Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout077Michelle Farfan From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Haylie Clement < hclement@cojefferson.wa.us > Wednesday, April 27,2016 5:09 PM ' Planning Commission Desk (PCommissionDesk@co jefferson.wa.us)' #Planning Team PC Agenda PC Agenda 05-04-2016.pdf Good Afternoon Planning Commissioners, Attached is the agenda for the Planning Commission meeting 5/412016. Please note that there are three meetings worth of minutes for your review. lf you have any questions please feel free to contact me. Thanks, Haylie Clement Administrative and Planning Clerk Jefferson County Community Development 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 Phone 360-379-4450 1 P:960:379-4450 6er Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGAGENDA Tri-Area Community Center I[Iay 4, zot6 Fi B6oi79-4451 plancomm@ co jefferson.wa. us . Call to Order/Roll Call o Approval ofAgenda o Approval of Meeting Minutes - t1.lO4/2OL5,12102/20L5,0L10612076 o Staff Updates o CommissionerAnnouncements Topic o Review of the Pleasant Harbor MPR draft regulations o Summary of today's meeting o Follow-up action items o Agenda ltems for May 18th meeting at 6:30 pm at the Tri-Area Community Center o Thank you for coming and participating in your government at workl 6:30 pm 6:45 pm 8:00 pm 8:15 pm 8:30 pm OPENING BUSINESS DrscussroN OBSERVER COMMENT When the Choir recognizes you to speak, pleose begin by stating your nome and address. Pleose be oware thot the observer comment period is ... i An optionol time period dedicoted to listening to the public, not o question ond onswer session. The Planning Commission is not required to provide response; ii Offered ot the Choir's discretion when there is time; iii Not o public heoring - comments mode during this time will not be port ol ony heoring record; iv Moy be structured with o three-minute per person time limit. CLOSING BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT ROLL CALL District 1 Coker: Present Felder: Present Koan'. Present District 2 Smith: Present Sircely: Absent E fochems; Present Call to Order at 6:31 pm District 3 Brotherton.' Present Giske: Absent E Hull; Present Staff Present David W Iohnson, Associate Planner foel Peterson, Associate Planner Public in Attendance: Ten Approval ofAgenda: Approved. Approval of Minutes: None to approve. STAFF UPDATES David Johnson: Assoc. Planner ANNOUNCEMENTS Cynthia Koan Chair The date for the Pleasant Harbor Master Plan Resort (MPR) Public Hearing is on January 6, I had an interesting meeting with folks from Land Trust in Chimacum to discuss their proposal for worker housing and farm related activities at Chimacum Corner behind the market. Very preliminary anyone interested let me know and I can get more information. Info on partner shorter PUBLIC HEARING PRESENTATION: foel Peterson Assoc. Planner Last meeting, DCD introduced an amendment to the sign code proposed by f efferson Transit. It was submitted on 9/29/15 and sponsored bythe board of county commissioners. They directed DCD to proceed with an amendment to the UDC for the sign regulations. We provided a threshold determination under SEPA of a Mitigated Determination of Non Significance (MDNS). An amendment to sign code last year that had constitutional issues regarding the way communities regulate signs. See that discussion in my staff report. We've had an environmental review and a constitutional review of the proposed amendment. Tonight is a public hearing, to take testimony for the planning commission to make a recommendation to either approve, deny or approve with modifications the amendment that will go to the board of County Commissioners. To summarize the amendment is to allow government entities to place a reader board or changing message signs on a government owned property, not closer than 200' or adjacent to residential property. And we have analysis of this proposal (with a glitch) and we also recommend an alteration to the language of proposal in order to meet with the constitutional muster. Page r of 4 6er Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center November 04, 2015 Pt 3603Z9-4450 F: g6o3z9-44sr plancomm@co jefferson.wa.us 6er Sheridan St, Port Townsend WA 98368 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center November 04,2ot1 Pt 960:379-4450 Fi g6o-279-44s1 plancomm@co jefferson.wa.us The logistical issues; Currently a reader board sign is prohibited. Last year's amendment allowed them in limited circumstances in commercial and light industrialareas only. Notwithin 200' of a residence and if within 300'of a residence, the sign would have to be turned off at night. My analysis of SEPA is to observe other public entities that have these signs and look at their zoning. There is no other public entity that isn't either sited on residential parcel or within 200' of one. I can't find one. Perhaps we can change the language from adjocent to abutting. The Environmental Impact Statements we have, don't have discussions about these electronic signs. Also looked at Comprehensive Plan that embodies the counties vision of what rural character and aesthetics look like. In evaluation, last year's amendment was not consistent with the comprehensive plan. Looking at the constitutionality of it, issues were brought up in legal review . . . if we use Government Entity, or property is owned by the government entity then it's a government property. A public entity can have public speech on their property, just as a private entity can have private speech on their private property. It has to be content neutral. See the article from our Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Michael Haas which further reinforces that our approach is going to be constitutional. The planning commission is tasked with listening and formulating public comments and concerns and going through a series of findings fon the record). You may make a determination immediately or defer to another meeting. PRESENTATION Tammi Rubert and Samantha Trone J effe rs o n Tra n s it Auth o rity Explained they emailed county and were told they could change Sign to a reader board. They got approval, modeled the East f efferson Fire and Rescue sign. We've submitted the change and got what we thought was approval. Applied to relocate the sign, and that's how we found out that it's not approved. The intent of the sign is to let the riders know before hand of an event or deviation. For instance, when the Hood Canal Bridge was closed, we could have posted that. We researched the sign and are using repurposed wood from the property. East f efferson Fire and Rescue partnered with us because they fuel at our fuel station and we have a local agreement with them. , CONCERNS FROM THE BOARD Does this open'ils up, if we allow thiq, sign oi make an exception, to other reader board signs? Concerned about the proximity to a very dangerous intersection where someone gets killed every other year. If you put a wood sign up, you wouldn't have to change our codes, My sense of your purpose of the sign was to provide significant public information, but it seems to me there's other technology that can do that, like an a.m. radio. Could this be referred to the Growth Management Hearing Board for rezoning? Or would we still have to change our code? Pull out language of closeness to residences and use a Conditional Use Permit? We don't want to cost anyone extra money or time with litigation. ANSWERS/ADDTTTONAL TNFORMATTON PROVTDED We received a state grant to add additional fifteen parking spaces out front for park and ride (or bike and ride). We moved out stops inside. All of our buses go through that intersection. The sign is not to just alert drivers, it's the monument sign for our facility, so we can't relocate it. It's just one or two lines with messages on it. We don't currently have a sign. We have tried other modes to get information out. We've posted on busses, on the park n ride, on our website. This is just another way to get messages out. The sign is custom made, says Jefferson Transit and has a reader board on it. Pagezof 4 PUBLIC COMMENT Brian Belmont, 64 Timber Ridge Dr. Port Ludlow: Support reader board sign. Glee Hubbard, 60 Admiralty Ln., Port Ludlow: Support reader board sign. Dave Armitate,747 Mt. Constance Way, Port Ludlow: Concern with 0rdinance, give people some leeway. Kathleen Klare, Quilcene: Support a reader board sign. Jean Ball, Chimacum: I find reader board or flashing or glowing signs or bill boards annoying. Please consider the location (at 4 cornersJ, it's not a beautiful residential area. The sign for bridge and ferry on 104 is nice. "Coming to the nuisance" term. Elizabeth V. Admiralty Ln., Port Ludlow: Please be flexible designing this sign so they don't shut you down. f efferson Co allowed Port Ludlow, allowed our resort . . . so when you're trying to maintain our rural forested atmosphere, you have to still be flexible and recognize we have dense areas. ferry Rupert L25 Cub Rd., Port Townsend: Has there been a study of car accidents at the Fire Hall? It IS a dangerous intersection but I don't think the sign will distract drivers there because the one at the Fire Hall doesn't distract drivers. Afier mitigation itwas moved: The Planning Commission supports o revision of the sign code that allows a non- commercial, public information sign to violate any requirement of the sign code with a conditional use permit. This movementwas seconded. , COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE PRESENTATION: Regional Coordinator for N. Olympic Peninsula and f udy Surber; City of Port Townsend Planning We're looking at strategies for adaptation to climate change. We can project the impact of climate change and it's our responsibility to plan for that focusing 6n'preparedness from a Land Use perspective and how to mitigate the impact of climate change. Planning is a responsibility of ours. Overview of projectwith climate projections: We've gathered observed and projected changes in Jefferson and Clallam Counties. Because of our moderated climate (due to the ocean), we don't expect to see such dramatic effects, but we've already seen warmer temperatures and expect to see more days over 90 degrees and more frost free days. The greatest change we expect to see is in the form of our precipitation: we expect larger storm events happening, more so in the winter, the sea level and seismic activity to rise. Ocean Acidification will have major impacts on the shellfish industry effecting both the economic and ecological functions. Human health and livelihood: Injuries during extreme weather events, heat related illness, forest fires, air quality, pollen production, microbial contamination, emerging risks of shell fish poisoning, crop yield. Power disruptions, flooding, transportation disruptions, expectation of immigration to this area. Sensitivity analysis: Wild Salmon, shellfish, sea and shore bird populations are all sensitive to climate change. Page g of4 North Olympic Climate Change Preparedness Plan: Kate Dean; Resource Conservation and Development Council with Cindy fane 6er Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98968 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center November 04,2ors Pi 36oi79-445o Ft 960-879-4451 plancomm@ co jefferson.wa.us 6er Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center November 04,zols Pt g60879-4450 F:96o379-445t plancomm@co jefferson.wa.us The November lBth meeting for the entire planning commission and sub-committee meeting and ad hoc committee to brainstorm on the numerous themes for the Comprehensive Plan Review. Defining themes: Aspects of the comp plan that may or may not have their own elements, may show up in multiple elements and/or are high level concerns that we wish to be mindful of. We need to get a notice in the paper on Friday and notify DCD and David. Move that the Plonning Commission bring to the ottention to the Board of County Commissioners that we are facing a very tough challenge in meeting the deadlines of the Comp Plan Updates and we need to have sufficient stoff ond resources from DCD dedicated to that program. Motion Passed with all in favor. Next Planning Commission meeting scheduled for Ll/18/20L5 at 6:30 pm at the Tri-Area Community Center Adjourned at 9:L2 pm These meeting minutes were approved this day of - 2016. Cynthia Koan, Chair We have three ways to organize the strategies: Critical infrastructure, Ecosystems and Water Supplies. Much more of the Olympic Peninsula will be unfavorable for the wild salmon (due to water temperatures). We expect a decrease in soil water storage (due to surface water runoff and higher temps), agriculture will have a number of impacts including a possible growth due to more carbon dioxide and longer frost free seasons (if there's enough water). The top strategies or recommendations we make include: Education, Awareness, Policy Land Use, switch from snow pack to rain based watersheds, promotion of smarter irrigation technologies, changes to codes and ordinances. FOLLOW.UP ITEMS Page 4 of 4 Teresa A Smith, PC Secretary /DCD 6zr Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center December 02, 2o1S Pt 360:379-4450. Fi B60-879-4451 plancomm@ co jefferson.wa.us ROLL CALL District 1 Coker: Present Felder: Present Koan: Present District 2 Smith: Absent E Sircely: Present Jochems; Present Call to Order at 6:30 pm District 3 Brotherton; Present Giske: Present Hull: Present Staff Present Joel Peterson, Associate Planner Public in Attendance: One Annroval ofAsenda: Aooroved. Aonroval of Minutes: None to approve. STAFF UPDATES There are no meeting minutes to approve yet but we have hired someone who is working on the backlog. David W lohnson wanted to remind us that January 6,2}L6wiit Ue the Public Hearing for the Pleasant Harbor EIS in Brinnon. They're close to finaling it, and baring any delays there will be a public notice on Monday, December 7, 2015 and the FEIS will be available on December 9,2015. COMMISSIONER ANNOUNCMENTS C.K. The DCD Director position had four applicants, two were selected and one showed up. David Goldsmith gave a recommendation, he's coming from Corvallis, has been a Planning Department Manager and worked around Connecticut for a while. There will be another meetf,rg with him. There is a panel interviewing him. K.C. Many members in our community would like to be involved with this screening. December 71,'20L5 is a meet and greet date. .. . C.K. After our 7L/18/ 15 meeting, the following Monday I went to the Board of County Commissioners and David Sullivan pulled me aside privately and informed me they had a one year, $L00,000.00 line item for a Consultant to work on the Comprehensive PIan. So we need to be clear on what we think they should do with that money. They're also working on an internal reorganization of some of their people to give us a single point of contact. It sounds like David W Johnson will be helping us with the public process piece and mapping it out. I'm hoping he can come on 72/1,6/15 to help us with that. f .P. It may not be until mid-fanuary, 2016. It's a proposal (with outreach) that David W Johnson will be presenting to David Goldsmith. I'm working on a critical path calendar for the backbone of required elements including the skeleton of other elements to fit into a finite number of days I hope to be done by December 18, 2015. C.K. I spoke with David Goldsmith, our Interim Director, and reiterated my interests of a real rewrite and a single author and a readable document of the Comprehensive Plan. He sounded excited and said he could imagine a document that was more of a short narrative with the detail. The technical detail that you guys use in code and policy would be more organized in the supporting document but to have a narrative piece that's readable to the lay public and has a single author. He seemed to really understand that idea and got excited. K.C. The idea is more to structure things, an equivalent way is to write an introduction, not reinventing the wheel, keeping all the nuts and bolts. Clarify that you're not talking about a complete re-write. Page r of 7 6zr Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98968 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center December o.2,2ols Pt g6ot79-445o Ft B60-979-4451 plancomm @co jefferson.wa.us C.K. Yes. This is an important discussion I'd like to move to the December t6,2015 meeting. M.S. Not necessarily a complete re-write. We need to clarify that a complete re-write would be to restructure (the document). Or to write a good introduction to (summarize the plan). We don't want to reinvent the wheel, just make it readable for the public while keeping the nuts and bolts. M.S. Our Sub Committee met and spoke of ways to approach the public, structuring meetings and our approach. It was constructive for an initial meeting with very general ideas regarding how to go about it. |.P. I had hoped but don't have a sheet of paper to give you with what our required deliverables with having a meeting blue is a LAMIRD a (limited area of more intensive rural development), a neighborhood crossroads, so it's considered commercial. These changing message signs are allowed in commercial and industrial zones. |efferson Transit was just outside the LAMIRD in a residential zone so their sign application had to be denied or the code changed. So the question is: If we allowed any governmental entity in any residential district to have a changing message sign, what would be the impact? That's the SEPA analysis I did that came up with a mitigated determination of non-significance. Meaning that if we applied some mitigations, it probably wouldn't be a significant environmental impact. The other part of my analysis is to look at the comprehensive plan and is it consistent with the comp plan? This was the hard part as I began to look at the EIS's and the development of the comp plan, in Chapter 3; Land use and Rural, is where it clearly defines what rural character is and what level of nuisances where going to allow in our rural residential areas. We allow facilities like Jefferson Transit to be in residential zones with a Conditional Use Permit. We don't allow the signs to be there though. So we're trying to figure out some alternate text that would clearly define how it's being applied and provide a solution to Jefferson Transit without opening things up too big. So we're here today to look at our text. We had a public hearing, about a dozen people came, around 9 people spoke, mostly about Port Ludlow, that they are in the Port Ludlow MPR, which is a little bit different zoning category, but they're in what you might consider it a mixed use commercial zone however they're within 200' of open space and a residence. So the code read that you can't do that. We looked at the effect of that Prohibition County wide at the the shops and nearly everyone is on a residence or neargovernmental entities: the firehouses, the parks, the school PaEe z of z M.S. And we'll want to capture the public comments precisely. T.B. We spoke about the business element aspects of it and how land was zoned and how to make it work. PUBLIC HEARING Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center December C2,zors Pi 360.379-4450. Fi 560379-4451 plancomm@co jefferson.wa.us 6zr Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98868 a residence so it became what we call "Trapped by the Ordinance". How do you implement the approval for a sign if 90 times out of 100 you're going to be faced with this restriction? So after the public hearing was over we began deliberations, and we will complete those deliberations tonight. What I sent out to you on Monday was in preparation of this were some options of how we might blend one or two or parts of different options in order to achieve two basic things. One is how do we allow f efferson Transit, which is a facility which is a public benefit to us all [some may define it as an essential public facility, or a public purpose facility), next door to a LAMIRD how can we allow them to have a sign? What analysis or logic path would we follow to allow them to have this sign? We're going to be looking at what are the impacts and how do we address the impacts in our development regulations? We address those, typically in this type of situation with a Conditional Use Permit and there are criteria that I've provided in the staff report, of this is how we evaluate a project that needs special permission or special review. The second thing is that they're across the street, they're next door, and they're all around residential. So we have that second prohibition of the 200' rule and how do we address that? So in our post hearing deliberations last time we talked about this, what came forward was "let's use the Conditional Use Permit process as a way of evaluating site by site what the impacts and mitigations could be. So in a sense, we're taking out or not going to make an effort to define a one size fits all code, we're going to use our Conditional Use Permit process to do a site by site analysis and that would allow f efferson Transit to have a sign, being across the street from a residence, if they could come up with a design that would avoid problems with that residence, and then it would also address the concerns with Port Ludlow, who were here with a very strong message of "here we are with an MPR and we want to communicate with our other neighbors but we've got a lot of residential and open space in our MPR that we're going to be able to find a place for a sign". So what I sent out, looks just a bit different than what you have in front of you. You notide that I said revised December 1st. In putting my proposed text together, I'm showing where we started from which was the applicant's text and DCD's proposed text, that Mr. David Alverez had some hand in, but then after the Planning Commission's Public Hearing there is two, and that's what we want to focus on tonight. This is to be responsive to the public comments. And I've put a sentence in yellow, that's included in alternate proposed text #1 but I left it out of alternate proposed text #2 and that was an oversite of mine. I was trying to pare down the text and be efficient but without including it in the second option, I'm not allowing Port Ludlow to have a sign because it didn't address that specific case of an entity that is in a commercial district but within 200' of a residence so it was intended to be a part of both of these so we could use the Conditional Use Permit process to review these rather than having a 200' rule. So the new document I brought you is updated. So both of these have that yellow sentence in there just to highlight that we mention that 200' rule but if you're within 200'you can use a Conditional Use Process. I was hoping the bullet points at the bottom reflect what each text does. So if you focus on them, we see that our new proposed text that you're seeing tonight has two methods by reducing the number of changing messages. One is to rezone Jefferson Transit Authority an Essential Public Facility thereby making it the only one and very special, (and that sign would be allowed for them and no one else (generically)). The concern with that approach is that it takes a long time to rezone them to an Essential Public Facility and they would not be able to illuminate the sign until that process is done. We have a draft agreement with them saying: you can put the sign up, test it, but not illuminate until the zoning's right. The other option may be more direct and helpful to Jefferson Transit and that is: If you're within 1.00'of a LAMIRD and the reason for 100'is because that's the width SR19 and SR20 right of way, the State routes have about a 100' right of way and Four Corner's Rd is about a 60' right of way, so that would be inclusive of that. It wouldn't allow for a diagonal adjacency if you take the hypotenuse of a 60' triangle, you would end up being about L20'. The thought is we have these designated areas of more intensive rural development and if you're that close to one, perhaps the nuisance of a lighted sign is not going to be that great, it will only apply to governmental entities which we find, looking at the geography of our governmental entities, they're in the communities they serve. They're either on a residential parcel with a firehouse, next to other residential parcels or maybe they're in a LAMIRD but they're next to a housing sub-development. So we're caught up by not being able to find very many cases by being able to site one right in the middle of a LAMIRD. You can raise the intensity inside a LAMIRD and I've got some findings here that might help tonight that might be able to help as I go through our required findings. Page g of 7 6er Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 can re-zone later. The zoning ofEss of this sign. Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center December e.2,2ors Pt 3608Z9-4450 F: g6o-379-4451 plancomm@co jefferson.wa.us I've put them in bullet points, it's kind of a logical path that supports the idea of allowing more intensity near a LAMIRD and this deliberation with the required findings, you can play around with the different elements here but basically were looking at signs for governmental entities being either only for Essential Public Facilities. If you're close to a LAMIRD and then if you're within 200'of a residence or open space we'll use a Conditional Use Process to permit those. So we're not out of alignment of how our code is working with Conditional Use Permits in residential zones, we're opening it up to governmental entities and we're allowing that governmental entity to go through that Conditional Use process near a residential zone, it's kind of a fact of life for how |efferson County's been developed. As far as going back to the essential public facility, in our use table we already have a category under institutional uses called transit facilities and it says yes they're allowed here, conditionally and so rural residential L in 10 is a conditional use, which they went through so there's a consideration for transit facilities already in our use table. There are other public facilities that have that same thought process of which ones are going to be conditional or discretionary or allowed out right. There's even a category for unnamed conditional uses that you could put a transit center into. Similarly we have, in our Public Facility section of our code that has advisory responses to whether they can be used in these different districts. If you're siting a waste management facility, it's a conditional use here, maybe a yes there maybe not allowed here. The thing to point out is with an essential use facility, they're not sited in the same way as a Conditional Use Permit does. The reason being is the way you site an Essential Public Facility is a Type 5 process, is much like a zoning change. The way the RCW was written it has to do with train stations, regional transportation facilities, rails to multi modal, ferry docks, things like that that are difficult to site. Or institutional buildings: Prisons, other kinds of Institutional Health Centers, Hospitals those are the types of things that GMA (Growth Management Act) says a jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan and development regulations cannot prohibit the citing of these facilities. They're going to take a little elevated different process, a Type 5 process. So right now we have Jefferson Transit already appropriately located with a Conditional Use Permit on a rural residential parcel, we could rezone them as an Essential Public Facility but I guess I'm wondering how much does that help them, they've already been sited. We're not going to back track and give them a Type 5 process and give them a special use permit at this point but it is a way to limit this sign to a very special circumstances so they're not all over the County. M.J. Can we go with option #1 but they can't use the lit part till zoning was approved. Now can you take the lighted part, and give them a Conditional Use Permit (an exception on this caseJ so they can use their sign? f .P. If we applied #2 they could light the sign as soon as their Conditional Use Permit has been approved and they ential Public Facility doesn't get us anywhere other than limiting the application K.C. We're highly specializing the approach and one thought mentioned in a previous meeting was that we were trying to do it in such a way that we were being a little more inclusive. I'm a little concerned that we may regret it in the future. If this is a problem within the sign code that has a wider application, I'd steer away from a single one up fix for this. Is it true that if an application meets these criteria and goes through the option #2 and goes for a Conditional Use Permit, can they still be denied? Motion & Second for Alternate Proposed Text #2,ltem C in December L,2015 revised document called Preparation of December 2,2015 Planning Commission Meeting Update Reader-Board for MLA15-00063 Proposed UDC amendment, JCC 18,30.150 sign code. Page 4 of7 6et Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center December c.2,2ors P: S6oi79-44so Fi 560379-4451 plancomm@co jefferson.wa.us ANSWERS AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PROVIDED The Essential Public Facility approach is an eloquent way of limiting it but it prolongs the pain and if we go with Text 2,(proximitytoaLAMIRD)theycouldapplyforaConditionalUsePermitrightafterthisisapproved. Ifitisimportant for them to be an Essential Public Facility that could be a separate activity they do through a Comprehensive Plan Amendment process and we could have that Type 5 review. My concern is that the EPF, as eloquent as it is, will drag us out quite a long we open up Quilcene and Brinnon, who are in similar situations there's two LAMIRD's there. So we have a handful of places where these may appear. time and maybe it's not needed. Then fire halls each that are right next to the Section 8.2 Planning Commission snd Board and Required Findings: Approved: 5 Nay: 2 Abstention; 1 REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR GMA ON THE of County (i) Strike the last two sentences from changing me ssage signs in ap D TEXT Review of the Growth monagement Indicotors (ii) Strike f,irst sentence from staff findings. (iiil Residents of f efferson County want to have input regarding what happens in their neighborhoods and the public value has changed regarding the Conditional Use Permit Review on a site by site basis to allow areas. No Changes No Changes N/A No Changes Amendments aren't necessary so it does not apply. This code change does not dictate a need for a change to the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan because we're linking it to the adjacent LAMIRD and making it a conditional use permit review process which can allow the public to appropriately evaluate the specific impact. Section 8.3 Time, Place and Manner Findings: 8.3.1Yes 8,3.2 Yes 8,3.3 Yes B.3.4Yes (i) (i i) (ii il (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) Page 5 of 7 6zr Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center December 02,2o1S Pt 360:379-4450. F: g6o-B79-44sr plancomm@co jefferson.wa.us Section 8.4 Takings Findings: 8.4.1 No 8.4.2 No 8.4.3 No 8.4.4 No 8.4.5 No Motion & Second for Alternate Proposed Text #2, of December 2, 2015 Planning Commission M Approved: 5 ,secuting Attorney and found to meet Item C in December t,2015 revised document called Preparation eeting Update Reader-Board for MLA15-00063 Proposed UDC Section 8.5 Findings on the Record 8.5.1 The Sign Code process and deliberations 8.5.2 lt's all in the record. 8.5.3 Yes 8.5.4 Yes The proposed amendment was reviewed by County Deputy Pro legal criteria. 8.5.5 No the decision is mindful of all known instances in county 9. PlanningCommission Recommendation: Nay: 2 Abstention: 1 Note to Board of County Commissioners:ng issues with this particular request that could be addressed in the Comprehensive PIan Amendment cycle to more clearly identify proper zoning. During our discussion it was noted that the representation of several types of Public Facilities is inidequate in the use table. We recommend that Jefferson Transit pursue rezoning to EPF. Presentation on December 14,2015 to the Board of County Commissioners. PUBLIC COMMENTS |ean Bell: Why not rezone transit to commercial instead of altering the code? I find it a little distasteful that we're going to go through all the trouble of altering the code for one public entity? You wouldn't have altered it for me, you won't alter it for my small business, and you won't alter it for my colleges so I find that a little hard to swallow. About this singular applicant for the position of DCD Director, I find that really disappointing. I hope he's really qualified and we love him. I wonder if we don't, can we throw him back and cast the net again? Why is there such low interest in the job? Are we not offering an attractive enough package? You mentioned a single offer of the laymen's form of the vision and I wonder what that's all about. Page 6 of 7 6zr Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center December e.2,2ols P:360-379-44So Fi 36oi79-4451 plancomm@co jefferson.wa.us FOLLOW UP ITEMS Our next meeting is December 16,20\5 here at 6:30. We will be working with DCD on the agenda but we will want some sub-committee reports. I will be getting an outline (a little bit of direction) out to all of you. And the new sub-committee focus's and assignments so you're real clear about that. So I'd love some su reports and I'm hoping to start talking about a timeline and some recommendations for that $100,000.00, w want them to do with that? Let's be clear ourselves so we can advocate clearly to the powers that be.e coming up with a timeline for outreach so in your sub-committees be thinking about what you guys of public interaction so that we can work with both pieces. Old business: last meeting we were discussing proper meth of us writing emails, we can't simply write the Planning Commission Board. That's clarity on this. Next Planning Commission meeting scheduled Adj These meeting minutes Cynthia Koan, We need to go DCD channel. We will get 5 at 6:3 the Tri-Area Community Center of 2016. PC Secretary/DCD % PageT of7 6zr Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center January o6,2oL6 Pt 960-879-445U. F: 360-g79-445r plancomm@co jefferson.wa.us ROLL CALL District 1 Coker: Present Felder: Present Koan: Present Call to Order at 6:30 pm District 2 Smith: Present Sircely: Present fochems; Present Public in Attendancer Many AnnrovalofAsenda: Annroved Approval of Minutes: None to approve STAFFUPDATES: NONE Phase 2: Davenport Community is a successful Destination Resort: It will have one hundred and ninety-one suites, 36,000 sq. ft. of commercial. It has a Health Exercise Center and Spa, Rejuvenation Plus Facility, Golf Pro Shop, Variety Store, Olympia Dining and Steamboat Lounge, Commercial Kitchen, Convention Center, Wedding Chapel and Sports Activities. District 3 Brotherton: Present Giske: Present Hull: Present Staff Present Garth Mann, Statesman Group, Ltd. David W. Johnson, Assoc. Plqnner COMMISSIONER ANNOUNCEMENTS: ln2O76the Planning Commission will meet twice a month, instead of once a month on the first and third Wednesday. At the Tri Area Community Center in Chimacum unless announced otherwise. You can always check the DCD website to see any changes Garth Mann from Statesman Group is the applicant and he will be telling you about his proiect: Pleasant Harbor Planning Phase tA on Pleasant Harbor Resort; We knew when we built it we wouldn't make any money on it but had to get started. That was done through a BSP (Binding Site Plan) that had been in place twenty years. The Pleasant Harbor and community has been integrated for quite a while. In 2015 we did a study to show how many jobs would be created. The population within a five minute drive of Pleasant Harbor is 491 people. In a fifteen minute drive it's 7,\62 and in a thirty minute drive it's 2,597. f efferson County total population in 20L5 is 30,635 people. Washington State is a little over 7 million. The population in Brinnon has been declining over the past five years. Compounding the change from 2010 to 2015: The County is increasing in size by Yz of 1% and the State has increased by Lo/0. The median household income in this area is the lowest in the State at roughly $39,000.00 in 2015 while the average income in Washington State is $63,320.00. You can see that there's something not positive in the County with regards to growth. The average age in this County is sixty years of age, the average age in the Stateisroughlythirty-sevenyears. Soyoucanseewithoutjobsbeingcreated,theCountywillfadeoffintothesunset. Negative growth is not a positive thing for a community. It will affect the character or your community. We're planning to create Phase 1B: Our plan is to create roughly four hundred jobs in that period, with roughly fifty million dollars revenue for the community. It's at Black Point Rd. and Highway 101. Each Phase takes roughly two years to complete. The community of the Maritime Village Fun Center is for ages four to ninety-four. A Farmer's Market, a Health Food Bistro, and a Community Walk Center also. We have sixty-six one and two bedroom sweets overlooking the harbor for short term stays. A grand total of 891 units, including some for staff housing. A Controlled Pistol Range in the arcade level, with Sheriffs Office, etc. Page t of 7 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center January o6, zot6 Pt 360-579-4450 Fi g60379-4451 plancomm@co jefferson.wa.us Phase 3: Will provide another opportunity for development with our fifty-two suites. They're designed to accommodate a total of two hundred and eight people. Similar to a time share format. Very well decorated and a nice addition. It will also provide some sort of transportation between Pleasant Harbor and Sea Tac Airport. Phase 4: The completion of everything you see there. The environment gets a lot of press, please see our footprint. We try to maintain as much of the habitat as we can. We're really improving the two hundred and fifty-six acres out there and following the footprint. Our plan for the environment is extremely sensitive. Our impervious footprint is less than 720/0. A state of the art Waste Water Treatment Plant is a six million dollar plant. It can create class A water from this for our Golf Course and the Fire Smart Program for irrigation. We will improve the design for the well for the quality of the aquifer and will put more water back into it than we take out. We will monitor this per the County as well. We will have no water runoff. We will use a conduit system at the bottom of the reservoir to accomplish heating and cooling. Improvements to Highway 101 and Black Point Rd., and an improvement to parking requirements at State Dock Road. We'll also use dark sky lighting with LED lights. We've reduced the Golf Course, at request, from eighteen to nine holes. We will have public transportation coming to the sight also. people from outside the area and work in concert 6zr Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 A successful resort today has to be year round. We ne with nature and the environment. David W. Johnson Associate Planner I'm going to cover the regulatory side of this. Specifically what the Planning Commission is being tasked to do as part of the approvalprocess with this resor.l: i:, ,, ,, There was an open house in 2014about this project, with the Environmental Impact Statement. There's Public Review Binders roaming around the room. ilease look at them and we can give you copies of them. Mr. Mann started by meeting with us back in 2006 with his plans. SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act) is a very long, expensive process you have to do with everything. Under SEPA you can take a large project and narrow it down into phases. Phase L was a Comprehensive Plan, from rural zone property to a Master Plan Resort property. That was done, and approved, in fanuary, 2008 with thirty conditions, including another [supplemental) Environmental Impact Statement, (SEIS) and another Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to analyze those two. In 2013 we hired EAE EngineeringtowritethenewElS. InDecember2014wereleasedthedraftandhadapresentationattheCommunity Center, etc. At the conclusion of the forty-five day comment period we stopped and looked at them all and we changed the draft, based on the comments, including Alternative #3 (Golf Course, (1,8 holes to t holes)). We finished on Decembe r 9,2015 and have it ready for the Planning Commission. We assume that the final FEIS is adequate for SEPA. The role of the Planning Commission specifically: We need to implement development regulations. We borrowed Port Ludlow's MPR (Master Plan Resort) Development Regulations. This is what the Planning Commission will review and make recommendations on starting in February,2016. The final element in Phase 2 is the Development Agreement. Under the Board of County Commissioners. It's a legal contract we borrowed from Port Ludlow (with changes) as well. Page z of 7 6zr Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center January o,6,2ot6 Pt 860379-445.U- Ft g60-379-4451 plancomm@co jefferson.wa.us The Staff Report I've already forwarded to the Planning Commission. This is the first time we've used this code in f efferson County because we've never built a MPR in ]efferson County before. State Law, to Comprehensive Plan, to Unified Development Code and my recommendations and conditions of approval. PUBTIC COMMENT Until we've adopted the recommendations there will not be a Master Plan Resort. PUBTIC HEARING Phase 2 review process of the Master Plan Resort M0B0B-00188 for Pleasant Harbor Resort: Roma Call, [with Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe): The proposed Pleasant Harbor Resort Project is within our tribes U and A in an area where we rely on fish. We were not consulted after the February meeting and have had no input on it. We continue to oppose this process. We are concerned about the adverse impacts on our land. The County bypassed our Tribal Consultation Process when it approved the Pleasant Harbor Marina and they violated our Tribal Treaty Rights. Barbara Moore-Lewis I'm speaking for the Brinnon Group the 501c3 group. This will impose a burden to our taxpayer's that they aren't willing to pay. Such as the Sheriffs needing to come down here for three shifts every day. I have a documented study that shows all the extra costs. When the Commissioner's approved this, they put on thirty conditions which were good but we have no proof they'veichanged to them, f oe of Brinnon, Last spring 95% of our kids qualified for free or reduced lunch. It's all because we have no economy here. Just from the retiree's, that's it. We have to create an economy here. This is an opportunity for f efferson Co. Phil Best, Hood Canal Environmental Council: Think very hard about the conditions you need for a positive result. Inadequate review time, consider the No Action Alternative, Hood Canal pollution. Mr. Coleman: I've been operating a small business out of the marina so this is important to me. Mr. Mann's replaced docks, the fuel system, met and exceeded all State and Federal requirements, storm water management was NON EXISTANT. Mr. Mann's improved the dangerous access road approaching Highway 101. Potable water supply was obsolete. Now it's a state of the art system. Electrical, sanitation, restaurants, etc. f ean Far: I live in Port Townsend zip code, not the city. I'm impressed with all the studies and analysis of this project. We should all figure out ways to approve and move this project forward. Samantha Boing: I'm twenty eight years old, without the Resort and Marina I'd have to move. There's nothing else here for us. We NEED this kind of growth. Darlene Shenfield: Overall we do support the Brinnon group's position including the no action alternative. The reuse of wastewater into water isn't good. It's terribly toxic. You can't reuse it. The pathogens that you think you've killed will come back to life. You can't get rid of the metals either. It's not safe, it will poison the land, animals, children and pets. The State will approve it now but don't. It's still not safe. Page 3 of 7 6zr Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center January o,6,2076 P:36o-979-44So F:360-379-4451 plancomm@co jefferson.wa.us Brenda McMullan: I've been watching the Brinnon project for many years. The water is insufficient. There's only one aquifer. It will pose severe challenges on using fresh water without seawater intrusion. The mere threat of it should close this project immediately. Monica Fletcher: With Sierra Clubs North Olympic Group: we respectfully request for more time to look at the FEIS and the Staff Report and the MPR regulations that apply to Ludlow but not this area. We want more time for us to respond: wetlands, water availabiliry fish and wildlife, traffic patterns, sewage waste issues. Denny Schultz: This County has been in economic decline for twenty years. We need something. This will be the largest employer in the County outside of Government. The only other is the Paper Mill. We need this project now. Steve Schibly: I'm the Tourism Marketing Coordinator: This is a game changer that will help with Kalaloch Lodge, Port Ludlow etc. ': Ken Velbert; My wife and I chose Hood Canal to put our boat in for the rest of our life. We think it's so beautiful but a very depressed area. We're excited about what's going on at Pleasant Harbor. It's out of this world. Please support this. Unknown: The regulation process is bad. Too many road blocks. I was a Planning Commissioner in 2008. We had many meetings in Brinnon and got the agreement on the first phase. Don't cut the Golf Course from 18 to t holes. We need this and morel Steve Walker: The aqui flown out already. The increase poverty not de year! George Sickle; I've been a p since I twenty years old. What would have happened to the area had they not come up here was disastrous and polluted. Look what he's done here already Richard Whirehall: The ls you come by boat. How much growth will this produce. You cut the GolfCourse It will draw too many and the one road can't take it. Roger W: I attend all these meetings and see money being spent on how you can't do this or that, and I see how no one has a job. They get into drugs. Stop preventing the development from trying. Beth Strostern: This is the most beautiful place on earth. We came here in 2000 because of its peace and beauty. The extent of the development will take away what we came to see. We're very concerned about it. I want to know that there are teeth to enforce the promises that were made. Like will the resort employ two hundred people as we were told? r Rhonda Black: I support the Resort. I've been here for ten years and see NO young people staying. There's nothing for them. Scott Black: I've mixed feelings about the resort. I like the green and don't really want it to go. I've seen how bad it can be. Page 4 of7 6zr Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98968 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center January o,6,2ot6 Pi g6ot79-445o F: 96o-3z9-445r plancomm@co jefferson.wa.us Christina Maloney: I'm an eight year resident of Brinnon and small business owner. The final EIS is a vast improvement from the previous one. The County scheduled this meeting when all the snow birds are gone, because it's winter and didn't give us much time at all to go over this documentation. I'm surprised about the discussion concerning the displacement of businesses (included in the former EIS drafts) isn't in this one. The former one said it wouldn't displace any businesses but it has displaced two, one of which is mine, Kayak Brinnon, and he also chose to compete with me which has resulted in a 600/o decreased family income. I can't speak for the other business owner, but I can tell you she was forced to shut down and liquidate. These actions, along with many other, have caused a great distrust with this company within the community. They will increase population from797 people to close to 3,000 people. That's a250o/o increase. I and many others enjoythis area because it's remote. If you add 2,000 people, it will impact our Iives greatly. I also am concerned because over 250 low wage workers will be laid off each fall, letting our State Welfare System, Oly Cap and local Food Bank pick up the slack. The final EIS says 52 apartment houses will be built for the workers. In summary, I opt for scenario B. Marion Murdock: As a longtime resident and property owner, I have concerns: traffic effects, controlled storm water overflows, ecological integrity, local water resources, economic impacts on local businesses and infrastructure. Traffic greatly increases every summer. The traffic study done was proved to be inadequate including only intersections. I've witnessed a number of accidents and the proposed development would only add to this problem with no expansion of the highway. Also concerned about the overflow of the grey water retention ponds. The wetlands in this project area are classified as Category II and provide high levels of wetland functions and are difficult to replace. The 2006 Wetland Functions Analysis not only used methods not up to date with current Washington State protocols but didn't include a professional rare plant survey. ,They're uncommon in the Puget Sound and Hood Canal area and the No Net Loss Policy dictates that these wetland resources should be maintained. The current project contains no plan for maintaining biodiversity of the remaining wetlands and does not provide adequate mitigation for the loss of wetlands and their ecological, biochemical, hydrological and habitat functions. The FSEIS says there's enough water for two years of development and after that another well can be drilled. I wonder what everyone feels about that, with the possibiliry of salt water intrusion. It seems odd that the 2007 draft stated that they wouldn't displace existing businesses but the first thing they did was open another kayak rental business displacing the existing and professionally run one at Pleasant Harbor Paddle. Rob Mitchell: Once again the FSEIS has been dumped on the Planning Commission and our citizen's right in the height of our Holidays. We must require another additional review period. The same problems with the DSEIS persist and remain unsolved traffic, water availability, a neighborhood water plan which does not protect current homeowners. Noise and air pollution from an open pit mining operation and massive cut and fill. Disposal of large volumes of bio solids, use of sewage treatment plant recycled water which does contain drugs and chemicals not removed. The loss of peace and tranquility before and after construction. Overcrowding on our limited trail systems, rivers and shell fish areas. The late addition of cutting the Golf Course from eighteen to nine holes which only cuts construction costs. The late addition of scenario B in the no action alternative does not. The Brinnon Sub Area Plan is not developed enough to seriously consider. It's full o[ vague and false negative impacts. The costs to all current residents and tax payers, the Iack of adequate emergency services, the traffic costs to working commuters, commerce, tourism, and added pollution in the Hood Canal Watershed. Degradation of our only major highway and secondary roads. This directly negatively impacts our health and safety. The high number of poverty Ievel jobs straining our taxpayer funded social services. This will increase our property taxes. An MPR at Black Point is the worst possible location for future sustainable growth not only in Brinnon but for the entire Olympic Peninsula. We should not hand over our last best resource for the developer's gain. The DSEIS was inadequate, the FSEIS was also inadequate therefore the conclusion is to opt for scenario A the no action alternative. Joanie Hendricks: I've been at all of these public meetings and still say this project is way too big. Think about removing one million cubic yards of earth and vegetation, then getting five inches of rain. Think about what that will do to our shell fish beds. Page g of 7 6zr Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98968 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center January o'6,2oL6 I'm a larva department manager for Taylor Shellfish and I really care about what's going to happen to she shellfish beds out there. Where I work we hire people from Port Ludlow, Port Townsend, and Sequim because we aren't getting local people applying. Same with other businesses in this area. There's a lot of self- employed people in this area. Because the scope of this project is so large, and I think it's detrimental to the environment, I would suggest the no action alternative. I have letters from my family and some neighbors to give you. Kathy Ackerman: When this first started I was a no. I thought it was too big and noisy and the pollution. Now I'm much more encouraged. I love the idea that it's done in sections. Then more meetings before another section. I'm still concerned about people's water quality and quantity in wells. But I think the planners and County Officials and Statesman have done a wonderful job working and working this over and like I said it will be done in stages which I think is the best approach. Britney Edwards: I have three young children and my biggest concern is their development. The school is great here but beyond that the opportunities are nonexistent for recreational activities. For basketball, dance or swimming I have to drive at least forty-five minutes. After talking to Pleasant Harbor Marina, they're looking at opening the pool to the community, as a membership. That's a huge opportunity. When my kids get older they'll need a place to work, even part time, and a place to recreate with their friends. We love the idea of having more options and a place to go and understand why it's taking so long, as we'd like to see a minimal impact on the environment as well. We appreciate everything the Statesman Group has done so far and we're excited to see the rest come to fruition. Sesial Culp: I support the idea of the project. Two concerns: traffic, and what the COUNTY will do about alleviating it and the second is that the water studies have been well done I HOPE we won't run out of ground water. I see many attractions to this project. I've heard the Resort will have a walk in Medical Clinic. I think you're going to get other medical professionals moving here to accommodate that increased population, and I think the people that already live here are going to benefit from that. And I want more medical personnel around here as well because I plan to retire here soon. In short, the pies going to expand, economically, and everyone's going to get a bigger piece. The existing businesses will have more business, It's not'iust the resort it just works that way. In short, change is inevitable, and it's either going to be a continued deterioration of this community or taking the first step toward the new future. It's our choice. Eleanor Safar: I'm turning this research in about the 0lympic Park Glaciers. The decline of them changes the streamflow, the snowmelt reducing the supply of water for the many competing uses and demands causing far- reaching ecological and social economic consequences. We all understand the tremendous trend towards this region and the use of the water with this resort. To add this huge development to this mix poses a long term transformation of the forest landscape. Global warming is a reality. Look at development of Suncadia on Snoqualmie. They've been in bankruptcy because of the economy now they're trying to take the two towns they vested in use of this project and they're still in litigation because the developer decided to renegotiate their contracts. If you think this is going to be easy, it isn't. Suncadia was once a 5 star resort, now it's a 3 star, and that's what happens when things get bad, they say they're going to do a lot of good things for you, but look at what does happen. Suncadia is a pretty good example of what I think will happen here, though I hope that's not the case. Peter Vales: I'd like to urge the Planning Commission to recommend additional time to review this proposal. The scale and location of this project right on Hood Canal, make a potential for a serious and irreversible damage to the environment. The devil is in the details in the mitigation measures and having a review period over the Holiday over something that's been in the works for ten years is simply not adequate. As an example, my comments made on the draft of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement we simply asked that a letter from Dr. Richard Horner dated 2007 who commented on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement be attached and reviewed as part of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement because he raised a number of issues with storm water. Pi 960379-4450- Ft 860-579-4451 plancomm@ co jefferson.wa.us Page 6 of 7 6er Sheridan St. Port Townsend WA 98368 Jefferson County Planning Commission MEETINGMINUTES Tri-Area Community Center January o,6,2oL6 Pi 960:379-445|u- Fi g60-579-4451 plancomm@co jefferson.wa.us In response to this, "thank you for your comments the 2007 AEIS was found to be adequate and therefore it is assumed that the issues raised in Dr. Horner's letter were addressed in sufficient degree". So in other words, because they were blown off in the EIS they should be fine in the SEIS. So, furthermore that letter from Dr. Horner was not included with my comment letter in the response so it doesn't appear in there. And I'm going to ask the Planning Commission to include it now and I'm giving you a copy of that. One of the issues Dr. Horner raised is with the massive expansion of traffic along 101 and the hundreds of thousands of additional car trips, what the impact of that would be in terms of storm water impacts from automobiles. There's a big section in here on that. His conclusion with the FEIS was: Concentration of toxic materials such as various metals and road run off is the condition most dangerous to aquatic life, the FEIS is an incomplete and thoroughly inadequate document not addressing these impacts at all. So here's his letter to the Planning Commission. Phil Benstead: Everyone's worried about the increase in traffic. When the Hood Canal Bridge was built it pretty much decimated most of the businesses along the canal here, I don't think a little extra traffic is going to be bad for business for anyone. It's going to be good for all the businesses along the canal. As far as poverty goes, I was just talking to Mike and Elyse that run the Food Bank. They're currently servicing up to 900 families. Why are so many using it? The other day someone mentioned the Sheriff and that the Resort wasn't going to pay for that. I would personally pay to have an extra Sheriff here because I'm tired of the drug dealer's running up and down our streets, I'm tired of kicking the people out that are making drug deals. The field over by the Marina now is being used as the low life's furniture deposit depot and the park has thousands of visitors each year, I haven't seen the elk being disturbed at all. Let's bring this project. I support iL Catherine Brinnon: I know all the technical stuff has been addressed, however on a personal note; most of us moved to this area because we like rural. We knew we had to drive a distance for anything. Kids never have like rural and always fled to the City. If you want to live by a Resort, go buy property by one, don't screw it up for the rest of us that are here for the rural. If anyone brought written comments you can turn them in now. I'm going to allow them to be submitted until the February3,2}l6meetingofthefeffersonCountyPlanningCommission. YoucansubmitthemtotheDCDoryoucan bring them on February 3.d. At that point we will stop taking them. The public testimony is now closed. Deliberations will take place on February 3,2016 in ChimaCum at the Tri Area Community Center. At the regular first Wednesday of the month meeting of the f efferson County Planning Commission. We will deliberate, then we will make a recommendation to the, Board of CounEy Commissioners, who will have another hearing, so you will get a chance to talk to them before they make a decision. Thank you. FOLLOW.UP ITEMS t'rW Next Planning Commission meeting scheduled for 02/03/2015 at 6:30 pm at the Tri-Area Community Center Adjourned at 9:04 pm These meeting minutes were approved this day of Cynthia Koan, Chair Teresa A Smith, PC Secretary/DCD 2016. PageT of7