Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDCD Comprehensive PlanJEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REQUEST TO: Board of County Commissioners Mark McCauley, County Administrator FROM: Brent A. Butler, DCD Director, AICP Josh D. Peters, DCD Deputy Director, AICP Joel Peterson, Lead Long Range Planner, AICP DATE: May 8, 2023 SUBJECT: 2023 Comprehensive Plan Cycle STATEMENT OF ISSUE: This agenda request meets the Community Development Department's (DCD) preliminary docket review requirements pursuant to JCC 18.45.060 (1) - DCD Review of Preliminary Docket. As such, this agenda request provides discussion and recommendations so that the Board of County Commissioners (Board) may establish the Final Docket of Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code amendment proposals for 2023. This agenda request and the accompanying attachments summarizes information and analysis in order for the Board to take official action on whether to "accept the Planning Commission recommendation regarding what amendment proposals will be on the Final Docket", or for the Board to "hold their own public hearing on what will be on the Final Docket". The latter action is required if the Board adds or subtracts from the Planning Commission's recommendation (see Attachment 1 - Planning Commission Findings & Recommendations, April 19, 2023) By a vote 9-0-0, the Planning Commission unanimously recommends docketing the two suggested text amendments. The Jefferson County Code (JCC) 18.45.060 outlines the Board decision process. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Chapter 18.45 of the Jefferson County Code (JCC), the Jefferson County Department of Community Development (DCD) accepts annual applications for formal site -specific (Attachments 2, 3 and 4) Comprehensive Plan amendments (e.g., re -zone proposals), and suggested text (Attachments 5 and 6) amendments to the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code (UDC). To provide clarity in distinguishing the two types of proposals, they are underlined and in boldface typeset. Proponents of site -specific amendments pay a fee to DCD for analysis and public process through the Planning Commission, and thus are automatically included on the Final Docket for consideration on the second regular Board meeting in May of each year as codified in 18.45.060 (4) Board of Commissioners Decision — Adoption of Final Docket. DCD and the Planning Commission maintain a running list, or docket, of suggested amendment work (JCC 18.45.050(2)), and may submit suggested amendments for Board consideration for what will be included on the annual Final Docket. This running docket reflects continued work in the community, state guidance or changes in state regulations, or developments in planning profession methods. This potential body of work is discussed at the annual Planning Commission and Board workshop and in DCD's annual report. Collectively, this set of site -specific and suggested text amendment proposals comprise the Preliminary Docket. In advance of the annual amendment cycle proposal deadline of March 1st, the Planning Commission and DCD discuss work plan priorities and capacity. After the Preliminary Docket is established, the Planning Commission holds a public hearing, and deliberates on which suggested text amendment proposals they recommend the Board include on the Final Docket. 2023 FORMAL SITE -SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS Three formal site -specific amendment proposals from the public were received by March 1, 2023 per JCC 18.45.050(3). Site -specific amendments are automatically placed on the final docket for processing during the amendment cycle. Case # ZON2023-00004 Applicant: Gifford-Yep Property (see Attachment 2) Location: Rhody Drive and Anderson Lake Road, Chimacum Proposal: Rezone 17 acres RR-20 to RR-5 for future 3-lot subdivision 2. Case # ZON2023-00005 Applicant: Bayside Housing & Services (see Attachment 3) Location: Woodley Place, Chimacum Road, Port Hadlock/Irondale Urban Growth Area Proposal: Bayside Housing and Services proposes a rezone of UGA Commercial to UGA High -Density Residential The applicant mentioned that they had sought a fee waiver from the Board. This applicant has not paid any application fees, so there has been no further processing of it. Technically, the application has not met requirements to be on the 2023 Preliminary Docket. Possibly to the applicant's advantage, DCD is likely to bring forward Port Hadlock/Irondale Urban Growth Area zoning revisions as a suggested Comprehensive Plan/UDC amendment in the 2024 amendment cycle. In so doing, the applicant's site -specific application will likely be addressed within the larger zoning considerations of DCD, including development of a mixed - use overlay concept, without requiring an application fee. 3. Case # ZON2023-00006 Applicant: Midori Farm (see Attachment 4) Location: Highway 101 & W. Columbia Street, Quilcene Proposal: Rezone 14.5 acres from RR-5 to AL-20 2023 SUGGESTED TEXT AMENDMENTS 1. Planning Commission: UDC amendments to development UDC code provisions which provide additional opportunities for workforce housing and affordable housing, by providing congregate housing options and tiny home planned unit development options. 2. Community Development (DCD): Omnibus UDC amendments, new and deferred items, addressing a number of corrections, updates, and clarifications to Title 18 of Jefferson County Code. ANALYSIS: Two suggested amendment proposals were developed for the 2023 amendment cycle. Planning Commission Amendment Proposal Since 2019, the Planning Commission has been developing housing concepts to use a performance -based standard to identify how multiple tiny homes can occupy a single residential parcel, much like the cluster development overlay in our current development regulations for Planned Rural Residential Development (PRRD). The proposal is to review and possibly add to incentives of the existing PRRD regulations (JCC 18.15.475) and draft new regulations for a residential housing overlay based on performance standards. This may be used in place of the standard "dwelling unit per acre" approach to residential density, and to demonstrate an equal or lower level of impact from the application of the housing overlay, and allowing more flexible housing choices. The proposal also examines the applicability of various styles of congregate housing and flexibility in its implementation. This proposal intends to match a broader variety of housing types to the varieties of housing needs we see in the County. DCD believes the time is right to fully develop and carry forward some proactive new ideas to provide more workforce and affordable housing choices (see Attachment 5). DCD Amendment Proposal The suggested amendment by DCD to complete an omnibus amendment package for Title 18, the Unified Development Code is recommended to keep our code current. Some proposed amendments had been previously held over from the 2018 Comprehensive Plan and UDC Periodic Review (see Attachment 6). Pursuant to JCC 18.45.060, DCD's review and recommendation includes the following considerations: a) Need; b) Urgency; c) Appropriateness; d) DCD staff capacity to substantively review and manage the suggested text amendments; and, e) Anticipated DCD cost and budget for processing the suggested amendments. Need: Housing needs have been identified by the community as one of the most important issues facing the County. In the Comprehensive Plan, it is identified as Framework Goal IV —Housing Variety and Affordability (p. xv), "Create opportunities for innovation and flexibility in housing types affordable and attainable across incomes, ages, and abilities. Promote an adequate supply of quality year-round housing for the work -force, seasonal housing for farmworkers, and recreational homes or accommodations for visitors." Housing goals, policies, and actions can be found in the Comprehensive Plan throughout the Land Use element (LU-G-4, Policies 4.1 through 4.4; LU-G-21 through LU-G-23; LU-G-32); Housing element (HS-G-1, HS-G-2; Action Plan Exhibit 3-7); Environment element (Action Plan Exhibit 5-6); Economic Development element (p.7-14); and Capital Facilities element (CF-G-6, Policy CF-P-6.5). Housing is inextricably tied to the County's employment and economic development goals and policies. UDC suggested text amendments are needed to keep the code current. Urgency: Affordable housing options for all incomes levels is an urgent goal and interest statewide is apparent. It is timely to develop proposals on the growing green edge of housing solutions as agencies and legislators are investigating ways to act on these issues. The 2023 amendment cycle provides a good opportunity to move forward on additional rural housing options. Community Development has slated review of urban standards for 2024, The urgency of UDC omnibus updates stem from the infrequent opportunities to update the code to correct, clarify, or update provisions. Appropriateness: Each of the two suggested text amendment proposals are appropriate for work in the 2023 amendment cycle. Please refer to statements already made regarding need and urgency. DCD Staff Capacity: Currently, DCD staff has an overall reduced staff capacity, but has dedicated staff for Long -Range planning to effectively process the suggested and site -specific amendments. Affordable and Workforce housing initiatives is a high priority for the County. Cost: Housing Amendments The Planning Commission, with its standing Housing Subcommittee, is providing directed work on the various aspects of workforce housing and affordable housing proposals. DCD planning staff have been working with the Planning Commission on this proposal. Estimated level of effort: 80 hours Estimated cost: $8,560 = 80 hours @ $107 current DCD Staff rate OR, considering the cost from the perspective of consultant work: Estimated level of effort: 80 hours @ $250 (low end, $350 high end) per hour consultant services plus $500 administrative costs, such as printing, travel, and legal ads. Estimated cost: $20,500--$28,500 Cost: Omnibus UDC Amendments A portion of the UDC amendment docket was deferred from the 2018 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Review and work has already been completed for about 20% of the UDC omnibus amendment proposals. Estimated level of effort: 80 hours Estimated cost: $8,560 = 80 hours @ $107 current DCD Staff rate The consultant cost estimate is for illustrative purposes. Time has already been invested by staff on each of the suggested text amendments and it could take considerable staff effort to bring a consultant up to speed on the 2023 work and to maintain contracts. These cost estimates reflect the great difference typically seen between staff rates and consultant rates. They also illustrate the value added to the County by maintaining planning capacity, through supporting a consistent team of planning staff. Planning work done by planning staff further provides value-added benefits to the County by maintaining institutional knowledge and expertise. Once the Final Docket is adopted by the BoCC, DCD Staff processes the proposed amendments consistent with the timeline below (Figure 1.) Figure 1- Process and Proposed Timeline for Establishing and Processing the Docket Date Activity March 1, 2023 Deadline for submittal of proposed Comp Plan and UDC text Amendments for the preliminary docket per JCC 18.45.040(2)(a). March 17, 2023 Staff compiles the Preliminary Docket of proposed amendments (attached) per JCC 18.45.050. April, 2023 Staff presents the Preliminary Docket to the Planning Commission and briefs them on the annual Comp Plan cycle and the docket process. April 19, 2023 The Planning Commission holds a public hearing on the Preliminary Docket and crafts a recommendation to the BoCC on what should be the final docket. May 8, 2023 Staff presents the Preliminary Docket and Planning Commission Recommendation to the BoCC. June, 2023 The BoCC adopts a Final Docket should they accept the PC's recommendation, or after they hold a public hearing should they choose to change the recommendation. July 3, 2023 If BoCC holds hearing on the Final Docket, it shall be no later than first meeting in July. July — Sept, 2023 Staff processes proposals on docket by review, analysis and produces a report with a recommendation on approval, denial, or approval with conditions or modifications for each amendment. October, 2023 Planning Commission reviews Staff Report and Recommendation, holds public hearing and makes recommendation to the BoCC on approval of proposed amendments. Oct - Nov, 2023 BoCC reviews proposed amendments, Staff and Planning Commission recommendations. Holds public hearing if changing Planning Commission recommendation. Staff drafts adopting ordinance. December 11, 2023 The BoCC shall take final legislative action on 2023 Docket by second regular board meeting in December, unless extended by the BoCC consistent with WAC 365-196- 640(3)(a). Scheduled as required by Chapter 18.45 JCC Department of Community Development (DCD) Final Docket Recommendation DCD recommends the two suggested text amendment proposals go forward in the 2023 amendment cycle. DCD finds that the Planning Commission's UDC amendment proposal to increase opportunities for workforce and affordable housing is critically important, time -sensitive, and within a favorable climate of developing additional housing solutions. DCD recommends this work go forward in the 2023 docket. Housing strategies that require additional work could be continued into the 2024 annual amendment cycle schedule. DCD finds that maintenance of the UDC is an important task to regularly address and omnibus amendments need to be completed in 2023. These are items that have been docketed for several years and will enhance the usability and clarity of the Unified Development Code. If there are UDC amendment proposals that need additional analysis, they can be placed on the slate for 2024. FISCAL IMPACT: County staff has sought to eliminate fiscal impacts by incorporating fees, which are currently under review through the FCG Group analysis. However, these proposals are outside of the DCD enterprise fund category and as such would need to be fully supported by the General Fund. RECOMMENDATION: Establish the Final 2023 Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code Annual Amendment Cycle after deliberating the Planning Commission recommendation on the 2023 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Cycle. SON ra JEFFERSON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION 621 Sheridan Street I Port Townsend, WA 98368 �t 360-379-4450 1 email: PlanComm@co.jefferson.wa.us 9t�1 Nhttp://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/580/Planning-Commission Jefferson County Board of Commissioners P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 April 19, 2023 The Jefferson County Planning Commission is pleased to forward to the Board of County Commissioners, the following findings and recommendations regarding Suggested Amendments to be included on the 2023 Annual Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code (UDC) Amendment Cycle Docket, pursuant to JCC 18.45.060(3). We provide these recommendations for your consideration after having held a noticed public hearing on the Preliminary Docket Suggested Amendments. The Planning Commission's recommendation is made after consideration of the perceived need, urgency and appropriateness of each suggested amendment. This report and recommendation also considers those proposed amendments resulting from the 2018 Comprehensive Plan periodic assessment and subsequent prioritization as set forth in the 2022 Planning Commission Annual Report, in response to JCC 18.45.050(4). Housing Amendments For many years, housing affordability has been identified as needing urgent attention. Upon deliberation and after receiving additional public input, we have determined that it is critical to provide multiple pathways to achieve multiple goals related to inclusionary zoning, support for restoration and ecosystem services, and the maintenance of the character of rural lands, including agricultural and other rural uses. The UGA requires additional options as soon as possible, so that new pathways can be available to the public as residents of the UGA prepare to begin their visioning of a sub -area plan, and as construction is set to begin on the public sewer project. UDC Amendments The omnibus amendment package comes from a running docket of proposals to update references, clarify code provisions, and modernize portions of the development regulations. The Planning Commission has reviewed the UDC amendment docket, some proposals spending years on the running docket, and desires to address all of the proposals on the list. Required Findings for All Proposed Amendments— 18.45.080(1)(b) (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; Planning Commission Finding: New circumstances present when the emergency ordinances were initiated, namely the Covid pandemic, created the urgency for developing regulations to allow temporary housing facilities. Our work now turns toward workforce housing and to address housing affordability. (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 Planning Commission Finding: There is no indication that assumptions upon which the Comp 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. Planning Commission Finding: There are a large number of organizations and a significant amount of County resources dedicated to addressing housing. The proposed amendment reflects a widely held value of the County's residents. The public comments largely reflect that the community believes that people facing housing challenges are an important issue to address. Criteria Governing Planning Commission Assessment -- 18.45.050(4)(b)(i) through (4)(b)(vii) (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; Planning Commission Finding: Annual compounded Countywide total growth rate envisioned in the 2004 Comprehensive Plan was 1.78%. However, the current population planning projection for 2010-2036 is 0.97% (Growlh rLfana ement Planning Population Frorecrions, Resolution 38-15). Currently, growth and development is occurring at about the same rate (around 1 % annually) as contemplated in the Comprehensive Plan. (ii) Whether the capacity of the county to provide adequate services has diminished or increased; Planning Commission 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. There is recognition that levels of service may not be sufficient in the provision of affordable housing and living wage jobs and thus may be a partial cause of the lower population growth we see. However, additional housing needs to be balanced with the other priorities of our Comprehensive Plan, such as environmental and agricultural protections. The capacity of the county to provide services is considered in the applicability standards of the housing overlay. (iii) Whether sufficient urban land is designated and zoned to meet projected demand and need; Planning Commission F indin: The county is currently planning additional urban development in the Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA. Being near services is important, so urban areas or Rural Village Centers would normally be developed at a scale and intensity to possibly provide support services. (iv) Whether any of the assumptions upon which the plan is based are no longer found to be valid; Planning Commission Finding: No, the assumptions are still valid. (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; Planning Commission Findin : Changes in county -wide attitudes are not evident, and amendments not needed at this time. (vi) Whether changes in circumstances dictate a need for amendments; Planning Commission Findin¢: The Covid pandemic revealed weakness in our social systems and heightened the need for community services and housing solutions. (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 § I] Planning Commission Finding: There are no inconsistencies between the proposed amendment and the Comprehensive Plan, CPPs, or GMA. Takings Findings Does the regulation or action result in a permanent physical occupation of private property? Planning Commission_ Finding: No. Does the regulation or action require a property owner to dedicate a portion of property or to grant an easement? Planning Commission Finding: No. Does the regulation or action deprive the owner of all economically viable uses of the property? Planning Commission Finding: No. Does the regulatory action have a severe impact on the landowner's economic interest? .Planning Commission Findin : Unlikely. Adjacent landowners may be moderately affected. Does the regulation or action deny a fundamental attribute of ownership? Planning Commission Finding: No. Findings on The Record 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? Plannini Commission Finding: Support from community organizations familiar with the proposal were considered. Can assertions in the record be confirmed by information from other sources? Plan_n_ina Commission Finding_ Yes. Broad source materials were considered. Is the decision we are about to make based on the record? Planning Commission Finding_ Yes. Does the decision we are about to make, as far as we know, satisfy legal criteria? Planning Commission Finding: Yes. Is the decision we are about to make limited to the specific request at hand? Planning Commission Finding. Yes. Planning Commission Recommendation: With a vote of Ai yeas, V nays, and 0 abstentions, the Planning Commission recommends the Board of County Commissioners add Housing Amendments and the UDC Omnibus Amendments to the Final Docket of suggested text amendments, Richard Hull, Chair Jefferson County Planning Commission K SON W 01�PART E�J �' ►C "I Sheridan s rt-,, T �� ����� 'T trier, fort Tow ���E�'7,.f �I Tei: 3st7.379.�tSil Townsend. 4NA g83t;•� ®��6NT ----J ! i Fax: 4451 a VVeb. wavW.co_ elf rsor�.11 co FEB iNGS e'-mall:dcdca.fe mmunft tf?ueluorre [ 17 1013 ers n.wa.us r Jefferson -" -t'Pjjcidj0�T rr►uni CCI:... 0 ��-gm' Div MLA # PLAN AMENDME1, 1-�— 1�I lJ PROJECTIAPPLICAWTNAME: J7t1Tle +for Com & �4licia Gifford Y_P- Arehensive Plan amendments, apAlrcations must be co Development by March T --��-- GornAleted a of the current calendar year in mpieted and submitted AAlications that are receivers y Order to be considered to the Department not include Applications for UDC amendments receivedTnaafter March t will be p on the during the annual a of Community not include all of lire information re y be considered 017 a rolling laced docket mendment Amcess. quired9 basis. R for the following under the Jefferson County Applications that a calendar year. SubmFtta! Re y Code) will be retumed h ,Complate (i.e., that d , quirennents to the applicant. i A completed Pe Plan Amendmentnit f AFFIIcafivn, completed and signed Slate Envrr[rnmenfal Pori aPFlicatian is not signed b st fOrth in the ,tefferson Coun Y owner. tY Pee Ordinance �' Act {SEPA} checkfrsl, and cvm 2_ ce_ Representative authorization is Prehensive Any additional infLzrmat on deemed necsa wired if 3• ry by the Administrator to evaluate the Pleas prepare and label as' Proposed a a. The location of the ahi+aEt A," a vicinity amendment. b• Proposed to map showing the following: The rand use designafion of all property redesignated; c' The uses of a!! properties located mr within five hundred 5Q0 Within five hundred{ } feet of the site; and 4• Please {SOf7} leer Of the ofe_ Prepare and label as "exhibit t3 Improicabvements. • Ap Application must include Plans s and infiyorma5on or studies accurate irnpraverr3ents. Apprrratians far strr� g proposed flan and an have maximum impact to the envirQi �m �i and Public that do y associated deyefopment prc>pflsaf{s}. if not specify ' depicting existing and propoSed uses and S. public facilities and services, t�ses and Potential irn Please prepare and label as pacts are within a three hundred Exhibit "C,' a ma assumed to {3pp)-f,., radius F that depicts existing candt!? Purpose, and means of a } The exhibit must depict topography, °ns on the site and constraints of the site. ass to the site. The intent of p graFhy. n the and within the general vicinity e exhibit is to cfearl bufrers Y Y_e., The current land use designation/zoning of the site is: Rural Residential _ YJrtiiB $e:, eaSeFnts and their s. >�Ilioia:�itfo +rd��tivs rrnrl 7. The pmAvsed land used D Wellin esrgnaUorrl�nnfn Rural 9 knit Per 2U acres 9ofthesitels:� ential - 1 Dwell, $ The current use of the site is: The Site Currently cOnt'ains a Single Tamil — -- _ _ ollir�g Unit por 5 acres ~ and several outbuildings �- - - --- _ y residence with detached + ge The Fraposed use Of the site Is: Subdivide to allow for Construct' - reSldLnces. Tile exiStin rBSldriCe i5 n of two additional single family g pi 'on to retT7 10. If changes to Comprehensive Plan or UDC text are -_ - in. language (i.e., to affected tend of l indicated both the required, plea prepay and lobel as p with underlining (e Comprehensive Plan and tptaC �chibit D,- P F 9•. underlirtina}, and text to be deleted indicated C shown in ° ro used amendatory with strikeouts (e. format, with text to be added { g•, strikeouts}. SITE SPECPC APPJM REV. WaMM Page 1 12. Please provide an explanation of why the amendment is being proposed. (Attach additional sheets, if necessary.) This amendment is being proposed to revise the zoning of the subject parcel (901-101-005) from RR 1:20 to RR 1:5 to allow the parcel to be subdivided into three parcels and allow construction of two additional residences. The subject parcel is an 18 acre parcel located at the northeast corner of Rhody Drive and Anderson Lake Road just south of Port Hadlock-Irondale. Re -zoning would allow the parcel to be developed for residential use more consistent with the current land use and densities of surrounding parcels as described below. The new lots would be accessed by private driveways off of Anderson Lake Road. The existing residence would maintain its current driveway off of Rhody Drive. Water and power services would be supplied by Jefferson County PUD and wastewater would disposed of with on -site septic systems on each lot consistent with surrounding lots. As noted above, this amendment would not change the use of the property (rural residential) but would simply increase the density. No revisions to the text of the comprehensive plan should be needed as the use is consistent with the goals of the current comprehensive plan, but zoning maps showing this parcel would require updates. The zoning surrounding the property is primarily a mix of RR 1:5 and RR 1:20. The one exception is HJ Carroll County Park which is to the southeast of the parcel and is on a parcel zoned PPR. The properties directly to the south of the subject parcel are zoned RR 1:5. These parcels vary in size from 0.29 acres (In Rhododendron Estates) to 5 acres and are currently being utilized for residential use. There are 5 parcels to the north of the subject parcel that are zoned RR 1:20. However, the parcels in that area vary in size from 1 to 6 acres (average density of 3.6 units per acre), and all but one of the parcels contain single family residences. The zoning changes to RR 1:5 directly to the north of these parcels. Properties to the east (east side of Rhody Drive) are zone RR 1:5 and vary in size from 0.4 acres to 1.45 acres. Most of these lots contain single family residences. The Church of Latter Day Saints is located directly across Rhody Drive from the subject parcel on a 1.45 acre lot. Properties to the west are zoned RR 1:20. The property directly west of the subject parcel is a 43 acre parcel that has been developed as a 186-unit RV park for use by members of the Escapee RV Club. The park was approved in 1991 through the binding site plan process. The use results in a density of approximately 4.3 units per acre. 13. The applicant hereby cetrw§ that the statements contained In this application are true and provide an accurate representadon-of amendment; and the applicant(s) hereby acknowledges that any approval issued on is applicant n f e d..�any such statement is found to be Fall i A OWS SIMA DA 7 - t T LVII PeR -Y ow IG TURE DA G� .Z o PRO OWNER'S SIG RE DATE DPROPERTY OWNERS SIGNATURE DATE 3 [NOTE: For all required signatures, representative a orizati required if application is n I signed by the owner.] SnESPECIRCAPP.DOC rtev.srzarAW Page 3 FJM Z hk r i A CD n Y m < C C/) M Y 2 Z A �O 'N t. S .. - 5 , E ENOVIC LrJ__& ASSOCIATES I C ll It P 0 R A 1' 11 h Date: Owners/Proponents: Exhibit B — Project Narrative Gifford Yep — Parcel Rezone February 25, 2023 Jamie & Alicia Gifford Yep P.O. Box 986 Chimacum, WA 98325 CIVIL ENGINEERING :301 1;asl 6th Strca, Suite I 11orl A,7gelv.i,AVisl)ington 98362 (360) 417-0501 1ax(360) 17-0511 I'.-In;lll; %C'I)O�'IC(i�)UI1'I11ittI5,I1CC The purpose of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is to re -zone an existing parcel located at 101665 Rhody Drive currently owned by Jamie and Alicia Gifford Yep to allow sub -division of the parcel. The 18 acre parcel is currently zoned RR 1:20 and currently contains a single-family residence, detached garage and several outbuildings. The parcel is accessed from an existing driveway off of Rhody Drive. The applicants wish to re -zone the parcel to RR 1:5 to allow the existing parcel to be subdivided into three parcels intended for single-family residential use. As noted elsewhere in this application, the surrounding zoning is primarily single family residential, and the effective densities vary from one unit per 3.6 acres (residences to the north in RR 1:20 zoning) down to 4.3 units per acre (RV park directly to the east in RR 1:20 zoning). Re -zoning this parcel will allow the parcel to be developed generally consistent with the surrounding parcels and will not cause any pressure to re -zone adjacent parcels as they have already been developed to densities beyond that typically allowed by the RR 1:5 zoning. If this amendment request is successful, the applicants plan to proceed with the subdivision process early next year. Please reach out if there are any questions regarding this application. Sincerely, Zenovic & Associates, Inc. Seth Rodman, P.E. Senior Design Engineer February 25, 2023 CIVIL. ENGINEERING _7T� To E' S I\(' 0 R 1' 0 R AT I 17 Date: Owners/Proponents Exhibit E — Inquiry Responses Gifford Yep — Parcel Rezone February 25, 2023 Jamie & Alicia Gifford Yep P.O. Box 986 Chimacum, WA 98325 i01 kzt fish Strm, Suite I ?6l1? 'i 1;i •45i)1 l ix ON)) 117-0511 L-mail; u+nnviC0101)•III ptls,nct The following are responses to the Inquiries per Question 11 of the Supplemental Application for Site -Specific Comprehensive Plan Amendments. The inquiries are repeated here for ease of reference. All references to the Comprehensive Plan should be understood to be referencing the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan adopted in December 2018 a. Is growth and development as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan occurring faster or slower than anticipated or is failing to materialize? Growth in the unincorporated areas are slightly higher than estimated, but growth in the incorporated areas is slightly slower than estimated. Per the 2021 Jefferson County Staff Report on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, overall growth in the Jefferson County Area has been generally consistent with the 0.98% growth rate estimated for the 2018-2035 planning horizon by the Comprehensive Plan. b. Has the capacity of the county to provide adequate services diminished or increased? The capacity of the county to provide adequate services has not decreased. Services directly adjacent to this project have not changed materially and are adequate to serve the proposed development. c. Is sufficient urban land designated and zoned to meet the projected demand and need. As this project is not located in the urban environment, this question is not specifically applicable to this project. However, per the 2021 staff report, there is sufficient urban land designated and zoned to meet projected demands. d. Are any of the assumptions upon which the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan is based no longer valid, or is new information available which was not considered during the adoption process or any annual amendments of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan? As the Comprehensive Plan is still relatively current (approximately 4 years since adoption) and review by staff in 2021 found that the assumptions were still valid. We find no reason to believe that, in general, the assumptions are not valid. Review of the properties directly surrounding the subject parcel did find that the actual residential densities of the parcels were much higher than allowable by the current zoning of those properties, which suggests that a review of zoning in those areas may be warranted to provide consistent uses in those areas. e. Does the proposed amendment reflect the current widely held values of the residents of Jefferson County? We believe that the proposed amendment is consistent with the widely -held values of the residents of Jefferson County. The proposed amendment, although increasing density of the subject parcel, would maintain the rural nature of the parcel and, due to the larger nature of the parcels, allow for opportunity to implement low -impact development techniques to mitigate impacts from any future construction and minimize any disruption of the natural environment. f. Do changes in the county -wide attitudes necessitate amendments to the goals of the plan and the basic values embodied with the Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement? It is our understanding that the overall county -wide attitude has remained generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement and that no amendment is needed either due to overall sentiment or due to this project. g. Do changes in circumstances dictate a need for amendment? While County staff have identified several changes in the 2021 report that indicate that amendments may be required, a review/revision of rural residential parcel zoning was not listed among them_ While we do not see this re -zone as a need for the overall County, we do view this as an opportunity to reconcile the use of this property with surrounding uses. h. Do inconsistencies exist between the County Comprehensive Plan and the GMA or the Comprehensive Plan and the County -Wide Planning Policy for Jefferson County? As this project is simply a rezone to increase the density of an existing rural residential parcel, an analysis of inconsistencies between County planning documents appears to be beyond the scope of the proposed amendment. To our knowledge the proposed rezone is consistent with the overall plans for moderate growth while maintaining the rural character of the current zone. i. Does the Proposal meet concurrency requirements for transportation? The existing lot is accessed from Rhody Drive (SR 19). The maintenance of that access for the existing residence would result in no net change to traffic patterns. The proposal would add two residential lots which would be accessed from Anderson Lake Road. Anderson Lake Road is a Minor Collector and specifically the intersection of Rhody Drive and Anderson Lake Road, directly adjacent to the property, was operating at a level of service (LOS) D which is below the LOS standard C per the Jefferson County Quimper Peninsula Transportation Study completed in January 2012. Due to its location, Anderson Lake Road is primarily a through -road providing access to/from SR20 and SR19. Peak hour volumes in 2008 were approximately 170 trips and the estimated peak hour volumes in 2031 is approximately 240 trips. It is estimated that this project will add less than 3 peak hour trips to the 2031 volumes (approximately 1.2% of overall traffic) and will have little to no measurable impact on the existing level of service at the Anderson Lake Road/SR19 Intersection. As such, we do not believe that this project requires additional facilities to be constructed concurrently with the development to adequately serve the proposed development, and mitigate any decrease in level of service. f Does the proposal adversely affect adopted level of service standards for public facilities, and services other than transportation? This project will not adversely affect the level of service standards for other public facilities such as water, sewer, solid waste, etc. Currently the site contains one single family residence. Approval of the amendment will allow two additional single-family residences which will have minimal impact to services in the area. k. Is the proposal consistent with the goals, policies and implementation strategies of the various elements of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan? Yes. The proposed amendment would continue the use of the property as a rural residential area while allowing moderate growth without impacting the surrounding environment and existing uses. 1. Will the proposal result in probable significant adverse impacts to the County's transportation network, capital facilities, utilities, parks and environmental features that cannot be mitigated? The project will not result in significant adverse impacts. The number of additional residents that would be allowed by the re -zone is minimal which effectively mitigates any significant adverse impact. Additionally, the project is located close to existing neighborhood centers (Chimacum and Port Hadlock/Irondale) which can serve the additional residents. Water service is available on the property frontages and wastewater will be dealt with onsite with no impact to public facilities. There are no known wetlands on the parcel that would be impacted. A portion of the parcel is mapped as seismic hazard but that can be effectively mitigated without impacting any adjacent properties by proper design and location of future residences. m. Will the proposal place uncompensated burdens upon existing or planned service capabilities? The proposal will not place uncompensated burdens on existing or planned service capabilities. The subdivision process and subsequent building permit process will require payment of any impact and service connection fees to offset impacts to existing services and provide for future improvements in the County. Additionally, property taxes of the additional parcels will increase as they are developed. n. How is the subject parcel(s) physically suitable for the requested land use designation and the anticipated land use development including, but not limited to the following: i. Access, Access to the future parcels will be from Anderson Lake Road which is directly to the south of the subject parcel. The site is generally level which will make access to the proposed sites relatively simple. ii. Provision of w4l'tics; Water and Power Utilities will be supplied by Jefferson County PUD. Connections will be made to existing facilities in the Anderson Lake Road right of way and no extension or expansion of existing systems will be required. Wastewater will be disposed of through onsite septic systems located on individual parcels. The existing residence is currently served by an onsite septic system which appears to be functioning well based on maintenance inspections of that system and it appears that the soils throughout the parcel are suitable for onsite disposal of wastewater. Solid waste service is available at the site through Jefferson County Solid Waste. iii. Compatibility with the existing and planned surrounding land uses? The majority of the parcels to the north, east and south of the subject parcel have been developed for single-family residential use on lots ranging in size from 0.43 acres up to 5 acres. The Church of Latter-day Saints is located on a 1.5 acre lot just to the east of the project. The parcel just to the west of the project is a 43 acre parcel that has been A eveloped as a private 186-unit RV Park. If the amendment is approved, the subject parcel will be divided into three parcels (5 acre minimum) for single-family residential use consistent with the majority of the surrounding uses. o. Will the proposal, if adopted, create pressure to change the land use designation of other properties? If the answer is yes, how would such change of land use designation on other properties be in the long-term best interests of the County as a whole? There are 5 properties just to the north of the subject parcel which are zoned RR 1:20. However, there is no incentive to up -zone those parcels to RR 1:5 as the largest of those parcels is 6.2 acres which would not allow any further subdivision. The remainder of the surrounding properties are zoned RR 1:5 consistent with the proposed re -zone. The RV Park to the west of the project is zoned RR 1:20, but the park was approved through the binding site plan process and there is no foreseeable reason to revise the zoning of that parcel. p. Does the proposed site -specific amendment materially affect the land use and population growth projections that are the bases of the Comprehensive Plan? The amendment does not materially affect the land use and population projections. The land use will remain as rural residential albeit at a higher density. This higher density will only allow for an additional two residences which is consistent with the moderate growth predictions. q. If the proposed redesignation/rezone is located within an unincorporated urban growth area (UGA), would the proposal materially affect the adequacy or availability of urban facilities and service to the immediate areas and the overall UGA? The proposed rezone is not within a UGA. r. Is the proposed amendment consistent with the Growth Management Act (Chapter 36.70A RCIM the Countywide Planning Policy for ,Jefferson Coun and other applicable inter - jurisdictional policies, agreement, and any other local, state or federal laws? The proposed amendment is consistent with state, federal and local policies, guidelines, and laws. Jefferson County will have the opportunity to review the future subdivision and building permits to ensure those developments also consistent. Please reach out if there are any questions regarding this summary Sincerely, Zenovic & Associates, Inc. Seth Rodman. _P_ Senior Design Engineer February 25, 2023 l DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 631 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend,lX�:k 98368 MUMB Tel:360.379.4450 1 Fax:360.379.4,451 \\'eb:,�.��i.cc�.'eEFais❑ .w;a.us/conunurdrrde�Yeloament E-mail: ded a'ecf.'effu�r�n.n�.us - - FEB 2 7 1023 PERMIT APPLICATION Jefferson County Community Development Steps in the Permit Process: -Review application checklist to ensure all information is completed prior to submitting application. -Make sure septic has been applied for and water availability has been proven. -Make an appointment to meet with the Permit Technician by calling 360-379-4450. This is not a standalone application; it must be accompanied by a project specific supplemental application. -Fees will be collected at intake. Additional fees may apply after review and payment is required before permit is issued. For Department Use Only Related Application #s: Site Information Assessor Tax Parcel Number: Site Address and/or Directions to Property:} Access (name,of street(s)) from which ac ess ill be gained: Present use of property: ' ct Description of Work (include proposed uses): ' ' Building Permit # MLA # Wastewater -Sewage Disposal This property is served by Port Townsend or Port Ludlow sewer system? YES If not served by sewer identified above, identify type of septic system below: Type of Sewage System Serving Property: _ Septic Septic Permit #: Community Septic Name o€System: Are other residences connected to the septic system? Additions or repairs to sewage system: IV Is it a complete or partial system installation: Complete` Partial Has a reserve drainfield been designated? Yes No NO )G Case #: �F:i? 1��Y—D7I] Date of Last Operations & Maintenance check: ci11111 "/C-�01C-'7 Attach last report to application Describe or attach any drainfield easements, covenants or notices on title, which may impact the property: The authorized agent/representative is the primary contact for all project -related questions and correspondence. The County will mail / e-mail requests and information about the application to the authorized agent/representative and will copy (cc) the owner noted below. The authorized agent/representative is responsible for communicating the information to all parties involved with the application. It is the responsibility of the authorized agent/representative and owner to ensure their mailbox accepts County email (i.e., County email is not blocked or sent to "`unk mail"). Applicant/Property Owner Information Property Owner: Name: �J( Address: Pho #- r E-mail Address: ( Please contact Authorized Agent/Representative with prc Property Owner Signature: J a� Note: For erojects with multiple owner , attach a separate sheet with each owner(s) in€orma n and Applicant: Authorized Agent/Representative (if otherthan owner) Name: Address: Phone #: E-mail Address: Professional: Is this an Authorized Agent/Representative for this project? Engineer Architect Surveyor Contractor Name: License # Address: Phone M _ E-mail Address: Professional: Is this an Authorized Agent/Rel Engineer Architect Surveyor Name: Address: Phone #: resentative for this project? Contractor License # Professional: Is this an Authorized Agent/Represe Engineer Architect Surveyor Name: Address: Phone #: E-mail Address: ntative for this project? Contractor License # E-mail Address: (select o NO YES Consultant NO YES Consultant NO YES Consultant By signing this application form, the owner/agent attests that the information provided herein, and in any attachments, is true and correct to the best of his or her knowledge" Any material falsehood or any omission of a material fact made by the owner/agent with respect to this application packet may result in making any issued permit null and void. i further agree to that all activities i intend to undertake or complete associated with this permit will be performed in compliance with all applicable federal, state and county laws and regulations and I agree to provide access and right of entry to Jefferson County and its employees, representatives or agents for the sole purpose Of application review and any required later inspections. Applicant may request noti40Ut1tLIh1e,,;ty',oni tent to en er upo the property for visits related to this application and subsequent permit issuance. Signature: Print Name: ] . Y pate: 5 w DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 Tel:360.379.4450 1 Fax:360.379.4451 Web: www. co. „effers®n wa.us; communt develol;uu ent E-mail: do&iR co.jefferson.wa.us PERMIT APPLICATION Steps in the Permit Process: -Review application checklist to ensure all information is completed prior to submitting application. -Make sure septic has been applied for and water availability has been proven. -Make an appointment to meet with the Permit Technician by calling 360-379-4450. -This is not a standalone application; it must be accompanied by a project specific supplemental application. -Fees will be collected at intake. Additional fees may apply after review and payment is required before permit is issued. For Department Use Only Related ADDlication #s: Wastewater - Sewage Disposal Building Permit # MLA # This property is served by Port Townsend or Port Ludlow sewer system? YES NO If y identify type of septic system below not served b sewer identifiedwabove, identi e Type of Sewage System Serving Property: Septic Septic Permit #: ©�- 7 D Community Septic Name of System: Case #: Are other residences connected to the septic system? Additions or repairs to sewage system: Is it a complete or partial system installation: Complete Partial Has a reserve drainfield been designated? Yes No Date of Last Operations & Maintenance check: _ Attach last report to application Describe or attach any drainfield easements, covenants or notices on title, which ch may impact the property: F _i,"'14, 1�,v,i, R. T)4r� ,'" 0►.v i✓IELi" lS n,, rt elfin-7_4RJro m. Permit Applicati m Page I of 2 The authorized agent/representative is the primary contact for all project -related questions and correspondence. The County will mail / e-mail requests and information about the application to the authorized agent/representative and will copy (cc) the owner noted below. The authorized agent/representative is responsible for communicating the information to all parties involved with the application. It is the responsibility of the authorized agent/representative and owner to ensure their mailbox accepts County email (i.e., Coin email is not blocked or sent to "junk mail.- mmm mmmmmmmm_ w w Applicant/Property Owner Information Property Owner: Name: Address:;loq.�� 1S,4Y RTr. -� E-mail Phone #: Address: ��d� .. � � �� " �� Please contact Authorized Agent/Representative with Note: For proojects with multiple owners attach a se q arate sheet with each o ner(r(s) information d 0 ation an Applicant: Authorized Agent/Representative (if other than owner) Name: ( ii"r _ @m:rmz .A Address: ,,�J �i,� . i a�.._ _ .. ......._m........._................................. Phone #: a�Ww � i � �.., E-maill Address: Professional Is this Agent/Representative . p of m ww�wm ntative for this ro ec Engineer Architect Surveyor Contractor Name: License # Address: ..............................�.�.�.......... ..d.....................� Phone #: E-mai................................... Adress: only Date: 7,w, 7 NO YES Consultant Professional: � ... ........ Is this an Authorized Agent/Representative for this project? NO � 6 Engineer ...... _._.. Architect Surveyor Contractor Name: License # Address: Phone M .. M.-- ,. ......... ....... E-mail Address: ProfeProfessional: ss.... _. Is this an Authorized A � �r t Agent/Representative for this protect? NO � ...,._®-� .....mm... �...m Engineer ........... _ _.._......�� Architect Surveyor Contractor Name: License # Address: Phone M E-mail Address: Consultant Consultant YES YES By signing this application form, the owner/agent attests that the information provided herein, and in any attachments, is true and correct to the best of his or her knowledge. Any material falsehood or any omission of a material fact made by the owner/agent with respect to this application packet may result in making any issued permit null and void. I further agree to that all activities I intend to undertake or complete associated with this permit will be performed in compliance with all applicable federal, Late and county laws nd regulations and I agree to provide access and right of entry to Jefferson County and its employees, represer tives ya :nts fon, le sole purpose of application review and any required later inspections. Applicant may request notice of th �Coun: � ent to er upon the property for visits related to this application and subsequent permit issuance. Signature: ` � - Print Name: MICc.. jl iwrl 7- Date : Perm t Application Page 2 of $ON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 08368 _ Tel: 36U79.4450 Pav 360.379.4451 Web:yL%vwxmictttrsf 111u;;. irrr:_i ..l ,iro r:: 4I1} _ 1 mail do fca cr..�ftcr{an,' 75 f NC3 C} PERMIT APPLICATION FEB 28 2023 Steps in the Permit Process: Jefferson County -Review application checklist to ensure all information is completed prior to submitting applicationCommunity Development -Make sure septic has been applied for and water availability has been proven. -Make an appointment to meet with the Permit Technician by calling 360-379-4450. -This is not a standalone application; it must be accompanied by a project specific supplemental application. -Fees will be collected at intake. Additional fees may apply after review and payment is required before permit is issued. For Department Use Only Related Application #s: Site Information Assessor Tax Parcel Number: Site Address and/or Directions to Property: Access (name of street(s)) from which access will be gained: Present use of property: Description of Work (include propos d uses): Building Permit # MLA # Wastewater - Sewage Disposal This property is served by Port Townsend or Port Ludlow sewer system? YES NO If not served by sewer identified above, identify type of septic system below: Type of Sewage System Serving Property: Septic Septic Permit #: S,ect 2_ _ Community Septic Name of System: Case #: Are other residences connected to the septic system? 41 [ Additions or repairs to sewage system: Is it a complete or partial system installation: Complete Partial Has a reserve drainfield been designated? Yes No Date of Last Operations & Maintenance check: Attach last report to application Describe or attach any drainfield easements, covenants or notices on title, which may impact the property: The authorized agent/representative is the primary contact for all project -related questions and correspondence. The County will mail / e-mail requests and information about the application to the authorized agent/representative and will copy (cc) the owner noted below. The authorized agent/representative is responsible for communicating the information to all parties involved with the application. It is the responsibility of the authorized agent/representative and owner to ensure their mailbox accepts County email (i.e., County email is not blocked or sent to Munk mail"). Applicant/Property Owner Information Property Owner: Name: ' L' Address: Phone #: z(,:, n Please Property Owner Signatu Note: For aroiects with multip Applicant: Authorized Ag Name: Address: Phone #: E-mail Address: j -- •� �a fh %, ;Tanta uthorized Agent/Kept ative with project info. (select only on ) Date: ers, attae separate sheet with each oWner(s) information and s gr attires. t/Representative (if other than owner) E-mail Address: ii - /J , <cj Professional: Engineer Name: Address: Is this an Authorized Agent/Representative for this project? NO YES Architect Surveyor Contractor Consultant License # Phone #: E-mail Address: Professional: Is this an Authorized Agent/Representative for this project? NO YES Engineer Architect Surveyor Contractor Consultant Name: License # Address: Phone #: E-mail Address: Professional: Is this an Authorized Agent/Representative for this project? NO YES Engineer Architect Surveyor Contractor Consultant Name: _ License # Address: _ Phone #: i E-mail Address: By signing this application form, the owner/agent attests that the information provided herein, and in any attachments, is true and correct to the best of his or her knowledge. Any material falsehood or any omission of a material fact made by the owner/agent with respect to this application packet may result in making any issued permit null and void. I further agree to that all activities I intend to undertake or complete associated with this permit will be performed in compliance with all applicable federal, state and county laws and regulations and i agree to provide access and right of entry to Jefferson County and its employees, representatives or nts for the sole purpose of application review and any required later inspections. Applicant may request notice Coun i t to enter upon the property for visits related to this application and subsequent permit issua ce. Signature: Print. Name., 2 &V bate: SON C, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 Tel: 360.379.4450 1 Fax: 360.379,4451 f Web: www.ca.iefferson.wa.us jcol_ munitydevelopment f S•177 N`� �' E-mail: dcdeco.iefferson.wa.us SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION FORMAL SITE -SPECIFIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT MLA # PROJECT/APPLICANT NAME: For Comprehensive Plan amendments, applications must be completed and submitted to the Department of Community Development by March 1 of the current calendar year in order to be considered during the annual amendment process. Completed applications that are received after March 1 will be placed on the docket for the following calendar year. Applications for UDC amendments may be considered on a rolling basis. Applications that are incomplete (i.e., that do not include all of the information required under the Jefferson County Code) will be returned to the applicant. Submittal Requirements 1. A completed Permit Application, completed and signed State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) checklist, and comprehensive Plan Amendment fee, as set forth in the Jefferson County Fee Ordinance. Representative authorization is required if application is not signed by owner. 2 Any additional information deemed necessary by the Administrator to evaluate the proposed amendment. 3 Please prepare and label as "Exhibit A," a vicinity map showing the following: a. The location of the area proposed to be redesignated; b. The land use designation of all property within five hundred (500) feet of the site; and C. The uses of all properties located within five hundred (500) feet of the site. 4 Please prepare and label as "Exhibit B," a description of the proposed Plan and any associated development proposal(s), if applicable. Applications must include plans and information or studies accurately depicting existing and proposed uses and improvements. Applications for such redesignations that do not specify proposed uses and potential impacts are assumed to have maximum impact to the environment and public facilities and services. 5 Please prepare and label as "Exhibit "C," a map that depicts existing conditions on the site and within the general vicinity [i.e., within a three hundred (300)-foot radius]. The exhibit must depict topography, wetlands and buffers, easements and their purpose, and means of access to the site. The intent of the exhibit is to clearly illustrate the physical opportunities and constraints of the site. 6. The current land use designation/zoning of the site is: [ -v r�� /,' s ,' •", s I I. 4 1 � 1 lr,1 ", 'e, !C 7. The proposed land use designation/zoning of the site is: L G r A f ( 0 4 S /'-4� Ne A.0 j'e-7 • , ✓�j S ,lam J B. The current use of the site is: tom; 41e r � 9. The proposed use of the site is: Ap.,/ i_I t&ye rat, 10 If changes to Comprehensive Plan or UDC text are required, please prepare and label as "Exhibit D," proposed amendatory language (i.e., to affected text of both the Comprehensive Plan and UDC) shown in "bill' format, with text to be added indicated with underlining (e.g., underlining), and text to be deleted indicated with strikeouts (e.g., s*•�^ ts) SITE SPECIFIC APP DOC REV 9/2312020 Page 1 Comprehensive Plan Amendment RE: Parcel # 702133022 and 702133029 294152 Hwy 101, Quilcene WA 98376 Exhibit A 1 RR-5 S r ` 1tdommr - Land use designation of all property within 500 feet of sited. Red lines measures approx. 500 feet from parcels. Comprehensive Plan Amendment RE: Parcel .# 702133022 and 702133029 294152 Hwy 101, Quilcene WA 98376 Exhibit A '11 Location of area proposed to be redesignated Comprehensive Plan Amendment RE: Parcel # 702133022 and 702133029 294152 Hwy 101, Quilcene WA 98376 Exhibit B Historically, this 14.6 acres was one parcel that was used as farmland, there are no buildings or development on site. In 2007 the previous owner divided the parcel into two parcels now designated RR 1 in 5. In 2016 M and J Investments purchased the property with the intention of keeping this productive farmland as working farmland. Since 2016 Midori Farm has been leasing this land to grow WSDA certified organic vegetables. Midori Farm currently has a long-term lease on this property and plans to continue farming here. The goal of this zoning change is to change the zoning of these parcels to Agriculture (AL or AP) to match existing neighboring farmland zoning and insure the property remains productive farmland. Future plans for the property include maintaining it as a working organic vegetable farm. If a zoning change is granted, the plan is to build a small vegetable processing facility (less than 1000 sq ft) to allow Midori Farm to make its value added sauerkrauts and kimchi onsite. This facility would be made from two modified shipping containers placed on concrete footings. It would also contain a bathroom facility for farm worker use. This building would be WSDA certified and connected to the existing Commercial Septic System (Sept 2021- 00108) already installed. There exists an unexplored potential for farm worker housing but there are no intentions for further development other than infrastructure necessary for maintaining the farming operations. Comprehensive Plan Amendment RE: Parcel # 702133022 and 702133029 294152 Hwy 101, Quilcene WA 98376 Exhibit C A MAN moo Existing conditions on site. Wetlands in blue. Pink are access roads. Highway 101 to the NE and Columbia Ave to the South border. 54 CD isilIpp— Y. tx cn 0 (D U) 1* I'M Comprehensive Plan Amendment RE: Parcel # 702133022 and 702133029 294152 Hwy 101, Quilcene WA 98376 Exhibit E a. NA b. NA c. NA d. NA e. The proposed amendment reflects the widely held values of the residents of Jefferson County. Actions encouraging the long-term sustainability and economic viability of small scale agricultural activities seem to be widely supported. f. NA g. NA h. NA i. The proposal will not impact concurrency requirements for transportation. j. The proposal does not impact the service standards for public facilities. k. The proposed rezoning of this property from rural residential to agricultural land is consistent with the goals and policies outlined in the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan section 2 on Agricultural lands. I. The proposal will not result in probable adverse impacts to the county's transportation network, capital facilities, utilities, parks, and environmental features that cannot be mitigated. m. The proposal will not place uncompensated burdens upon existing or planned service capabilities. n. The subject parcels are ideally suited for Ag zoning. The soil in this valley bottom land is solely comprised of Quilcene Alderwood Complex which is well drained and ideal for growing a variety of crops. (i)The parcels have ideal highway access to Highway 101 allowing for quick transportation of farm goods to local and regional markets. (ii)The parcels have two wells and have plenty of available irrigation water from the Quilcene Irrigation System. Power is already on site. (iii) Neighboring and adjacent properties are already zoned AL-20. Neighboring land use is mixed with agricultural land, forestry land, rural residential. o. Uncertain if the proposal will create a pressure to change the land use designation of other properties. If it did, having more prime agricultural land zoned for AG would help Jefferson County meet is goals for supporting agricultural produces, small business / economic growth and local food security. p. The proposed amendment does remove one rural residential building opportunity in Jefferson County. One residential building opportunity would still exist in the AG zoned parcel. q. NA r. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Growth Management Act. A oV—' -`1 PROPERTY OWNER'S SIGNATUI [NOTE: For all required signatures, 12. Please provide an explanation of why the amendment is being proposed. (Attach additional sheets, if necessary.) Historically, this 14.6 acres was one parcel that was used as farmland, there are no buildings or development on site. In 2007 the previous owner divided the parcel into two parcels now designated RR 1 in 5. In 2016 M and J Investments purchased the property with the intention of keeping this productive farmland as working farmland. Since 2016 Midori Farm has been leasing this land to grow WSDA certified organic vegetables. Midori Farm currently has a long-term lease on this property and plans to continue farming here. The goal of this zoning change -is to change the zoning of these parcels to Agriculture (AL or AP) to match existing neighboring farmland zoning and insure the property remains productive farmland. 13. The applicant hereby certifies that the statements contained in this application are true and provide an accurate representation of the proposed amendment; and the applicants] hereby acknowledges that any approval issued on this /pli ation may be revoked if any such statement is found to be false -, 2 R2 P�Ik Ca ! F% DATE J PR PERTY SIG RE ❑ E E 11 DATE DATE �. 0 z� autho - ion is required if application i not sig ed by the owner.] SITE SPECIFIC APP.DOC REV 923r1020 Page 3 SON c DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT O� 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 tiTel: 360.379.4450 1 Fax:360.379.4451 Web: www.co.Jefferson.xva.us/communitpdeveloi2ment E-mail: dcd&co.Jefferson.wa.us IN SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION TEXT AMENDMENT PROPOSALS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE Project/Applicant Name: Housing Amendments MLA # For Comprehensive Plan amendments, applications must be completed and submitted to the Department of Community Development by March 1 of the current calendar year in order to be considered during this year's amendment process. Completed applications that are received after March 1 will be placed on the preliminary docket for the following calendar year. Generally, applications for text amendments are proposals that broadly apply to the goals, policies and implementation strategies of the Comprehensive Plan. Applications for suggested UDC amendments may be considered on a rolling basis. Applications that are incomplete (i.e., that do not include all of the information required under the Jefferson County Code) will be returned to the applicant. Submittal Requirements 1. A completed Permit Application and all required Exhibits. 2. A completed and signed State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Checklist. 3. Any additional information deemed necessary by the Administrator to evaluate the proposed amendment. 4. Please prepare and label as "Exhibit A," a description of the proposed text Comprehensive Plan/UDC amendment. Applications for such amendments that do not specify proposed uses and potential impacts are assumed to have maximum impact to the environment and public facilities and services. Specific text for housing overlay is to be determined. Overlay purpose is to apply alternative standards for sites that can accommodate multiple small homes or a congregate housing structure in a single-family residential zone, and demonstrate lower impacts through meeting performance sta nda rds. 5. Please prepare and label as "Exhibit B," proposed amendatory language (i.e., to affected text of both the Comprehensive Plan and UDC) shown in "bill" format, with text to be added indicated with underlining (e.g., underlining), and text to be deleted indicated with strikeouts (e.g., '+rests). Bill format will be provided after specific text is identified. 6. Please prepare and label as "Exhibit C," a thorough explanation of how the proposed amendment, meets, conflicts with, or relates to the following inquiries (NOTE: Simple "yes" or "no" responses are unacceptable.) a. Is growth and development as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan occurring faster or slower than anticipated, or is failing to materialize? Growth and development is occurring at about the same rate (around 1% annually) as contemplated in the Comprehensive Plan. b. Has the capacity of the county to provide adequate services diminished or increased? The capacity of the county to provide services is considered in the applicability standards of the housing overlay. C. Is sufficient urban land designated and zoned to meet projected demand and need? Yes, rural residential zoning, including RR-5 is readily available for housing. See JCC Chapter 18.45 COMP PLAN AMEND APP.DOC REV. 01/2019 Are any of the assumptions upon which the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan is based no longer valid, or is new information available which was not considered during the adoption process or any annual amendments of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan? The Comprehensive Plan considers the need for innovative solutions to housing availability and affordability. Recent attempts by State Legislature to address housing issues within proposed amendments to the Growth Management Act (Ch. 36.70A RCW) demonstrate a climate more amenable to more people accommodated on rural parcels. e. Does the proposed amendment reflect the current widely held values of the residents of Jefferson County? Yes. f. Do changes in county -wide attitudes necessitate amendments to the goals of the plan and the basic values embodied within the Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement? Some policies may need to be articulated with more detail, but the intention of the Vision Statement remains intact. g. Do changes in circumstances dictated a need for amendment? Yes. Housing needs have been an issue for some time, but the crescendo of these circumstances require additional efforts. h. Do inconsistencies exist between the Comprehensive Plan and the GMA or the Comprehensive Plan and the County -wide Planning Policy for Jefferson County? It is possible that the Comprehensive Plan contemplates policies not addressed in the Growth Management Act. Demonstrate that the following conditions are met (if applicable): The proposed text amendment meets concurrency requirements for transportation and does not adversely affect adopted level of service standards for other public facilities and services (e.g., sheriff, fire and emergency medical services, parks, fire flow, and general governmental services); The proposed text amendment meets concurrency requirements for transportation and does not adversely affect adopted levels of service for other public facilities. Site -specific criteria are used to make determinations, case -by -case, based on local service availability. The proposed text amendment is consistent with the goals, policies and implementation strategies of the various elements of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan; Yes, the proposed text amendment is consistent with the goals, policies and implementation strategies of the various elements of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. k. The proposed text amendment will not result in probable significant adverse impacts to the county's transportation network, capital facilities, utilities, parks, and environmental features that cannot be mitigated, and will not place uncompensated burdens upon existing or planned service capabilities; The proposed text amendment is designed to avoid adverse impacts to the county's transportation network, capital facilities, utilities, parks, and environmental features that cannot be mitigated, nor will it place uncompensated burdens upon existing or planned service capabilities. In many cases, the amendment offers pathways to achieve urgent community goals in housing while also supporting the county's transit system, adding community benefits, and contributing to maintaining the distinct character of each area, aiding ecosystem services and restoration efforts, and boosting community resiliency. In the case of a text amendment to the Land Use Map, that the subject parcels are physically suitable for the requested land use designation and the anticipated land use development, including, but not limited to, the following: Included in the proposed text amendment are additional options for individual zoning overlay districts in applicable zones, each designed with consideration for the qualities of each land use district. (A) Access; (B) Provision of utilities; In all cases involving rural levels of service, the provision of utilities for overlay districts is designed to rest within the range of what is currently allowed under JCC for a single-family residence on rural residential parcels. (C) Compatibility with existing and planned surrounding land uses; M. The proposed text amendment will not create a pressure to change the land use designation of other properties, unless the change of land use designation for other properties is in the long-term best interests See JCC Chapter 18.45 COMP PLAN AMEND APP.DOC REV. 01/2019 of the county as a whole; The proposed text amendment will not create a pressure to change the land use designation of other properties. Elements of the proposed text amendment incentivize providing public benefits and under certain circumstances, new overlay pathways carry the requirement of proactive community meetings following an application. The proposed text amendment does not materially affect the land use and population growth projections that are the bases of the Comprehensive Plan; The proposed text amendment contains provisions specifically designed ensure the land use and population growth projections that are bases of the Comprehensive Plan are not materially affected. o. If within an unincorporated urban growth area (UGA), the proposed text amendment does not materially affect the adequacy or availability of urban facilities and services to the immediate area and the overall UGA- In areas within the UGA, the proposed text amendment will not materially affect the adequacy or availability of urban facilities and services. p. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Growth Management Act (Chapter 36.70A RCW), the County -Wide Planning Policy for Jefferson County, any other applicable inter -jurisdictional policies or agreements, and any other local, state or federal laws. The proposed amendment is congruent with the GMA and Jefferson County Planning Policies. All proposed new overlay options are consistent with the qualities, limitations and land uses associated with each specific area across several land use zoning districts. See JCC Chapter 18.45 COMP PLAN AMEND APP.DOC REV. 01/2019 Please provide an explanation of why the amendment is being proposed. (Attach additional sheets, if necessary.) For many years, housing affordability has been identified as needing urgent attention. Upon deliberation and after receiving additional public input, we have determined that it is critical to provide multiple pathways to achieve multiple goals related to inclusionary zoning, support for restoration and ecosystem services, and the maintenance of the character of rural lands, including agricultural and other rural uses. The UGA requires additional options as soon as possible, so that new pathways can be available to the public as residents of the UGA prepare to begin their visioning of a sub -area plan, and as construction is set to begin on the public sewer project. The applicant hereby certifies that the statements contained in this application are true and provide an accurate representation of the proposed amendment; and the applicant(s) hereby acknowledges that any approval issued on this application may be revoked if any such statement is found to be false. Signature: Print Name: Date: See JCC Chapter 18.45 COMP PLAN AMEND APP.DOC REV. 01/2019 Exhibit A: Proiect Description PROJECT DESCRIPTION Design code alternative based on the Planned Rural Residential Development (PRRD) framework: 1. Outlines the development of a special project 2. Looks at cumulative development impacts 3. Uses performance standards for level of development rather than residential zoned density (dwelling units/acre) 4. It is an overlay zone, or floating zone, and done by an opt -in program 5. Can implement a Planned Low Impact Development (PLID) land division section, particularly in Port Hadlock/Irondale UGA. 6. It considers any critical areas and performance standards are applied to reduce cumulative impacts, improve condition of critical areas, applies Low Impact Development standards. 7. Permitted through a Type II process with a community meeting requirement 8. Bonus density and incentives can include amenities such as linear parkways, connectivity networks to trails and parks (propose for year two-2024 Amendment Cycle. 9. Amends Farmworker Housing code to decouple employer from housing provider. 10. Biodiversity plan, impervious surfaces, parking and transportation See JCC Chapter 18.45 COMP PLAN AMEND APP.DOC REV. 01/2019 UDC Amendments Deferred from 2018 Docket to Future Work Plan ver. 2023-05-02 Item # Type of Change Code Section Description Future Work Plan Year/ Other Notes M = Maintenance to update references or correct scrivener errors P = Change to update UDC from Code Interpretations or Administrative Policy S = Suggested change enhancing usability, applicability, or understanding of code D = Deferred from 2018 CP/UDC Periodic Review DC = Deliberation required for Comprehensive Plan Consistency 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. 13 D 18.10.060 Consider updated definition of Family to be current with federal definitions and accommodate a variety of living arrangements, such as for housing affordability. 17 DC 18.15 Add zoning designations to private inholdings in Quinault Indian Nation. E.g. Seacrest parcels. Review changing zoning along Upper Quinault River to reduce development intensity (Quinault Nation doing Upper Quinault River restoration project) 2024 [COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT] 19 DC 18.15 Review adding more Convenience Crossroads zoning (CAC GHG reduction - basic needs within 20 min. walk) [COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT] 2024 21 D 18.15 Consider libraries as Conditional use in Rural Residential zones. Currently prohibited or grandfathered. 22 D 18.15.040 Table 3-1 Single family residences aren't allowed in the Convenience Crossroads (CC) commercial zone (Table 3-1), but Table 3-1 references cottage industry as allowed in CC. [Same issue in other commercial districts, as well as same disparity with Home Business.] 23 M 18.15.040 Table 3-1 Generally, change "marijuana" to "Cannabis" to match state statute. Old entry: 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". 24 D 18.15.040 *review use table for adequately siting veterinary clinics. Addressed in the Agriculture code as a Discretionary Use in Ag zone, there is a section in Performance Standards for Vetinerary Clinics and Hospitals in 18.20.420, specifying they must meet Industrial Site Development Standards, but does not address siting beyond that. Suggest "D" in Commercial, Industrial and large Residential (RR1:10, RR1:20), with possibly future development of more detailed performance standards. *Table 3-1 Veterinary Clinics refers to Ag section, 18.20.030. Address the potential need for Veterinary Clinic uses in other zoning districts. The other zones in the table are simply blank. *Ag Code: 18.20.030 (3)(e)(ii)(C) Other Accessory Uses --Veterinary clinics [serving large animals] subject to Type II "D" use permit review. *18.20.420 Veterinary Clinics or Hospitals -- subject to 18.20.220 Industrial standards for site development. [Due to potential hazardous materials.] 26 D 18.15.040 Uses in the county waste management EPF. Uses in that zone need to be addressed in a use table or in a section of the JCC. (Or left to be governed by Use Agreements with the County.) [Note: Essential Public Facilities (both county waste management and the airport EPF) are a category under the "Public" land use district. The use table only refers to "Parks, Preserves and Recreation" under the Public land use district.] Need to add other types of Public land use. 27 D 18.15.040 See Record and Ordinance. Revise Use Table to include Private Parks & Rec. Update map for parcel 602131002 if not already done to reflect Ord. 02-0521-01. [Ordinance reads as if it created a new land designation for a single parcel, for Camp Parsons.] 30 M 18.15.1124 Airport safety zones. Clarify standards used for FAA regulations and provide citation. 31 M 18.15.1132 Airport. Ground transportation facilities —provide regulation citation. 34 & 48 D 18.15.155(7) Highway 20 Visual Corridor--Aaland Planning Services (APS).Codify 1998 State Route 20 vegetated 18.15.574-576 buffer policy. Added text of Highway 20 Policies as a new overlay district. NOTE: I was not sure how to handle the formatting here; someone should look at this with an eye to making it consistent with the UDC (Neil Aaland). 40 D 18.15.480(2) In JCC 18.15.480 (2), the second sentence needs to allow for reconfiguration. It also needs to address vesting of density for PRRD's for lot size. Investigate with with other PRRD review. 41 D 18.15.520 Article VI-M, 18.15.475 Planned Rural Residential Developments (PRRD). At 18.15.520, be clearer in PRRD regulations about how bonus density will be calculated — provide the Hearing Examiner more solid criteria[ to make a determination. Consider providing more bonus density (weighted incentives) in the Incentives section .515 and density bonus at section .520 for a project with an overall smaller number of units than larger, because a Type III process to get one additional unit added to a small cluster is not going to be cost effective in comparison to bonus of several units for a large cluster. Also challenging to assemble enough land to develop rural clusters. 45 D 18.15.571 Repeal Overlay District Article VI-N: Forest Transition Overlay --has not been applied and may not provide the best outcomes for the rural -forest interface. Action is in Comprehensive Plan. 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- 0 Small -Scale Recreation and Tourist (SRT) Overlay District" -- which is referring only to Brinnon Subarea Plan. Rename Article VI-0 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 D 18.15.635 Code Publishing Review p. 8. 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 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. Re: does it adequately prevent [ow -density development in the UGA. 53 D 18.18 Amendment to provide Mixed Use Overlay in UGA commercial zones 2024 54 D 18.18.040 Consider rental properties in the UGA without owner on -site. JCC requires a rental to be associated with a primary residential use. Cannot rent out properties without the owner living on property. 55 D 18.18.040 Table 3A-1 *Add to use table: Food and Beverage Stands (Mobile, Temporary, Permanent) *Distinguish "Public" from 18.15 by naming it "Urban Public (UP)" (see other amendment reference above) *Fix reference "Marijuana recreational retailer" etc. *consider adding Farmer's Markets or Temporary Food Stands uses to Agricultural and Forestry Uses or to Commercial Uses. 56 D 18.18.050 Clarify Ironda[e/Port Hadlock UGA regulations for urban density development on interim septic systems. 57 DC 18.18.050 Note re: Allowed Residential Density, Table 3A-2 Density and Dimensional Standards: "Standard densities apply to development with connection to sanitary sewer system..." This is considered to mean that the zoned densities of the UGA will be followed and required with development & redevelopment. See [2006] Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Rural Element p. 3-4, Existing Lots of Record: "In addition to recognizing legal pre-existing land uses, Jefferson County recognizes existing lots of record as legal lots." A more complete understanding is needed regarding State subdivision law, and what is considered to be legal lots, and discussion of how redevelopment of Irondale/Port Hadlock UGA is achieved with vested plats and plats that are not considered vested. [Check to see if this is completely addressed in Ordinance #09-1003-22] 59 S 18.18.100(2)(g) Code Publishing Review doc., p. 10. 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. 62 S 18.19.120(1) *Subsection (1): Revise to allow new development with interim septic systems. 18.19.120(2) *Subsection (2) Revise to allow different scenarios of when interim septic system needs to be 18.19.130 decommissioned. *Section 130: consider standards that are not simply rural standards, but prepare and incentivize urban standards. 63 S 18.20. Consider JCC update to reflect rules and regulations pertaining to the manufacturing and sales of 18.30. Biodiesel materials. 64 D 18.20.020(2)(g) Consider updating ADU performance standards to be inclusive of unique adaptations meeting IBC (indernational Building Code). 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 not appropriate for retail. Add text here about administrative options to adapt different performance standards. 70 S 18.20.140 JCC 18.20.140--Commercial Uses, review re: adding reference and requirements for General Institutional Uses. 71 M 18.20.160 (1)(c) Forest conversion. 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.] 74 D 18.20.180 Day care & residential facilities. Code Publishing Review. Review for FFHA and accommodations for people with disabilities. 75 D 18.20.182(2)(b) Code Interpretation 4/01/2016. JCC 18.20.182 Food and Beverage Stands. Check for apparent inconsistency in the Code: Table of Uses at 18.15.040 does not allow" Food and Beverage Stands" in RR1:5. The Table is not sensitive to the fact that there are three types of Food and Beverage Stands and separate provisions for approval, and a Mobile Food Unit would be appropriate at a site such as the Elks Lodge (zoned RR1:5). Also, wedding party catering by a Mobile Food Unit has been requested in RR1:5. Potential solution would be to list "Mobile Food Units" that have an itinerary (more than one location) as a separate line in the Use Table, with "Yes" use in each Land Use category. The Temporary, Permanent, and Mobile -with -one -location Food and Beverage Stands would be regulated differently in the Land Use zones. 77 M 18.20.200 Include marijuana operation in prohibition list for home businesses. 184 & 79 S 18.20.295; Change the word "marijuana" to "cannabis" throughout the UDC sections to implement Second 18.15.040 Table 3-1 Substitute House Bill (2SHB) 1210, Chapter 16, Laws of 2022. [see other amendment items about this 81 M 18.20.295 (3)(b) Add word "USE". "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) Landscaping requirements. 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-2022/0n-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. 118 S 18.35.470 Make the condominiumization language clearer (JCC 18.35.470) with consideration for possible eaffects on ADU's. 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. 121 M 18.40.030 (5) Edit sentence "Project review conducted pursuant to..." for clarity. 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) . [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 See 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 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. 162 S 15.05.030 Code versions auto -adopted by resolution but does not update in Title 15. Udate versions. Add Residential Code Appendix Qfor Tiny Home standards to the list, along with Wildland Urban Interface code from WAC [19.27.560] as "(7)" referencing WAC 51.55. 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 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 18.20.020(2)(g) 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? Conform with Title 15. 166 "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 18.40.180 predecision hearing is required. A notice of application shall be required for all Type 11 and Type III projects, regardless of whether such projects are exempt from SEPA. [Ord. 8-06 § 1 168 18.40.330 and Article III No protocol identified for re -noticing projects when the project has changed. i.e. SEPA now Public Notice 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 added 2018 Requirements Chapter comment period again and allow SEPA appeal to be consolidated at Type III hearing. 18.40, 169 JCC 18.40.800 and remove duplicate language 18.40.750(3)(g) added 2018 170 18.15.020(2)(c) and Text amendment in the description of Inholding Forest to match Comprehensive Plan. Remove check 18.05 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 reference error: cites Ch. 42.17 RCW which has morphed to Ch 42.17A Campaign disclosure and 18.40.720 (4) contribution. Possibly reference should be Ch. 42.56 RCW Public Records Act. added 2/12/19 173 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 18.20.060 & 18.10 attorney challenge that 18.20.060 does not apply, but only can do "livestock management" under added 4/29/19 Ag Code 18.20.030. Misses opportunity to provide CUP and protection from nuisance provisions of Title 6 - Animal Control. 174 Update based on passge of SB 1377 relating to density bonuses for affordable housing on property added 8/1/2019 owned by a religious organization. 175 Conditional Uses. Revise clarify the differentiation between minor and major amendment. added 8/1/2019 18.40.570 176 18.30.040 (4) Sewage disposal. Review sanitary sewer language for relevance. 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. LCB Board Action: Approved proposal for expedited rule making (CR 105) to replace every use of 18.15; Ch. 18.18; Ch. the term "marijuana" with the term "cannabis" throughout Title 314 WAC. added 4/27/2022 8.60 1791 118.22 JSeismic source information NEHRP referenced but not EES seismic data added 5/18/2022 1801 118.35 JAdministrative Lot Certification process should be repealed. added 5/18/2022 182 s 18.25.280 Shoreline Master Program is much more thorough regarding the County's ability to require on -site 18.39.160 archaeological monitoring during excavation than our development standards in 18.30.160. C.f. UDC Ch. 18.40. Archaeological survey added as a SEPA mitigation in a MDNS. SEPA Checklist comports 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. 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 7/27/2022 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. 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. 7/28/2022 18.40.530 "Approval criteria for all conditional uses. (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:" 184 18.35.040(1 - 4) Review and update exemptions to reflect current state statute and things like road segregations and lot certifications (if not part of the Legal Lot of Record changes). May involve adding 8/24/2022 exemptions. 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) Forest Resource Lands setback in 18.15.150 applies the setback to lands "adjacent". 1) When 18.10.010 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 8/31/2022 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 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 9/2/2022 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. for 2024 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." 2024 188 imp 18.18.160 Sewer service are (entire LIGA) and phased implementation areas need to be defined more clearly. The phasing plan reference to 2008 GSP needs to be updated to the most recently adopted GSP (2020?) Significance: can we allow urban densities to be developed on temporary septic systems? We once said "Yes", but Hearings board had trouble with that. Need to research this again in light 11/23/2022 of City of Manchester, et cetera, for the specific conditions that allowed them to be on septic rather than a sewer extension. Consider shadow platting in service area for future condition. 189 bab Ch. 18.20 Consider temporary use permit for living in an RV while constructing a home. 3/1/2023 190 dwj Title 17 Amend Title 17 to preclude timber harvest in Open Space Zone -- move to 2024 3/1/2023 for 2024 2024 191 18.12.070 Correct incomplete word. "An owner of contiguous, substandard lots as of the effective date of tkr [the] ordinance codified in this chapter shall aggregate (combine) lots to meet the requirements of 3/1/2023 this chapter" 192 18.15.571 Rescind Article VI-N, JCC 18.15.571, Forest Transition Overlay. See Comprehensive Plan. 2018 194 Ch. 18.10, 18.20 Add updated definitions from City/County temporary emergency housing work to update Ordinance #05-0613-22. 2022-2023 195 jdp Ch. 18.35 (5) Pursuant to Chapters 79.125 and 58.17 RCW, tidelands boundaries that are coincident with state-owned aquatic lands may not be altered in any fashion under this section. Tideland Mar-23 , beundaFy line The to tidelands lies the depaFtment OF adjustment. authWity alteF platted with of ,., a