Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Agenda 08-17-2022Arlene Alen – District 1 LD Richert – District 2 Kevin Coker – District 1 Richard Hull, Chair – District 3 Cynthia Koan – District 1 Chris Llewellyn – District 3 Matt Sircely, Vice Chair -District 2 Michael Nilssen – District 3 Lorna Smith – District 2 Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes. 1 AGENDA JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Regular Meeting – August 17, 2022 Tri Area Community Center, 10 West Valley Road, Chimacum, Washington 98325 COVID-19 NOTICE NO IN-PERSON PUBLIC ATTENDANCE ALLOWED (Per Jefferson County RESOLUTION No. 45-21) You can join this meeting by using the following methods: Zoom Meeting: Meeting ID: 886 7104 7253 Passcode: 894561 https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88671047253?pwd=OU8vTWZGWTVRRGNRVEQ1c2k0WDVadz09 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 of the meeting Audio-only: For one tap mobile copy and paste: +12532158782,,88671047253#,,,,*894561# Please sign on 5 to 10 minutes before the official start of the meeting to check sound and video quality This video will be closed-captioned enabled. 5:30PM Welcome Chair and Overview Presentation 1. Call to Order/Roll Call 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of Minutes a. July 20, 2022 Minutes 4. Planning Commission Updates (10 minutes) 5. DCD Staff and Director Updates (5 minutes) a. EnerGov Update – Josh Peters. DCD and Environmental Public Health (EPH) staff have been trained on the new permitting software, EnerGov. We are now working through a substantial testing protocol before we are able to “go live.” The plan is to transition from Tidemark to EnerGov, working through whatever issues remain, and then initiate the customer portal that will enable online applications and other public-facing features. We are moving as quickly as possible to get EnerGov up and running; however, that last step involving the customer portal is not expected until sometime this fall. Arlene Alen – District 1 LD Richert – District 2 Kevin Coker – District 1 Richard Hull, Chair – District 3 Cynthia Koan – District 1 Chris Llewellyn – District 3 Matt Sircely, Vice Chair -District 2 Michael Nilssen – District 3 Lorna Smith – District 2 Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes. 2 b. DCD Staffing – Josh Peters. Sarah Bearman is no longer employed at DCD. Helena will continue in her role as clerk to the Planning Commission until we are able to hire a Planning Tech and/or assign someone else to those duties. Thank you for your patience. PUBLIC COMMENT 6. Three minutes per speaker. CONSENT AGENDA 7. Consent Agenda Item a. Shoreline Master Program Update – General Information Item to Read and Receive. DCD had two virtual meetings with Ecology staff and our SMP consultant toward the beginning on July to review topic areas and questions concerning the draft SMP update that we submitted to Ecology months ago. Ecology had asked for a check-in before providing the county with written comments. Once we receive those comments, we’ll restart the legislative process for updating the SMP. The next iteration of the proposal—assuming some changes based on Ecology’s comments—would go through a public process that includes the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners. b. Housing Conversations with our Community event on August 18 – General Information Item to Read and Receive REGULAR BUSINESS 8. Legal Lot of Record Regulation Development Update – Bryan Benjamin a. Summary of Public Input b. Draft Ordinance 9. Miles Sand and Gravel MRLO Project Review – Joel Peterson a. Presentation 10. Planning Commission Retreat – Joel Peterson 621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes. 1 MEETING MINUTES JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Regular Meeting – July 20, 2022 Tri Area Community Center, 10 West Valley Road, Chimacum, Washington 98325 5:33PM Welcome Chair and Overview Presentation 1.Call to Order/Roll Call District 1 District 2 District 3 Alen Present Sircely Present Hull Present Coker Present Smith Present Nilssen Present Koan Present Richert Unexcused Llewelyn Present 2.Approval of Agenda 3.Approval of Minutes a.June 15, 2022 Minutes Motions Motion # Motion 1st 2nd Yay Nay Abstain 1 Motion to Approve Minutes with edits suggested by Planning Commissioner Nilssen Coker Alen 6 2 PUBLIC COMMENT 4.Three minutes per speaker. a.No public comments this meeting. Public Comments period closed at 5:44 PM. 5.Planning Commission Updates a.Planning Commissioner Sircely called Board of County Commissioners Chair Dean. b.Planning Commissioner Sircely met with Planning Commissioner Llewelyn to discuss goal setting for renewable energy and transportation. 6.DCD Staff and Director Updates (5 minutes) a.DCD launching new permitting database on August 8th, 2022 b.Planning Commissioners’ comments on standard operating procedures c.Planning Commission Vacancy Hiring Process i.The Board of County Commissioners interviewed all Planning Commission applicants and selected Planning Commissioner Llewelyn and Planning Commissioner Smith to continue serving their districts. CONSENT AGENDA 7.No Consent Agenda Items this meeting. ITEM 3A 621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes. 2 REGULAR BUSINESS 8. Miles Sand and Gravel MRLO (30 minutes) – Joel Peterson a. Ryan Ransavage, licensed geologist employed by Miles Sand & Gravel, presents their proposed conditional use project. Commissioner Coker inquired about traffic changes due to the project. None are proposed. Commissioner Koan asked about changes to water usage and consumption. Ransavage reports that the process is generally non-consumptive, with water being recycled. The current volume of 5,000 gallons per day would not change under proposed expansion. Commissioner Llewelyn asked about land reclamation plan. Per RCW 78.44, the project would follow a reclamation plan that is a condition of permit approval. The Department of Natural Resources sets reclamation conditions for segmented reclamation. Topsoil is retained onsite and then used to plant trees at end of mining project. Commissioner Koan asked why Pope is leasing land that is being reclaimed. Ransavage says that it is because Miles Sand and Gravel is the one legally responsible for the current reclamation project. Commissioner Koan requests more information on truck transportation and noise level changes. Commissioner Sircely asked about chemical fertilizers in reclamation. Ransavage reported at Miles Sand and Gravel does not use artificial fertilizer and is certified naturally weed- free by the County Weed Board. 9. Legal Lot of Record (30 minutes) – Bryan Benjamin a. Communications Plan update b. StoryMap update 10. September Retreat Planning (30 minutes) – Joel Peterson a. Discuss 2023 Work Plan b. Survey of Availability: We confirmed September 17th for our Retreat. Please save the date! 7:40 PM ADJOURNMENT The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for August 3, 2022, at 5:30. To attend virtually please use the following link or dial in using your phone by calling: +1 (646) 749-3122; Access Code: 883-126-605. Link is https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88671047253?pwd=OU8vTWZGWTVRRGNRVEQ1c2k0WDVadz09 and the passcode is 894561 To learn if in-person attendance is possible, please view the next meeting agenda. These meeting minutes were approved this ____________ day of_____, 2022. ____________________________ Richard Hull, Chair Helena Smith, Secretary ITEM 3A Come join the dialogue with government officials on housing policy, while encouraging conversation, greater community engagement, and policy partnership! Under the tent: join us! Meet the Intergovernmental Collaborative Group (ICG), including all elected representatives from the City, County, Port, and PUD to discuss solutions to our housing crisis Aug 18th Where: Corner of 22nd St. and San Juan Ave. Port townsend Thursday 5-7pm Housing Conversations with our Community This event is convened by the housing advocates at Housing Solutions Network. To learn more about our work and future events, please visit: www.housingsolutionsnetwork.org All are Welcome! ITEM 7B 1 JEFFERSON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TO: Jefferson County Planning Commissioners Brent Butler, Director, Department of Community Development (DCD) Josh Peters, Planning Manager, DCD FROM: Bryan Benjamin, Assistant Planner, DCD DATE: August 11, 2022 SUBJECT: Development Moratorium Affecting Pre-1971 Plats – Ordinance No. 09-1210-21 Legal Lot of Record – Outreach Updates and Draft Ordinance STATEMENT OF ISSUE Opening public participation for development of new Legal Lo t of Record regulations has been informative for developing a narrative of preferences and priorities for regulatory change. However, initial participation has been characterized by lower than anticipated responsiveness. For example, none of the 36 paper surveys distributed at the Jefferson County Farmer’s Markets have been returned to the department and only 9 online surveys had been completed at the date of this report. Additionally, a draft of the Legal Lot of Record ordinance—JCC 18.12 - Legal Lot of Record Determination and Lot Consolidation—is submitted for initial review by the Planning Commission. There are three outstanding policy questions that would benefit from input by the Commission, and general feedback on the draft ordinance is also encouraged. BACKGROUND DCD has held 20 legal lot of record advisory meetings since December 2021. The purpose of these meetings was to generate guidance on public outreach approaches and deliverables through County and stakeholder input. The County Advisory Team (CAT) consists of representativ es from DCD, Department of Environmental Public Health, the Assessor’s Office, and Central Services. Stakeholder input was generated through DCD-led meetings with local Real Estate Brokers & Agents and through public comments. The Planning Commission has reviewed DCD’s work since implementation of the Moratorium, including an analysis of the approaches other counties have taken to legal lot determination processes and development of educational materials and engagement opportunities for public participation. ITEM 8 2 MONTH DATES HELD County Advisory Team Real Estate Brokers & Agents Planning Commission Board of County Commissioners December 2021 Dec. 3, 10, 17 Dec. 1 January 2022 Jan. 7 and 14 Jan. 12 Jan. 5 February 2022 Feb. 4 Feb. 9 March 2022 No meetings held* April 2022 Apr. 11 Apr. 13 and 19 Apr. 20 May 2022 May 20, 27 June 2022 June 1, 15 July 2022 July 20 July 11 ANALYSIS The Department of Community Development encourages continued public participation while language of JCC 18.12 is in development . Initial feedback indicates preference for a regulatory approach balancing allowance of continued development in affacted plats with water quality and health, welfare, and safety considerations. However, low rates of response may limit the actionability of community survey results. Increasing visibility and participation in the survey is imperative to creating a source of data that can shape new regulations. JCC 18.12 proposes mechanisms that balance water quality and health, welfare, and safety considerations with the allowances to develop affected properties. If an affected lot is restricted from developing, JCC 18.12 established two reasonable economic use provisions by which property owners may pursue their development interest : A.) reasonable economic use of a substandard lot and B.) a determination of reasonable economic use for all or part of an affected plat . The second option is proposed as a way to streamline permitting timelines that would be created by requiring all affected lots to go through a reasonable economic use process. In addition, there are three policy questions that are unanswered in the draft of JCC 18.12 that should be given specific attention, including: 1.Should the ordinance address condominimization more than what is included in JCC 18.12.030(2); 2.Should a standalone, approved septic system constitute legal lot of record status if: 1.) the septic system does not meet current standards, and 2.) if the system was permitted for a non-residential use (e.g. RV hookup, garage/workshop, etc.) per JCC 18.12 .070(4)(f); 3.How should the standards for development of substandard lots apply to the UGA considering transitional overlay, sewer availability, etc. RECOMMENDATION DCD requests feedback on strengthening public participation on this issue and on the draft language of JCC 18.12, including the three outstanding policy questions that should be g iven special attentio n. ITEM 8 Legal Lot of Record Survey - Initial Results 8/11/2022 Did you read through the Legal Lot of Record StoryMap prior to completing this survey? Answered: 9 Skipped: 0 0 2 4 6 8 Yes No Yes 8 88.89% No 1 11.11% Do you reside in Jefferson County? Answers Count Percentage Page 1 of 14 ITEM 8A Answered: 9 Skipped: 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Yes, I live in... Yes, I live ou...No, my primary... Yes, I live in the City of Port Townsend 1 11.11% Yes, I live outside of city limits (unincorporated County) 6 66.67% No, my primary residence is not in Jefferson County 2 22.22% If you own property in the County, which option(s) describe you best? 0 1 2 3 4 My property is... My property is... I own property... I own one (1) ... I own multiple... Not Applicable Answers Count Percentage Page 2 of 14 ITEM 8A Answered: 9 Skipped: 0 My property is located in a pre-1971 plat 4 44.44% My property is located outside of a pre-1971 plat 3 33.33% I own property both within and outside of pre-1971 plats 0 0% I own one (1) parcel in Jefferson County 1 11.11% I own multiple parcels in Jefferson County 1 11.11% Not Applicable 2 22.22% If you own property in the County, which option best describes what is built on your property? 0 1 2 3 4 5 My property is... My property ha... My property ha... I own multiple... Not Applicable My property is vacant 2 22.22% My property has a residence built on it 5 55.56% My property has only a garage or other development on it (in cluding a septic system) 00% Answers Count Percentage Answers Count PercentageAnswersCountPercentage Page 3 of 14 ITEM 8A Answered: 9 Skipped: 0 I own multiple properties and some are developed, while oth ers are not 00% Not Applicable 2 22.22% What factors should the County prioritize when regulating 0 1 2 3 4 5 Protect water ... Allow continue... Achieve health...Avoid impacts ...Conserve natur... Prevent reside... 1 Protect water quality 2 Allow continued development in pre-1971 plats 3 Achieve health, safety, and welfare standards in pre-1971 plats 4 Avoid impacts to environmentally critical areas 22.22% 2 11.11% 1 33.33% 3 33.33% 3 0% 0 44.44% 4 11.11% 1 11.11% 1 0% 0 11.11% 1 22.22% 2 33.33% 3 0% 0 33.33% 3 0% 0 0% 0 33.33% 3 22.22% 2 11.11% 1 33.33% 3 Rank Answers 1 2 3 4 5Average score 4.22 4.11 4.11 3.56 What factors should the County prioritize when regulation development in pre-1971 lots? Page 4 of 14 ITEM 8A Answered: 9 Skipped: 0 5 Conserve natural resource areas 2.89 Pre-1971 plats that are mostly developed (50% or more) should continue to develop. Pre-1971 plats that are mostly undeveloped (49% or less) should meet current zoning standards for future development. Page 5 of 14 ITEM 8A Average 4.1 Answered: 9 Skipped: 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 12345 1111.11% 2111.11% 300% 4111.11% 5 6 66.67% Development within pre-1971 plats that meet current health, safety, and welfare standards should be allowed. Answers Count Percentage Page 6 of 14 ITEM 8A Average 4.3 Answered: 9 Skipped: 0 0 1 2 3 4 6 7 5 12345 1111.11% 200% 3111.11% 400% 5 7 77.78% New legal lot of record regulations should prevent urban levels of growth in the county's rural areas. Answers Count Percentage Page 7 of 14 ITEM 8A Average 3.2 Answered: 9 Skipped: 0 0 1 2 3 12345 1 2 22.22% 2111.11% 3 2 22.22% 4111.11% 5 3 33.33% New legal lot of record regulations should create standards that protect natural resource areas. Answers Count Percentage Page 8 of 14 ITEM 8A Average 3.8 Answered: 9 Skipped: 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 12345 1111.11% 2111.11% 3 2 22.22% 400% 5 5 55.56% Pre-1971 plats that do not meet current health, safety, and welfare standards should meet those standards prior to more homes being built. Answers Count Percentage Page 9 of 14 ITEM 8A Average 3.2 Answered: 9 Skipped: 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 12345 1111.11% 200% 3 6 66.67% 400% 5 2 22.22% New legal lot of record regulations should create standards that prevent further overlap with critical areas. Answers Count Percentage Page 10 of 14 ITEM 8A Average 3.6 Answered: 9 Skipped: 0 0 1 2 3 4 12345 1 2 22.22% 2111.11% 300% 4 2 22.22% 5 4 44.44% Future development in all pre-1971 plats should meet current zoning standards. Answers Count Percentage Page 11 of 14 ITEM 8A Average 2.1 Answered: 9 Skipped: 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 12345 1 5 55.56% 2111.11% 3111.11% 4111.11% 5111.11% New legal lot of record regulations should create standards that protect water quality. Answers Count Percentage Page 12 of 14 ITEM 8A Average 3.9 Answered: 9 Skipped: 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 12345 1111.11% 2111.11% 3111.11% 4111.11% 5 5 55.56% What else should the County consider about legal lot of record regulations? As acknowledged in the StoryMap, there may be other interests that the County should consider when developing legal lot of record regulations. Please use the text entry below to record any additional thoughts or concerns that you have about this issue. Answers Count Percentage Page 13 of 14 ITEM 8A Answered: 4 Skipped: 5 As a prospective vacant land buyer of a pre-1971 lot, the moratorium is disheartening yet I see the need for greater oversight to some degree. My opinion is that if a lot is able to meet current health, safety and welfare standards and is out of critical area, the property should be permitted for develo pment. If the property does not meet both criteria, two fair options come to mind. Offer the owner fa ir market value for their property and place the lots into a land trust of some sort, or offer different u ses, tax breaks etc for now having a lot that is deemed unable to be developed. While many of thes e lots are undeveloped, people own real estate with the idea that it will one day be able to become developed and be an asset for their portfolio. 1 At a time when we so desperately need affordable housing and easy access to services, the DCD has decided to try to close the door on the few remaining areas that could support higher density cl ose in to town with affordable prices. You are NOT meeting the needs of the community at large, yo u're meeting the needs of the new wealthy and the NIMBY's. The acrobatics being performed to tor pedo affordable housing is astonishing and I hope to bring this to light. All of your resolutions and f ocus groups are doing very little. We have an opportunity to actually create some homes that YOU NG people who didn't move here in the past 3 years can afford. We're one of the oldest counties in the United States! Can we meet in the middle and make SOME room for those starting out and wa nting to live in this community? 1 I am torn. I just bought a 2.5 acre spot in the pre-1971 Kuhnsville plat with my husband and our two little kids. We are hoping to build a small house. We knew about the moratorium when we bought it, but didn’t know the 1 dwelling per 5 acre zoning regulation. I am completely on the side of preservi ng critical areas and maintaining a healthy ecosystem by not developing rural areas. I also think th e growth between 2010 and now should be considered in the new regulations to accommodate tho se who have lived in the area for a decent amount of time and deserve adequate housing opportuni ties. We have lived in Jefferson County since 2014. I grew up in Anacortes and have always consid ered this area “home.” I don’t think the are should become more developed, but I want to be able to develop myself - so that is why I am torn. 1 We have enough regulations in this county. 1 Page 14 of 14 ITEM 8A Chapter 18.12 Legal Lot of Record Determination and Lot Consolidation 18.12.010. Purpose and applicability. 18.12.020. Effect of legal lot of record determination. 18.12.030. Process for determination of legal lot of record. 18.12.040. Application and submittal contents. 18.12.050. Legal lot of record determination - approval standards. 18.12.060. Lots or parcels of land that are not considered legal lots of record. 18.12.070. Development of lots of record that do not meet minimum lot size or underlying density of the zoning district. 18.12.080. Reasonable economic use criteria. 18.12.090. Lots created by testamentary provision or the laws of descent . 18.12.100. Violation of subdivision code and innocent purchaser for value. 18.12.110. Application fee. 18.12.010. Purpose and applicability. (1)This chapter addresses the processes and standards for determining whether a lot or parcel is a legal lot of record, consistent with applicable state and local law. This chapter is intended to comply with RCW 58.17.210. (2)A lot is a lot of record if it meets the definition of JCC 18.10.040. A lot of record may be conveyed without violating the provisions of Chapter 58.17 RCW. To be eligible for a development permit, a lot of record must be determined to be a legal lot of record. (3)This chapter provides for a legal lot of record determination process, which is an administrative permitting process for determination of whether a lot or parcel is eligible for development. (4)This chapter applies to any application for a legal lot of record determination, and to any application for any development permit, including an on-site sewage system permit under Chapter 8.15 JCC. 18.12.020. Effect of legal lot of record determination. (1)If the department determines a lot to be a legal lot of record under this chapter, a copy of the director’s determination will be recorded with the county auditor. Failure to record determination of legal lot of record status may result in loss of approval status, and may require additional review of the lot for legal lot of record status under this chapter. (2)A determination by the director that a lot, tract, or parcel of land does not meet the requirements for a legal lot of record, lot of record, or innocent purchaser for value exception pursuant to JCC 18.12.100 shall also be recorded by the director for purposes of innocent purchaser notification. The director shall collect sufficient fees as part of the application process for determination of legal lot of record to cover this expense. (3)In certain cases, the director may require the applicant or owner to provide a professional survey of the legal lot of record with a legal description, and to record the survey with the county DRAFT Page 1 of 9 ITEM 8B auditor. The director shall determine by administrative rule when it is necessary to r equire a professional survey of the legal lot of record. (4)Once issued and recorded, a determination of legal lot of record shall constitute a final determination for the specified legal description. Any future development permit requests on the same legal description may rely on the existing determination. Determinations issued administratively by the county prior to the effective date of Chapter 18.12 JCC shall be entitled to the same finality as a legal lot of record determination issued pursuant to this chapter . (5)Issuance of a legal lot of record determination finding that a lot is eligible to be considered for development permits under this chapter shall not constitute a determination that the lot of record has met all other applicable requirements of the Jefferson County Code or any other applicable local, state, or federal law. Nothing in this section shall be interpreted to replace or supersede any requirements of any applicable public or private water purveyor. 18.12.030. Process for determination of legal lot of record. (1)The department may determine that a lot or parcel of land is a legal lot of record through one of the following processes: (a)Stand-alone application for status as legal lot of record. An owner of property or their representative may apply for a determination that a lot or parcel of land is a legal lot of record, with submittal of applicable fees. The application will be processed as a Type I application. (b)Legal lot of record determination in conjunction with a development, subdivision, or other land use application. The department shall review any application for a building permit, development, subdivision, or any other land use application or approval to ensure the requirements of this chapter are met. (2)A legal lot of record determination shall be required prior to or as a part of any development permit application, septic application, land use permit application, or land division permit application, o r prior to any other process to adjustment property boundaries, including condominimization. The applicant shall submit fees for a legal lot of record determination with any other fees assessed, unless the lot or parcel has been recognized as a legal lo t of record through a previous determination. (3)Any legal lot of record determination required as part of a development permit application shall not require a letter of completeness (JCC 18.40.110), a Notice of Development Application and public comment period (JCC 18.40.160 and 18.40.220), nor a Notice of Decision (JCC chapter 18.40). (4)The land owner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate that the lot or parcel of land is a legal lot of record by a preponderance of the evidence, supported by appropriate written documentation per JCC 18.12.040. (5)A lot or parcel of land that has been previously recognized by the county as a legal lot of record and recorded with the county auditor shall remain a legal lot of recor d unless changed by the action of the owner. 18.12.040. Application submittal and contents. DRAFT Page 2 of 9 ITEM 8B (1)Information required for stand-alone application. The application for a stand-alone legal lot of record determination shall be submitted on department forms, along with the required fees established under JCC XX.XX.XXX. The application shall include a written description of the proposed use of the property and all materials required pursuant to JCC 18.12.040(3). (2)Information required for supplemental application. A supplemental application for legal lot of record determination shall be required for any development permit application proposed on a parcel or lot that has not received a prior determination establishing legal lot of record status. A supplemental application shall be submitted on department forms, along with the required fees established under JCC XX.XX.XXX. (3)Both the supplemental permit application and stand-alone permit application must include sufficient documentation to evidence that a lot or parcel is a legal lot of record. The administrator in their sole discretion may require the one or more of the following types of documentation for review: (a)Recorded plat or associated AFN. (b)Approved unrecorded subdivision. (c)Deed prior to September 7, 1971. (d)Prior recognition of legal lot status by the county. (e)Title report. (f)Deed history. (g)Tax history. 18.12.050. Legal lot of record determination - approval standards. (1)To be considered a legal lot of record and eligible for a development permit, the applicant must demonstrate all of the following standards apply: (a)The lot was legally created, meaning that it meets the definition of lot of record, as defined in JCC 18.10.120, or is a lot owned by an innocent purchaser for value who meets the requirements of JCC 18.12.070 and RCW 58.17.210 for the lot in question; and (b)The lot of record qualifies under one of the following: (i)It meets the minimum lot size requireme nts, or if no minimum lot size requirement exists, the density of the zoning district in which it is located; or (ii)The lot meets one or more of the provisions identified in JCC 18.12.070(3) or JCC 18.12.080. (2)Lots restricted from development by prior county decision (i.e., plat notes, open space designation, or other means) shall not be considered buildable regardless of lot size, unless the restriction is removed through a codified process allowing removal of the restriction and the lot meets all current requirements of county code. DRAFT Page 3 of 9 ITEM 8B (3)A lot of record may be legally conveyed without violating the provisions of RCW 58.17.210, but may or may not be eligible for development permits. 18.12.060. Lots, tracts, or parcels of land that are not considere d legal lots of record. (1)The following types of lots or parcels of land are not legal lots of record and will not be considered eligible for development under this chapter: (a)Vacated rights-of-way; (b)Tidelands; (c)Parcels designated solely for access purposes; and (d)Parcels created for tax segregation purposes. (2)A separate assessor’s parcel number shall not be sufficient evidence that a lot meets the definition of lot of record or legal lot of record. (3)Any plat created prior to June 9, 1937 that was in single ownership as of October 4, 2021 shall not be considered to contain separate legal lots of record for development purposes. Under these circumstances, the owner must apply for a subdivision or short subdivision pursuant to Chapter 18.35 JCC and meet current zoning density requirements if they wish to divide the property into additional lots. (4)Any plat created between June 9, 1937 and August 11, 1969 that was in single ownership as of October 4, 2021 and does not meet health, safety, and welfare standards per JCC 18.12.080(2) shall not be considered to contain separate legal lots of record for development purposes. Under these circumstances, the owner must apply for a subdivision or short subdivision pursuant to Chapter 18.35 JCC and meet current zoning density requirements to achieve legal lot of record status. 18.12.070. Development of lots of record that do not meet minimum lot size or underlying density of the zoning district. (1)Lots of record that do not meet the minimum lot size requirements or underlying density of the zoning district in which they are located (hereafter “substandard lots”) shall only be considered for development permits if they are not restricted from development by prior county decision or action, are not the types of parcels listed in JCC 18.12.060(1) or (2), and meet one or more of the exceptions described in this section. (2) A landowner must aggregate adjacent lots to the extent possible to bring the lot to conforming status. Any lots sold for the purpose of avoiding this requirement shall be considered be subject to the limitation in JCC 18.12.080(1)(c) and not eligible for a reasonable economic use exception. (3)If more than one of the following exceptions applies, the director shall approve the exception that is the most consistent with the purposes of the land use district in which it is located, as described in Chapter 18.15 JCC. The lot approved must be of the least nonconforming size possible with respect to current zoning requirements to meet the requirements of this section. If a landowner could aggregate lots to make a more conforming lot, the director shall require the landowner to do so to satisfy the requirements of this section. DRAFT Page 4 of 9 ITEM 8B (4) A substandard lot may be considered a legal lot of record and eligible for a development permit through meeting one of the following provisions: (a) The lot of record was properly platted and approved by Jefferson County on or after August 11, 1969; provided, that it complies with JCC 18.12.050(2). (b) The configuration of the lot has been previously approved by the county through an administrative procedure prior to the effective date of this chapter. (c) The lot of record is part of an adopted “Limited Area of More Intense Rural Development (LAMIRD)” or Rural Village Center pursuant to the comprehensive plan, can satisfy any necessary minimum lot area requirements for siting an on- site sewage system and water supply, and the density proposed allows for infill development at densities comparable to the surrounding area. (d) The lot of record or aggregation of lots is located in the Irondale and Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area Overlay District, and can satisfy the requirements of the Jefferson County Code for water (either on-site or connection to a public water system) and for wastewater (either on-site or connection to a public sewer system). (e) The lot contains an existing dwelling unit for which the owner obtained a permit for its construction and approval to occupy from the county; (f) The lot was approved by the county for development and the approval has not expired; (g) The lot of record was legally created prior to August 11, 1969, or if created after August 11, 1969, was exempt from subdivision requirements at the time it was created, and meets one of the following requirements: (i) The lot of record is five acres or larger and is located in any rural land use district; or (ii) The lot of record is 10 acres or larger and is located in any resource lands land use district; (h) The lot of record is not within a flood hazard area or channel migration zone expected to impact the property within 100 years and the director in their sole discretion determines that development of the lot meets all requirements of chapter 8.15 JCC, is necessary for emergency purposes, and the benefits of recognizing the lot as a legal lot of record outweigh the potential detriments; (i) The lot of record is not within a flood hazard area or channel migration zone expected to impact the property within 100 years and the director in their sole discretion determines that development of the substandard lot: A. consists of a nonresidential use that is consistent with the applicable land use district , B. would further one or more policies of the comprehensive plan, and C. development of the lot meets all requirements of chapter 8.15 JCC. DRAFT Page 5 of 9 ITEM 8B (4) Aggregation of lots. An owner of contiguous, substandard lots shall aggregate (combine) lots to meet the requirements of this section; provided, that any aggregation of lots shall meet the minimum lot size or underlying density and be recorded as a boundary line adjustment pursuant to JCC 18.35.060 through 18.35.080. If the resulting aggregation of lots does not meet the zoning minimum lot size or underlying density, the lot must meet an exception in JCC 18.12.070(3), or the owner must apply for and receive a reasonable use exception pursuant to JCC 18.12.080 to be considered for a development permit . (5) Any lot of record that is recognized as eligible for development under this section shall be considered a legal lot of record and a buildable lot eligible for development . 18.12.080. Reasonable economic use of substandard lots – approval criteria (1) Reasonable economic use of a substandard lot. The director will consider a reasonable use exception only if none of the provisions of JCC 18.12.070 apply to allow for development on a substandard lot . The director may grant the exception if the applicant demonstrates that the application for a reasonable economic use exception meets all of the following criteria: (a) The health officer has certified that the proposed means of sewage disposal and water supply on and to the lot, tract or parcel are adequate and will likely not cause degradation to groundwater or surface water quality; (b) The director has determined that the lot, tract or parcel is served with an adequately designed means of ingress and egress, and with adequate drainage facilities, none o f which interfere with or impair existing or planned public roads and drainage facilities in the vicinity; (c) The existence of the substandard lot is not the result of the property owner segregating or dividing the property or otherwise creating the condition that results in the need for a reasonable economic use exception; (d) The property owner cannot consolidate an adjacent lot(s) to create a buildable lot pursuant to JCC 18.12.070(4); (e) The lot, tract, or parcel is directly adjacent to existing lot, tract, or pa rcel with existing residential development; (f) The proposed activity on the lot will not adversely affect the public, safety and welfare of persons occupying the property, adjacent or nearby property owners, or the general public; (g) The proposed activity on the lot will not cause or increase flooding, degradation of critical areas or species, degradation to natural resources such as shellfish beds, or degradation of areas preserved for public enjoyment such as parks, beaches, and other natural areas; DRAFT Page 6 of 9 ITEM 8B (h)The proposed activity on the lot will not adversely affect adjacent or nearby property owners, or interfere with their enjoyment of their property; (i)The activity proposed is the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable economic use of the property, including agricu ltural, forestry, or recreational activities; and (j)The director determines that issuance of the permit will not adversely affect the public interest, as required by RCW 58.17.210. (2)Determination of reasonable economic use for all or part of a plat pre-August 11, 1969. Certain plats may substantially meet the of Title 18 JCC and chapter 58.17 RCW. If a substandard lot cannot be developed under the provisions of JCC 18.12.070(3) or JCC 18.12.080(1), a lot owner or representative may apply for an evaluation of the entire plat. The director may determine that lots within all or part of a plat can be recognized as legal lots of record if they meet the following requirements: (a)The plat was legally created between June 9, 1937 and August 11, 1969; (b)Further development of the plat would not substantively alter rural character based on existing location and patterns of development within the plat; (c)Recognition of lots within the plat would not impact forestry resources according to the following provisions: (i)Lots are not zoned for forestry use; (ii) Lots that are vacant or not developed with residential uses and are more than 250 feet from any CF-80 parcel; (iii) Lots that are vacant or not developed with residential uses and are more than 100 feet from any RF-40 parcel. (d)The plat has reasonable access to existing public recreation facilities, such as parks, open spaces, or community facilities; (e)Development of lots within the plat can comply with chapter 18.22 JCC; (f)Every lot proposed for develop ment within the plat can satisfy the water availability requirements of RCW 19.27.097 and any applicable water resource inventory area (WRIA) administrative rule adopted by the Washington State Department of Ecology; (g)Development of the plat will not harm environmental resources such as shorelines, shellfish areas, and salmonid habitat, nor will it impact water quality or quantity; and (h)The director receives a report from the director of public works that concludes that further of the development of the plat will not create significant adverse environmental impacts to the transportation system, after evaluating the following: DRAFT Page 7 of 9 ITEM 8B A. Levels of service of existing roadways and possible effects caused by development of the plat; B. Ingress and egress to the plat ; C. Road engineering; D. Management of stormwater runoff from roads; E. Whether the developed plat can meet current stormwater regulations; F. Any existing community stormwater drainage system; and, G. Utility access and maintenance easements for county maintenance; and (i) The director receives a report from the department of public health that concludes that further of the development of the plat will not create significant adverse environmental impacts to public health, after reviewing the following: A. Water availability and potential impacts to water and other environmental resources that may be affected by development of the plat; and B. Proposed methods for sewage disposal, and the availability of adequate land area for each proposed lot to meet state and local regulat ions. 18.12.090 Lots created by testamentary provision or the laws of descent. Lots created through testamentary provisions or the laws of descent shall be governed by t he following requirements: (1) Lots that meet the current lot size or underlying density requirements of the zoning district in which they are located shall be treated the same as a legally subdivided lot and shall be considered a legal lot of record; (2) Lots that do not meet the current lot size or underlying density requirements of the zoning district in which they are located, but which did meet the requirements in effect at the time they were created will be treated the same as substandard lots of record under JCC 18.12.060(4); (3) Lots that do not meet the current minimum lot size or underlying density of the zoning district in which they are located, and did not meet the standards in effect at the time they were created shall be treated as lots of record for purposes of conveyance, but will not be considered to be buildable lots that can receive development permits. 18.12.100 Violation of subdivision code and innocent purchaser for value. DRAFT Page 8 of 9 ITEM 8B (1)Knowingly transferring or selling a lot in violation of land division regulations is a gross misdemeanor pursuant to RCW 58.17.300. Development of any lot, tract or parcel of land divided in violation of state law or this title is prohibited. No building permit, on-site sewage system permit or other development permit shall be issued for any lot, tract or parcel, divided in violation of JCC Title 18 or chapter 58.17 RCW. The prohibition contained in this section shall not apply to an innocent purchaser for value without actual notice. (2)Innocent purchaser for value exception. The director may approve the creation of a lot, parcel or tract that otherwise violates JCC Title 18 or Chapter 58.17 RCW under the limitations contained in this section. Any lot that qualifies for an innocent purchaser for value exception must still satisfy the requirements of JCC 18.12.050 to become a legal lot of record. (a)To qualify for an innocent purchaser for va lue exception, the applicant must demonstrate the following: (i)The applicant purchased the lot, tract or parcel for value; and (ii)The applicant did not have actual notice that the lot, tract or parcel had been part of a larger lot, tract or parcel that was subdivided. (b)All contiguous lots created in violation of chapter 58.17 RCW that are under the same ownership at the time of application for innocent purchaser status shall be recognized only as a single lot and shall be combined through a boundary line adjustment. (c)A determination under this section shall be a Type II decision. The applicant for an innocent purchaser for value exception under this section bears the burden of proof to demonstrate that the application meets the applicable requirements by a preponderance of the evidence, supported by adequate documentation. 18.12.110. Application Fee. A $XXX application fee is required to file an application for a legal lot of record. DRAFT Page 9 of 9 ITEM 8B MINERAL RESOURCE LANDS OVERLAY MILES SAND & GRAVEL (MLA2021-00017) ITEM 9a PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW PROCESS •Familiarization of Planning Commission with evaluation criteria •Review of Community Development Staff Report and SEPA Addendum •Hold Hearing on September 7, 2022 to receive public comment on proposal. •Evaluate your findings and public testimony to make findings and conclusions. You will be asked to prepare your individual Findings and Conclusions to bring to PC deliberations on September 21, 2022. A recommendation letter will result from the deliberations. ITEM 9a MRLO ADOPTION PROCESS •Planning Commission Recommendation letter transmitted to Board of County Commissioners on October 2, 2022 (Due to Courthouse Tuesday, September 27, 2022) •MLA21-00019 Miles Sand & Gravel MRLO Draft Work Product--Subject to Change v . 8/12/22 June July Site Visit 16-Jun Miles S&G Presentation to PC 20-Jul Planning Commission Review 17-Aug Planning Commission Public Hearing 7-Sep Recommendations for BoCC 21-Sep BoCC Briefing 3-Oct BoCC Public Hearing 31-Oct Legislative Action 7-Nov ITEM 9a COME TO THE 8/17/2022 MEETING WITH THE FOLLOWING THREE WORK PRODUCTS AND ANSWERS TO FINDINGS ON NEXT SLIDE: Use the Homework #1 references found in the June 1, 2022 Agenda: “Application for Miles Sand & Gravel (MLA2021-00019). Also refer to presentation in July 20, 2022 PC Meeting. 1.Write a statement on the GMA reference you read (RCW 36.70A.050 & citations in Chapter365-190 WAC) and what it means to you. Why do you think the legislation written that way, what is it saying? 2.An annotated list of Comprehensive Plan references. Which goals & policies are most important to you for your assessment of the proposal? (Don’t say, “ALL”. Specify which ones are the most relevant or important to you.) Cite the specific reference—we’ll be making a list of them. 3.List of questions for each other and planning staff. You may send your questions in advance to Joel Peterson, jpeterson@co.Jefferson.wa.us. If you have questions about how to do the homework, email Joel right away. ITEM 9a PRELIMINARY FINDINGS (MAKE NO CONCLUSIONS YET) Bring answers to the following questions to the 8/17/2022 meeting: •What is the proposal? _________________________ •How large of an area does the proposal cover?________ •What are the changes to the current use of the land in the area of the proposal? _____ •What are the cumulative impacts of the proposal? ____________________________ •How does the proposal align or conflict with the Comprehensive Plan? _____________ •Begin to answer Required Findings in JCC 18.45.080. ITEM 9a Planning Commission Retreat 2022-2023 Proposed Schedule 9:00 Greeting & Opening by Board Commissioner 1 9:30 –10:00 Recap of Year’s Work 10:00-10:30 Work Plan& Budgeting #1 10:30-11:00 Activity (Communication) & Break 11:00 Greeting by Board Commissioner 2 11:30-12:00 Work Plan & Budgeting #2 12:00-1:00 Lunch Break 1:00 Greeting by Board Commissioner 3 1:30-2:00 Bylaws Review & Update 2:00-2:30 Activity (Deliberation) & Break 2:30-3:00 Recap & Send-off Homework: Make a list of three topics you think are important to cover for an Activity or Best Practice segment of the day & add any comments regarding the agenda, organization or location of the meeting. Activity or Best Practice 1 2 3 Comments on meeting agenda, organization or location A. B. C.