDs [LANI[RDs] are not within UGAs and should not be served with sewer service." Gain PHB, at 4. The GAM does not support this argument. "Limited areas of more intensive rural development" are permitted by the GAM, "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 contributes] to urban sprawl "; providing sewer service to RAIDs is explicitly permitted by the GMA.67 In addition to Gain, Pierce County was also challenged by the City of Tacoma regarding delineation and sewering of its LAMIRDs. In City of Tacoma v. Pierce County, the Central Puget Sound GMHB held that Pierce County's sewered LAMIRD was inconsistent with their county -wide planning policies because the county -wide planning policies only allowed sewer extensions outside of urban growth areas when: (1) sewer remedied a health or environmental problem; or (2) a formal binding agreement to service an area [LAMIRD] was in place prior to the establishment of the UGA.68 The GMHB did not reach the issue of whether the comprehensive plan policy at issue in Gain was consistent with GMA, as the argument was abandoned by Tacoma .69 However, the GMHB did quote and reiterate Gain's holding that "providing sewer service to RAIDS is explicitly permitted by the GMA."70 65 Gain v. Pierce County, CPSGMHB, 99-3-0019, Final Decision and Order at 8 (April 18, 2000). 66 Id. at 5. 67 Id. at 6. (emphasis added). 68 City of Tacoma v. Pierce County, CPSGMHB, 99-3-0023c, Final Decision and Order at 7 (June 26, 2000). ("Tacoma IT') 69 Id. 70 Tacoma II at 9 (quoting Gain v. Pierce County, CPSGMHB, 99-3-0019, Final Decision and Order (April 18, 2000)). Page 41 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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.71 Washington Courts Have Not Expressly Addressed the Issue of Sewering a LAMIRD There are no published Washington court opinions on whether LAMIRDs may be sewered. However, Cooper Point may provide some guidance. As noted above, the Washington Supreme Court upheld a strict necessary to protect the public health and the environment standard when analyzing whether sewer extensions in a rural area meet the RCW 36.70A.110(4) and WAC 365-196-425(4) exception.72 In Cooper Point, Thurston County argued that a lower "necessary" test should be established when sewering rural areas because the Legislature allows for "necessary public facilities" within LAMIRDs.73 The court noted that the area at issue in Cooper Point was not a LAMIRD and further that RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d) [LAMIRDs] "requires a showing of necessity ... [b]ecause that provision does not define `necessary' it is not helpful in ascertaining the meaning of that term [necessary under RCW 36.70A.110(4)]."74 This dicta could be read to indicate that the court understands that LAMIRDs may be sewered, but they are still subject to a "necessary" test and that the LAMIRD necessary test may be a lower threshold than RCW 3 6.70A. 110(4). Sewering Rural Areas Must be Consistent with the Countywide Planning Policies Countywide planning policies ("CPPs") are policy statements, developed by the county and its incorporated cities, which establish a common framework for which the jurisdictions' comprehensive plans are based.75 Comprehensive plans must be consistent with the CPPs.76 A review of the Jefferson County CPPs reveal that sewering the Brinnon LAMIRD may be supportable if there is a threat to the public health or welfare or to protect an area of environmental sensitivity. Below is a review of the CPPs at issue. Policy # 2 — Policy on the Promotion of Contiguous and Orderly Development and the Provision of Urban Services to Such Development 71 Cooper Point at 13; See also Director of the State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development v. Snohomish County, CPSGMHB, 03-3-0017, Final Decision and Order (March 8, 2004). (holding that extension of sewer services to churches in rural areas violated RCW 36.70A.110(4)). 72 Id. at 13-15. 73 Id. at 13. 74 Id. 75 RCW 36.70A.210(1). 76 Id. Page 42 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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.'$ 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 i£ (1) they are a "necessary public facility"; and (2) if the County can demonstrate that sewering the LAMIRD is consistent with its CPPs, specifically that the sewer is necessary to remedy a threat to public health, welfare, or the environment. 77 Jefferson County Washington, Resolution No.128-92 at 7, December 21, 1992. (emphasis added). 78 Id. at 21-22. Page 43 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 The Necessity Test Under Exception 4 is Lower than the Strict Necessity Test in Cooper Point Under RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d) and Gain, LAMIRDs may be sewered if the sewer is a "necessary public facility" supporting the LAMIRD. This likely requires a showing that the LAMIRD needs a sewer to support development at the density allowed under the RVC zoning classification. The Brinnon LAMIRD is located within a 100-year flood zone, within close proximity of the Hood Canal (approximately 630 — 3,000 feet from the OHWM of the Hood Canal), within close proximity of the Dosewallips River (approximately 150 feet from the OHWM of the Dosewallips River), and has soil types which are not ideal for septic systems. Because of these environmental factors, Jefferson County Environmental Public has reported that septic systems are more difficult to construct and more difficult to effectively operate without impacts to public health and the environment within the Brinnon LAMIRD. Further, certain existing developments within the Brinnon LAMIRD, such as the Brinnon School, generally require sewers to effectively operate. Given these facts, it is likely that a sewer is a necessary public facility to support the current and future development of the Brinnon LAMIRD. Further, any extension of sewer services to the Brinnon LAMIRD must be consistent with the Jefferson County CPPs, specifically Policy #2, which adopts a threat to public health, welfare, or the environment standard. Jefferson County must demonstrate that the sewer is needed to mitigate a threat to public health, welfare, or the environment. Further, CPP Policy # 2 requires that the threat be caused by existing development. As stated above, the Brinnon LAMIRD is located in a 100-year flood zone, in close proximity to the Hood Canal and Dosewallips River, has types of pre-existing development which usually require sewers, and there has been a long-established history of effluent contamination closing the shellfish beds adjacent to the Brinnon LAMIRD. These facts are likely enough to meet a threat standard. Question 3 - If Jefferson County Permits Sewer Connections for Properties Within the Brinnon LAMIRD to the Dosewallips Sewer, Does the Comprehensive Plan Have to be Amended? The Comprehensive Plan Must Be Amended to Incorporate and Plan for the Dosewallips Sewer and 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 44 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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 GMA requires a capital facilities element consisting of. I. An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, showing the locations and capacities of the capital facilities; IL 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.82It 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 (April4, 1995). 81 Durland v. San Juan County, WWGMHB, 00-2-0062c, Final Decision and Order (May 7, 2001). sz If development regulations are adopted without the necessary capital facilities planning and Jefferson County enters into any agreement or other binding authority to provide sewer to the Brinnon LAMIRD, it may be deemed a de facto comprehensive plan amendment under Ronald Wastewater District, et al. v. Snohomish County, CPSGMHB, 16-3-0004c, Final Decision and Order (January 25, 2017). Page 45 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Sewering the Brinnon LAMIRD May Require a Sewer Plan In addition to the capital facilities planning effort, extending the Dosewallips Sewer may require further approval from the Washington Department of Ecology, including a sewer plan.83 It is recommended that this occurs at a later time and the Comprehensive Plan be amended once the sewer plan is approved, if needed. Consistency Amendments to Existing Language Within the Comprehensive Plan Below is an overview of the Comprehensive Plan policies and narrative which must be amended if Exception 4 is selected: • Policy CF-P-6.3 states: New urban public services will only be provided within a UGA and not be extended beyond a UGA unless deemed to be an essential public service to mitigate a threat to public health, safety, or general welfare. Existing sanitary sewer treatment facility capacity will not be used as a justification for expansion of a sewer system or development inconsistent with County- wide Planning Policies and the Comprehensive Plan. 84 o DCD staff recommends amending CF-P-6.3 to provide for a comprehensive sewer policy addressing: (1) sewering rural areas under RCW 36.70A.110(4); (2) sewering LAMIRDs; (3) sewering rural schools serving urban and rural student populations; and (4) sewering essential public facilities in rural areas. o As currently written, the policy does not align with the CPPs or the governing law. • Exhibit 8-2 states "[d]o not extend urban public facilities beyond UGA boundaries (a requirement of GMA)." 85 Exhibit 8-2 relates the CPPs to the Capital Facility Plan. o DCD staff recommends amending this Exhibit to align with the new Comprehensive Plan policy. 83 RCW 90.48.110 ("all engineering reports, plans, and specification of the construction of new sewerage systems ... or for improvements or extension to existing sewerage 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. Jefferson County Washington, Comprehensive Plan, at 8-30, December 2018. (emphasis added). as Id. at 8-6. Page 46 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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. 86 Id. at 1 _80. Page 47 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 C. MLA20-00102 — Text Amendments to Support the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update. Docket Item: Comprehensive Plan text amendment to support the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update. Background: Jefferson County Public Works has developed technical revisions to the Port Hadlock UGA Sewer which improve the proposed system's cost-effectiveness. Public Works has or will obtain funding for the more cost-effective sewer system. The technical revisions meet the requirements of the 2008 Port Hadlock Sewer Plan. The more cost- effective sewer system uses new prefabricated, modular membrane bioreactor ("MBR") treatment units and a pressurized collection system to reduce initial project cost. Zoning, population, project phasing, and level -of -service remain the same. The revised draft sewer plan may be viewed at hllps://www.jeffersoncounlypublichealth.org/1158/Port-Hadlock- Wastewater-System. 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 48 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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 2021 Port Hadlock UGA 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 2021 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 ofservice - 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 2021 Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update. The adopted LOS is 132 gallons per day / estimated residential unit. 6-year financing plan — The GMA requires a 6-year financing plan for planned public facilities. Currently the Comprehensive Plan states " $0" for the 6-year financing plan. DCD staff recommends putting in the draft numbers from the revised draft plan for the 2018-2023 planning horizon, along with details on the source of the revenues. The total cost for the planning horizon is $25,900,139 with $11,903,121 coming from local sources. Narrative — The Comprehensive Plan has statements in the narrative and action plans which indicate that the Port Hadlock sewer will not operate within the next 6years. This language is proposed to be revised and replaced with language indicating that the County may be operating the system within the next 6 years. Recommendations: DCD staff recommends that the Comprehensive Plan be updated to indicate that the County plans to implement the more cost-effective technical strategies from the 2021 Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update, as discussed above. The proposed recommended changes, in line in and line out format, are in Appendix 3. Page 49 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Planning Commission Recommendations: On February 17, 2021, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of MLA20-00102. Staff Revisions Since Planning Commission Recommendation: On March 30, 2021, the Washington State Department of Ecology ("Ecology") approved the 2021 Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update. In previous editions of the staff report and in hearings and briefings before the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners, Appendix 3 referenced the 2020 Draft Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update. To align the proposed amendments with the Ecology approved 2021 Port Hadlock UGA Sewer Facility Plan Update, DCD Staff recommends changes to the original proposed amendment text to include the 2021 plan date and minor revisions to the narrative to indicate final Ecology approval of the update. 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. Docketltem: 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 Page 50 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 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 51 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 001211003 001214005 899900147 / I a 001281005 a a 0 4: aso Q co 190 0 12 1 qi4 Kala.Il)nt n*a4 -� 0 999900152 14 "999900163 T 1 i TM � 11 it �j 4ah 1 + 999900155 �' 41411� e 001282017 f � r ..}� 999900139 G f, 001782022 1 fy5 + + t� 001282023 a� ; - 999900159 ' \ 001261002 �ai� 5999001738 999900158 999900160 001282015 cad 0 Co w. m QA 0012 2¢ °' Q �p4 ai4•� �) 3g I` �• I 001263003' fie. All v 001283015� 999900131 0 001283011 * n`yr c n e o + 1 001253005 6012$gppl r g Vol Apra 001283001 "�° • ix. .�`���,�1� 1� ,: �JN ufp�r1 �{, c���rrs�. t999900151 A .n oj t' ��� 999900148 99390Li1d6 999900145 .k 5 999800152 999900153 001262017 001282022 00282023 4` f�82025r' .a Rr•�` 001282020 y ti ,A 001233. 0 001283015 001281002 41 9999 = 3 I 999900144 154 �i o a c- 999900157 r 999900158 999900132, r fr. 999900131 1J +3 fo��'1� 1�3PJ,�'nJiris�l��JSsf&hrrrfpJrr c{�iifShflCo�nsj vl.a., Figure 11 — MLA20-00039 Current Zoning -'1 0 RE -'I II RR-5 RR-5 RR-5 These data are provided on n `.AS -IS" basis, without ivarranty of any type, pressed or implied, including t not lirrtitedto any warranty to their perrormance, Tie rchant ability. orfltnessfor {p� AA� qqr-yy��-yy �ry �ry Iif1 LA20-00039 Zoning �ON C�j� 4 �tt Sa 1.M28 ❑ate-112812021 jany particular purpose. m n.a sm awe sw rvefsor r a a PNPerz^ i sal a r a --4 ayes Page 54 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 001211003 001214005 - k 999900147 Lb a ® 001281005 n f0cm ti N T -Ella int-L)i 00Vol O \ 999900152 g0153 Y-�- 1LO 1 q j 9'990@1a5 4y°1 E 001282017 en � 0a®,p��' �'00isxaxx 00!_'Mu ` c3 9989a0159 ' -- 001281002 rem' 999900138 009900158 999900160 �a 001282015 20 - � 001263003`Ile 001233015 999900131 f' } + + ti• ��� 0012 a 3 I cy 001283005 .. fr � • v� I t*s II r ur I 1 0 f! ; ry ��p3�y Lo 31�t �r � fFs r ra1 � P salrr�s JA _ `•U � .��ro�r'1� 19P�J"Las �Jrs ��7&� rr�if.Jarl:l�cn 8o�rt . �H Figure 13 — MLA20-00039 Potential Building Locations and Access Page 56 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Figure 14 — MLA20-00039 Potential Lot Layout Page 57 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Page 58 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Figure 17 — MLA20-00039 View of Adjacent Development (west) of Property from Analysis: Review and Analysis of Surrounding Uses and Zoning The property is an area which is characterized by similar rural development. To the north, east, and south is the Woodland Hills neighborhood. While Woodland Hill's zoning is RR1:10, the development pattern is 1 SFR per 5 acres. Further to the east is the Kala Point neighborhood which is zoned RR1:5, but on average has a development patter of 1 SFR per 0.5 acres, in addition to higher density condominium and commercial development adjacent to the shoreline. To the immediate south is the Calvary Community Church, which is off of Romans Road. While zoned RR1:10 this development is consistent with more urbanized areas. To the immediate west is RR1:10 zoning with commercial development (adjacent to SR19) which includes Secret Gardens Northwest and the Jefferson County Genealogical Society Research Center. To the immediate west is RR1:10 zoning with a few SFRs with a development pattern of 1 SFR per 5 acres. Page 59 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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".90 The proposed rezone meets the RR1:5 designation criteria as the property is surrounded by areas of similar or more intensive development and with existing similar lots of record (5 acres or less). Applicable Comprehensive Plan Narrative, Goals, and Policies Rural Areas Policies Summarized from County -wide Planning Policies91 — Rural areas are "characterized by low density development, open spaces, minimal public services, resource dependent activities, and industries; and outdoor recreational facilities". Level of service standards are to fit rural areas and rural centers such as "emergency services, transportation and roads, individual septic systems, individual or community water systems, and storm water and water quality" systems. Parcel sizes are to be "commensurate with the character of existing rural communities" and rural areas are to have a "variety of acreage parcels". The proposed rezone is consistent with the summarized rural area policies, especially considering the surrounding historic development patterns of similar or more intensive uses. Goals and Policies — • Goal LU-G-18 Encourage residential land use and development intensities that protect the character of rural areas, avoid interference with resource land uses, and minimize impacts upon environmentally sensitive areas.92 • Goal LU-G-20 Ensure that rural residential development preserves rural character, protects rural community identity, is compatible with surrounding land uses, and minimizes infrastructure needs.93 o Policy LU-P-20.1 Identify and encourage diverse rural land uses and densities which preserve rural character and rural community identity.9' o Policy LU-P-20.2 Establish rural residential land use densities for all lands located outside of designated Urban Growth Areas. Proposed rural 90 Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan at 1-19. 91 Id. at 1-34. 92Id. at 1-98. 93 Id. at 1-99. 94 Id. Page 60 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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.9s 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 14,000.98 It is estimated that the ADT will be 21,350 on this road segment in 2038, which is under the segment's ADT capacity. Other County Department Review and Comments Public Works Review Comments • From the north, the site has an existing approach permitted under #RAP08-00016 from Parkridge Drive, a county road, with access through an easement between lots 52 and 53 of Woodland Hills. • From the south, the site has access over an easement through the adjacent parcel, connecting to State Route 19 along Romans Road, a private road. • Department of Public Works takes no exceptions to the proposed comprehensive plan amendment to rezone Assessor Parcel Number 001281002 from RR-10 to RR-5. 95 Id. 96 18.88 ADT from 2 detached SFR development (based upon 9.44 ADT per SFR — per ITE Trip Generation Manual) and 14.64 ADT from 2 ADUs (based upon 7.32 ADT per ADU — per ITE Trip Generation Manual, multi- family land use). 97 Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Technical Document at 31. 98 Id. Page 61 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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 62 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 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 63 of 63 DCD Staff Report — 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket April 8, 2021 Exhibit 1 - Existing Jefferson County Producers and Processors YTD Sales First Permit Known (Jan AVNs or Written Permitted Number Legal Name DBA Processor Producer Permit # Date Address Parcel ID No. Zoning Oct I Warnings by Jeff Co Notes Written warning in 2015 192 W Fredericks St, for failure to maintain Port Townsend, WA security a l a ra m and 1 Pacala Inc Dream City Yes Tier 415970 3/20/18 98368 948601301 LI $1.98m surveillance system Yes West Glen Cove Area One AVN (administrative violation notice) in 2017 for using unauthorized 5030 Eaglemount Rd, pesticides, soil Change of use applied for on 11/5/2014 and finaled Suite A, Chimacum, WA amendments, fertilizers, on 8/6/2015. Appears to be a non -conforming legal 2 Treehawk Farms Yes Tier 3 412193 1/26/16 95325 801091002 AP-20 $1.04m or other crop production Yes use. Northern Canal Investmens, Olympic Mountain Gardens, and 4429 Coyle Rd, Quilcene, C(d) granted in 2016 forthe Marijuana Processing. 3 The Hight Point Pen Air Yes Tier 3 413625 2/16/16 WA 95376 701142002 CF-SO $700k No known Yes Production seems to be a non -conforming use. AVN issued in 2019 for 234 Otto St, Suite R-3, violation of Kohl Processing American Hash Port Townsend, WA transportation 4 Enterprises Makers Yes No 416772 1/9/17 98368 001212015 LI/C $393k requirements Yes Glen Cove Area. Change of use permit. High Dive, Honor Roll, Written warning in 2020 Infamy, Leaf forfailureto use and Glen Cove Chief, and 272 Otto St, Port maintain traceability, or S Com pa ny Medina Yes Tier 416530 12/31/14 Townsend, WA 98368 986700901 LI $382k both Yes G len Cove Area. Building permits. 274 Otto St, Suite U, Emerald Port Townsend, WA Glen Cove Area. Change of use permit/building 6 Experience Sacred Yes Tier 1 414273 4/5/19 98368 001212016 LI/C $367k No known Yes permit. 274 A Otto St, Port G len Cove Area. Change of use permit/building 7 Pure Funk Northwest Funk Yes Tier 1 412556 1/27/15 Townsend, WA 98368 001212016 LI/C $90k No known Yes permit. Written warning in 2019 409 Lane De Chantal, for failure to use and 5.04 ac, shoreline, discovery bay area. CUP for Port Townsend, WA maintain traceability, or Processing approved on 10/30/2014. Production S DiscoveryGarden Yes Tier 416103 2/22/16 98368 001302012 RR-5 $70k both Yes appears to be a legal non -conforming use. Written warning in 2015 for failure to maintain Disco Bay Heights, 2.46 ac, Roger Hall, CUP, 144 Milo Curry Rd, Port security alaram and Cottage Industry for production and processing 9 Auntie Onolicious Yes Tier 1 412300 1/2/15 Townsend, WA 98368 001321096 RR-5 $21k surveillance system Yes approved on 10/24/2018. CBD of Washington, Central Business 205 N Otto St, Suite B, Central Business District, and Port Townsend, WA Glen Cove Area. Change of use permit/building 10 District PortTownsend Yes No 417097 12/31/14 98368 986701902 LI Unkn No known Yes permit. Chong's Choice/Alta Nova, PDT Technologies, 205A N Otto St, Port 11 PDT Technologies and Tetra Labs Yes No 415704 3/3/15 Townsend, WA 98368 986701902 LI Unkn No known 71 Mustang Ln Area C, Suite 2, Brinnon, WA 12 Rocky Brook Ranch Yes Tier 417763 6/1/16 95320 966900117 RR-5 Unkn No known *As of 15 Dec 2020. Data from WSLCB, 502data.com, and Jeff Co permitting systems. Approximate numbers, please verify all data Glen Cove Area. Change of use permit/building Yes permit. .23 acres, Lazy C Ranch. S Foot Marijuana Fence Permit applied for on 2/18/2015, finaled in 2016. May or may not be a legal non -conforming use, moratorium in place when fence applied for. Open Unknown solid waste cases. No CU P for Processing.