HomeMy WebLinkAboutLog036
e
e
JEFFERSON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
621 Sheridan Street. Port Townsend. Washington 98368
360/379-4450.360/379-4451 Fax
www.co.jefferson.wa.us/commdevelopment
Memorandum: Consolidated Application for 2006 Development Agreement
Amendment & Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
To:
Through:
Fr:
Date:
Re:
Jefferson County Soard of Commissioners (SoCC),
John Fishbach, County Administrator
Sarbara Nightingale, Associate Planner, Port Ludlow Master Planned Resort, Department of
Community Development (DCD)
June 14, 2006
Notice of Application, 30-day Comment Period, and Public Hearing
Attachments:
MLA06-00221 Master Permit Application for Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
Amendment No.1 Port Ludlow Development Agreement (revised)
Land Use Procedures Ordinance (LUPO) Sec. 6, 7, and 16
Notice of Application (Option 1)
Notice of Application (Option 2)
Backaround
This Consolidated Application includes: 1) a suggested amendment to the Port Ludlow Master Planned Code
(MPR Code) Ordinance 08-1004-99, adopted in 2000 as Resolution 42-00, known as the Port Ludlow
Development Agreement (PLDA), and 2) a Shoreline Substantial Development Application for a 120-unit
residential development in six buildings, one reception/recreation building, pools, roads, and trails.
Development Agreement Amendment
Pursuant to RCW 36.70S and Section 4.6 of the MPR Code, the SoCC must approve all amendments to the
PLDA by ordinance or resolution and only after notice to the public and a public hearing. Under the Land-Use
Procedures Ordinance, adopted as Ordinance 04-0828-98, vested under the Development Agreement this is a
Type C legislative decision. This suggested Port Ludlow Development Agreement amendment defines terms
and changes the Development Agreement to specify Timeshare Use for Tract E, a 14.66 acre portion of the
Port Ludlow MPR, on the Plat of Ludlow Cove and change the Tract E Development Standards accordingly.
Shoreline Substantial Development Agreement
Section 6 of PLDA vested Land Use Procedures Ordinance # 04-0828-98 and the Jefferson County Shoreline
Management Master Program for Jefferson County defines a shoreline permit for residential use along Tract E
in Ludlow Say to be a primary use and an administrative Type A decision.
Consolidated Application
Section 7 of the PLDA vested Land Use Procedures Ordinance # 04-0828-98 provides, at the option of the
applicant, for a.consolidated application and requires that the highest procedure is required for any permit
included in the consolidated application. This requires that the decision be a Type C Decision by the County
Soard of Commissioners. Under Section 16 of the attached LUPO that applies to the PLDA, there are two
Decision Procedures the SoCC select from to make this legislative decision. One procedure is for the SoCC to
refer the application to the Hearing Examiner for an open record hearing and recommendations to be
transmitted to the SoCC, from which they can make their legislative decision. The other procedure is for the
SoCC to hold only their own hearing, without referral to a Hearing Examiner for recommendations.
LOG ITEM
# 1~
Page l
oeD Rae for Rnal Docket 6-14-06 PLA consolidated app
ofL.
Page 1
e
--
Attached you will find 2 versions of a Notice of Application for a Consolidated Application submitted by Port
Ludlow Associates (PLA). The Option 1 Notice of Application is a 30-day notice that mentions only the BoCC
Hearing and decision, if the BoCC should decide to hold only a BoCC hearing prior to the decision. Option 2
Notice of Application is the 30-day notice that includes mention of an open record hearing before a Hearing
Examiner for recommendations to the BoCC prior to the BoCC making a decision on the application. Staff
submits these two versions for the BoCC to select which Notice of Application or decision procedure they
choose to follow.
. .
There is a webpage dedicated to the Port Ludlow MPR that can be accessed from the County homepage:
www.co.iefferson.wa.us.
Discussion of DCD Staff Sufficiency
DCD now has a planning staff dedicated to Port Ludlow Master Planned Resort issues and development.
Anticipated DCD Cost and Budaet
In this case, the proponents will be paying fees to cover costs of county staffing resources; nonetheless, the
scale, complexity, and controversy of the proposal will be a challenge to DCD this year.
Department of Community Development Final Docket Recommendation
The following is a summary description of the suggested amendment and staff comments in relation to project
demands on available resources:
MLA06-00221 proposed by Port Ludlow Associates changes the language and development standards of the
Port Ludlow MPR to allow timeshare use in Tract E.
Comment: Staff has reviewed this suggested amendment and sees this as a combined legislative/project
permit decision falling under LUPO Section 16 as a Type C Decision that requires legislative action by the
BoCC and SEPA review. Proiect Historv: As part of the larger Ludlow Cove project, a Conditional Use for the
multi-family project was approved on August 2, 2002. At that time, a three-year time limit was set for the
submittal of plans and commencement of environmental review for the next phase of Ludlow Cove. Within that
timeline, plans were submitted and the SEPA review and public hearing process began. An application for the
120-unit time-share multi-family residential development situated on 14.66 acres within the PL MPR was
received in 2005. A Notice of Application was issued in June 2005. Public Notice was posted on July 20, 2005.
A MONS was recommended and approved by the SEPA-responsible official on July 27,2005. A public
hearing was held on August 16, 2005. A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit was approved by the
Jefferson County Hearing Examiner on September 2,2005. On September 30,2005, the County received a
letter confirming receipt of permit approval from Jeffree Stewart of WDOE. The Findings, Conclusions, and
Decision from the public hearing upheld PLA's vested interest in a multi-family residential development and
approved the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Binding Site Plan/Condominium Subdivision by
PLA with conditions. An appeal was filed and the Appellate Hearings Examiner issued an Order to Vacate and
Remand the previous decision. The original Hearing Examiner then issued an Order Response to Remand on
February 6,2006. The appellate Examiner decision has now been appealed to Superior Court. A May 17, 2006
Shoreline Hearings Board (SHB) Decision has remanded the decision back to Jefferson County for further
action.
Staff considers this application to be a Type C County Commissioner Decision, under the Land Use
Procedures Ordinance #04-0828-98, Section 16. Staff recommends that the BoCC accept this proposal for
review, hold a public hearing, and seek legal council prior to taking action. Staff also recommends.that
the public notice serve as notice of using the existing environmental documents pursuant to SEPA rules (Chapter
197 -11-600 WAC) with respect to this code amendment proposal. Under WAC 197-11-600, if the new proposal is
unchanged from the original project proposal reviewed under SEPA, the existing SEPA documents can be used to
satisfy the county's responsibilities under SEPA. This is the case. The proposed amendment does not differ
from the original 120-unit time-share condominium conditional use proposal previously reviewed under SEPA.
The County intends to adopt the existing environmental documents.
DCD Rae for RnaJ Docket 6-14-06 PLA consolidated app
Page 2
e
e
~ That BoCC decision is subject to an appeal either to the Shoreline Hearings Board or Superior Court as a Land
Use Petition Act (LUPA) lawsuit.
Fees will be paid' by the proponent to cover county staff and resources.
Conclusion
Based on an assessment of the nature of this amendment, staff recommends that the BoCC take action to
provide this public notice of application, which provides a 30-day comment period, and allow the Hearing
Examiner to conduct an open record hearing and make recommendations to the BoCC regarding the
legislative decision required of this consolidated application. Staff further recommends that the BoCC seek
legal counsel prior to taking action.
[End]
DCD Rae for Rnal Docket 6-14-06 PLA consolidated app
Page 3