HomeMy WebLinkAbout03.01.2023 PC Meeting PacketArlene Alen – District 1 LD Richert – District 2 Richard Hull, Chair – District 3
Kevin Coker – District 1 Matt Sircely, Vice Chair -District 2 Chris Llewellyn – District 3
Cynthia Koan – District 1 Lorna Smith – District 2 Michael Nilssen – District 3
1
AGENDA
JEFFERSON COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting – March 1, 2023
Tri Area Community Center, 10 West Valley Road, Chimacum, Washington 98325
This will be a hybrid meeting with telephone or on-line options. The public is invited to
attend in-person, with a limit of up to 50 percent of the venue' s capacity pursuant to
Resolution 24-22.
You can join this meeting remotely by using the following methods:
Zoom Meeting: Meeting ID: 886 7104 7253 Passcode: 894561
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88671047253?pwd=OU8vTWZGWTVRRGNRVEQ1c2k0WDVadz09
This option will allow you to join the meeting live. You will need to enter an email address. If you wish
to provide public comment, click on the hand icon at the bottom of the screen to “raise your hand.”.
Participation will be up to the Chair of the meeting
Audio-only: For one tap mobile copy and paste:
+12532158782,,88671047253#,,,,*894561#
Please sign on 5 to 10 minutes before the official start of the meeting to check sound and video quality
This video will be closed-captioned enabled.
5:30PM Welcome Chair and Overview Presentation
1. Call to Order/Roll Call
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of Minutes
4. Planning Commission Updates (10 minutes)
5. DCD Staff and Director Updates (5 minutes)
PUBLIC COMMENT
6. Public comments from attendees about any topic that is not on the agenda. Public comments on
agenda items can be given during the agenda item’s section. When the Chair recognizes you to
speak, please begin by stating your name and address. Please be aware that the public comment
period is three minutes.
CONSENT AGENDA
7. Transmitted Information – General Information Items to Receive and Read. Suggested motion:
“I move to receive the items on the Consent Agenda”.
Arlene Alen – District 1 LD Richert – District 2 Richard Hull, Chair – District 3
Kevin Coker – District 1 Matt Sircely, Vice Chair -District 2 Chris Llewellyn – District 3
Cynthia Koan – District 1 Lorna Smith – District 2 Michael Nilssen – District 3
2
REGULAR BUSINESS
8. PC Training: Update training tracker and review training opportunities.
9. Expiration of Terms: Kevin Coker, District 1; LD Richert, District 2. Discuss process of filling
positions.
10. Topic – State Legislature
a. How GMA may be amended with current bills. [handout]
b. Where the state is going and how it fits into the current Ruckelshaus Report from
Commerce to the Legislature. (don’t want to get ahead of Legislature, but want to be
proactive).
11. Topic-- 2023 Annual Amendment Cycle
a. Considerations for the 2024 amendment cycle and 2025 periodic review
i. Identify possible focus areas for periodic review (e.g. Climate change, Tribal
Elements, and Housing)
JEFFERSON COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 1, 2023
AGENDA
1.PC Training Record Review--Update training tracker and review training opportunities.
2.Expiration of Terms: Currently, Kevin Coker, District 1; LD Richert, District 2. Discuss process of filling
positions.
3.Future Direction of GMA
a.Where the State is going in 2023 Legislature.,
b.context of the Ruckelshaus Roadmap Report from Commerce to the Legislature regarding GMA.
4.Bills in 2003 state legislative session that amend GMA. [handout]
5.Annual Amendment Cycles and Period Review Coordination & Scheduling
a.Considerations for 2023 amendment cycle
b.2024 amendment cycle
c.2025 Periodic Review
d.Identify potential focus areas for periodic review (e.g. Climate change, Tribal Element, Housing)
HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS
•PC Training Record
•PC Terms and Re-Application Process
FUTURE DIRECTION OF
GROWTH
MANAGEMENT ACT
(GMA)
INSIGHTS FROM STATE REPORTS
AND LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS
COLLABORATIVE ROADMAP PHASE III
2023 LEGISLATIVE BILLS THAT AMEND GMA
•[Handout]
•See Legislative Information Center Web Site for Bill Updates
SEPA AMENDMENTS FOR ALL GEOGRAPHIC AREAS
•WAC 197-11-800(1) Minor new construction
Exemption added for attached homes such as duplexes and four-plexes to current
exemption for residential single family homes within all geographic areas.
ANNUAL AMENDMENT CYCLES AND PERIODIC
REVIEW COORDINATION & SCHEDULING
•Considerations for 2023 amendment cycle
•2024 amendment cycle
•2025 Periodic Review
•Identify potential focus areas for periodic review (e.g. Climate change,
Tribal Element, Housing)
2023 AMENDMENT CYCLE
SITE-SPECIFIC ZONING AMENDMENT PROPOSAL
•Midori Farms Proposal to Rezone 14.5 Acres from RR-
5 to AL-20, adjacent to Existing AL-20 Zoned Land.
Quilcene
500-Foot
Analysis
Zone
2023 AMENDMENT CYCLE
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS--UDC
•Unified Development Code Amendment Docket
•[Handout]
2023 AMENDMENT CYCLE
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS--HOUSING
•Housing amendments for 2023 and 2024 amendment cycles.
•Boarding houses
•Farmworker housing
•Missing middle housing
•Planned Rural Residential Development code review
Development regulations regarding housing
•Other
Land-Use Legislative Bills amending GMA: Upcoming
HB 1276(SSB 5235) Accessory dwelling units H Housing Concerns Concerning accessory dwelling units. Companion to SB 5235 Amends the GMA to require that the housing element of comprehensive plans include consideration and utilization, rather than consideration of the role, of ADUs in meeting housing needs, in compliance with 36.70A.698, which is also amended in the bill. The definition of an attached ADU in 36.70A.696 is amended to include "an attached ADU must have a substantial portion of its footprint within the other housing unit, and must share structural elements with the other unit." The definition of "owner" is stricken. 36.70A.697 is amended to include counties in the requirement to adopt or amend into development regulation and zoning regulations, etc., the requirements of 36.70A.98 during the next required comp plan update cycle. 36.70.698 is amended to include counties and to preempt local authority for prohibiting the construction of ADUs on residentially zoned lots within UGAs. New requirements are also added that limit local authority for regulating ADUs. Counties and cities may not: 1. impose a limit on ADUs of fewer than one attached and one detached on a residential lot of more the 4500 sq. ft. unless the lot is zone to allow: (a) at least 2 dwelling units (in which at least one ADU must be allowed) or (b) at least three dwelling units. 2. Impose a limit on ADUs of fewer than one attached or detached on a residential lot of less than 4500 sq. ft. unless the lot is otherwise zone to allow at least 2 dwelling units. 3. Impose any prohibition of the sale or other conveyance of a condominium unit independently of a principal unit that is based solely on the grounds that the condo unit was originally build as an ADU, provide the condo unit is served by utilities independently. 4. Impose any owner occupancy requirements on any housing or dwelling unit on a lot containing an ADU unless the ADU is a short term rental, or the city or county waives or reduced impact fees and costs associated with ADU construction if the units are offered at or below 80% AMI. 5. Require off-street parking for the ADU if near a major transit stop. 6. Apply other regulations to ADU that are more restrictive than applied to SFR or other residential developments. A list of allowed regulations is also included for ADUs by local governments. They are: 1. Generally applicable development regulations. 2. Public health, safety, building code, and environmental permitting. 3. Prohibition on the construction of ADUs on lot not connected to or served by public sewers. 4. A prohibition or restriction on the construction of ADUs in residential zones with a density of one dwelling unit per acre or less that are within areas designated as critical areas. Counties are authorized to adopt local regulations waiving or deferring fees, deferring the payment of taxes, or waiving specific regulations if the ADU is subject to binding commitments that it will not be regularly offered for short-term rental.
SHB 1351 (SB 5456) Minimum parking requirements H Rules R Reed Medium Oppose Prohibiting the imposition of minimum parking requirements except under certain circumstances. This bill prohibits counties planning under the GMA from imposing minimum parking requirements for new residential or commercial development in the following circumstances: 1. Within 1/2 mile of a transit stop that receives level 1 or 2 transit service. 2. Within 1/4 mile of a transit stop that receives level 3 transit service. A GMA-planning county may impose minimum parking requirements on an individual project in the circumstances described previously, provided that county makes written findings within 30 days of the receipt of a completed application that not doing so would have a substantially negative impact, supportive of a preponderance of the evidence in the record, on existing on-site residential or commercial parking within one-half mile of the development project. Counties may not impose minimum parking requirements for developments meeting 1 and 2 above, under any circumstances, if: 1. the housing development dedicates a minimum of 20% of the housing units
to very low, low, or moderate-income households for a minimum of 12 years or 2. the housing development contains fewer than 20 housing units.
HB 1403 Water & sewage system access H Local Govt Goehner Monitoring Neutral Making it possible for more properties to have access to water, storm drains, and sanitary sewage systems. This bill amends the GMA to allow a city to extend water and sewer into areas beyond the city limits and designate UGAs. The definition of rural character in the GMA is amended to strike the word "traditional" in 36.70A.030(23)(b), strike all of (c) that provide visual landscapes that are traditionally found in rural areas and communities, and all of (f) that generally do not require the extension of urban governmental services. The definition of "rural governmental services" in (25) is amended to remove that they don't include storm or sanitary sewers. 36.70A.070 is amended to remove the requirement that the comprehensive plan "shall be an internally consistent document and all elements shall be consistent with the future land use map." The rural element 36.70A.070(5)(c)(i) is amended to remove the word "containing" so that the measure governing rural development only need to control rural development. 36.70A.070(5)(d)(i)(C) dealing with LAMIRDs is also amended to state that development or redevelopment in terms of building size, scale, use, or intensity "shall be consistent with the needs of the people in those communities, including access to domestic water, storm, and sanitary sewer systems that are feasible and affordable for the location. Further changes to type III LAMIRDs states that public facilities shall be limited to moderate, rather than not permit, low-density sprawl. Findings of noncompliance may not be based on the provision of water, sewer, or stormwater facilities extended outside of the city's boundaries, even when they are inconsistent with the comp plan and state funding cannot be restricted or reduced.
HB 1517 (SB 5466) Transit-oriented development H Housing Reed Monitoring Neutral Promoting transit-oriented development. This bill pertains mostly to cities and establishes incentives and requirements for residential development near public transit assets. The GMA is amended, however, in a manner that will impact some counties. Under the bill, counties are prohibited from requiring off-street parking as a condition of development within a station area, except for disabled parking. A "station area" is defined as all parcels UGA and within 3/4 of a mile of a major transit stop. Parcels that do not have pedestrian access to the station area are exempt. A project not providing parking within a station area cannot be given a SEPA determination of significance resulting from the lack of parking provision. A new categorical exemption is created in SEPA for projects that meet the following: It is related to a proposed development that would fill in a station hub or station area as defined in RCW 36.70A.030; (b) It is related to a proposed: (i) Multifamily residential development; (ii) Mixed-use development; or (iii) Commercial development; and (c) It is not inconsistent with the applicable comprehensive plan, and does not clearly exceed the density or intensity of use called for in the goals and policies of the applicable comprehensive plan. HB 1611 Local government permitting H Finance Reed High Oppose Concerning local government permitting. Local governments planning under the GMA with a population of 20K or more are required to adopt or amend ordinances or resolutions to comply with the requirements of the bill by 3/1/2024. All others by 3/1/2025. Permitting requirements are amended to require that local governments must make a determination of completeness for residential use permit applications within 14 days rather than the current 28. If a local government notifies an applicant that additional information is required, they must notify the applicant within 7 days with a determination of completeness after the information requested is
received. Residential permit review timeframes are also amended as follows: 1. 120 days for five or fewer dwelling units. 2. 180 days for 6 to 101 dwelling units. 3. 270 days for more than 102 dwelling units. If permit review timeframes are exceeded, they shall be deemed approved if: 1. The permit is for more than five dwelling units and at least 20% are affordable to low-income households; or 2. the permit is for more than five dwelling units and all units are affordable to moderate-income households. To determine the number of days elapsed for processing the permit, the following periods are excluded: 1. Any period during which the applicant has be asked for corrections or other actions. 2. During the preparation of an EIS. 3. During administrative appeals. 4. Any mutually agreed upon time extension. Any substantial revision by the applicant resets the clock. The time limits do not apply to new fully contained communities as provided for in RCW 36.70A.350. Counties also lose the opportunity to collect REET on the first sale of any residential or mixed-use involving residential use real property for which a permit was sought if the time frames are exceeded.
SSB 5190 (SHB1110) Middle housing S Ways & Means Trudeau Monitoring Neutral Increasing middle housing in areas traditionally dedicated to single-family detached housing. This is a companion to HB 1110. This bill is about middle housing. It modifies 36.70A.030's definition of "rural governmental service" by striking "transportation and public transit services, and other public utilities" associated with rural development... It requires every city with a population of 6K or more, or any city w/in a contiguous UGA with a city w/a population above 200k required to plan under the GMA to authorize: 1. the development of at least 4 units per lot on all residential lots; 2. The development of at least 6 units per lot on all residential lots if 2 of the 6 are affordable; 3. The development of 6 units per lot on all residential lots w/in 1/2 mile of a major transit stop. SSB 5235 (HB 1276) Accessory dwelling units S 2nd Reading Shewmake Monitoring Concerns oncerning accessory dwelling units. Amends the GMA to require that the housing element of comprehensive plans include consideration and utilization, rather than consideration of the role, of ADUs in meeting housing needs, in compliance with 36.70A.698, which is also amended in the bill. The definition of an attached ADU in 36.70A.696 is amended to include "an attached ADU must have a substantial portion of its footprint within the other housing unit, and must share structural elements with the other unit." The definition of "owner" is stricken. 36.70A.697 is amended to include counties in the requirement to adopt or amend into development regulation and zoning regulations, etc., the requirements of 36.70A.98 during the next required comp plan update cycle. 36.70.698 is amended to include counties and to preempt local authority for prohibiting the construction of ADUs on residentially zoned lots within UGAs. New requirements are also added that limit local authority for regulating ADUs. Counties and cities may not: 1. impose a limit on ADUs of fewer than one attached and one detached on a residential lot of more the 4500 sq. ft. unless the lot is zone to allow: (a) at least 2 dwelling units (in which at least one ADU must be allowed) or (b) at least three dwelling units. 2. Impose a limit on ADUs of fewer than one attached or detached on a residential lot of less than 4500 sq. ft. unless the lot is otherwise zone to allow at least 2 dwelling units. 3. Impose any prohibition of the sale or other conveyance of a condominium unit independently of a principal unit that is based solely on the grounds that the condo unit was originally built as an ADU, provide the condo unit is served by utilities independently. 4. Impose any owner occupancy requirements on any housing or dwelling unit on a lot containing an ADU unless the ADU is a short-term rental, or the city or county waives or reduced impact fees and costs associated with ADU construction if the units are offered at or below 80% AMI. 5. Require off-street parking for the ADU if near a major transit stop. 6. Apply other regulations to ADU that are more restrictive than applied to SFR or other residential
developments. A list of allowed regulations is also included for ADUs by local governments. They are: 1. Generally applicable development regulations. 2. Public health, safety, building code, and environmental permitting. 3. Prohibition on the construction of ADUs on lot not connected to or served by public sewers. 4. A prohibition or restriction on the construction of ADUs in residential zones with a density of one dwelling unit per acre or less that are within areas designated as critical areas. Counties are authorized to adopt local regulations waiving or deferring fees, deferring the payment of taxes, or waiving specific regulations if the ADU is subject to binding commitments that it will not be regularly offered for short-term rental. SB 5466 (HB 1517) Transit-oriented development S Transportation Liias Monitoring Neutral Promoting transit-oriented development. WSDOT is instructed to create a new division or expand an existing one to provide technical assistance and award planning grants to cities to implement requirements of the bill, provide compliance review of any transit-oriented development, and mediate disputes between WSDOT, local governments, and project proponents. A grant program is created, in cooperation with Commerce, to assist in the financing of housing projects within rapid transit corridors. Local governments are among the eligible grantees. Projects eligible to receive grants must meet the following requirements: 1. be within ¼ mile of a rapid transit corridor (light rail, commuter rail, bus rapid transit, ferry terminals, and bus stops); 2. comply with floor area ratio or net density minimums; 3. produce at least 100 units of housing; and 4. include a covenant on the property requiring at least 20% of units to remain affordable for at least 99 years. 36.70A.030 is amended to include a definition for "floor area ratio", "major transit station," "station area," "station hub," and "transit-oriented density." The GMA is amended to add a section prohibiting GMA-planning cities from enacting or enforcing any development regulation within a station area that would prohibit the siting of multifamily on any residential use parcel, and other requirements. The limitations in 36.70A.620 for minimum residential parking for housing units constructed after 7/1/19 for affordable housing, senior and disability housing, and market rate multifamily near transit are repealed. Counties are prohibited from requiring off-street parking as a condition of permitting development within a station area, except for off-street parking that is permanently marked for the exclusive use of individuals with disabilities. SEPA is amended in 43.21C.229 to "provide cities and counties with additional flexibility to accommodate infill as well as to facilitate the timely and certain deployment of sustainable transit-oriented development. It is also amended to require that any project action meeting the following criteria be categorically exempt from SEPA: 1. it is related to a proposed development that would fill in a station hub or station area; 2. it is related to a proposed multifamily residential development, mixed-use development, or commercial development, and it is not inconsistent with the comp plan and does not exceed density or intensity policies. SB 5473 Project permit timelines S Loc Gov, Land Gildon Medium Support - Concerning project permit timelines. This bill has been negotiated between AWB, WSAC, and AWC. 36.70B.020 is amended to change the definition for "project permit," removing building permits and adding "which do not require a comprehensive plan amendment to "site specific rezones." 36.70B.070 is amended to require that a notice of complete application be provided to the applicant within 20 days, rather than 28, and that the 20 days is calculated by counting 5 days per week, excluding holidays, rather than calendar days. This actually extends the deadline by one full week, plus holidays. Counties are required, if the application is deemed incomplete, to notify the applicant in writing that the procedural submission requirements of the local government have not been met and outline what is needed. When a project application is complete in (2) is changed to state "as outline in the permit application." The following is also added: Additional information or studies may be
required or project modifications may be undertaken subsequent to the procedural review of the application by the local government. Also added: However, if the procedural submission requirements, as outlined on the project permit application have been provided, the need for additional information or studies may not preclude a completeness determination. Subsection (3) is also amended to include that "the determination of completeness may include or be combined with," and "the notice of application pursuant to the requirements in RCW 36.70A.110" is added to the list. That date upon which the application is deemed complete if the local government does not provide a written determination is changed to the 29th date after it is received. RCW 36.70B.080 is changed with regard to time periods counties have to review permits and issue a final decision. The current 120-day timeframe is changed to three different time frames: 1. 45 days for permits which do not require public notice; 2. 70 days for permits requiring public notice; and 3. 120 for permits requiring public notice and a public hearing. Jurisdictions are authorized to modify the timeframes and permits types as long as the modifications don't exceed 120 days. Calculating the days in review begins from the date of completeness to the date a final decision is issued. The number of days is calculated by counting 5 days per week, excluding holidays. Days do not include time periods between where the county has notified the applicant in writing that additional information is required and the day when responsive information is submitted. Time periods are also stopped when an applicant informs the local government, in writing, they would like to temporarily suspend review. Time periods are also stopped when an administrative appeal is filed. When time periods for review and decision are not met, the applicant is entitled to a discount on the permit fee. Discounts are 10% for up to 20% of the time frame exceeded, and 20% if the timeframe is exceeded by more than 20%. Counties can exempt themselves from the penalties for exceeding timeframes if they implement at least three of the following options: 1. collect fees that cover the full costs of permitting review; 2. enter into an interlocal agreement with another jurisdiction for sharing permitting staff and resources; 3. have on-call permitting assistance in place and budgeted for when volumes increase; 4. have new positions budgeted that are contingent on increased permit revenue; 5. adopt development regulations which only require public hearings for applications required to have a public hearing be statute; 6. adopt development regulations making pre-application meetings optional rather than mandatory; 7. adopt regulations making housing types an outright permitted use in all zones where housing type is permitted; 8. adopt a program allowing outside professionals with appropriate licenses to certify components of applications consistent with their license; 9. offer a meeting with applicants to resolve outstanding issues during the review process.
Draft Work Product--Subject to Change
UDC Amendments Deferred from 2018 Docket to Future Work Plan ver. 2022-05-24
Item #Type of
Change
Code Section Description
8 M 18.10.030 Add definition for “Cumulative Effects of similar actions in the area” as used in 18.15.610. See
18.25.100(3)(aa), and discussion on review page 8.
10 18.10.190 Add definition for Standing. Cf. 18.05.085(3).
23 M 18.15.040 Table 3-1 Fix awkward adjective "recreational" reference in "Marijuana recreational producer", "Marijuana
recreational processor", "Marijuana recreational retailer". Remove altogether or write as
"Marijuana producer (recreational)". Performance standards are awkwardly in alphabetized list
under "Recreational" at 18.20.295. Move to "M".
30 M 18.15.1124 Clarify standards used for FAA regulations with document cite.
31 M 18.15.1132 Ground transportation facilities—provide regulation cite.
38 M 18.15.225 The JCC stillAmend references to the appellant examiner for the Reasonable Economic Use
Variance process. Does this mean that we would still use the appellant examiner process in these
instances? Should this be docketed? Or has it already been? 18.15.225 Notice.
39 M JCC 18.15.255 JCC 18.15.255 (3)(a) references an outdated portion of the On-site Sewage Code. I believe it and
should reference WAC 246-272-22501.
47 M 18.15.572 Review possibly awkward construction between 18.15.470 "Article VI-L Remote Rural Overlay
Districts for the West End Planning Area and the Brinnon Planning Area" and 18.15.572 "Article VI-
O Small-Scale Recreation and Tourist (SRT) Overlay District" -- which is referring only to Brinnon
Subarea Plan. Rename Article VI-O to include "Brinnon Subarea Plan" or address all SRT in one
area. See also Article VII -- Subarea Plans; 18.15.580 Brinnon Subarea Plan.
49 M 18.15.610 (2)(b)MID approval criteria. Analyzing impacts of major industrial development--uses term "cumulative
effects" which should probably be defined.
51 M 18.15.635 Reauthorization of Article needed through Board’s legislative action.
Refers to code provisions for Major Industrial Developments (MID) -- requires public hearing and
reauthorization action. Review Growth Management Act (GMA) amendments.
52 S 18.18 Code Interpretation 6/10/2009 explaining transitional and urban zoning and lot combinations.
Review interpretation for possible code text that is more expository.
59 S 18.18.100(2)(g)UGA sign regulations differ from 18.30.150(8)(d) and may be impermissible restraint on speech.
Generally, need to review sign code across UDC for compatibility between 18.18, 18.20 and 18.25.
Review for compliance with "strict scrutiny" standard.
69 S 18.20.295 (4)(g)18.20.295 (4) (g) – Recreational Marijuana: site development standards require all have “Type A”
landscape screening from adjacent parcels. This is nonsense not appropriate for retail. Add text
here about administrative options to adapt different performance standards.
70 S 18.20.140 JCC 18.20.140 needs requirements for General Institutional Uses.
71 M 18.20.150 (1)(c)Update RCW reference.
72 M 18.20.160 (5)(c)+Revise release of moratorium and add the one acre provision 18.20.160 (5)(c) (assessor allows
one-acre site allowing to remain under forestry tax category.)
73 M 18.20.160 (5)The text of RCW 76.09.060 and JCC 18.20.160(5) are conflicting. The text needs to be updated to
coincide with one another. [Forest Practices Act, conversion harvest and development
moratorium.]
77 M 18.20.200 Include marijuana operation in prohibition list for home businesses.
79 M 18.20.295 Update name of “Liquor and Cannabis Board”. Add definitions for license and licensee.
184 18.20.295;
18.15.040 Table 3-1
Change the word “marijuana” to “cannabis” throughout the UDC sections to implement Second
Substitute House Bill (2SHB) 1210, Chapter 16, Laws of 2022.
81 M 18.20.295 (3)(b)Add USE in "Allowed as conditional discretionary (C(d)) use with a cottage industry permit…"
84 M 18.20.350(3)(j)(v)“Cumulative effect” or “cumulative impact” undefined [use definition from State references -
RCW or WAC].
92 S 18.30.050 Table 6-1 *JCC 18.30.050 Table 6-1 at Minimum rear and Side Setbacks...add footnote "20"
*Footnote 20. "If a development proposal depends on two or more lots or parcels to be
considered as one site for purposes of complying with the provisions of this title or of any other
provision of Jefferson County Code, the department may require a the applicant to record a
covenant to the benefit of the county that requires the retention of the lots under common
ownership and control for the duration that the use is maintained on the site."
*Area of Impervious Surface Coverage. Change to include pervious pavement in the calculation.
*Note 15 re: stormwater requirements on parcel < one acre, show it's minimized, demonstrate
house is comparable to neighborhood (gross floor area).
101 S 18.30.100 Table 6-3 Investigate parking stall size standards for compact vehicles.
103 S 18.30.130 (8)(b)Pruned and trimmed as necessary—see Wuthrich v. King County, No. 92555-5 and note for JCC
18.30.050.
104 M 18.30.150 (8)(d)Harmonize with UGA sign code at JCC 18.18.100.
106 M 18.30.150 (8)(d)Removed time limits for political signs. JCC 18.30.150 regarding time limits for political signs--
Reed v. City of Maguire U.S. Supreme Court applies strict scrutiny to any regulation based on
content. Remove the political time limits so they are not regulated differently from real estate
signs, et cetera. JMP
(jmp) MRSC 7/28/22 New information Re: Reed v. City of Maguire for on & off-premisis sign
regulation: https://mrsc.org/Home/Stay-Informed/MRSC-Insight/July-2022/On-Off-Premises-Sign-
Regulations-Clarified.aspx. Intermediate scrutiny standard.
107 M 18.30.150 (6)(r)*(r) need height standard referencing "urban residential" zone too.For UGA development standard
review
118 S 18.35.470 Make the condominium-ization – JCC 18.35.470 – language clearer with consideration for possible
eaffects on ADU’s.
no text yet
119 S 18.35.670 The plat alteration section (JCC 18.35.670) is kind of left hanging without a final “what to do”. We
should work on adding this. Should include final steps including such as taxes being paid, number
of copies for final, signature blocks, etc. Please let me know if you’d like me to work on this
section.
needs more discussion & process
improvement
121 M 18.40.030 (5)Edit sentence "Project review conducted pursuant to…" for clarity.not sure what the problem is
129 M 18.40.130 (2)Review text and revise for clarity. Looks like cut/paste from RCW and not completely in context.
133 S 18.40.230 Aaland: In first paragraph, changed the provision to combine the notice of application with
threshold determination from “may” to “shall” combine to conform with 18.40.780(1)(c)
needs more process work
133 S 18.40.230 [Note: this is part of a larger issue of noticing before appeal period runs out.
133 S 18.40.230 Staff: Noticing timeframes in JCC 18.40.230 do not agree with those specified in JCC
18.40.330(2)(b) and (3) - SEPA notice cannot be combined for noticing as specified in JCC
18.40.230 in case of SEPA appeal (due to SEPA appeal noticing timeframes).
See also 18.40.780 (1)(c) which says threshold determination and hearing notice "shall" be
combined. This creates a problem to couple the two, because the hearing is noticed without
allowing the appeal period to run out, and any appeal would be omitted from the hearing notice.
135 S 18.40.330(6)Added a new (6) explicitly eliminating certain SEPA appeals. [Evaluate this change further.]
142 S 18.40.640 Code Interpretation, David Goldsmith (no date, 2016),: Administrative Road Setback Variances
shall be subject to Article IX, 18.40.640 Variance Types -- Review Process, as a distinct variance in
addition to other types of variances provided in the code. Refer also to 18.30.050 Table 6-1
footnote #6, "...the administrator may reduce the minimum road setbacks if the strict application
of such setback would render a legal lot of record unbuildable under the provisions of the code."
18.40.650(5) that condition is not caused by applicant. Clarify that the application will be
evaluated under variance criteria. Ensure consistent and equitable review for all applicants.
143 S 18.40.760(3)(a)(i)Add more detailed “cumulative impact” language
144 S 18.40.810 (8)Deleted requirement to mail notice of appeal ten days prior to hearing.
147 S 18.40.030 Additional language to determine project review type.
149 M 18.40.530 Define vague terms in Approval of Conditional Uses—“cumulative effect”, “similar actions”, “in
the area”.
150 M 18.40.650 Review variance approval criteria, “cumulative impact” language with other sections, & Shoreline
Master Program (SMP).
155 S 18.45 18.45 does not make a clear distinction between an annual amendment cycle and the periodic
review. The schedule for a periodic review simply refers to the annual amendment cycle.
Therefore, to handle the scope of a periodic review, DCD has to pass a Resolution to defer annual
amendments so that we’re not “trying to change a flat tire while the car is travelling”. A periodic
review of the CP Comprehensive Plan needs to allow DCD to establish a work plan with its own
schedule.
158 S 18.50.060(6)*Notice considered served three days after posting
18.50.060 *Enforcement: Notice and Order – service by mail, change postmark date to “3 days after
postmark”
159 S 18.50.110(1)(d)Civil and criminal penalties—when fines accrue, postmark date to “3 days after postmark”.
Correct fine/imprisonment amounts/times for misdemeanor.
18.50.110(4)
162 S Title 15 Adopt International Residential Code Appendix Q for Tiny Home standards. Alternately adopt our
own modification of Appendix Q. See emails Mary Blaine and Patty Charnas 11/13/17 and
11/14/17.
163 S 18.40.310 Reconsideration. Review Pierce County's code provisions. 5- day request time period and 10-day
response period is limiting.
164 S 18.30 Clarify meaning of no minimum lot size in Table 6-1, Ch. 18.30. Does not make small lots
"noncomforming" in terms of SMP.
165
18.20.020(2)(g)
Clarify when a shipping container can be remodeled into ADU. Differentiate between a "road
ready" vehicle typically receiving a state-plan or self-certified insignia from the Washington State
Department of Labor and Industries with a dwelling that is converted from something else such
as a shipping container, shed or other open framed building and the conversion takes place on the
site where it will be used. Truck storage container different from shipping container?
deferred
166
18.40.180
"A notice of application shall not be required for Type I project permits that are
categorically exempt under SEPA, unless a public comment period or an open record
predecision hearing is required. A notice of application shall be required for all Type II and
Type III projects, regardless of whether such projects are exempt from SEPA. [Ord. 8-06 §
1]
deferred
167
M 18.40.530
Remove requirement regarding compliance with federal statutes as a local CUP approval criteron.
"(g) The conditional use complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of this code and
any other applicable local code , state or federal law; and more specifically, conforms to the
standards contained in Chapters 18.20 and 18.30 JCC;"
completed
168 18.40.330 and Article III
Public Notice
Requirements Chapter
18.40,
No protocol identified for re-noticing projects when the project has changed. i.e. SEPA now
required when it wasn't before, example timeline:Type III project notice period ends, proponent
changes project adding additional parking triggering SEPA, how to (or should?) re-notice provide
comment period again and allow SEPA appeal to be consolidated at Type III hearing.
added 2018
169 JCC 18.40.800 and
18.40.750(3)(g)
duplicate language added 2018
170 18.15 and check 18.05 Text amendment in the description of Inholding Forest to match Comprehensive Plan. Remove
vesting sentence.added 9-24-18
171 18.45.040 (b)(v)reference error: current text is "(1)(c) and (1)(d)", should be "(1)(b) and 1(c)"added 1/18/19
172
18.40.720 (4)
reference error: cites Ch. 42.17 RCW which has morphed to Ch 42.17A Campaign disclosure and
contribution. Possibly reference should be Ch. 42.56 RCW Public Records Act.added 2/12/19
173
18.20.060
Code section is written too narrowly for dogs and cats. Animal shelters and animal welfare
facilites exist for other animal species. Refer to PRE19-00011 Discovery Bay Ranch Animal Shelter
and attorney challenge that 18.20.060 does not apply, but only can do "livestock management"
under Ag Code 18.20.030. Misses opportunity to provide CUP and protection from nuisance
provisions of Title 6 - Animal Control.
added 4/29/19
174 Update based on passge of SB 1377 relating to density bonuses for affordable housing on
property owned by a religious organization.added 8/1/2019
175 18.40.570
Revise to differentiate between minor and major amendment. Use draft language from PAO added 8/1/2019
176 18.30.040 (4)(based on recommendation from PAO, repeal. It is no longer relevant added 8/1/2019
177 JCC 18.40.810 Standard of Review not "de novo". added 3/28/2022
178 JCC 18.20.295-.230; Ch.
18.15; Ch. 18.18; Ch.
8.60
LCB Board Action: Approved proposal for expedited rule making (CR 105) to replace every use of
the term “marijuana” with the term “cannabis” throughout Title 314 WAC.
added 4/27/2022
179 18.22 Seismic source information NEHRP referenced but not EES seismic data added 5/18/2022
180 18.35 Administrative Lot Certification process should be repealed (Barbara Ehrlichman)added 5/18/2022
181 18.22.830(1)Conservation District and DCD never got together to outline the Farm Plan process (JCC
18.22.830(1))
added 5/24/2022
182 s 18.25.280
18.39.160
JMP - I find that our Shoreline Master Program is much more thorough regarding the County’s
ability to require on-site archaeological monitoring during excavation than our development
standards in 18.30.160. Nonetheless, I am considering the UDC sufficient to require on-site
archaeological monitoring while excavating in areas considered high risk for cultural artifacts or
human remains based on written evaluation by a qualified archaeologist. (JCC 18.30.160(1)).
[Note: in the Discovery Bay PRRD project, I added archaeological survey, and monitoring where
required to the project, as a SEPA mitigation in a MDNS—among several other mitigating
requirements—because the application did not adequately address it. In the current case, [sewer
construction], standards described in the applicant’s SEPA Checklist comport with the SMP (the
jurisdiction where the highest risk occurs).] However, I notice different procedural requirements
between SMP at JCC 18.25.280 and Development standards at JCC 18.30.160. Namely: 1.
18.30.160(1) “Significant archaeological data or artifacts must be recovered before work begins or
resumes on a project. No application will be delayed more than 10 working days for such an
inspection.” In the SMP at 18.25.280(2)(d) “The county shall prohibit any use or development
that poses a threat to a HACSE resource. Alternatively the county shall require the development
to be postponed to allow for: (i) Coordination with potentially affected tribes and/or the State
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation; and/or (ii) Investigation of public
acquisition potential; and/or (iii) Retrieval and preservation of significant artifacts. 2. The SMP
gives the UDC Administrator authority to revise the procedural requirements. (JCC
18.25.280(3)(d)). But this is not explicitly stated in JCC 18.30.160.
7/27/2022
183 S 18.40.500 & Ch. 18.18 18.40.500 This article shall apply to each application for a conditional use permit. Only those uses
indicated by a “C(a),” “C(d)” or “C” opposite the use in Table 3-1 in JCC 18.15.040 will be
considered for a conditional use permit. [Ord. 8-06 § 1]
Need to include use table of 18.18.
18.40.530 "Approval criteria for all conditional uses.Share
(1) The county may approve or approve with modifications an application for a conditional use
permit (i.e., uses listed in Table 3-1 in JCC 18.15.040 as “C(a),” “C(d)” or “C”) if all of the following
criteria are satisfied:"
7/28/2022
184 18.35.040(1 - 4)Review and update exemptions to reflect current state statute and things like road segragations
and lot certifications (if not part of the Legal Lot of Record changes). May involve adding
exemptions.
8/24/2022
185 Ch. 18.20 Add provisions for Boarding Housing -- Background with David Wayne J. and Kevin Coker.8/31/2022
186 18.15.150(3)
18.10.010
Forest Resource Lands setback in 18.15.150 applies the setback to lands "adjacent". 1) When
there is an intervening road right of way, should the setback still apply across the road? Compare
with "functionally isolated" concept with SMP & CAO. Forest setback is for safety--providing
deference to forestry practices which may be felling tall trees. 2) "Adjacent" definition at
18.10.010 includes areas on the other side of a road. Should it be changed to "abutting" to specify
properties that have a common boundary? Does that adequately address the safety issue? See
written DCD guidance (2021?) on the application process when forest setbacks are involved. jmp
8/31/2022
187 Ch 18.30 Email to Customer re: Fire Wise Planning. "As an emerging issue, and exacerbated by climate
change, additional planning for fire safety has become necessary, particularly in residential areas
surrounded by forest lands or other areas with heavy fuel loads. This is referred to as the wildland
interface. You have likely seen news stories from California where power companies have had to
do rolling blackouts for fire mitigation in areas with high winds, dry conditions, and heavy fuel
loads in case a power line is blown down. The conventional term and program is called Fire Wise
Planning. There is additional information about this on the County website at the Emergency
Management Department https://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/950/Dept-of-Emergency-
Management. See “Wildfire Preparedness” under the heading “Wildfire Information and
Conditions” Our region is experiencing changes to climatic conditions in terms of precipitation
amounts and timing. Mitigative measures for climate change may need to include more wildfire
planning in the future."
9/2/2022
2023 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendment Process Flowchart
Formal Site-Specific Amendment & Suggested Amendment Proposals
Anticipated timeline
or required deadline
Shading denotes legislatively determined dates
Draft January 9, 2023 - Subject to Revision
4:30 pm Reports
March 1, 2023
March 17, 2019
est. April 2023
May 8, 2023
July 3, 2023
July/August 2023
September 2023
October 2023
November 2023
December 11, 2023
February 2023
PC Recommentdation Report
to BoCC Regarding
Suggested Amendments
DCD Staff Report, SEPA
Addendum & Recommendations
on Docketed Proposals
Planning Commission
Recommendations to BoCC
on Docketed Proposals
DCD Drafts Ordinance
for Final Board Action
DCD Compilation of
Preliminary Docket &
Evaluation Report on
Suggested Amendments
Applications due no later than March 1 of each year
JCC 18.45.040(2)(a)
DCD Staff Report evaluating which Suggested Amendments meet criteria to be placed on
the Final Docket
JCC 18.45.060(1)
Staff prepares compilationof Preliminary Docket for public review by the end of the second full business week of March of each year.
+ All Formal Site-specific Amendments + All Suggested Amendments
JCC 18.45.050
Optional Joint BoCC/Planning Commission Workshop
Invite applicants to present proposals
JCC 18.45.060(2)
Planning Commission Hearing on Suggested Amendments on preliminary docket
JCC 18.45.060(3)
Planning Commission Report and Recommendation to BoCC on Suggested Amendments
for Final Docket
JCC 18.45.060(3)
BoCC to consider Preliminary Docket by the second regular BoCC meeting in May
JCC 18.45.060(4)
Possible BoCC public hearing on suggested amendments if majority of BoCC decides to add or subtract suggested amendments
to be held no later than the first BoCC meeting in July
JCC 18.45.060(4)(a)
BoCC adopts Final Docket
All timely submitted petitions for Formal Site-Specific Amendments
Proposals for Suggested Amendments which the BOCC elects to consider
DCD review, staff report, and recommendation of Final Docket, including SEPA review
JCC 18.45.070
Planning Commission review of Final Docket proposals & at least one Public Hearing
JCC 18.45.080(1)
Planning Commission recommendations on Final Docket proposals to BoCC
Approve, Deny, Approve with Conditions or Modifications
BoCC reviews CPAs and PC Recommendations at regularly scheduled meeting
JCC 18.45.080(2)(b)
Optional BoCC workshop to review the Planning Commission
Recommendations
JCC 18.45.080(2)(a)
BoCC Public Hearing if change deemed necessary to Planning Commission
Recommendations
BoCC Decision
The final action on the docket must be taken
by the second regular board meeting in
December of each year
JCC 18.45.080(2)(d)
Possible Appeals shall be filed with and processed by WWGMHB per Chapter
36.70A RCW
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
1
MEETING MINUTES
JEFFERSON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting – January 4, 2023
Tri Area Community Center, 10 West Valley Road, Chimacum, Washington 98325 5:30PM Welcome Chair and Overview Presentation 1. Call to Order/Roll Call
District 1 District 2 District 3
Alen Sircely Hull
Coker Smith Nilssen
Koan Richert Llewelyn – Unexcused
absence
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of Minutes (No minutes this meeting to approve.)
Motions
Motion # Motion 1st 2nd Yay Nay Abstain
1 Motion to Approve minutes
2 Motion to Approve consent agenda
PUBLIC COMMENT
4. Three minutes per speaker. (No public comments this meeting)
5. Planning Commission Updates
a. Matt Sircely Jan 3, 2023 Letter to JCPC on 2023 Priority Items, JCPC Affordable Housing
Subcommittee.
6. DCD Staff and Director Updates (5 minutes)
a. Eleventh Temporary County Policy Based on Emergency Response to Covid Pandemic—
hybrid meetings allowed at 50% capacity. CONSENT AGENDA 7. General Information Item to Read and Receive
REGULAR BUSINESS
8. Additional Staffing of Planning Commission
a. Auburn Lovett
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
2
b. Alex Henley
9. Formation of Public Outreach Subcommittee and Charter
a. Commissioner Koan recommended a subcommittee to address the Planning Commission
Web page individually.
b. Outreach Subcommittee task force will be headed by Commissioners Lorna Smith and
Cynthia Koan.
o Added objective is to develop a format and text for the Planning Commission Web
page.
Accessibility
Visuals
Etc.
10. Review background materials for January 18, 2023, BoCC and PC joint meeting.
a. PC Revitalization Goals
b. 2022 Meeting Summary Items
c. PC Subcommittee Report
d. Specific PC Focus Areas
7:30 PM ADJOURNMENT The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for ______ __, 2023, at 5:30. To attend virtually
please use the following link or dial in using your phone by calling: +1 (646) 749-3122; Access Code:
883-126-605. Link is https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88671047253?pwd=OU8vTWZGWTVRRGNRVEQ1c2k0WDVadz09 and the passcode is 894561 To learn if in-person attendance is possible, please view the next meeting agenda.
These meeting minutes were approved this ____________ day of_____, 2023. ____________________________ Richard Hull, Chair Auburn Lovett, Secretary
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
1
MEETING MINUTES JEFFERSON COUNTY- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Regular Meeting – January 25, 2023 Tri-Area Community Center, 10 West Valley Road, Chimacum, Washington 98325 Joint Planning Commission Meeting/Board of County Commissioners Meeting
Welcome Chair and Overview Presentation
1. Call to Order/Roll Call
District 1 District 2 District 3 Alen- X Sircely- X Hull -X
Coker-X Smith - X Nilssen -X
Koan- X Richert-X Llewelyn – Unexcused Absence
2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of Minutes (Past minutes were not addressed in this joint meeting)
Motions
Motion # Motion 1st 2nd Yay Nay Abstain
1 Motion to Approve minutes
2 Motion to Approve consent agenda
PUBLIC COMMENT
4. Three minutes per speaker--No public comments
5. Planning Commission Updates—Updates were not addressed in this joint meeting
6. DCD Staff and Director Updates (5 minutes)—Updates were not addressed in this joint meeting
CONSENT AGENDA 7. General Information Item to Read and Receive—No attached information items REGULAR BUSINESS
Planning Commission and BoCC Meetings were called to order 5:32 pm.
1. Introduction of pc chair: appreciates BoCC attendance and hopes it becomes annual
a) Past year discussions facilitated by DCD to promote community priorities, pc developed a work
plan with recommendations for BoCC
o Pc recommends several topics that will be discussed later in this meeting
• Heidi: General sewer and plan questions for Hadlock UGA, ordinances, etc. Commented [JP1]: Look up, report what questions were asked
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
2
• Joel Peterson presented the 2022 Annual Planning Commission/DCD Report
• Discussed goals, planning, and Outreach Subcommittee resulting from Planning Commission Annual Retreats
• Planning Commission & BoCC Annual plan and prioritization exercise
o Establish a work plan and measures of success that drive the process and allows for
annual evaluation.
• Community Development suggests that the Joint PC and BoCC meeting become annual.
o Important to continue to build bridges between The Department of Community
Development, the Planning Commission, and the Board of County Commissioners.
September meeting was a good time of year because it precedes the County
budget cycle.
Purpose of the PC retreat: organizational review, processes/procedure improvements, and complete organizational and operational items such as Bylaws review.
• Training and meetings
o 2022 19 of 24 possible meetings (Average for the past 7 yrs)
o Planning Commission provided recommendations on ordinances for temporary housing, legal lots of record, and mineral resource lands overlay.
• 2025 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Review
State deadline June 30, 2025
Relief from the Annual amendment cycle during Periodic Review: Proposed
deferring the 2025 annual amendment cycle in favor of the Periodic Review.
Probably too late to defer the 2024 Annual Amendment Cycle since the
deadline for 2023 is upon us.
• Brotherton and Peterson discussed meeting in September annually to hear suggestions and concerns from the year.
Mark McCauley: the board adopts the budget on the second Monday in December. Thus, there is time before that date for amendments to the budget (Sept/Oct)
• Brotherton: Legislation that informs the update of the comprehensive plan (housing
element) may be coming from the state legislature.
o Potentially a substantial update and could be a way to include planning
commission ideas.
• Cynthia Koan: we extended our review last cycle, what are the chances that we will/can
extend the deadline again?
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
3
o Joel Peterson: we may be able to but most likely do not want to go that route, GMA says in a rural county, you may be able to extend an additional year
Unsure if that extinguishes the Commerce planning grant
The offset from the city disturbs other information (demographic, population, etc.)
• Brent Butler: important reminder regarding the comprehensive plan: its never taken less
than 2 years to complete the plan amendment
• Commissioner Dean: we know of some changes to GMA that will affect the
Comprehensive Plan
o As well as the climate change bill
o Timing is especially hard due to the UGA Hadlock sewer coming online in 2024
Good to start thinking about/preparing for UGA planning now
o Is there a timeline for the Commerce grant?
Joel Peterson: Dept of Commerce will send the information at some point, but we do not have that information at this time
o Brent Butler: In the last community I worked in, it cost $400,000 for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
Funding would open up at the end of 2023 at the earliest.
Housing
Missing middle housing in the city of Port Townsend and the tri-
area that could potentially be added
Loss of historic farms
o Incentives for preserving those buildings
What can we do to help these issues without opening up the
zoning?
o Joel Peterson: The public did not like the timeline last time. The community did
not feel our application time was sufficient to be able to give input on the comprehensive plan update. This especially concerned the site-specific zoning changes.
So, deferral of the update may be beneficial
o Lorna Smith: We did an excellent job last Periodic Review that engaged the public in a way that is replicable
Happy with community involvement
o Josh Peters: my take on it is that the comp plan amendments were significant
This deadline is close
See what happens this legislative cycle and go from there
Maybe not do an EIS unless we are significantly changing the comp plan –
however, there are many items that may significantly change the comp
plan
• Housing
• Tribal element
• Climate change
Tweak what we have and that will likely expend the budget
o Greg: what would trigger an EIS?
o Brent Butler: Pop/ demographic change as well as:
• Concern about the change in demographics not being accounted for
• An exceedance of growth than was anticipated during COVID
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
4
Facility types
Parks/outdoor spaces based on age
o Josh Peters:
Project actions: are there significant adverse impacts (regarding the triggering of SEPA)
Non-project actions are trickier
• We have been adopting existing environment documents for the
comp plan
If the changes are within the scope of what’s been analyzed in the past
we should just adopt existing documents
• New things such as climate change changes
o Brent Butler: Expanding the UGA in Port Townsend could potentially require that
EIS
Looking at big-ticket items is important
o Cynthia Koan: the expansion of Port Townsend would require a vote?
Who would make that decision?
o Brent Butler: pop growth analysis would determine if a UGA expansion is needed
That analysis would be a component of that
Buildable lands analysis o staff, Board, and PC discussed the process of Port Townsend annexation. o Brent Butler: Local org looks at the ability to serve that area
o Mark M.: 60% has to be agreed (of property owners who would be annexed)
Sometimes built into the buyer’s agreement
o Brent Butler: Cities draw the line where the most tax draw is and cut the areas with the most police calls
o Joel Peterson: Regarding the current Comprehensive Plan, we issued a “DS”
(significant impacts) and adopted all the SEPA documents as meeting the analysis
requirements of an EIS.
Joel Peterson: I would like to introduce Arlene Alen Alan who will discuss a new subcommittee regarding
outreach
o Arlene Alen: this subcommittee was formed due to concerns regarding
community engagement,
Website focus
Challenge we have faced is that in JC we have a very engaged public but they do not use the current pathways to be heard
Purpose of this subcommittee
• Community outreach will support DCD in a variety of ways to increase outreach and community awareness
• Getting the word out for engineers to submit plans for a review of
housing stock plans
o Greg: this seems like a great place to start
Leader wants a quarterly article and this committee may be able to utilize
that
o Heidi: outreach regarding the comp plan is incredibly important
Richard Hull: presentation coming up on general forest practices
• Lorna Smith: Forest Practices are a long-time problem
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
5
o Currently, timber harvest on private lands in JC is regulated by DNR and requires a potential 4 different types of permits as well as a potential SEPA review
o They are also not beholden to Development requirements and CAO
o Pros and cons:
Currently Class IV General Forest Practice authority resides in a few counties
• JC would have more land use control and other protections may
not be met
• JC Critical Areas Ordinance provides a higher degree of protection
than a standard DNR approach
Cons:
• Cost of personnel time and review and enforcement
o The pc was proposing this but I think there needs to be
more research
o How many occur every year and what level of staff involvement is required?
Cost and benefits should continue to be discussed further with DCD
o Cynthia Koan: can we influence the state to benefit from the tax benefits then we may have more resources for enforcement
The unfairness of resources coming from JC and we do not benefit from is
a consideration even though it’s a different thing
o Greg: the dueling priorities of housing and other zoning is a consideration
• Lorna Smith: the intent of taking on Class IV General Forest Practice review is to change
the reality that landowners only have to adhere only to minimal DNR policies
o If JC takes it we can strengthen the CAO and regulations regarding this
We could impose our regulations
If their intent is to convert and didn’t state their intent to convert they have to wait out the moratorium
• LD: when have we seen forestry turned into housing in the last 15 years?
o Brent Butler: MPR is planning on it but hasn’t done it yet
• Josh Peters: I put this on the list because it has been on the law for a while now
o Some counties have added it and some haven’t
o You have commercial practices that are regulated by DNR
o The conversions are Class IV General permits
We have a stormwater permit and a SEPA review for this
We should think about it because it aligns with our SDR processes
• Efficiency standpoint: instead of going to DNR (who doesn’t pay
as much attention to this type of permit)
o Might be easier to convert
Ross who is in the audience worked for 2 decades at DNR
• Ross: “I would recommend it because it benefits landowners from a cost system”
Commissioner Dean: this seems like a less urgent thing to address Richard Hull: Kevin Coker will present on the topic of Housing
Elements that should be revised/clarified
o Commissioner Dean: the short-term rental regulations are something I feel very motivated to take on in the next couple of years
Less planning and more process but curious if you are considering it.
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
6
o Kevin: Yes, as a satellite issue and needs to be looked at
In a way as something to review
o Lorna Smith: We are seeing more out in Cape George in what would otherwise be affordable housing
o LD: it's a complex issue
o Arlene Alen: it's a Matt Sircely of how those owners have taken advantage of
tenets and there is a decline in that population and are looking at —
o Heidi: a lack of long-term rentals affects tourism
o Kevin: at the state level there is discussion on how to increase density in rural
zoning
That's another thing I’m keeping an eye on
o Josh Peters: my first glance is that it doesn't affect us
There are several ADU bills
ADU’s on rural properties legality was called into question and we are hoping the result aligns with what we already do
o Kevin Coker: This relates to stock plans and this may relate to the plans regarding ADUs
o Greg: What’s next? This is just your research so far
o Kevin: this is to look at various housing topics and address them
Maybe ways to loosen certain housing provisions and I will talk to others
and see what will encourage innovations
Mat: housing and ADUS
The governor vetoed an ADU provision last cycle because of sprawl
concerns
• Maybe we are doing something right or maybe he doesn't know
We have a good comp plan and what we haven't done is implement said
plan
• Public engagement will get us to the finish line
There are lots of different ideas that could be applicable in different zones in the county
Each zone changes what constitutes its character
Types of housing, goals, and GMA satisfactions are addressed in the comp plan
Boarding/cohousing could help like Chimacum commons
Complying with GMA is in our plan and what is possible is vital
GMA Concerns
• Environmental issues
o Keep them strong and incorporate them into other laws
• Service provisions
o Proposals do not need to drain services but could instead
add
• Character
o Rural character of different areas
o Zoning and their requirements and how do we increase the workforce
o How do we include the CAO?
• Incorporating CAO and other factors are important for this
county
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
7
• Affordability of all these points is also key
• UGA has the most freedom for innovative development
o Rural areas are the most restrictive
Greg: why aren't people using the temp housing ordinance to create farmworker housing?
• Can create different facilities and qualify as temp housing
o Commissioner Dean: do you mean zoning land?
o LD: has there been a study about the actual number of people working on a farm
in JC?
o Commissioner Dean: bureau of labor and statistics tracks it
Richard Hull: I wanted to talk about the pc and BoCC interactions
o The County Commissioner Deans have deadlines and we often don’t have as
much time for input from the community
• Greg: are you talking about LLORs?
o Richard Hull: it put us in a squeeze and it feels like we didn’t do the job as well as we could have
o LP: it feels like we weren’t given enough information quickly enough and it felt like a rubber stamp and it was disheartening
• General comments about not getting enough time to make decisions and get input
• Greg: I agree, I think we can do a better job of giving you more time
• Richard Hull: thanks for your stipend for training
• LD: it seems like DCD is overworked and I want it to work well. I suggest you let DCD get
their breath before we pile more on
ADJOURNMENT (7:31) The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for February 1, 2023, at 5:30. To attend virtually please use the following link or dial in using your phone by calling: +1 (646) 749-3122; Access Code: 883-126-605. The link is https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88671047253?pwd=OU8vTWZGWTVRRGNRVEQ1c2k0WDVadz09 and the passcode is 894561 To learn if in-person attendance is possible, please view the next meeting agenda.
These meeting minutes were approved this ____________ day of_____, 2022.
____________________________
Richard Hull, Chair R. Auburn Lovett, Secretary
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
1
MEETING MINUTES
JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Regular Meeting – February 1, 2023
Tri Area Community Center, 10 West Valley Road, Chimacum, Washington 98325 Welcome Chair and Overview Presentation (5:30PM) 1. Call to Order/Roll Call
District 1 District 2 District 3
Alen- Excused late Sircely- absent Hull-X
Coker-absent Smith- X Nilssen- Excused absence
Koan- Absent Richert- Excused absence Llewelyn-X
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of Minutes (No Minutes approved)
Motions
Motion # Motion 1st 2nd Yay Nay Abstain
1 Motion to Approve minutes
2 Motion to Approve consent agenda
PUBLIC COMMENT
4. Three minutes per speaker.
a. Mike Warner Port Hadlock
i. Commends coming together with the community
b. Judy Alexander
i. Volunteer for org that provides housing for people experiencing houselessness
ii. Hope for feasible housing solutions
c. Robin
i. Shelter manager for cap ground village
1. Involved with tiny shelters as well
2. We are excited for the joint meeting and look forward to fruitful
conversation
d. Frank Hoffman
i. Lives in District 3
ii. Appreciate the volunteers in their effort working on these issues
iii. Tendency to politicize these issues when it does not need to be
iv. Poverty creates desperation and while this is not an excuse for inappropriate
behavior but it is a reason
1. Lead with empathy and facilitate solutions such as tiny homes and such
e. Julia Cochrane
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
2
i. Winter welcoming center downtown founder
ii. We are seeing new ppl every week
iii. We are seeing record numbers (25 a day)
iv. Ending this takes everybody, unhoused people are us and are just like us
f. Buster Ferris
i. Eden saw woods
1. Enjoy in the city and the county
5. Planning Commission Updates (No updates this meeting)
6. DCD Staff and Director Updates (5 minutes)
CONSENT AGENDA 7. General Information Item to Read and Receive
REGULAR BUSINESS
a. A. Staff presentation
Joel’s presentation: i. We are working on county ordinances for people experiencing homelessness and
coming up with a way to build a facility to support these populations.
Last met Oct 19, 2022, about consistent ordinances
ii. 1. Recap and Work Done with Definitions
1. Shared goals:
a. Facilitate housing for the unsheltered with public health and safety I
mind
b. There is a desire to simplify the process to create
2. Why would we want consistency?
a. Funding
b. Sanitation
3. We need to change the language to people-centered for inclusivity
a. This is when referring to people who are experiencing homelessness
and have certain needs
b. Even in some state laws (RCW) still use pejorative language
i. DCD is confident this language will change in the future and
be updated
c. Also wanted to make sure that language is not “scaring” people off
or making people disinterested in the resources provided.
4. Housing includes
a. Homelessness
b. Emergency housing
c. Transitional housing
d. Social housing
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
3
e. Affordable rental housing
f. Affordable home ownership
g. Market rental housing
h. Market home ownership
5. HUD Continuum of Care system
a. Want to reference when thinking of these solutions as well.
iii. Emma Bolin presentation
1. House bill 12.20 has some requirements for permanent and transitional
housing
2. Indoor emergency housing/shelters
3. Want to make sure that the decisions will be safe from litigation and make
sure our intent is very clear
4. Don’t conflate building longevity with use
a. Some might be transitional some may not be
5. Consistency with state law is key
6. Housing types considered
a. Disaster relief shelter
b. Outdoor temporary facility
c. Indoor temporary facility
d. Tiny shelter village
e. Indoor permanent facility
f. Mixed permanent facility
g. Transitional housing
7. Want to have proposed ordinances for the board by early summer to allow
for changes before the transitional ordinance is up
iv. Judy Surber
1. Came up with different types because of different permits and standards
2. Temporary use v conditional use
a. Temporary are for interim use, not permanent
i. Severe weather shelter (seasonal or transient)
1. Lasts 180 days
ii. Type II
b. Conditional
i. Provides flexibility
ii. Addresses duration (approved as long as use exists)
iii. Type I or II
3. Discussion of Draft Definitions
v. 2. Q/A for section #1 items
1. Term Affordable
a. Getting specific – refers to specific AMIs and such forth
b. Maybe below market could be an alternative
2. Transitional housing in the service provider world describes certain services
for 2 years
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
4
a. May need something to distinguish more (difference between old
alcohol plant and tin village)
3. Barbara
a. Housing advocate
i. Definition of transitional housing is important in addressing
housing and unhoused services
ii. Clear understanding is important
vi. 3. Building Code-Related Points for Temporary Housing
Phil: BLD Code related points- temporary housing
a. Construction standards
i. Tents- none (other than site standards)
ii. RVs, vehicles, trailers, none (other than site standards)
iii. Tiny shelters- more standards
1. Different from RVs and tents
2. Tiny shelters are built by hand on/off-site
iv. Born on date (around 10 years potentially)
1. Reasonable return on investment for this type of
structure
Dave:
b. Site standards- inspections
i. Annual for temp housing
1. Common buildings (kitchen, laundry, bathing,
restroom facilities)
2. Setbacks, fire lanes, ingress/egress, smoking
3. Any other land use permit conditions
ii. Well maintained the life of a structure is 10 yrs., not super
long
1. There needs to be flexibility
c. WAC 51-16-030 exemptions for indigent housing guidelines
i. Exception to development standards -for only 5 years
1. As long as exempted code/buildings pose no threat
to human life, health, or safety
2. Emma:
a. Next steps
b. Like to return to review the entire ordinance but hoping for
consistent decisions today
c. City and county timeline is coming to a close
3. Joel:
a. The county finished the ordinance in June 2022 and can upgrade
definitions
i. Or roll this update into a larger update in the 2023
comprehensive plan
1. That would allow for bigger changes
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
5
b. Caswell brown village- conditional use permit and another for the
complete package of activities proposed on the property
vii. 4. Q&A for section #2 items
b. Next steps
i. Look to have JCC consistent
ii. Find consistency with the planning commission and the housing board
ADJOURNMENT (7:36 PM) The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for January 4, 2021, at 5:30. To attend virtually please use the following link or dial in using your phone by calling: +1 (646) 749-3122; Access Code:
883-126-605. Link is https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88671047253?pwd=OU8vTWZGWTVRRGNRVEQ1c2k0WDVadz09 and the passcode is 894561 To learn if in-person attendance is possible, please view the next meeting agenda.
These meeting minutes were approved this ____________ day of_____, 2022. ____________________________ Richard Hull, Chair Helena Smith, Secretary
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes per speaker.
1
MEETING MINUTES
JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Regular Meeting – November 2, 2022
Virtual only
5:30 PM Welcome Chair and Overview Presentation
1. Call to Order/Roll Call
District 1 District 2 District 3
Alen present Sircely present Hull present
Coker present Smith present Nilssen present
Koan present (left 7:00) Richert present (late) Llewelyn present (late)
2. Approval of Agenda – approved via unanimous consent
3. Approval of Minutes
a. October 19, 2022 Minutes
Motions
Motion # Motion 1st 2nd Yay Nay Abstain
1 Motion to Approve minutes Coker Smith 7 0
2 Motion to Approve consent agenda Koan Coker 8 0
3 Priority order of UDC Updates Sircely Coker 9 0
4 Priority order of CP Updates Sircely Alen 8 0
5 Housing – CP-UDC amendments Coker Nilssen 8 0
6 Housing – non-CP-UDC amendments Coker Alen 8 0
7 Other DCD projects Coker Richert 8 0
4. Planning Commission Updates
a. Ms. Koan shared, among other planning-related anecdotes, that her father, a former
county commissioner who recently passed, signed the authorizing document for creation
of the Planning Commission in 1997.
5. DCD Staff and Deputy Director Updates – Associate Planner Peterson (unless otherwise noted)
a. November 16, 2022 Business Meeting Cancellation & Short-Course Training Webinar –
sign up through Department of Commerce
b. December 7 Joint PC meeting – Harmonizing City and County Ordinances on Temporary
Housing Facilities for People Experiencing Homelessness
c. New County Guidance on Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA)
d. Upcoming public meetings for grant projects – via Associate Planner Donna Frostholm
e. Planning Commission Desk email service – Ms. Koan suggested that a PDF of the meeting
agenda be included with the hyperlink to Laserfiche documents
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes per speaker.
2
f. Planning Commission stipend invoices to be sent to Auditor – Payments anticipated in late
November
g. DCD staffing update – Deputy Director Peters said that a new Assistant Planner, Jenny
Murphy, starts on November 14 and that the Planning Technician position is close to
being filled (currently in negotiation). The Planning Commission Clerk duties will be
assumed by incoming staff.
PUBLIC COMMENT
6. No comment made.
CONSENT AGENDA
7. General Information Item to Read and Receive
a. County Guidance on Legislative Updates to the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA)
REGULAR BUSINESS 8. Prioritization of Top PC Work Plan Items in Preparation to Meet with Board of County
Commissioners (BoCC) regarding Work Plan Priorities and Implementation Recommendations
a. Resources provided:
i. Power Point Presentation – Work Planning 2023
ii. Priority Ranking Survey Results – Data compiled from six respondents prior to
meeting. Rankings provided numeric value (point system per rank priority, divided
by number of responses). Score represents average. Composite priority rankings
by color bar graph.
b. Planning Commission deliberation on priority rankings – See agenda packet for project
descriptions (and acronyms).
i. UDC Updates – Extensive discussion on the idea of assuming jurisdiction from DNR
over Class IV-General forest practices (conversions) – Question: Would there be
any tax revenue implications were the county to assume jurisdiction? (Staff will ask
DNR.) Motion adopted: UGA, FPA conversions, LAMIRD regs, UDC Docket.
ii. Comp Plan Updates – Discussion on Chimacum Commons, farmworker housing.
Motion adopted: 2023 cycle, LAMIRD review, Chimacum Commons, UGA review,
Tribal Element, CP annual assessment, Gateway Plan, 2025 periodic review.
iii. Housing – CP-UDC amendments – Discussion of farmworker housing, connection
to policy for sanitary systems (onsite waste management), boarding houses.
Motion adopted: farmworker housing, boarding houses, PRRD review, housing
facilities ordinance revisited, inclusionary zoning, short-term rentals, camping
ordinance.
iv. Housing – non-CP-UDC amendments – Discussion whether affordable housing
study needed (as we know already that it’s an issue). Motion adopted: stock
building plans, grant opportunities, tax exemptions, C-Pacer, housing study. Ms.
Llewelyn mentioned grant opportunities for farmers.
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450 Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name
and address. Please be aware that the public comment period is three minutes per speaker.
3
v. Other DCD projects – Discussion on emergency management / climate change
planning, CWPP, farms capacity for water for fighting fire, CWSP, wildland-urban
interface. Motion adopted: CWPP, emergency mgmt./climate, CPPs, Quinault
Nation engagement, CWSP update, SOPs, fee review, code enforcement, ongoing
grants, Glen Cove/Tri-Area Special Study review, information mgmt.
c. Implementation – additional Planning Commission comments for BoCC
7:30 PM ADJOURNMENT
The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for November 16, 2022, at 5:30. To attend virtually
please use the following link or dial in using your phone by calling: +1 (646) 749-3122; Access Code: 883-
126-605. Link is
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88671047253?pwd=OU8vTWZGWTVRRGNRVEQ1c2k0WDVadz09 and the
passcode is 894561
To learn if in-person attendance is possible, please view the next meeting agenda.
These meeting minutes were approved this ____________ day of_____, 2022. ____________________________ Richard Hull, Chair Josh D. Peters, Department of Community Development