HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022 08 24 DCD Staff Report LLOR_Final (001)JEFFERSON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 | Web: www.co.jefferson.wa.us/communitydevelopment Tel: 360.379.4450 | Fax: 360.379.4451 | Email: dcd@co.jefferson.wa.us __________________________________________________________________________________________
SquareONE Resource Center | Building Permits & Inspections | Development Review | Long Range Planning
STAFF REPORT &
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Proposal to Amend Unified Development Code (UDC)
Jefferson County Code (JCC) 18.12: ‘Legal Lot of Record
Determination and Lot Consolidation’ and Amendments to
JCC 18.10 and 18.35
August 24, 2022
INTEGRATED GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT (GMA) /
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) ANALYSIS
Environmental Review of a Non-Project Action
Table of Contents
1. Fact Sheet
2. Executive Summary
3. Environmental Summary
3.1. Introduction and Process
3.1.1. Adoption of Existing Environmental Documents
3.1.2. Level of Environmental Analysis
3.1.3. Process & Public Involvement
4. Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies—Evaluation of Compatibility with the
Comprehensive Plan
5. Unified Development Code—Jefferson County Code
6. Conclusion
7. Criteria for Evaluation of Proposed Amendment—Required Findings
7.1. JCC 18.45.090 Findings for Board-Initiated UDC Amendment
7.2. Planning Commission & Board of County Commissioners Review of Growth Management
Indicators and Required Findings
7.2.1. Required Findings for All Proposed Amendments – JCC 18.45.080(1)(b)
7.2.2. Criteria Governing Planning Commission Assessment – JCC 18.45.050(4)(b)(i) through
(4)(b)(vii)
7.3. Findings on the Record
8. Planning Commission Recommendation
9. Attachments
Attachment A – Public Notice
Attachment B – SEPA Checklist
Attachment C – Draft Ordinance
1. Fact Sheet
Title and Description of
Proposed Action
Pursuant to the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA), the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) is considering adoption of an amendment proposal to the Unified Development Code (UDC). The proposal is not site-specific.
This document is a combined Staff Report and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Analysis for the proposed UDC amendment. The objective of this document is to analyze the proposed amendment individually and cumulatively with regard to UDC amendment criteria outlined in Jefferson County Code (JCC) 18.45 and potential environmental impacts under SEPA. Adoption of the UDC amendment is a non-project action under SEPA and is not intended to satisfy individual project action SEPA requirements (i.e., the environmental review needed for future land use or building permit applications). JCC 18.45.080(1)(d) specifies that recommendations from the Planning
Commission to the BoCC on the proposed UDC amendment proposals come forward as deny, approve, or approve with conditions or modifications. Proponent
The Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC)
Lead Agency
Jefferson County Department of Community Development (DCD) 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 SEPA Responsible Official: Josh D. Peters, AICP, Planning Manager (360) 379-4450
Planner
Bryan Benjamin, Assistant Planner Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 379-4459 bbenjamin@co.jefferson.wa.us
Date of Staff Report
August 24, 2022
Date of Initial SEPA DNS Threshold Determination
August 24, 2022
1
SEPA and Amendment Comment Period
Comments on the SEPA threshold determination must be submitted to Attn: Legal Lot of Record SEPA, Department of Community Development, 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368, or via email to bbenjamin@co.jefferson.wa.us, by Wednesday, September 7, 2022. A copy of the subsequent final threshold determination for the specific proposal may be obtained upon request. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PUBLIC HEARING Oral and written comments are welcome at the Planning Commission public hearing, 5:30 p.m., Wednesday, September 7, 2022. COVID-19 NOTICE: NO IN-PERSON 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 managed by the Planning Commission Chair. 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 for persons with disabilities. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DCD and the Planning Commission are accepting general comments on the merits of these suggested amendments to the UDC regarding Legal Lot of Record Determination and Lot Consolidation. Written comments will be accepted by email or at Community Development office through September 7, 2022 at 4:30 PM. Any written comments on these suggested amendments submitted after the close of the public comment period will be forwarded to the BoCC for consideration in its legislative decision. The BoCC may also hold a public hearing before acting. Formal notice would appear in the Leader newspaper. Written comments on the proposal may be submitted to the Department of Community Development, Attn. Legal Lot of Record Ordinance, 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 or via email to bbenjamin@co.jefferson.wa.us.
Past Related Actions and Future Anticipated Actions
The BoCC adopted two emergency interim ordinances for “Establishing a Moratorium on Acceptance and Processing of Applications that Require Recognition of Legal Lots of Record and Plats in Existence Prior to September 7, 1971 for the Purpose of Further Development”: Ordinance No. 06-1011-21 and Ordinance No. 09-1210-21.
2
Tentative Adoption Date
A legislative decision from the BoCC on this proposal is anticipated to be on or around October 3, 2022. A current project schedule can be requested from DCD. Appeal Information
Ordinances adopted under the authority of the Growth Management Act may be appealed pursuant to RCW 36.70A.280 and .290.
Location of
Background Material
Background materials and documents supporting the analysis are available for inspection at DCD from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Thursday. Materials can be access on-line at: https://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/1601/StoryMap
2. Executive Summary
What is the proposed change to development regulations?
To establish regulations for the determination of the legal status of lots and to provide
standards for nonconforming lots. Jefferson County Code (JCC) does not currently have
provisions for determining whether a lot of record is a legal lot of record that can be
considered legally eligible for development. A new chapter, JCC 18.12, is added to the Unified
Development Code (UDC) outlining standards for the determination of legal status and
creating provisions for development of nonconforming parcels. In addition, there will be
definitions updates in JCC 18.10, as well as changes to boundary line adjustment processes
in JCC 18.35.
Past legislation that guides Jefferson County’s decision on the current amendment proposal:
County Legislation
• BoCC Interim Ordinance No. 06-1011-21 establishing a moratorium on acceptance and processing of applications that require recognition of legal lots of record and plats in existence prior to September 7, 1971 for the purpose of further development.
• BoCC Interim Ordinance No. 09-1210-21 creating exceptions to the moratorium to
allow some development permit applications to be processed. State Legislation
• Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 58.17.210 - prohibits the County from issuing a building permit, septic permit, or other development permit for any lot, tract, or parcel of land divided in violation of Chapter 58.17 RCW, unless the landowner is an innocent purchaser for value;
• RCW 36.32.120(7) - provides that the county legislative authorities shall make and enforce, by appropriate resolutions or ordinances, all such police and sanitary regulations as are not in conflict with state law; and,
3
• Growth Management Act (GMA), Chapter 36.70A RCW - requires the County to plan
consistent with its provisions.
Background In Jefferson County, many small lots were created through plats that were recorded or
otherwise acknowledged in the late 1800s and early 1900s. In 1971, the County adopted its
first local subdivision regulation—Ordinance No. 2—which established health, safety, and welfare standards that all new land division proposals had to meet. Properties within plats established prior to 1971 continued to be developed over time by individual property owners.
With the recent uptick in the real estate market, the Department of Community Development (DCD) received three applications to develop pre-1971 plats en masse and at urban-level densities. These applications would result in increased housing densities in the rural county, contrary to the areas designated under the Growth Management Act to receive urban levels of growth—including the City of Port Townsend, the Port Hadlock / Irondale Urban Growth Area,
and the Port Ludlow and Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resorts.
In response to these applications, the County implemented a twelve-month emergency moratorium on October 4, 2021, ordinance no. 06-1011-21, affecting development and land use permit applications within pre-1971 plats. The moratorium was implemented to prevent
further development of pre-1971 plats while DCD was tasked to develop permanent regulations that will replace the moratorium. On December 20, 2021 the moratorium was repealed and replaced by ordinance no. 09-1210-21, which added ten exceptions to the moratorium to allow lower impact development to continue in pre-1971 plats.
How are development regulations changed?
Amendments to regulations can be proposed at any time by the BoCC or Planning Agency when they are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan (JCC 18.45.090). As part of the BoCC emergency ordinances (ordinance no. 06-1011-21 and ordinance no. 09-1210-21), the BoCC
directed DCD to proceed with a permanent UDC amendment for determination of legal status of lots, pursuant to JCC 18.45.090. How Do We Evaluate the Effects of a Change in the Development Regulations?
Changes to development regulations are regulated by state and local law. A change to a
development regulation must comport with the procedural and substantive requirements of the Growth Management Act (GMA), chapter 36.70A RCW and the Planning Enabling Act, chapter 36.70 RCW. Jefferson County has adopted code provisions consistent with the GMA and the Planning Enabling Act for consideration of changes to development regulations,
including the opportunity for meaningful public participation. In addition, as an action that may potentially affect the environment, the ordinance is subject to review under the State Environmental Policy Act.
Is the proposal consistent with the Comprehensive Plan?
4
The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan was adopted in full compliance with the
requirements of the Growth Management Act and the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA).
Policy LU-P-20.3 of the comprehensive plan directs the department to review the matter of
legal lots of record and present policy options to the Board of County Commissioners:
“Analyze historical subdivisions in Jefferson County to define processes for legal lots of record
certifications, and define valid plats in rural and urban areas.” This process provides for
implementation of Policy LU-P-20.3.
3. Environmental Summary
3.1. Introduction and Process
Amendments to development regulations are “actions” as defined under State Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA). SEPA review can be integrated with other governmental decision-making
procedures such as those under the Growth Management Act (GMA), and is supplementary to
those procedures for amending development regulations under GMA. (See Washington
Administrative Code (WAC) 197-11-210 through 197-11-235, SEPA/GMA integration
procedures.) The thoughtful integration of SEPA compliance with the overall effort to implement
the act will provide understanding and insight of significant value to the choices growth
management requires (WAC 365-196-620(2)(a)).
3.1.1. Adoption of Existing Environmental Documents
The following existing environmental documents have been adopted through legal notice published in the Port Townsend & Jefferson County Leader newspaper on August 24, 2022.
State Environmental Policy Act Documents Adopted
Year State Environmental Policy Act Document Description
1997-1998 Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements (DEIS/FEIS) and addenda
prepared in anticipation of adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in 1998. The DEIS
and FEIS are dated February 24, 1997 and May 27, 1998, respectively, and
examined the potential cumulative environmental impacts of adopting alternative
versions of the Comprehensive Plan.
6/30/1999
8/18/1999
Draft Supplemental EIS (DSEIS)--Comprehensive Plan 1999 Amendments (Task III of
Tri-Area/Glen Cove Special Study)
Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. Jefferson County Comprehensive
Plan 1999 Amendments. Tri-Area/Glen Cove Special Study Task IV.
5
6/11/2001 Glen Cove/Tri-Area Special Study Supplemental EIS Final Decision Document, June
11, 2001
2002 Integrated Growth Management Act/State Environmental Policy Act Document
Environmental Review of a Non-Project Action: Draft Supplemental EIS August 21,
2002, to Supplement the Comprehensive Plan Draft and Final EIS (1997) and
Comprehensive Plan 1999 Amendments Draft and Final SEIS. November 25, 2002
Integrated FSEIS 2002 Amendment Docket.
This FSEIS was appealed before the Western Washington Growth Management
Hearings Board (WWGMHB) of which the WWGMHB issued a Final Decision and
Order (FDO) and remanded it back to the Department for additional environmental
review.
The county hired Wheeler Consulting, to prepare additional environmental review
based on the FDO. A DSEIS to the 2002 CPA SEIS was issued on March 3, 2004.
A FSEIS to the 2002 CPA SEIS was issued on May 12, 2004 as part of the review
and in consideration of MLA02-00235.
2003 Staff Recommendation and Environmental Analysis with Regard to the Adoption of
Four Proposed Site-Specific Amendments to the 1998 Jefferson County
Comprehensive Plan. SEPA Addendum August 6, 2003. Sept. 17, 2003 SEPA
Addendum for Suggested Amendments
2004 2004 Staff Report and SEPA Addendum to 1998 EIS for UGA Amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan issued May 19, 2004.
2004 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Department of Community
Development Integrated Staff Report and SEPA Addendum issued September 22,
2004.
2005 Integrated GMA/SEPA Addendum Staff Report, August 3, 2005. Incorporated by reference: 1998 DEIS/FEIS and 2004 Addendum.
2006 Integrated GMA/SEPA Addendum Staff Rpt., July 19, 2006
2007 SEPA Addendum, adopting by reference 2004 Staff Report and SEPA Addendum
for UGA Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan issued May 19, 2004 and 2004
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Department of Community Development
Integrated Staff Report and SEPA Addendum issued September 22, 2004.
2008 Integrated GMA/SEPA Addendum Staff Report, September 3, 2008. Adopted by
reference: 1998 DEIS/FEIS, and environmental documents from 2004, 2005, 2006,
and 2007 environmental review
6
2009 Integrated GMA/SEPA Addendum Staff Report, September 2, 2009. Adopted by
legal notice: 1998 DEIS/FEIS, September 22nd Staff Report 2004, 2005, 2006,
2007, 2008, "and all supplementary information…supporting record, analyses,
materials."
2010 Integrated GMA/SEPA Addendum Staff Report, September 2010.
2013 Integrated GMA/SEPA Addendum, Staff Report September 4, 2013. Adopted by
reference all previous SEPA documents.
2015 Staff Report & SEPA Environmental Review, Proposal to Amend Unified Development
Code, JCC 18.30.150 Sign Code, October 29, 2015. Integrated Growth
Management Act/State Environmental Policy Act Analysis, Environmental Review of a
Non-Project Action.
2018 Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Update 2038
SEPA Addendum to 1998 Draft and Final Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan
Environmental Impact Statements and subsequent Supplemental EISs and Addenda.
April 4, 2018
Source: Jefferson County 2022
3.1.2. Level of Environmental Analysis
This document provides both a qualitative and a quantitative analysis of environmental impacts
as appropriate to the general nature of the code amendment proposal. The adoption of Unified
Development Code (UDC) amendments is classified under SEPA as a non-project action
involving decisions on policies, plans, or programs (WAC 197-11-704) and a broader
environmental analysis is applied here than to those applied to permit review of a site-specific
project. This analysis is using the phased review concept (WAC 197-11-060(5)) and integrates
the broad analyses of the adopted documents to review the current proposed action.
3.1.3. Process & Public Involvement
The Board of County Commissioners adopted a moratorium ordinance, Ordinance No. 09-
1210-21, on December 20, 2022 and discussed the UDC Amendment in open session and
directed DCD to proceed with developing regulations for the determination of legal status of
lots. Following JCC 18.45.090(1)(a), DCD can proceed with a UDC amendment outside of the
annual amendment cycle as a Board-sponsored UDC amendment.
DCD completed a SEPA Checklist and issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS). A
threshold decision is required for any proposal which meets the definition of action and is not
categorically exempt (WAC 197-11-310). A threshold decision means a decision by the
7
responsible official of the lead agency whether or not an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
is required for the proposal.
A threshold determination shall not balance whether the beneficial aspects of a proposal
outweigh its adverse impacts, but rather, shall consider whether a proposal has any probable
significant adverse environmental impacts (WAC 197-11-330(5)). The DNS determination
considers the action as causing no probable significant adverse environmental impacts. No
action may be taken on the proposal during a 14-day comment period on the SEPA threshold
decision. Based upon comments that may be received, a threshold determination can be
withdrawn and re-issued, or finalized.
Within the same public notice, DCD issued the GMA-required Notice of Intent to Amend the
Unified Development Code and notice of a public hearing at the Planning Commission on
September 7, 2022.
The Planning Commission and the DCD will take public comment on the SEPA determination
and the proposed amendment through September 7, 2022. Any comments received after that
date will be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) for their consideration
before they make a final legislative decision on the proposal. After the public hearing, the
Planning Commission will make findings and prepare a recommendation to the BoCC.
4. Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies—
Evaluation of Compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan
The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan recognizes the following at page 1-28:
“Some areas zoned for residential uses have smaller lots platted prior to 1998
than would be allowed with new plats. Residential uses may be permitted on
existing lots of record as legal lots. However, in terms of development, some of
the smaller lot sizes could require consolidation with other lots to meet current
Health Department standards for wells or septic areas, or to meet other
regulations, such as critical areas…”
The Comprehensive Plan also endorses analysis of “…historical subdivisions in Jefferson
County to define processes for legal lots of record certifications, and define valid plats in rural
and urban areas” (1-99). While the new chapter JCC 18.12 and amendments to JCC 18.10
and JCC 18.35 were written in response to the emergency moratorium, it is clear that the 2018
Comprehensive Plan established that analysis for legal lot of record determination processes
was necessary in understanding how development of small, historical lots in the rural county
would meet expectations and requirements for protection of rural character.
Further, the primary mechanisms of bringing these historical lots into greater conformance
with contemporary zoning and environmental standards—requiring lot consolidation and/or
demonstrating that a lot or plat meets applicable health, welfare, safety, and natural resource
8
protection standards—appear supported by a variety of Comprehensive Plan goals and
policies, including:
Goals
• Goal LU-G-18 Encourage residential land use and development intensities that protect
the character of rural areas, avoid interference with resource land uses, and minimize
impacts upon environmentally sensitive areas. (1-98)
• Goal LU-G-20 Ensure that rural residential development preserves rural character,
protects rural community identity, is compatible with surrounding land uses, and
minimizes infrastructure needs. (1-99)
• Goal EN-G-1 Ensure a sustainable and safe water supply for residential, economic,
and environmental needs that rely on conservation and other current technologies,
while incorporating the most current climate projections into supply planning. (5-14)
Policies
• Policy LU-P-15.1 Identify and implement rural land uses, densities, and environmental
standards which preserve and protect rural character. Evaluate environmental quality
as critical to the preservation of rural character. (1-96)
• Policy LU-P-16.2 Encourage project proponents to mitigate potential adverse impacts
to the public health, safety, and welfare as a result of a proposed project, action, or use
concurrent with project development. (1-97)
• Policy LU-P-17.2 Encourage innovation and creativity in lot and site design and in re-
platting of existing lots to create efficient land developments, add flexibility in design,
and encourage multi-modal transportation while meeting underlying density and site
requirements. (1-97)
• Policy LU-P-20.3 Analyze historical subdivisions in Jefferson County to define
processes for legal lots of record certifications, and define valid plats in rural and urban
areas. (1-99)
• Policy HS-P-1.3 Update codes and development standards that preserve existing
higher densities and improve housing development and redevelopment opportunities in
County Urban Growth Areas (UGAs), Rural Village Centers (RVC), Rural Crossroads
(CC), and Master Planned Resorts (MPR). (3-15)
5. Unified Development Code—Jefferson County Code
Jefferson County adopted the Unified Development Code (UDC) in December 2000 (effective
January 16, 2001) as the unified set of development regulations to implement the
Comprehensive Plan adopted in August 1998. Until the adoption of the UDC, the
Comprehensive Plan was implemented through a variety of separate ordinances, some in
place prior to the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan.
9
The relevant sections of the UDC are Chapter 18.10 Definitions, Chapter 18.35 Land
Divisions, and the new chapter JCC 18.12. These chapters and sections provide appropriate
standards and regulation for addressing and mitigating site-specific issues when applying the
proposed code.
6. Conclusion
The proposed amendment does not have any probable significant adverse environmental
impacts. The SEPA Checklist and past County EIS and Addenda adequately analyze
environmental concerns. The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan supports and
encourages the proposed amendments to the UDC.
7. Criteria for Evaluation of Proposed Amendment—Required
Findings
7.1. JCC 18.45.090 Findings for Board-Initiated UDC Amendment
(1) Initiation. The text of the county’s adopted Comprehensive Plan implementing
regulations (also referred to within this code as “development regulations”) may be
amended at any time, provided the amendment is consistent with the Jefferson County
Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map. When inconsistent with the Comprehensive
Plan and Land Use Map, the amendment shall be processed concurrent with any
necessary plan amendments using the process and timelines for plan amendments set
forth in this chapter. “Implementing regulations” means the controls placed on
development or land use activities by the county, including, but not limited to, this Unified
Development Code, the Jefferson County Shoreline Master Program, or any other official
controls required to implement the plan (see RCW 36.70A.030). Proposed amendments,
changes, or modifications may be initiated as follows:
(a) When consistent with the plan, at any time at the direction of the board of county
commissioners or by the planning commission pursuant to RCW 36.70.550;
(b) When inconsistent with the plan, under the process and time lines for Comprehensive
Plan amendments by any interested person consistent with this chapter; or
(c) Immediately following or concurrent with an amendment or amendments to the
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, the implementing regulations shall be amended
to be consistent with the plan and Land Use Map.
7.2. Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners
Review of Growth Management Indicators and Required Findings
10
JCC 18.45.090 requires the following: (3) Planning Commission Review. The planning
commission shall hold a public hearing on any amendment(s) to the implementing
regulations and shall make a recommendation to the board of county commissioners
using the site-specific criteria set forth in JCC 18.45.080(1)(b) and (1)(c), as applicable.
7.2.1. Required Findings for All Proposed Amendments—JCC
18.45.080(1)(b)
JCC 18.45.080(1)(b) requires specific findings by the Planning Commission when
reviewing development regulation amendments. The following lays out the review
requirements and the staff findings responding to these requirements:
(b) Required Findings – Generally. For all proposed amendments, the planning
commission shall develop findings and conclusions and a recommendation which
consider the growth management indicators set forth in JCC 18.45.050(4)(b)(i) through
(4)(b)(vii), as well as the following:
(i) Whether circumstances related to the proposed amendment and/or the area in
which it is located have substantially changed since the adoption of the Jefferson
County Comprehensive Plan;
Staff Finding: No new circumstances related to the proposed amendment have
substantially changed since the adoption of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan.
The affordable housing crisis is a concern for members of the public and for the County,
but legal status determination of lots throughout the County is required for establishing
development eligibility. The ordinance balances conformance with GMA and the
Comprehensive Plan with reasonable economic use of property for development of a
residence. No affordability impacts are expected given the County’s surplus in land
available for residential development.
(ii) Whether the assumptions upon which the Jefferson County Comprehensive
Plan is based are no longer valid, or whether new information is available which was not
considered during the adoption process or any annual amendments of the Jefferson
County Comprehensive Plan; and
Staff Finding: There is no indication that assumptions upon which the
Comprehensive Plan is based are no longer valid. The Comprehensive Plan documents
housing goals and policies that support the amendment proposal.
(iii) Whether the proposed amendment reflects current widely held values of the
residents of Jefferson County.
11
Staff Finding: Public comment has indicated the need to recognize a
particularized and sensitive analysis of when lots should be restricted from future
development and when a lot or plat should be able to continue developing. The
proposed amendment reflects the results of such analysis and responds to a widely held
value of the County’s residents.
7.2.2. Criteria Governing Planning Commission Assessment—JCC
18.45.050(4)(b)(i) through (4)(b)(vii)
Relevant to the adoption is the periodic assessment requirements of JCC 18.45.050(b).
The following lays out the review requirements and the staff findings responding to these
requirements:
(b) Criteria Governing Planning Commission Assessment. The planning commission’s
periodic assessment and recommendation shall be based upon, but shall not be limited
to, an inquiry into the following growth management indicators:
(i) Whether growth and development as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan is
occurring faster or slower than anticipated, or is failing to materialize;
Staff Finding: Annual compounded Countywide total growth rate envisioned in the
2004 Comprehensive Plan was 1.78%. However, current population planning
projections for 2010-2036 is 0.97% (Growth Management Planning Population
Projections, Resolution 38-15). Even with a slower growth rate, there is a shortage of
housing and a lack of affordable, attainable housing.
(ii) Whether the capacity of the county to provide adequate services has
diminished or increased;
Staff Finding: Levels of service in the 2018 Comprehensive Plan can generally be
maintained at the same level to accommodate the next 20-year population
projection.
(iii) Whether sufficient urban land is designated and zoned to meet projected
demand and need;
Staff Finding: There is a surplus of residential parcels in the county. See:
Proposed Irondale/Port Hadlock UGA: DWELLING UNIT & POPULATION HOLDING
CAPACITY ANALYSIS, January 21, 2009
(iv) Whether any of the assumptions upon which the plan is based are no longer
found to be valid;
12
Staff Finding: The Comprehensive Plan accurately represents the current
analysis of legal lot of record determination processes in the County.
(v) Whether changes in county-wide attitudes necessitate amendments to the
goals of the plan and the basic values embodied within the Comprehensive Plan Vision
Statement;
Staff Finding: Changes in county-wide attitudes are not evident.
(vi) Whether changes in circumstances dictate a need for amendments;
Staff Finding: The emergency moratorium (ordinance no. 06-1011-21 and
ordinance no. 09-1210-21) responded to three development permit applications affecting
pre-1971 plats in the rural county, raising residential density in rural areas without public
process. These amendments respond to the GMA requirements for public participation
in projects creating increased densities and to the state requirements of determining
legal eligibility for development prior to approval of development permits.
(vii) Whether inconsistencies exist between the Comprehensive Plan and the
GMA or the Comprehensive Plan and the County-wide Planning Policy for Jefferson
County. [Ord. 2-06 § 1]
Staff Finding: There are no inconsistencies between the proposed amendment
and the Comprehensive Plan or GMA.
7.3. Findings on The Record
7.3.1. In addition to the guidance provided by GMA, the County-Wide Planning Policies,
the Jefferson County Code, and the Comprehensive Plan, what else is in the record
with respect to this proposal?
• AGLO 1974 No. 7 - Jan 17 1974: APPLICABILITY OF CHAPTER 271,
LAWS OF 1969, 1st EX. SESS., TO CERTAIN PREVIOUSLY PLATTED
AREAS
• AGO 1996 No. 5 - Feb 29 1996: Effect of 1969 Platting Act on land platted
before enactment
• AGO 1998 No. 4 - Mar 3 1998: Effect of Growth Management Act on option
of counties to require resubdivision of lands platted before 1937
• Geospatial analysis of potential impacts to land use and environmentally
critical areas, conducted by the Department of Community Development as
13
presented in the Legal Lot of Record project StoryMap:
https://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/1601/StoryMap
8. Planning Commission Recommendations
The Planning Commission’s findings and conclusions shall include a recommendation to the
BoCC that the proposed amendment(s) be denied, approved, or approved with conditions or
modifications.
14
Leader Legal Notices, legals@ptleader.com
PLEASE PUBLISH ONE TIME ON WEDNESDAY AUGUST 24, 2022
Department of Community Development
621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368
Bryan Benjamin: (360) 379-4459
NOTICE OF INTENT TO AMEND THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE (UDC)
RELATING TO PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO LEGAL LOT OF RECORD DETERMINATION
AND
NOTICE OF ADOPTION OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS AND PENDING
SEPA DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS)
AND
NOTICE OF SEPTEMBER 7 PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE JEFFERSON COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION ON PROPOSED UDC AMENDMENTS
Pursuant to the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) and State
Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Jefferson County is issuing an integrated GMA/SEPA
document per WAC 197-11-210 through 197-11-235, relative to proposed amendments
to the Jefferson County Code (JCC). Jefferson County has determined that it is the
appropriate SEPA lead agency for the proposal. Adoption of any JCC amendments
through this action would be a Nonproject Action under SEPA, Chapter 43.21C RCW.
Summary of Proposed Changes: To make a countywide amendment within Jefferson
County’s Unified Development Code (UDC), JCC Title 18, related to determination of the
legal status of lots, standards for nonconforming lots, and boundary line adjustments,
amending JCC chapters 18.10 and 18.35 and adopting a new chapter 18.12.
GMA Notice: This document serves as the Notice of Intent to Amend the Jefferson
County Development Regulations and is being circulated per WAC 365-196-620 to State
agencies responsible for reviewing proposed amendments to comprehensive plans
and/or development regulations.
SEPA Notice: Because the proposal is not site-specific, the proposed amendment will be
reviewed under SEPA as a Nonproject Action involving decisions policies, plans, or
programs (WAC 197-11-704). The Department of Community Development (DCD) has
assumed the responsibility of Lead Agency under SEPA, has reviewed the proposed
project for probable adverse environmental impacts, and expects to issue a
Determination of Non-Significance (DNS). This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2);
the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of this notice. The
proposal may include mitigation measures under applicable development regulations,
and the project review process may incorporate or require mitigation measures
regardless of whether an EIS is prepared.
Comments on the SEPA Threshold Determination must be submitted to the Department
of Community Development, Attn. Legal Lot of Record Ordinance, 621 Sheridan Street,
Port Townsend, WA 98368, by Wednesday, September 7, 2022. A copy of the
Attachment A
subsequent final threshold determination for the specific proposal may be obtained
upon request.
Adoption of Existing Environmental Documents: This announcement also serves as a
notice of adoption of existing environmental documents. After review of the suggested
amendments and existing environmental documents, the SEPA Responsible Official at
DCD has determined that existing environmental documents provide adequate
environmental review to satisfy the requirements of WAC 197-11-600.
The following existing environmental documents are being adopted:
•1997-1998 Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements (DEIS/FEIS) and
addenda prepared in anticipation of adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in 1998.
The DEIS and FEIS are dated February 24, 1997 and May 27, 1998, respectively, and
examined the potential cumulative environmental impacts of adopting alternative
versions of the Comprehensive Plan.
•6/30/1999 Draft Supplemental EIS (DSEIS)--Comprehensive Plan 1999 Amendments
(Task III of Tri-Area/Glen Cove Special Study)
•8/18/1999 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. Jefferson County
Comprehensive Plan 1999 Amendments. Tri-Area/Glen Cove Special Study Task IV.
•6/11/2001 Glen Cove/Tri-Area Special Study Supplemental EIS Final Decision
Document, June 11, 2001
•2002 Integrated Growth Management Act/State Environmental Policy Act
Document Environmental Review of a Nonprroject Action: Draft Supplemental EIS
August 21, 2002, to Supplement the Comprehensive Plan Draft and Final EIS (1997)
and Comprehensive Plan 1999 Amendments Draft and Final SEIS. November 25,
2002 Integrated FSEIS 2002 Amendment Docket. This FSEIS was appealed before the
Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board (WWGMHB) of which
the WWGMHB issued a Final Decision and Order (FDO) and remanded it back to the
Department for additional environmental review. The county hired Wheeler
Consulting, to prepare additional environmental review based on the FDO. A DSEIS
to the 2002 CPA SEIS was issued on March 3, 2004. A FSEIS to the 2002 CPA SEIS was
issued on May 12, 2004 as part of the review and in consideration of MLA02-00235.
•2004 Staff report and SEPA Addendum to 1998 EIS for UGA Amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan issued May 19, 2004.
•2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket Department of Community
Development Integrated Staff Report and SEPA Addendum issued September 22,
2004.
•2009 Integrated GMA/SEPA Addendum Staff Report, September 2, 2009. Adopted
by legal notice: 1998 DEIS/FEIS, September 22nd Staff Report 2004, 2005, 2006,
2007, 2008, "and all supplementary information…supporting record, analyses,
materials."
•2018 Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Update 2038 SEPA Addendum to 1998
Draft and Final Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact
Statements and subsequent Supplemental EISs and Addenda. April 4, 2018
Attachment A
Planning Commission Public Hearing: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Jefferson
County Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, September 7,
2022 to take oral and written comment on the proposed amendments to the UDC
before making a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) on
whether to adopt the proposed amendments. The Planning Commission meeting and
public hearing will be held on-line beginning at 5:30 PM, Wednesday, September 7,
2022.
COVID-19 NOTICE: NO IN-PERSON 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=OU8vTWZGWTVRRGNRVEQ1c2k0WDV
adz09
This link is also provided electronically on the DCD webpage (address below).
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 is managed 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 for persons with
disabilities.
Public Comment Period: The Department of Community Development and the Planning
Commission are accepting general comments on the merits of these suggested
amendments to determination of the legal status of lots and standards for
nonconforming lots. Written comments will be accepted through the close of the Public
Hearing on Wednesday, September 7, 2022. Any written comments on these suggested
amendments submitted after the close of the public comment period will be forwarded
to the BoCC for consideration in its legislative decision. The BoCC may also hold a public
hearing before acting. Formal notice would appear in this newspaper. Written
comments on the proposal may be submitted to the Department of Community
Development, Attn. Legal Lot of Record Ordinance, 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend,
WA 98368 or via email to bbenjamin@co.jefferson.wa.us
Availability of Documents: For more information or to inspect or request copies of the
original application for the proposed amendments, the adopted existing environmental
documents or the Staff Report and Recommendation, visit the DCD webpage at
Attachment A
http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/commdevelopment and follow the link to Public
Notices.
You can also access the project documents directly from the Laserfiche Web Portal at:
https://test.co.jefferson.wa.us/WeblinkExternal/Browse.aspx?id=3998136&dbid=0&rep
o=Jefferson
Attachment A
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 1 of 18
SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Purpose of checklist: Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal.
Instructions for applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use “not applicable” or
"does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision-
making process.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your
answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact.
Instructions for Lead Agencies:
Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to
make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents.
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non-projects) questions in Part B - Environmental Elements –that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal.
A. Background [HELP]
1.Name of proposed project, if applicable:
Proposed amendments to the UDC, an Ordinance related to determination of the legal status of lots, standards for nonconforming lots, and boundary line adjustments; amending chapter 18.10
Attachment B
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 2 of 18
and 18.35 of the Jefferson County Code; and adopting a new chapter 18.12 of the Jefferson County Code.
2. Name of applicant: Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners.
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Department of Community Development, 621 Sheridan St., Port Townsend WA 98368; Bryan
Benjamin, (360) 379-4459.
4. Date checklist prepared: August 22, 2022. 5. Agency requesting checklist: Jefferson County.
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Hearing Scheduled at Planning Commission September 7, 2022; final action at BoCC October
3, 2022.
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
No. The county is only planning to take legislative action on this ordinance amending the UDC.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be
prepared, directly related to this proposal.
Comprehensive Plan EIS and subsequent SEPA Addenda provide supplementary
environmental information. Project-specific environmental information and geospatial analysis
has been prepared in the form of a StoryMap for this project:
https://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/1601/StoryMap
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
No, no pending applications for other proposals directly affecting properties covered by the proposed UDC amendments are known.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Adoption by the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners. Review by the Washington State
Department of Commerce and other agencies, per the Growth Management Act.
Attachment B
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 3 of 18
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to
describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) Ordinance updating the UDC to provide for the determination of legal lot of record status, eligibility for development, and development standards of nonconforming lots. This is a nonproject action.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Applies to all applicable property within unincorporated Jefferson County.
B. Environmental Elements [HELP]
1. Earth [help] a. General description of the site: (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other _____________ Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
Attachment B
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 4 of 18
e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any:
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit. However, the proposed ordinance may reduce potential impacts from residential development within erosion hazard areas by limiting when development can occur within affected pre-August 11, 1969 plats.
2. Air [help] a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit. 3. Water [help] a. Surface Water: [help]
Attachment B
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 5 of 18
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe
type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site
will be evaluated under each permit. However, the proposed ordinance may reduce potential flood and channel migration zone impacts to residential development by limiting when development can occur in flood hazard and channel migration zone areas within affected
pre-August 11, 1969 plats.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site
will be evaluated under each permit.
b. Ground Water: [help] 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities
withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site
will be evaluated under each permit. However, the proposed ordinance may limit water
Attachment B
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 6 of 18
withdrawn from wells in the rural county and total discharge into groundwater by limiting
when development can occur within pre-August 11, 1969 plats.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals. . . ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site
will be evaluated under each permit.
c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site
will be evaluated under each permit.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site
will be evaluated under each permit. 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If
so, describe.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site
will be evaluated under each permit.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage
pattern impacts, if any:
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit. However, an overall result of the proposed ordinance may be
reductions in residential development impacts to surface, ground, and runoff water, and
drainage patterns by limiting residential development within pre-August 11, 1969 plats.
4. Plants [help] a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: ____deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
____evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
____shrubs
Attachment B
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 7 of 18
____grass
____pasture
____crop or grain
____ Orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. ____ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
____water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
____other types of vegetation
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit. b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
5. Animals [help] a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other ________
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
Attachment B
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 8 of 18
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
6. Energy and Natural Resources [help] a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
7. Environmental Health [help] a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk
of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe.
1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site
Attachment B
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 9 of 18
will be evaluated under each permit.
2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines
located within the project area and in the vicinity. Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site
will be evaluated under each permit. 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced
during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site
will be evaluated under each permit.
4) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site
will be evaluated under each permit.
5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site
will be evaluated under each permit. However, an overall result of the proposed ordinance
may be reductions in environmental health hazards from residential development by limiting
future residential development within pre-August 11, 1969 plats.
b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site
will be evaluated under each permit.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a
short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indi- cate what hours noise would come from the site.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site
will be evaluated under each permit.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site
will be evaluated under each permit.
Attachment B
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 10 of 18
8. Land and Shoreline Use [help] a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current
land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit. b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal
business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how:
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site
will be evaluated under each permit.
c. Describe any structures on the site.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
Attachment B
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 11 of 18
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any:
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any:
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
9. Housing [help] a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, mid-
dle, or low-income housing.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing.
Attachment B
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 12 of 18
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit. However, the proposed ordinance may reduce the total
number or rural residential lots that are legally eligible for development in the rural county. The
County currently has a surplus of residential lots, and no substantive change to this surplus is
anticipated as a part of this ordinance.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit. However, the proposed ordinance provides for reasonable
economic use ofa property according to its ability to meet health, welfare, and safety standards
within a pre-August 11, 1969 plat.
10. Aesthetics [help] a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
11. Light and Glare [help] a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly
occur?
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
Attachment B
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 13 of 18
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
12. Recreation [help] a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will be evaluated under each permit.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
13. Historic and cultural preservation [help] a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers ? If so, specifically describe.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies
conducted at the site to identify such resources. Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of
archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc.
Attachment B
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 14 of 18
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
14. Transportation [help] a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop?
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate?
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe
(indicate whether public or private).
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit. e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates?
Attachment B
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 15 of 18
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
15. Public Services [help]
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
16. Utilities [help] a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other ___________
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed.
Not applicable – the project is to amend the Unified Development Code. Each potential site will
be evaluated under each permit.
Attachment B
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 16 of 18
C. Signature [HELP] The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: ___________________________________________________
Name of signee __________________________________________________
Position and Agency/Organization ____________________________________
Date Submitted: _____________
D. Supplemental sheet for nonproject actions [HELP] (IT IS NOT NECESSARY to use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction
with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or
at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; pro- duction, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise?
The addition of provisions for legal lot of record status determination and development
standards for nonconforming lots will not result in increases to: discharge to water; emissions to
air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise. The
expected reduction of high density residential development within the rural county should
decrease water discharge, emissions, production, storage, or release of toxic/hazardous
substances, and noise in the rural county.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are:
Changes in legal lot of record eligibility to align with GMA standards for rural residential
development will reduce high density development potential in the rural County and prevent
the above listed impacts by decreasing development of of high density nonconforming lots in
the rural county.
2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
The addition of provisions for legal lot of record status determination and development
standards for nonconforming lots will not be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life.
The expected reduction of high density residential development within the rural county should
decrease the likelihood of future development to impact plants, animals, fish, and marine life.
Attachment B
Bryan Benjamin
Assistant Planner, Jefferson County
08/23/2022
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 17 of 18
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are:
Reduced development impacts by requiring legal status of substandard lots will either
require aggregation of lots to meet zoning standards to the greatest extent possible or by
proving that environmental impacts will not result from reasonable economic use of the
property.
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
The addition of provisions for legal lot of record status determination and development
standards for nonconforming lots will not likely deplete energy or natural resources. The
expected reduction of high density residential development in the rural county will likely protect
existing energy and natural resources.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:
Ensure that legal status of lots within pre-August 11, 1969 plats meet forestry setbacks and reduce density and future energy needs within the rural county.
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or
areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
The addition of provisions for legal lot of record status determination and development
standards for nonconforming lots will not affect environmentally sensitive areas or other areas
designated for governmental protection. The expected reduction of high density residential
development in the rural county will likely protect environmentally sensitive areas from
development impacts.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
Ensure that residential development occurs within conforming parcels according to minimum lot sizes as determined by zoning or conformance to the greatest extent possible or by proving that environmental impacts will not result from reasonable economic use of the property. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans?
The addition of provisions for legal lot of record status determination and development standards for nonconforming lots will not encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans. The regulations require protection of shoreline ecological function and will likely reduce high density development in shoreline areas.
Attachment B
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 18 of 18
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public
services and utilities?
The addition of provisions for legal lot of record status determination and development standards for nonconforming lots will not increase demands on transportation or public services
and utilities. The regulations will likely result in the reduction of future high density development in the rural county and will likely decrease demand for transportation and public services in the in pre-August 11, 1969 plats.
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:
7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment.
The purpose of this ordinance is to decrease the potential for nonconforming development in the rural county that is characterized by urban density. The provisions for legal lot of record status determination and standards for nonconforming lots will bring future development into closer conformity with local, state, and federal laws for the protection of the environmental.
Attachment B
DRAFT
Page 1 of 24
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF JEFFERSON
An Ordinance Related to Determination of the Legal Status of Lots, Standards for Nonconforming Lots, and Boundary Line
Adjustments; Amending Chapter 18.10 and 18.35 of the Jefferson County Code; and Adopting a New Chapter 18.12 of the Jefferson County Code
ORDINANCE NO.
WHEREAS, RCW 58.17.210 prohibits the County from issuing a building permit, septic permit, or
other development permit for any lot, tract, or parcel of land divided in violation of Chapter 58.17
RCW, unless the landowner is an innocent purchaser for value; and
WHEREAS, the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan recognizes the following at page 1-28:
Some areas zoned for residential uses have smaller lots platted prior to 1998 than would be allowed with new plats. Residential uses may be permitted on existing lots
of record as legal lots. However, in terms of development, some of the smaller lot sizes could require consolidation with other lots to meet current Health Department standards for wells or septic areas, or to meet other regulations, such as critical areas;
and
WHEREAS, the amendments adopted as part of this Ordinance will implement the intent of the
Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners (“BoCC”) recognizes the need to adopt an administrative process to determine whether a lot was legally created; and
WHEREAS, the BoCC wishes to balance the desire to protect the character and quality of residential communities as envisioned by the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and current
zoning code with the desire to allow residential development on legally existing lots that were
created before the current zoning was in place; and
WHEREAS, although property owners may develop legally existing lots smaller than current zoning, the BoCC recognizes the need to ensure that on-site sewage systems (OSS) on small lots do
not pollute marine waters or otherwise degrade water quality, so as to protect public health and the
riparian and marine environment; and
WHEREAS, in some circumstances substandard lots should be consolidated to allow for creation of a lot that meets minimum public health standards and land use regulations; and
WHEREAS, in adopting this ordinance, the BoCC balances the need to protect the public health and important environmental resources within the county as well as rural character with the need to
allow a property owner of reasonable economic use of their property.
NOW THEREFORE, be it ordained by the BoCC as follows:
Attachment C
DRAFT
Page 2 of 24
Section 1. Findings. The BoCC hereby adopt the above recitals (the “WHEREAS” statements) as
its findings of fact in support of this Ordinance.
Section 2. Amending JCC 18.10.040 and 18.10.120. Jefferson County Code Sections 18.10.040
(last amended by Ord. 4-19 § 1 (Exh. A)) and 18.10.120 (last amended by Ord. 5-20 § 3 (Appx. A)), are amended to read as set out in Appendix A.
Section 3. Adding New Chapter 18.12 JCC. A new chapter 18.12 is added to the Jefferson County Code to read as set out in Appendix B.
Section 4. Amending JCC 18.35.060 through JCC 18.35.080. Sections 18.35.060, 18.35.070, and
18.35.080 of the Jefferson County Code, last amended by Ordinance 14-18 § 4 (Exh. B), are amended to read as set out in Appendix C.
Section 5. Establishment Fees. Fees set forth in Chapter 18.12 JCC shall be established. These fees shall be added to the Appendix Fee Schedule.
Section 6. Severability. The provisions of this Ordinance are declared separate and severable. If
any provision of this Ordinance or its application to any person or circumstances is held invalid, then the remainder of this Ordinance or application of its provisions to other persons or circumstances shall remain valid and unaffected.
Section 6. SEPA Compliance. The Department of Community Development prepared an
environmental checklist detailing the proposed ordinance and its compliance with the State
Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). After a review of the environmental checklist, proposal, available information, and applicable regulations Jefferson County’s SEPA Responsible Official issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) on August 23, 2022 under WAC 197-11-340(1). The DNS was posted to the statewide SEPA Register managed by the Washington Department of
Ecology.
Section 7. Effective Date. This ordinance is effective immediately upon adoption.
(SIGNATURES FOLLOW ON THE NEXT PAGE)
Attachment C
DRAFT
Page 3 of 24
APPROVED and ADOPTED this ________ day of _____________, 2022.
SEAL:
ATTEST:
______________________ _________________________________ Carolyn Gallaway
Deputy Clerk of the Board Approved as to form only:
_________________________________
Philip C. Hunsucker Date Chief Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS ________________________________________ Kate Dean, Chair
________________________________________ Heidi Eisenhour, Member ________________________________________
Greg Brotherton, Member
Attachment C
DRAFT
Page 4 of 24
APPENDIX A
Section JCC 18.10.040 of the Jefferson County Code,, last amended by Ord. 4-19 § 1 (Exh. A), is
amended to read: JCC 18.10.040 D definitions.
“Day care, commercial” means a person or agency that provides care for 13 or more children during
part of the 24-hour day (RCW 74.15.020).
(1) “Home day care provider” means a state-licensed day care provider who regularly provides day care for not more than 12 children in the provider’s home in the family living quarters (RCW 74.15.020).
(2) “Child day care center” means a person or agency providing care during part of the 24-hour day
to 12 or fewer children in a facility other than the family abode of the person or persons under whose direct care the children are placed (RCW 35.63.170).
“Days, calendar” means so many days computed according to the course of the calendar. In
computing comment and appeal periods under this code, if the last day so computed is a Saturday,
Sunday or legal holiday, the comment or appeal period shall run to the next business day.
“DCD” means the Jefferson County department of community development.
“Dedicate” means to set aside a piece of real property, a structure, or a facility for public or private use or ownership.
“Dedication” means a deliberate appropriation of land by its owners for any general and public
uses, reserving to the owner/dedicator no other rights than such as are compatible with the full
exercise and enjoyment of the public uses to which the property has been devoted.
“Degrade” means to scale down in desirability or salability, to impair in respect to some physical property or to reduce in structure or function, in terms of Jefferson County standards and
environment.
“Density” means the quantity per unit area, such as the number of dwelling units per acre.
“Design capacity” means the theoretical or calculated maximum ability of a system or device to handle the duty for which it is to be used.
“Developable area” means the area of land which is not constrained from development by land use
restrictions.
“Development” means the construction, reconstruction, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, or enlargement of any structure; any grading, excavation, mining, landfill; or any extension of the use of land, dredging, drilling, dumping, filling, earth movement, clearing or removal of vegetation (except activities meeting the definition of forest practices), storage of materials or equipment in a
designated floodway, or other site disturbance, which either requires a permit, approval
Attachment C
DRAFT
Page 5 of 24
or authorization from the County or is proposed by a public agency. “Development application”
means an application for a development permit.
“Development envelope” means the portion of a lot which may be used for development. As
applied to a buildable lot for residential purposes, the portion of a lot which may contain a dwelling(s) and accessory structures.
“Development permit” means any permit issued by Jefferson County allowing development.
“Development regulation or regulations” means the controls placed on development or land use
activities, including, but not limited to, zoning ordinances, critical areas ordinances, shoreline
master programs, official controls, planned unit development ordinances, subdivision ordinances, and binding site plan ordinances, together with any amendments thereto. A development regulation does not include a decision to approve a project permit or project permit application, as defined in RCW 36.70B.020, even though the decision may be expressed in a resolution or ordinance of the
legislative body of the county (RCW 36.70A.030(7)). However, for the avoidance of doubt, a development regulation does not include ordinances or regulations that address administrative processes and procedures related to land use planning, interim or emergency ordinances, moratorium ordinances, or remand actions from state administrative boards or courts of law.
“Development right” means the right to develop property subject to federal, state, and local
restrictions and regulations.
“Director” means, unless otherwise specified, the director of the county’s department of community development (DCD) or the director’s designee.
“Discretionary use” means all unnamed and certain named uses in Table 3-1 in
JCC 18.15.040 which, subject to the administrative review and classification criteria set out in
Chapter 18.15 JCC, may be classified by the administrator as an allowed outright “Yes” use, a
conditional “C” use or a prohibited “No” use in the applicable district for which the use is proposed.
“District” means a part, zone, or geographic area within Jefferson County within which certain development regulations apply.
“Disturbed area” means any place where activities clearly in preparation for, or during, surface
mining have physically disrupted, covered, compacted, moved, or otherwise altered the characteristics of soil, bedrock, vegetation, or topography that existed prior to such activity. Disturbed areas may include but are not limited to: working faces, water bodies created by mine-related excavation, pit floors, the land beneath processing plant and stock pile sites, spoil pile sites,
and equipment staging areas. Disturbed areas shall also include aboveground waste rock sites and
tailing facilities, and other surface manifestations of underground mines. Disturbed areas do not
include surface mine access roads in mineral resource land designations unless these have characteristics of topography, drainage, slope stability, or ownership that, in the opinion of the department of natural resources, make reclamation necessary, lands that have been reclaimed to all
standards outlined in this chapter, rules of the department of natural resources, any applicable SEPA
document, and the approved reclamation plan, and subsurface aspects of underground mines, such
as portals, tunnels, shafts, pillars, and stopes.
Attachment C
DRAFT
Page 6 of 24
“Division of land” means the creation of any new lot or lots for the purpose of sale, lease, or
transfer of ownership (see Chapter 18.35 JCC).
DOT. (See “WADOT” or “WSDOT.”)
“Drainage” means surface water runoff; the removal of surface water or groundwater from land by drains, grading, or other means, which include runoff controls to minimize erosion and sedimentation during and after construction or development.
“Drainageway” means any natural or artificial watercourse, trench, ditch, swale, or similar
depression into which surface water flows.
“Dredging” means the removal of earth from the bottom of a stream, river, lake, bay, or other water
body.
“Drinking establishment (lounge)” means a business primarily engaged in the retail sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises. A restaurant operated as part of a lounge is
considered to be accessory to the lounge.
“Drive-thru window service” means businesses where patrons may carry on business on the premises while in a motor vehicle (see also “Mobile food unit”).
“Driveway” means a strip of land which provides vehicular access to one or two lots.
Duplex. (See “Dwelling unit, two-family.”)
“Dwelling unit” means one or more rooms or structures designed for occupancy by an individual or
family for living and sleeping purposes, containing kitchen facilities and rooms with internal accessibility, for use solely by the dwelling’s occupants.
“Dwelling unit, multiple-family” means one or more structures containing three or more dwelling
units.
“Dwelling unit, two-family” (duplex) means a single structure containing two dwelling units.
Section JCC 18.10.120 of the Jefferson County Code, last amended by Ord. 5-20 § 3 (Appx. A), is amended to read:
JCC 18.10.120 L definitions.
“Land disturbing activity” means any activity that results in movement of earth, or a change in the
existing soil cover (both vegetative and nonvegetative) and/or the existing soil topography. Land disturbing activities include, but are not limited to, clearing, grading, filling, and excavation. Compaction that is associated with stabilization of structures and road construction shall also be considered a land disturbing activity. Vegetation maintenance practices are not considered land-
disturbing activity.
Attachment C
DRAFT
Page 7 of 24
Land Division. (See “Division of land.”)
“Land use decision” means a final determination by the county’s hearing body or officer with the
highest level of authority to make the determination, including those with authority to hear appeals,
on:
(a) An application for a project permit or other governmental approval required by law before real property may be improved, developed, modified, sold, transferred, or used, but excluding applications for permits or approvals to use, vacate, or transfer streets, parks, and similar types of
public property; excluding applications for legislative approvals such as area-wide rezones and
annexations; and excluding applications for business licenses;
(b) An interpretative or declaratory decision regarding the application to a specific property of zoning or other ordinances or rules regulating the improvement, development, modification, maintenance, or use of real property; and
(c) The enforcement by the county of regulations governing the improvement, development,
modification, maintenance, or use of real property.
“Landslide hazard areas” has the same meaning as in WAC 365-190-030(10).
“Landward” means to or toward the land.
“Legal lot of record” means any lot that is determined to be a legal lot of record pursuant to chapter
18.12 JCC and is the same as “legal lot of record” referred to in WAC 246-272A.0320(5)(e)(i).
“Level of service (LOS)” means the number of units of capacity per unit of demand (e.g., trips, population, school-age residents) or other appropriate measure of need sufficient to meet the standards for adequate service set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. (See also “Adequate capacity
(adequate capital or public facilities),” “Available capital facilities (available capacity),” and
“Concurrency.”)
“Light industrial” means a use involving: (1) basic processing and manufacturing of materials or products predominantly from previously prepared materials; or (2) finished products or parts, including processing, fabrication, assembly, treatment, packaging, incidental storage, sales, and
distribution of such products, but excluding basic processing of raw materials except food products.
“Livestock” means horses, mules, donkeys, cattle, bison, sheep, goats, swine, rabbits, llamas, alpacas, ratites, poultry, waterfowl, game birds, and other species so designated by statute.
Livestock does not mean free-ranging wildlife as defined in Title 77 RCW.
“Livestock management” includes breeding, birthing, feeding, care, processing and sales of animals and animal products, birds, honey bees, fish and shellfish.
“Logging” means activities related to and conducted for purposes of harvesting or processing
timber.
“Long-term commercial significance” has the same meaning as in WAC 365-190-030(11).
Attachment C
DRAFT
Page 8 of 24
“Lot” means a contiguous quantity of land in possession of, owned by or recorded as the property
of a person or entity. A lot shall also include any individually numbered or separately designated
parcels of property in an approved subdivision or development.
“Lot, buildable,” means a lot that is a legal lot of record, as determined by the director pursuant to Chapter 18.12 JCC and applicable law, and eligible for to apply for a development or other land use permit, subdivision, or land division. “Lot, corner” means a lot situated at the intersection of two roads, by which the interior angle does not exceed 135 degrees.
“Lot coverage” means the surface area of a lot or lots within a single development which is
occupied by buildings, excluding roof overhangs and covered porches not used for sales, storage, or service.
“Lot, frontage” means the boundary of a lot that is along an existing or dedicated public road, or
where no public road exists, along a private road, easement or access way. On an interior lot, it is
the lot line abutting a road; or, on a pipestem (i.e., flag) lot it is the interior lot line most parallel to
the nearest road from which access is obtained.
“Lot of record” means an undeveloped lot, tract or parcel of land shown on an officially recorded short plat or long plat or a parcel of land officially recorded or registered as a unit of property and
described by platted lot number or by metes and bounds and lawfully established for conveyancing
purposes on the date of recording of the instrument first referencing the lot. The term “lot of record”
does not imply that the lot was created in conformity with the legal regulatory requirements for subdivision of property in accordance with Chapter 58.17 RCW or Chapter 18.35 JCC. a lot or parcel of land that met all applicable zoning and subdivision requirements in effect at the time of lot creation, and meets the standards of JCC 18.12.050. A lot of record is not necessarily developable
or buildable. To be developed, a legal lot of record must also meet the definition of “buildable lot,”
as determined by the county.
“Lot, pipestem” means a lot not meeting minimum frontage requirements and where access to the public road is by a narrow private right-of-way or driveway. The term is synonymous with “flag lot.”
“Lot, substandard” means a lot or parcel of land that has less than the required minimum area or
width as established by the land use district in which it is located; and provided, that such lot or parcel was of record as a legally created lot on the effective date of the Jefferson County Unified Development Code. A substandard lot is a legal lot of record. “Substandard” should not be equated with unbuildable. (See “Lot, buildable.”)
“Lot, through” means a lot that has both ends fronting on a road or street; both ends shall be deemed
front.
“Lumber mill, portable” means portable equipment to mill, split, or otherwise process forest products.
“Lumber mill, stationary” means a permanently located facility or equipment used to process forest products.
Attachment C
DRAFT
Page 9 of 24
APPENDIX B
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
Attachment C
DRAFT
Page 10 of 24
survey of the legal lot of record with a legal description, and to record the survey with the county auditor. The director shall determine by administrative rule when it is necessary to require 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, or 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 lot 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 record unless changed by the action of the owner.
18.12.040. Application submittal and contents.
Attachment C
DRAFT
Page 11 of 24
(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 18.12.110. 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 18.12.110.
(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 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 requirements, 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.
Attachment C
DRAFT
Page 12 of 24
(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 considered 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.
Attachment C
DRAFT
Page 13 of 24
(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.
Attachment C
DRAFT
Page 14 of 24
(5) 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.
(6) 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 is 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 of 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 parcel 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;
Attachment C
DRAFT
Page 15 of 24
(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 agricultural, 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 development 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:
Attachment C
DRAFT
Page 16 of 24
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
regulations.
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 the 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.
Attachment C
DRAFT
17 Draft of: August 18, 2022
(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 value 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.
Attachment C
DRAFT
18 Draft of: August 18, 2022
APPENDIX C
Amendments to the Boundary Line Adjustments Code
Section 18.35.060 of the Jefferson County Code, last amended by Ord. 14-18 § 4 (Exh. B), is
amended to read:
18.35.060 Purpose, scope, and limitations.
(1) Purpose and Scope. The purpose of this article is to provide procedures and criteria for the
review and approval of adjustments to boundary lines between platted or unplatted lots, tracts or
parcels, or both in order to:
(a) Allow the enlargement or merging of lots, tracts or parcels to improve or qualify as a buildable lot or for any other lawful purpose;
(b) Rectify defects in legal descriptions;
(c) Achieve increased setbacks from property lines or critical areas;
(d) Correct situations wherein an established use is located across a lot line; or
(e) For other similar purposes.
This article is also intended to ensure compliance with the Survey Recording Act, Chapter 58.09 RCW and Chapter 332-130 WAC.
(2) Prohibited Boundary Changes. This article shall not apply to boundary changes that would:
(a) Result in the creation of an additional lot, tract, parcel, site within a binding site plan or
division as defined in Chapter 18.10 JCC;
(b) Result in a lot, tract or parcel or site within a binding site plan that does not qualify as a buildable lot as defined in Chapter 18.10 JCC;
(c) An adjustment that crosses zoning district boundaries. Adjustments may be allowed
across different rural residential densities;
(d) Be inconsistent with any restrictions or conditions of approval for a recorded short plat or long plat; or circumvent the short subdivision or long subdivision procedures set forth in this chapter; or
(e) Separate an accessory dwelling unit from the primary use of the property.
Attachment C
DRAFT
19 Draft of: August 18, 2022
(3) Lot Consolidation. The consolidation of two or more lots, tracts or parcels for the purpose of creating a single lot, tract or parcel that meets the requirements for a buildable lot shall in all
cases be considered a minor adjustment of boundary lines and shall not be subject to the short subdivision or long subdivision provisions of this chapter. Lot consolidations shall not require a survey or soil evaluation.
(4) Adjustments to Binding Site Plans. Recognized lots in an approved binding site plan shall be considered a single site and no lot lines on the site may be altered by a boundary line adjustment
to separate lots to another property not included in the original site plan of the subject
development.
(5) Rectifying legal defects, such as an established use located across a lot line, and the adjustment of boundary lines to match water bodies, roads, or fence lines, shall be considered minor adjustments and shall not require a soil evaluation..
(6) Time Limitations. If more than two lots, tracts or parcels have been subject to a boundary line adjustment process, those lots shall not be permitted to use the boundary line adjustment process again for five years with the exception of lot consolidations, testamentary divisions, civil cases, court orders, rectifying legal defects, or the adjustment of one line between two or more property owners for the purpose of settling a dispute.
Section 18.35.070 of the Jefferson County Code, last amended by Ord. 14-18 § 4 (Exh. B), is
amended to read:
18.35.070 Application submittal and contents.
To be considered complete, applications for boundary line adjustments shall include the
following:
(1) Applications for boundary line adjustments shall be made on forms provided by the Jefferson County department of community development and shall be submitted to the department of community development, along with the appropriate fees established under the Jefferson County fee ordinance.
(a) A single application may be submitted for multiple BLAs for adjacent parcels, lots,
tracts or sites within a binding site plan. However, standard application fee(s) shall apply to
each BLA after the first two per additional parcel, lot, tract or site.
(b) In instances of lot consolidation, standard application fee(s) shall apply based on the number of resulting parcels or lots;
(2) A completed land use permit application form, including all materials required pursuant to
Chapter 18.40 JCC;
Attachment C
DRAFT
20 Draft of: August 18, 2022
(3) Three copies of a clean and legible drawing suitable for recording showing the following:
(a) The proposed lines for all affected lots, tracts or parcels, indicated by bold solid lines;
(b) The existing lot, tract or parcel lines proposed to be changed, indicated by light broken
lines;
(c) The location and dimensions of all structures/improvements existing upon the affected lots, tracts or parcels and the distance between each such structure/improvement and the proposed boundary lines, with structures proposed to be removed from the site depicted
with broken lines and structures to remain on the site depicted with solid lines;
(d) A north arrow indication and scale;
(e) All assessor’s tax parcel numbers for the affected lots, tracts or parcels;
(f) The location of the property as to quarter/quarter section;
(g) The location and dimensions of any easements within or adjacent to any affected lots,
tracts or parcels;
(h) The location, right-of-way widths, pavement widths and names of all existing or platted streets or roads, whether public or private, and other public ways within or adjacent to the affected lots, tracts or parcels;
(i) The area and dimensions of each lot prior to and following the proposed adjustment;
(j) The existing on-site sewage system components and reserve areas and the proposed location for on-site sewage systems and soil test pits for all affected lots that are not currently served by an on-site sewage system or other approved wastewater treatment system;
(k) The location of all existing and proposed water and storm drainage facilities; and
(l) The approximate location and extent of any critical areas identified in Chapter 18.22 JCC. The following notice will be recorded on the drawing when the parcels that are part of the boundary line adjustment include, or are adjacent to, critical areas:
Notice to Public: Current Jefferson County geographic information systems (GIS) maps identify the presence of a critical area such as stream, wetland, flood, landslide
hazard, erosion, aquifer recharge area, fish and wildlife habitat, shoreline, etc., lying within and/or adjacent to the revised parcels encompassed by this Boundary Line Adjustment. Prior to any land disturbing activity or construction activity, applicant/owner shall contact the Jefferson County department of community
Attachment C
DRAFT
21 Draft of: August 18, 2022
development regarding compliance for such critical areas. Approval of this Boundary Line Adjustment does not guarantee a buildable site within said parcel(s). Such
determination is dependent on approvals of water, septic, bulk and dimensional
setbacks, and critical area requirements.
(4) The original legal description of the entire property together with new separate legal descriptions for each lot, tract or parcel, labeling them each as existing parcel A, existing parcel
B, revised parcel A, revised parcel B, etc. The drawing shall be attached to or include on the face
a formal legal declaration of the boundary line adjustment, signed and notarized by all legal owners of the subject properties. In cases where the property has not been surveyed, the following disclaimer shall be recorded on the drawing:
DISCLAIMER LANGUAGE FOR BLA STATEMENT OF INTENT: Your request
for a Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA) has been approved. Since no survey was
submitted as part of your BLA application, the County accepts no liability for what facts a survey might have revealed. A survey might have revealed that a structure or improvement believed to be on the applicant’s property is, in fact, located wholly or partially upon someone else’s property or upon property that is not the subject of this BLA. But in the absence of a survey, the applicant bears sole responsibility if such a
problem arises.
(5) A copy of any covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs), deed restrictions, or planned
rural residential development (PRRD) agreements pertaining to or affecting the property; and
(6) If an individual septic system is proposed (i.e., as opposed to connection to either a community drainfield or municipal sewer system), the applicant shall provide written verification
from the Jefferson County department of environmental health that the lots, tracts, parcels or sites, as each would exist after the boundary line adjustment, are adequate to accommodate an on-site sewage disposal system. The location of soil logs must be shown on the drawing to show land area sufficient to meet environmental health requirements for each resultant lot, tract, or
parcel that does not contain a dwelling. In cases where the requirement to provide written
verification that the resultant lots can accommodate on-site sewage system from the Jefferson County department of environmental health has been waived, the following notice shall be recorded on the drawing:
Notice to Public: Approval of this Boundary Line Adjustment does not guarantee a
buildable site within said parcel(s). Such determination is dependent on approvals of
water, septic, bulk and dimensional setbacks, and ESA requirements.
This requirement shall be waived for resultant parcels that:
(a) Have existing residential structures; or
Attachment C
DRAFT
22 Draft of: August 18, 2022
(b) Have limited the use of the resultant parcel to agriculture, forestry, or open space through conservation easements, restrictive covenant, or similar legal arrangement. The
open space tax program shall not be used to fulfill this requirement;
(7) The application shall be accompanied by a current (i.e., within 30 days) title company certification of the following:
(a) The legal description of the total parcels sought to be adjusted;
(b) Those individuals or corporations holding an ownership interest and any security
interest (such as deeds or trust or mortgages) or any other encumbrances affecting the title of said parcels. Such individuals or corporations shall sign and approve the final survey prior to final approval;
(c) Any lands to be dedicated shall be confirmed as being owned in fee title by the owner(s) signing the dedication certificate;
(d) Any easements or restrictions affecting the properties to be adjusted with a description
of purpose and referenced by the auditor’s file number and/or recording number; and
(e) If lands are to be dedicated or conveyed to the county as part of the subdivision, an American Land Title Association (A.L.T.A.) policy may be required by the director of the
department of public works.
Section 18.35.080 of the Jefferson County Code, last amended by Ord. 14-18 § 4 (Exh. B), is
amended to read:
18.35.080 Review process and criteria.
(1) Prior to approval, a proposed boundary line adjustment shall be reviewed by the Jefferson
County assessor.
(2) Based on any comments solicited and received from the department of public works, the department of environmental health or other applicable departments and agencies, the administrator shall approve the proposed boundary line adjustment only upon finding that the adjustment would not:
(a) Create any additional lot, tract, parcel, site within a binding site plan or division or
relocate any lot, tract, parcel, or site within a binding site plan or division to another parent
parcel;
(b) Result in the creation of a lot which is not a buildable lot, unless such lot is restricted by recorded instrument acknowledging the lot is for the purpose of conservation, open space, or other similar purpose;
Attachment C
DRAFT
23 Draft of: August 18, 2022
(b) Result in a lot, tract, parcel, site within a binding site plan or division that results in insufficient area or dimension to meet the minimum requirements for area and dimension
as set forth in chapter 8.15 JCC and state and local health codes and regulations;
(c) Diminish or impair drainage, water supply, existing sewage disposal, and access or easement for vehicles or pedestrians, utilities, and fire protection for any lot, tract, parcel, site (i.e., within an approved binding site plan), or division;
(d) Diminish or impair any public or private utility easement or deprive any parcel of
access or utilities;
(e) Diminish or impair the functions and values of critical areas designated under Chapter 18.22 JCC, or create an unsafe or hazardous environmental condition;
(f) Create unreasonably restrictive or hazardous access to the property;
(g) Create a nonconforming lot, tract, or parcel or increase the nonconforming aspects of an
existing lot, tract or parcel relative to Chapter 18.15 JCC;
(h) Replat or vacate a short plat or long plat, or revise, amend, or violate any of the
conditions of approval for any short or long subdivision; or
(i) Create a lot, tract, or parcel that crosses zoning district boundaries, with the exception an adjustment across rural residential densities.
(3) Following approval by the administrator, a final record of survey document shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor in accordance with Chapter 58.09 RCW and Chapter 332-130 WAC. The document shall contain a land surveyor’s certificate and a recording certificate. The final page of the record of survey document shall contain the following signature blocks:
(a) The Jefferson County assessor’s office, to be signed by the Jefferson County assessor or
his/her designee; and
(b) The department of community development, to be signed by the administrator.
(4) Upon approval the following statement of intent shall be recorded by the auditor and referenced by auditor file number on the final survey:
THIS RECORDING IS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASSISTING WITH A
BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT PURSUANT TO RCW 58.17.040(6). IT DOES NOT CREATE ANY ADDITIONAL LOTS, TRACTS, PARCELS, OR A DIVISION AS THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREON SHALL MERGE OR BE INTEGRATED INTO ABUTTING PROPERTY PRESENTLY OWNED BY THE PROPONENTS. NOR DOES THE BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT RESULT
Attachment C
DRAFT
24 Draft of: August 18, 2022
IN ANY LOTS, TRACTS, PARCELS OR DIVISION WHICH CONTAIN INSUFFICIENT AREA AND DIMENSION TO MEET MINIMUM COUNTY AND
SANITATION REQUIREMENTS FOR WIDTH AND AREA FOR A BUILDING
SITE.
(5) Pursuant to RCW 84.56.345, current year and any delinquent taxes shall be paid before approval of any boundary line adjustment.
(6) Applications for boundary line adjustments shall be processed according to the procedures
for Type I land use decisions established in Chapter 18.40 JCC.
Attachment C