HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-09-06 PC - 01_Agenda PacketVacant – District 1 LD Richert – District 2 Richard Hull, Chair – District 3
Kevin Coker – District 1 Matt Sircely, Vice Chair – District 2 Chris Llewellyn – District 3
Cynthia Koan – District 1 Vacant – District 2 Michael Nilssen – District 3
1
AGENDA
JEFFERSON COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting – September 6, 2023
Tri Area Community Center, 10 West Valley Road, Chimacum, Washington 98325
This will be a hybrid meeting with telephone or on-line options. The public is invited to
attend in-person, with a limit of up to 50 percent of the venue' s capacity pursuant to
Resolution 24-22.
You can join this meeting remotely by using the following methods:
Zoom Meeting: Meeting ID: 886 7104 7253 Passcode: 894561
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88671047253?pwd=OU8vTWZGWTVRRGNRVEQ1c2k0WDVadz09
This option will allow you to join the meeting live. You will need to enter an email address. If you wish
to provide public comment, click on the hand icon at the bottom of the screen to “raise your hand.”
The public comment period is managed by the Chair.
Audio-only: For one tap mobile copy and paste:
+12532158782,,88671047253#,,,,*894561#
Please sign on 5 to 10 minutes before the official start of the meeting to check sound and video quality.
This video will be closed-captioned enabled.
5:30PM Chair Welcome and Overview Presentation
1. Call to Order/Roll Call
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of Minutes
a. August 2, 2023
4. Planning Commission Updates (10 minutes)
5. DCD Staff and Director Updates (5 minutes)
a. Community Development is advertising two open PC positions: District 1 and District 2.
The BoCC will handle the applications and an interview process will be conducted with
Community Development and the district’s commissioner. Appointments will be made in
a regular session by vote of the Board.
b. Stipend request for August 2nd sent to Finance. Please let us know if there are any issues
with the stipend. The level of oversight needed by me got to be too much, so the finance
people are taking it over. Please keep your own records as there will not likely be
reporting as done in the past. Note: There were no PC meetings in July.
c. PC Retreat Date? Josh is conferring with BoCC re: potential dates toward end of year or
January. We would like to hold the retreat after new PC members are appointed. DCD will
send a survey to the Planning Commission regarding scope of future project work, input
Vacant – District 1 LD Richert – District 2 Richard Hull, Chair – District 3
Kevin Coker – District 1 Matt Sircely, Vice Chair – District 2 Chris Llewellyn – District 3
Cynthia Koan – District 1 Vacant – District 2 Michael Nilssen – District 3
2
on the retreat format, e.g. number of days, attendance by individual Commissioners
and/or plan a Joint BoCC/Planning Commission workshop as additionally done last year?
d. Proposed Schedule for Upcoming PC Meetings:
i. September 20 – CPA 2023 staff report and proposal presentations
ii. October 4 – SMP Public Hearing
iii. October 18 – PC deliberation & recommendations on SMP
iv. October 25? Hold for possible special meeting for SPM recommendation?
v. November 1 -- CPA 2023 Public Hearing
vi. November 8? Hold for possible special meeting for PC deliberation &
recommendations on 2023 Comprehensive Plan amendments?
vii. November 15 – PC deliberation & recommendations on CPA 2023
PUBLIC COMMENT
6. Public comments from attendees about any topic that is not on the agenda. Public comments on
agenda items can be given during the agenda item’s section. When the Chair recognizes you to
speak, please begin by stating your name and address. Please be aware that the public comment
period is three minutes.
CONSENT AGENDA
7. Transmitted Information – General Information Items to Receive and Read. Suggested process:
Chair asks “Do we have consent to accept the transmitted information?”
07a-Stock Plans_Staff Report_5September2023
07b-Final Staff Report_Caswell-Brown
Please refer to SMP Information Update: Jefferson County SMP periodic review webpage:
https://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/1481/Shoreline-Master-Program-Periodic-Review
REGULAR BUSINESS
8. Election of Officers
PC Bylaws, Section 4 – Officers. Officers of the Planning Commission shall be chair and vice chair.
Candidates for chair and vice chair shall be nominated from the floor annually at the first regular
meeting in September from among its active members. Nominations require no “second.” The election
Bylaws of the Jefferson County Washington Planning Commission adopted 10/5/2022 Page | 3
shall take place at the next scheduled meeting unless two-thirds (2/3) of active members vote at the
nominating meeting to hold the election at the same meeting. Nominations from the floor can also take
place at the second/election meeting (if held).
9. Appointments to Vacant Sub-Committee Seats (file 09_Subcommittes 2022)
Issue: Arlene’s departure leaves a vacant chair position in the Outreach Sub-Committee and a
vacant seat in the Stock Plans Sub-Committee. To assist Community Development, and with the
Vacant – District 1 LD Richert – District 2 Richard Hull, Chair – District 3
Kevin Coker – District 1 Matt Sircely, Vice Chair – District 2 Chris Llewellyn – District 3
Cynthia Koan – District 1 Vacant – District 2 Michael Nilssen – District 3
3
functionality of the sub-committee, let us fill these vacant seats with one of the following
processes from Roberts Rules of Order:
a. Nominations from the floor and appointment by the Chair
b. Nominations by the Chair and present the question: “shall these persons constitute the Sub-
committee?”, with any member able to make a motion to strike one or more names, but not
insert new ones.
c. Appointment by the Chair
See PC Bylaws, Section 8—Meetings and Workshops. When appropriate and necessary, the chair
shall establish committees and appoint members to them. If made up of less than a quorum of
the Planning Commission, committees are not governed by the OPMA and therefore such
committee meetings do not require public notice or an audio record.
10. Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendment Proposal Review
PC review and additional input on proposals for consideration in staff report.
a. Site-specific Amendment Proposals
i. Miles Sand & Gravel MRL Overlay, Case ZON2021-00013 (file 10c)
ii. Gifford-Yep RR20 to RR5 Rezone, Case ZON2023-00004 (file 10d)
iii. Midori Farm RR20 to AL20 Rezone, Case ZON2023-00006 (file 10e)
b. PC Housing Amendments Proposal
c. UDC Omnibus Amendments
11. Preliminary Planning Commission Budget (file 11_2024 Budget 8-31-2023)
a. Review of planned expenditures and short discussion, if needed
b. Finalize PC recommendations, if any, to BoCC on September 20.
PC Bylaws Section 12 - BUDGET: A preliminary budget for the Planning Commission shall be
prepared by the DCD. An itemized estimate of expenditures for the ensuing calendar year
shall be included in the preliminary budget.
The preliminary budget shall be reviewed by members at the earliest possible time so the
members may express any shortcomings in the budget and make a recommendation directly
to the Board of County Commissioners to address the Planning Commission's needs.
The budget shall become final in December without further review by the Planning
Commission, unless there is a substantial change. The budget and any amendments thereof
shall be prepared in accordance with requirements established by the Jefferson County
Auditor.
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450
Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name and address. Please
be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
1
MEETING MINUTES
JEFFERSON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting (Virtual) – August 2, 2023
5:35 PM Welcome Chair and Overview Presentation
1.Call to Order/Roll Call
District 1 District 2 District 3
Vacant Sircely ✓ Hull ✓
Coker ✓ Smith – Excused Absence Nilssen ✓
Koan ✓ Richert ✓ Llewelyn – Unexcused Absence
One Vacancy; 6 of 7 Commissioners Present; Quorum = 5; Majority vote for tonight’s business = 4
2.Approval of Agenda – Agenda Update (Chairman Hull): The one public comment period will be
for agenda items.
3.Approval of Minutes
Motions
Motion # Motion 1st 2nd Yay Nay Abstain
1 Motion to Approve minutes Koan Nilssen 5 0 1
2 Motion to Approve consent agenda Sircely Coker 6 0 0
PUBLIC COMMENT
4.Planning Commission Updates: L.D. Richert, “Has there been any talk on the PC about the county
procuring land around the landfill?” Respondents: “No, there has not been any talk on the PC.”
5.DCD Staff and Director Updates (5 minutes): Josh Peters (DCD Director), “Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'll start. First, I'll answer the question posed by L.D., as Cynthia mentioned it is something that the
county is doing, however it's not an issue at this stage and I'm actually unaware of at what stage
it would be. It’s possibly not a planning commission related issue, it's more of a project that's
being conducted by the Solid Waste program within the Department of Public Works. I did put a
link in the comments to the page that discusses the project to find or to analyze alternate sites for
additional landfill capacity. So, if anyone's interested, it's there. I just want to say briefly that I
appreciate the flexibility of the commissioners for going to a virtual only meeting this week. I
listed the reasons in some correspondence to you and I hope you understand. I think it's a good
choice for tonight for the reasons I laid out.” Mr. Peters continues, “We had just the one topic to
discuss, really, in addition to some logistical things and I was not sure how long it would take. So, I
was hoping to save you a trip to Chimacum. But the other factor is that we continue to have staff
capacity issues as well. We just continue to have staff capacity issues here at DCD and every time
It seems like we make progress on that we suffer a setback. In this case, it's the lead planner to
the Planning Commission who has simply been unavailable. So, it's just an extra body of work that
we need to handle with the other staff that we have who are also doing other things or had
previously been assigned to do other things. I do want to give kudos to both George Terry and
03_2023-08-02 Minutes
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450
Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name and address. Please
be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
2
Alex Henley for stepping up to assist with this meeting, as well, of course, to our consultants who
have prepared some materials for us this evening. So, that's the extent of my report.”
6.Comments from the public. Three minutes per speaker:
•Jan Wold - Jefferson County resident
o About 30% of all Puget Sound tidelands are under permit for shellfish farms.
o Of all shellfish farming, geoduck farming is the most destructive.
o Geoduck/shellfish farming should require a conditional use permit.
o CUP is consistent with Kitsap CO SMP.
o Concerned with development within the 150 ft shoreline buffer.
o Emphasized the county’s SMP mission of considering global warming and sea level
rise.
•Kim Thompson – Executive Director, Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association (PCSGA)
o Shellfish growers are highly dependent on healthy ecosystems and water quality to
support their livelihoods and they support the SMP process as a mechanism to
keep those systems healthy.
o Shellfish farming provides many benefits to local communities and society at large,
including a source of nutritious food that uses almost no land or fresh water and it
will support a more resilient food future in the changing climate.
o Shellfish farming provides an important source of jobs, particularly in rural coastal
communities.
o Concerned that the current version of the SMP has significant changes for
aquaculture and it was presented for the first time in June which was during the
busy summer harvest time for growers.
•Sissy Brook – Environmental Planning Biologist, Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe
o The Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe supports commercial aquaculture for local food
production and restoration projects involving aquaculture activities to protect the
local resources, improve water quality in our area, and to protect the tribe’s treaty
rights.
o Tribal elders have expressed increased interest in pursuing aquaculture for both
food sovereignty and maintaining traditional practices of seafood harvest and
commerce.
o The Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe agrees that aquaculture operations shall utilize
best practices.
o The permitting and installation of mooring buoys needs to be tracked to ensure
that a density of 10 boats per 10 acres does not trigger a marina designation.
o Our other comments address confusing wording and onerous requirements within
the SMP. These may inhibit small, minimal impact growers and resource
practitioners such as the tribe and groups like the Puget Sound Restoration Fund
from obtaining permits.
•Lisa Carleton-Long – Operations Manager, Rock Point Oyster Company
o Presently Rock Point provides 20 to 25 jobs to Jefferson County's workforce. The
success of Rock Point depends on the continued health and well-being of our
watersheds in our environment.
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450
Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name and address. Please
be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
3
o Rock Point has a long-standing commitment to environmental stewardship in
addition to complying with all state, local, and federal regulations.
o Rock Point conducts monthly beach cleanups and partners with environmental
NGOs on research.
o The most recent changes to the aquaculture sections of the SMP only became
available to Rock Point in June, which is also during one of their most active
harvesting times because of the summer tides.
o Rock Point is still processing the proposed SMP language and working to
understand what these changes mean for their business. They anticipate having
questions for the consultants working on the project.
•Marilyn Showalter - Jefferson County resident
o Comments are focused on geoduck farming, not all shellfish farming.
o The SMP draft does require a conditional use permit for new operations. A
conditional use permit does not dictate the outcome of what happens. It simply
allows interested parties to present evidence.
o Time to move forward with the public hearing as the SMP draft has been
tentatively approved.
o Time for the Planning Commission to move it along and there will be future
opportunities for revisions.
•Gordon King – Taylor Shellfish
o The initial SMP draft in 2020 seemed thoughtfully written as was the document
that was presented to the public in June, 2021.
o Afterward, the process of updating the SMP went dark with no minutes or meeting
recordings until October, 2021.
o At that point, I got to see the draft and found that the aquaculture section had
been butchered at the same meeting the draft was sent to Department of Ecology.
o A small group of Shine waterfront property owners with a badly run geoduck farm
in their neighborhood had carried out a considered lobbying campaign to make it
as difficult as possible to permit and grow shellfish in Jefferson County. They, of
course, have a right to put their point of view forward, however, significant parts
of what they told the Planning Commission was not balanced or accurate.
o Additionally, they started submitting public comments before the public comment
period was open and continued after the public comment period was closed.
o The SMP draft, as it now stands, is a set of regulations that will negatively impact
the shellfish agriculture industry, which is an important economic driver in rural
Jefferson County and has been for more than a century.
•Sue Corbett - Jefferson County (Shine) resident
o There is not much oversight for a lot of geoduck farms. There aren't many people
around to see what's going on so here we just happen to be in front of the farm
and can see what actually goes on.
o Hydraulic hoses liquefying acres of tidelands doesn't seem like a very good thing
for the creatures that live within the tidelands.
o May of 2021, sent in a letter with 42 signatures from neighbors in this area asking
that you include an opportunity for a public review and a requirement for a
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450
Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name and address. Please
be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
4
conditional use permit before any tide lands not previously used for geoduck
farming are used for geoduck cultivation.
•Adam James – Hama Hama Oyster Company
o Believes that these changes to the SMP are going to have some negative impacts
on the rural economy in Jefferson County and points farther.
o Farming in Jefferson County, and its cold waters, has become critical to our
operations here in Mason County and even outside the state.
o Our customers rely on the product that we grow there. Our employees in Jefferson
County rely on the income generated from the sales of that product. We hope that
you all take that into consideration while you're reviewing this plan.
•Reed Gunstone – G&G Gunstone Clams Inc.
o Poor audio quality/connection, the Chairman requested a written comment.
CONSENT AGENDA
7.General Information Items to read and receive:
a. BERK Consultants update for SMP Periodic Review project
b. BERK memorandum re: shoreline setback information and policy options
REGULAR BUSINESS
8.Topic: BERK and Shoreline Master Program (SMP) updates:
a.Project Timeline
i.It starts from the Department of Ecology (DOE) initial determination of
consistency. They took a year to get to that point. Then, the county secured some
grant funds and the consultant team (BERK) was brought back on board to
respond to those ecology comments.
ii.That grant went through June 30, 2023. PC had 2 meetings in June including an
open house. BERK was at the June 29, 2023 PC meeting where the PC discussed
some of the questions and key topics that led to the packet material that is the
focus of tonight’s meeting.
b.Addressing changing local circumstances, eliminating redundancies, and improving clarity.
c.Consistency with regulatory reform and the constraints of the legal framework and
staffing capacity.
d.BERK making revisions to the SMP to reflect key input and address the DOE’s request for a
cumulative impacts analysis addendum that includes some particulars that DOE wants to
see.
e.Modest home and common line provisions, minor residential expansions of
nonconforming structures, and beach access structures.
f.Updated periodic checklist and creating a uses checklist.
g.Draft shoreline user guide that was the subject of a related grant. The idea being to help
improve the understanding and use of the SMP.
h.The most important thing is to get the SMP provisions to a hearing draft format.
621 Sheridan St. P: 360-379-4450
Port Townsend, WA, 98368 PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us
Public Comment: When the Chair recognizes you to speak, please begin by stating your name and address. Please
be aware that the public comment period is three minutes.
5
9.Potential dates for SMP public hearing: September 20, 2023 or October 4, 2023. (PCSGA Annual
Conference 9/19-9/21)
10.Opportunity for Commissioners to tour Taylor Shellfish.
11.Deadline for Comprehensive Plan docket is in December.
12.PC Retreat tentatively planned for some time “before it snows”.
13.Cancellation of August 16, 2023 PC meeting.
7:22 PM ADJOURNMENT
The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for September 6, 2023, at 5:30. To attend virtually
please use the following link or dial in using your phone by calling: +1 (646) 749-3122; Access Code:
883-126-605. Link is
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88671047253?pwd=OU8vTWZGWTVRRGNRVEQ1c2k0WDVadz09 and the
passcode is 894561
To learn if in-person attendance is possible, please view the next meeting agenda.
These meeting minutes were approved this ____________ day of_____, 2023.
____________________________
Richard Hull, Chair A. George Terry, Secretary
1
JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
CONSENT AGENDA
TO: Board of Commissioners
Mark McCauley, County Administrator
FROM: Brent A. Butler, AICP, Chief Strategy Officer
Phil Cecere, Certified Fire Marshal and Certified Building Official
DATE: September 5, 2023
RE: Stock Plans
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
The purpose of this consent agenda is to update the Board of County Commissioners
(“BoCC”) on the joint partnership with the City of Port Townsend regarding an initiative
underway to gauge the community’s interest in the 34 different building plans posted on the
county website with the eventual goal of using some of these as preapproved stock plans.
BACKGROUND:
Stock plans are used as an innovative tool to reduce permitting timelines, cost, and
noncompliance with local state and federal regulations. They can be used for a primary house,
accessory dwelling unit, or multifamily structure. Currently many jurisdictions throughout
western Washington authorize stock plans. Some of these municipalities limit stock plans to
accessory dwellings while others allow them for other housing types. Currently, the cities of
Olympia, Lacey, Tumwater, Renton, Kent and Seattle, among others, have approved stock
plan programs. The three cost categories include: 1) plan set, 2) plan engineering, 3) hourly
support.
Benefits include:
•Expedite delivery of housing by eliminating the need for review and approval of the
initial plan set
•Architect is available to assist the homeowners/builder for an hourly rate
•Reduced design costs
•Designs may be more appealing and offer cost competitive options to manufactured
structures
•Pre-packaged designs are guaranteed to meet local and state building codes
•Applicant saves on the jurisdiction’s Plan Review fees since the structural plans are
already approved
07_Stock Plans_Staff Report_5September2023
2
•Reduced design costs. New structural single family designs average 8-12% of the total
valuation of the construction cost. At an average of $300/sq ft of building cost for
average grade construction, project valuations for these designs range from $86,400-
$450,000. Typical design costs on a per project basis would therefore range between
$8,600 and $45,000. However, this program enables the designer to skip several steps
and lower costs on their designs similar to cheaper pre-designed plans available on the
internet. Multifamily designs are typically more expensive; therefore, reduced plan
costs may encourage more infill development within the Tri-Area where sewer is
planned.
Site specific land use review is still required as some areas may have critical areas or other
development constraints unique to the site.
Call for projects Update
Stock Plan Submittals for Selection: | Jefferson County, WA
The City and County announced a call for projects to supplement four plans selected by three
community members serving on the county planning commission; one of these four is no
longer available. As a result of the call for projects, the City/County joint project received
three submittals from three western Washington architects/design professionals including
GreenPOD (5 plans), Cascadia (11 plans), and Ross Chapin (15 plans). Currently, the
City/County joint project has 34 different plan sets, all of which can be reviewed online.
Collectively, these plans when included with those selected previously, as discussed below,
may be more than what can be funded. The designs range from 288-1500 square feet. The
Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) specifically requested information about numbers of
individuals interested in the plans prior to selecting some for plans review funding.
Stock Plan Background
Initially Jefferson County Commissioners Kevin Coker, Matt Sircely, and Arlene Alen used
the City of Seattle's call for projects and selected four plans that would be easier to construct
for someone who is outside of the building trades. They also sought to identify plans that
would be less costly to construct. Commissioners Alan and Coker studied architecture and
Sircely is a committed housing advocate. Of the 140 plan sets submitted to the city of Seattle,
ten were made available for City of Seattle residents. Of these, three are selected for
consideration: Artisan Group (1 plan), Shape Arch (1 plan) and Urban Cottage (1 plan).
ANALYSIS:
After review and discussion with Wendy Davis, Communications Specialist, and the City of
Port Townsend’s project lead, Emma Bolin, Director, Planning and Development Services, the
following next steps are in place.
3
Timeline and public engagement
•Additional time is now afforded to the project because the 2021 State Building Code
was delayed until October 29, 2023.
•During the delay, staff will be working with Housing Solutions Network and
professionals assisting home buyers and renters to identify people interested in a stock
plan program. These individuals will be queried on which designs they are most
interested in to help inform the joint committee.
•Formation of joint committee and kick off meeting in early October.
The joint committee will evaluate the interest in the submitted plans as well as discuss further
selection criteria such as: a) Building efficiency, b) Cost, c) Design, d) Multifamily housing
needs for Tri-Area/Port Townsend, and e) Single-family typologies. Currently, there are
limited small-scale multi-family and attached residential infill builders operating within the
city and the county future Port Hadlock urban growth area. How can this program incentivize
and spur the proliferation of confident multifamily builders?
•Meeting/final recommendation of selected stock plans by Committee to BoCC in late
October followed by a City Council briefing.
•Other ways to solicit feedback: Staff is targeting a specific audience that may be
interested in building or living in buildings using these stock designs. Anyone can submit
their feedback to the County or City by contacting Brent Butler bbutler@co.jefferson.wa.us
or Emma Bolin ebolin@cityofpt.us
County Process
The County will piggyback the City’s process wherever feasible.
Table 1: Jefferson County Process
Typical Building Fees What the fee covers Stock Plan program
Base building permit fee,
(based on fee valuation)
Inspections Fee still required
Plan Review fee, 20% of
building permit fee (reduced
from 65%)
Site Plan review, structural plan
check no less than 4 hrs. of review
time.
Plan review for specific
site
Special reports $107/hr
consistent w/ RCW82.02.020
Additional review for site specific
issues if required beyond 4 hrs. of
review.
Fee required if site
specific complications
exist.
State fees $6.50 Mandatory state fee on all building
permits funds State Bldg. Council
Fee still required
Technology scan fee $26.75 Permit Database Maintenance Fees Fee still required
Other County department
reviews (EH, PW, etc.)
Potable water, Septic, Road
approach, Addressing, Etc.
Fee still required
SDR, LLOR (varies) Site development review, Legal lot
of record review
Fee or exempt
4
City of Port Townsend Process - As part of the City’s 2023 Workplan objective to inspire
and deliver zoning code changes to unlock dense and affordable infill housing, the city is
partnering with Jefferson County to design and implement a stock plan program with public
input. The City’s Planning Commission nominated two of its members to serve on the stock
plan joint committee with Jefferson County. Once the committee and BoCC settle on final
recommended plans, the county will conduct a structural and energy code review. The city will
review the stamped plans to ensure consistency with City adopted building code. Because both
jurisdictions adopt the International Residential Code and State Building Code, the city
expects the consistency review for the selected plans to not require much staff resources.
The city has already adopted a reduced fee list for stock ADU and single-family residence
plans. The reduced fees in the form of a “Site Plan Adaptation Fee” pay for planning and
engineering staff review to ensure that the site plan will work for the chosen stock plan set and
to ensure conditions relating to setbacks, critical areas, and infrastructure are incorporated into
the building permit. This fee covers time for co-problem-solving when the building plans do
not fit on the site. City staff does not recommend waiving this fee or the “Building Permit Fee”
which pays for inspections. Moreover, other jurisdictions that have implemented similar stock
plan programs reported charging similar fees due to the considerable amount of time needed to
assist customers with this project.
As part of a building permit application, all new residential applicants must pay typical
building fees described in the table below. Differences in the typical fees versus stock plan
program are noted in the far-right column.
Table 1: City of Port Townsend Process
Typical Building Fees What the fee covers Stock Plan program
Base building permit fee,
(based on fee valuation, typical
$1,430)
Inspections Fee still required
Plan Review fee, 65% of
building permit fee (typical
$1,000)
Site Plan review, structural
plan check
Site Plan Adaptation Fee
charged instead as follows:
$242: Single Family Dwelling
$192: ADU
Energy Code Fee ($96) Structural plan review for
energy code compliance and
air quality code.
Fee not required
State fees $6.50 Mandatory state fee on all
building permits funds State
Building Code Council
Fee still required
Technology fee 2% Permit Database Maintenance
Fees
Fee still required
Records fee 5% Administrative requirements
for records management and
retention.
Fee still required
5
The City has not developed a reduced site plan adaptation fee for multifamily structures. Some
of the design submittals are multifamily designs. Should any of these designs be selected by
the County for funding plan review, the City will need to evaluate if a multifamily site plan
adaptation fee is appropriate.
Users of these plans as multifamily or single-family units may qualify for further City subsidy.
The City has a low-income housing fee deferral program (PTMC 3.36.011), which allows
private or nonprofit organizations constructing low income housing units at or less than 80%
Area Median Income adjusted by family size to defer building fees and utility connection
charges for up to four units per applicant per year and system development charges (SDC) up
to any limit on deferred amount. Multifamily units meeting the income criteria may apply to
defer building fees and utility connection charges up to $10,000 per project and no limit on
system development charges.
This program does not extend to accessory dwelling units; however, ADU’s are exempt from
paying SDC’s because they can connect to the existing home’s side sewer.
Finally, additional low-income multifamily unit subsidy is available for property tax
exemption via the City’s multifamily tax exemption program per Chapter 3.15 Port Townsend
Municipal Code. Multifamily designs, if selected for plan review subsidy, can cumulatively
lower project costs; however, city and county staff will coordinate polling local small builders
to determine if these multifamily infill designs are within reach of our local builders and their
capacity and if the designs will be adaptable for a wide variety of sites.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The BoCC would need to allocated funds for plan review, and the Chief Strategy Officer
continues to work on this project, and estimates that an additional 40 hours of his time will be
required to bring this project to conclusion.
RECOMMENDATION:
Accept and file
REVIEWED BY:
Mark McCauley, County Administrator Date
STAFF REPORT
Caswell-Brown Village
APPLICANT
Olympic Community Action Programs
STAFF REVIEWER -
Brent A. Butler, Chief Strategy Officer
Jefferson County, Washington
August 2023
07b_Final Staff Report_Caswell-Brown
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Description Page
I Project Description 2
II Review Process and Schedule 3
A Should this be a Type III Permit 3
B Urgency Issue 3
C Unnamed institutional use and Public Purpose Facilities 5
D Why Conditional Use Permit and SEPA Mitigations? 5
E Regulations Governing Existing Use are Temporary 6
F Public Facilities 6
G How CUPs are reviewed and authorized 7
H Determination of Completeness / Notice of Application 7
III SEPA Environmental Review 8
A Review Process 8
B SEPA Appeals 8
IV Project Phasing 8
V Site Context, Previous Site Usage, and Zoning 11
A Site Context and Description of Surrounding Uses 11
B Previous Site Usage 15
C Zoning 15
D History 16
VI The Criteria 20
VII Staff Recommendation 27
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village
ii
Figures and Tables
Figure 1 Rendering of Shelter Page 2
Table 1 First Responder Calls Page 7
Figure 2 Phasing Plan Page 9
Figure 3 Aerial Site Photo Page 11
Figure 4 North East Aerial Page 12
Figure 5 Evans Vista Master Plan Page 13
Figure 6 Port Townsend Paper
Mill and Ponds
Page 13
Figures 7 & 8 Larry Scott Trail
Easement
Page 14
Table 2 Comparative Analysis of
Proposal and UDC
Page 16
Figure 9 Rendering of Shelter Page 20
Figure 10 Emergency Shelter Site
Plan
Page 22
Figure 11 Tiny Shelter and RV Park Page 22
Figure 12 Lighting Devices Page 23
Figure 13 Access Page 24
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter & 40-Space Tiny Shelter/RV Park
Page 2 of 32
I.Request and Project Description
A.Request for Conditional Use Permit
Olympic Peninsula Community Action Programs (OlyCAP) seeks a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a 50-
bed emergency shelter (“shelter”) with permanent supportive housing and a 40-lot park (“park”)
consisting primarily of recreational vehicles and tiny shelters to provide housing for persons
experiencing housing insecurity. Caswell-Brown Village refers to the combined shelter and park.
B.Project Description
The 11,830 square foot shelter is designed with communal kitchen and bathrooms, two common rooms,
24 emergency shelter beds and 16 permanent supportive housing units consisting of three one-
bedroom units and 13 single room occupancies serving very low-income individuals suffering chronic
housing instability. The shelter is planned with flexible space to support up to 75 individuals during peak
weather emergencies and includes staff quarters with 27 parking stalls in the upper portion of a 21.8-
acre parcel. The existing park sited on a temporary basis would obtain permanent siting through this
CUP. The 40-lot park is outfitted with 19 parking spaces; common building; sanitation unit with showers,
restrooms, and sinks; site monitor office; garbage / recycling pad; and a kitchen tent. Approved as a
temporary housing facility pursuant to Jefferson County Code 18.20.385, the Park is located on a graded
area of the parcel’s lower site. It is currently permitted in accordance with temporary housing facilities
for individuals who are unsheltered for a period of 180 days with extensions allowed for an additional
two years. The 40-lot park will share the 21.8 parcel with the emergency shelter, and the site currently
has an approved temporary housing facility permitted in accordance with Jefferson County Code
18.20.385 with recreational vehicles/campers and tiny shelter.
Below is an artist’s rendering of the one-story emergency shelter with clerestory windows for extra light.
Figure 1: See Exhibit 22 for Caswell-Brown Village’s Emergency Shelter and 40-lot Park Plan
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 3 of 32
II. Review Process and Schedule
Jefferson County Code Title 18 is the Unified Development Code, which is the principal tool for
implementing the goals and policies of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. Since the review
schedule for applications is determined by the use classification and associated use impacts, this section
explains: 1) the Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrator’s Type III permit designation and the
urgency, 2) why this is an ‘unnamed institutional use’ that falls under the rubric of ‘public use facilities’,
3) why a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is warranted, and 4) how CUPs are reviewed and authorized.
A. Should this be a Type III permit review?
This is determined to be a Type III permit. The UDC outlines three options for this permit that includes as
a Development Agreement (JCC 18.40.820 to 18.40.860), an Essential Public Facility (JCC 18.15.110), or a
Public Purpose Facility as set forth in Table 3-1 of the UDC. Both Development Agreements and
Essential Public Facilities are legislative actions commonly referenced to as Type V permits. Type V
process requires final approval by the Board of County Commissioners (“Board”) after transmittal of the
Planning Commission recommendation. The Board’s decision would be appealable to the Western
Washington Growth Management Hearings. Additionally, the siting of essential public facilities would be
processed along with the county’s annual comprehensive plan cycle. While the essential public facilities
designation grants the County wide latitude in siting facilities typically difficult to site and include uses
such as airports, state education facilities, regional transportation facilities, group homes, state and local
correctional facilities, solid waste handling facilities, inpatient facilities, and secure community transition
facilities, a Type V process takes substantial time. Consistency, and urgency alone argue for the Type III
discretionary review pathway as opposed to a Type V.
B. Is there an urgency?
Approval of this use would respond to the county’s housing emergency and need for public facilities
providing both supportive and low-cost housing for persons experiencing housing insecurity and/or
chronic health issues. Out of recognition of this emergency especially for persons who are unsheltered,
extremely low income and/or experiencing disabilities, the Board adopted an Emergency Resolution,
Resolution Number 35- 17 (See Exhibit 23). In this report, staff uses terms defined by the US Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) (see https://www.hudexchange.info/faqs/crosscutting-
requirements/section-3/general/how-are-low-income-and-very-low-income-determined/ accessed
August 17, 2023) HUD defines those earning up to 80 percent of less of the area median income (AMI)
as low income; those earning up to 50% of AMI as very low income; and those earning up to 30% of AMI,
as extremely low income.
In the years since the county’s 2017 adoption of the emergency resolution, data suggests that Jefferson
County housing emergency not only continues unabated but has expanded to engulf our neighbor,
Clallam County. Based on a recent review, Jefferson County successfully permits housing that is
affordable to households earning above the area median income, as most new housing falls into this
category (see The Building Industry of Washington Report: Cost of Constructing Homes in Washington,
Feb. 2023 accessed online August 16, 2023 https://www.biaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Cost-
of-Construction-Homes-in-Washington-Feb2023.pdf ) However, the county is unable to meet the needs
of lower-income households, and thereby failing to implement the Comprehensive Plan Goal HS-G-1
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 4 of 32
‘Encourage and support efforts to increase housing availability for county
residents of all income groups’
While the county is aware of several projects in early planning phases that are designed to address the
lowest income groups, including Habitat’s Mason Street and Bayside’s Port Hadlock Motel, only Peter’s
Place has been completed with great fanfare (see, Twietmeyer, Nick. “‘Peter’s Place’ tiny house village
unveiled in Port Hadlock.” The Leader. January 8, 2021 (accessed August 17, 2023
https://www.ptleader.com/stories/peters-place-tiny-house-village-unveiled-in-port-hadlock,73128))
Based on the county’s 10 year housing plan, DCD documented 37 beds for low income households in the
county outside of the city limits without Peter’s Place or market rate stakeholders offering units for rent
below market rate. These are associated with OlyCAP’s South Seven project and Bayside Housing’s Old
Alcohol Plant (see page 13, footnote 1 of the History Section for the source).
The most recent housing affordability data documents that regional affordability has worsened since the
county’s adoption of that 2017 resolution. As a key provider of real estate research and housing data
across the State of Washington, the Washington Center for Real Estate Research (the Center), primarily
funded by the State legislature, provides robust data and market reports. The Center’s most recently
available data paints an increasingly dire picture of Jefferson County’s affordability, and further
illustrates that this use is clothed in a public interest. In its most recently published report of county
data, 4th quarter of 2022, the Center illustrates housing affordability numerically from a high of 95 to a
low of 29 with lower numbers indicative of worsening affordability. For first time homebuyers, Jefferson
County received an affordability rating of 40, which ties with both King and Clallam counties as the third
least affordable. Both San Juan County and Chelan County which respectively were 29 and 37 are the
only counties where affordability was worse (see WCRE’s Housing Affordability Indexes | (uw.edu),
accessed August 13, 2023). When comparing cities, first time homebuyer affordability ranged from a
high of 66 to a low of 25. The City of Port Townsend is 25, earning it the title as Washington State’s least
affordable city for first time homebuyers, as documented by the Center’s most recently published fourth
quarter of 2022 data. The runner up, the City of Mercer Island, at 27 is slightly more affordable for first
time homebuyers. This data suggests a crisis not only for extremely low-income households which HUD
defines as households those earning 30% or less of the area median income (AMI) but also for the
workforce.
Washington case law illustrates that local governments have wide latitude in permitting shelters as
either a public purpose facility, a Type III process, or an essential public purpose facility, a Type V
process. One case in particular is noteworthy; in response to a nongovernmental organization’s
complaint that a Board erred in ruling that centers and shelters serving people experiencing
homelessness are not essential public facilities under the GMA, a Hearings Board ruled that the “GMA
did not require day use centers and overnight shelters serving people experiencing homelessness to be
identified as essential public facilities under the GMA as a matter of law but that the City had discretion
to do so” (See, re: Homeward Bound in Puyallup v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management
Homeward Bound).
Approving this use as a public purpose facility would be the most expeditious, conscientious and
consistent pathway. The Essential Public Purpose Facilities designation, as an alternative review and
approval pathway, is not consistent with the spirit or intent of the Board’s emergency legislation and
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 5 of 32
past practices. As required for Type V permits, the essential public facilities designation requires
Planning Agency review and submittal of recommendations to the Board. Such an approach increases
costs by lengthening the overall review timeline thereby failing to respond adequately to a declared
housing emergency (see Exhibit 23 -Emergency Resolution 35-17 and Interim Control Ordinance 10-
1221-20). This designation would also be inconsistent with past county practices where the public
purpose facilities designation has been used, including for Fire Stations, the Public Utility District, the
Jefferson County Historical Society, and other uses (see Exhibit 24). Frail individuals with disabilities who
are unsheltered may not survive extreme weather emergencies. Increased processing times and cost
arising out of the Type V process envisioned for essential public facilities would be unwarranted.
Furthermore, increasing the timelines by utilizing a Type V process, as opposed to the Type III, would
result in project approval after the State Building Council’s new codes become effective in October 2023,
thereby also increasing construction costs in addition to the timeline.
C.Why is this use classified as unnamed institutional and public purpose facilities?
Pursuant to Jefferson County Code (JCC) 18.10.090 I definitions and JCC 18.15.045 Unnamed Uses, the
UDC Administrator classified the emergency shelter and 40-Space Park, as an ‘unnamed institutional
use’. The basis for this classification lies in the UDC definition which states: ‘“Institutional facilities or
development” means structures and related activity areas used by organizations providing education,
social, or noncommercial recreational services to the community, including performance halls,
government service offices, facilities for assembly, colleges, primary and secondary schools, museums,
and libraries.” The Administrator considers the emergency shelter and 40-space park for individuals
who are unsheltered similar to structures and related activity areas used by organizations providing
social services. Henceforth, Jefferson County reviews Caswell-Brown Village as an ‘unnamed institutional
use’ pursuant to JCC 18.15.040 Public Purpose Facilities Categories of land use.
According to JCC 18.10.180 ‘“Public purpose facilities” means lands and facilities needed to provide the
full range of services to the public provided by government, substantially funded by government,
contracted for by government, or provided by private entities to meet public service obligations.’ The
UDC Administrator recognizes this as a public purpose facility based on three specific findings. First,
OlyCAP secured state and local government grants to construct and operate the facility (see Exhibit 25 –
Award Letter). Additionally, Caswell-Brown Village is substantially funded by government through
Jefferson County’s use of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds - the third round of Coronavirus
economic impact payments - to purchase the site for $600,000, and lease it to OlyCAP at a below market
rate of $10 per year (see Exhibit 26 – OlyCAP Lease). Finally, Jefferson County entered into a
professional services agreement with the applicant, OlyCAP, to meet the public service obligation of
providing housing for income groups whose earnings are so low that they cannot obtain housing
otherwise. For the foregoing reasons, the use fulfills a public purpose which is highlighted by Jefferson
County’s declared housing emergency.
D.Why is the county requiring a conditional use permit and attaching SEPA mitigations?
Unnamed institutional uses under public purpose facilities are listed as “D” for discretionary in
18.15.040 Table 3-1 which means that the UDC Administrator has the discretion to choose the
appropriate pathway. Guidance is provided through JCC criteria, specifically pursuant to JCC 18.15.045
(2) Unnamed uses, which states: “the UDC Administrator shall use the criteria contained in JCC
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 6 of 32
18.15.040 (2) to determine and establish whether the proposed unnamed use shall be classified as an
allowed use, a conditional use or prohibited with the appliable district.” Using the nine criteria listed in
JCC 18.15.040(2)(a) thru (i), the county determines that a conditional use permit is required pursuant to
(h) which states:
Shares characteristics common with but not of significantly greater intensity,
density or that generates more environmental impact than those uses allowed
in the district in which it is to be located.”
The county identifies the need for a CUP given that the use is on the upper end of intensities that have
been normally allowed in the rural residential zoning district (1 Unit /20 acres). To see a list of similarly
approved permits using the public purpose facilities designation, please review Exhibit 24. The purpose
according to JCC 18.15.015 (1) (c) is ‘to provide a buffer in areas adjacent to UGAs and designated forest
and agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance, as well as protecting areas identified as
possessing area-wide environmental features which constrain development such as shoreline areas or
areas of steep and unstable slopes. The [RR 1:20 zoning] district also protects land from premature
conversion to higher residential densities prior to an established need.’
E. Adopted regulations governing existing use are temporary
In June 2022, Jefferson County codified Temporary Housing Facilities (THF) in JCC 18.20.385, as a Type II
process in Table 8-1 Permits – Decisions. The THF designation is distinct and apart from the Type V
processing for essential public facilities. The purpose of THF is set forth below:
The purpose of this section is to allow and establish a review process for the
location, siting, and operation of temporary housing facilities for unsheltered
and unhoused individual s and families within Jefferson County.
Subsequent to this adoption, the applicant, OlyCAP submitted an application for the county’s first
temporary housing facility. The applicant now proposes to convert this use from a temporary use to a
permanent one, and also to expand the site by adding an emergency shelter.
F. Public Services
After approval of the temporary use at the new Mill Road site, East Jefferson Fire Rescue (EJFR) and the
Port Townsend Police Department documented the number of calls to the American Legion site (see
Table 1). The combined call volume suggests that there will be an increased demand for public services
at the Caswell-Brown site upon the American Legion Shelter’s closure. The current American Legion
lease expires in 2024, and OlyCAP which also manages that site has stated that the existing American
Legion shelter will close then with the expectation that the Caswell-Brown site would accommodate
those who currently use the American Legion site for shelter.
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 7 of 32
TABLE 1: First Responder Calls to American Legion Site
PORT TOWNSEND
POLICE CALLS
EAST JEFFERSON FIRE
RESCUE CALLS
TOTAL
2017 76 21 97
2018 59 21 80
2019 81 22 103
2020 54 23 77
2021 41 38 79
2022 49 36 85
2023 56 as of 7/26/23 16 as of 7/25/2023 72 as of 7/25
Source: call summaries provided by first responder agencies listed in Exhibits 19 to 21
Based on the public service needs documented in Table 1, a conditional use permit is required and SEPA
mitigations are included. Whereas Type II administrative permitting pathway includes public input and
authorizes the United Development Code (“UDC”) Administrator to make a final decision, as occurred
with the temporary siting of the 40-lot park under these newly adopted THF regulations, the Type III
CUP process applies to the expanded permanent site, acknowledging potential impacts to public
services as documented by communications with first responders (see Exhibits 19 to 21). Performance,
use and building standards in JCC 18.20.385 and JCC 15.05.065 reduced impacts to less than a significant
level and would no longer apply once the Village shelter becomes permanently sited. Jefferson County
therefore issued a Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (MDNS) under SEPA’s substantive
authority with mitigations necessary to reduce, minimize or mitigate the impacts.
G.How CUPs are reviewed and authorized?
Conditional Uses are codified in the Jefferson County UDC Title 18 Jefferson County Code (JCC)
18.40.490 – 600 and requires a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner. Importantly, this is despite
the prior approval of the 40-lot park; this prior approval through the Temporary Housing Facilities (THF)
ordinance is approved temporarily, i.e., for 180 days with extensions authorized to 2 ½ years pursuant to
housing facilities regulations adopted in June 2022. As discussed later in this staff report under the
project phasing section, the THF is considered phase 1 of the Caswell-Brown project. Hence, this
permanent housing facility shall be reviewed pursuant to Table 3-1 under “public purpose facilities’
unnamed institutional uses. Type III processes are prepared by a staff planner, and reviewed and
approved by the Jefferson County Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner’s decision can be appealed
to the Superior Court.
H.Determination of Completeness / Notice of Application
On November 25, 2023, the county found the application complete. On May 3, 2023, Jefferson County
published a Notice of Application and likely SEPA Threshold Determination in the Port Townsend Leader,
the county’s newspaper of record.
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 8 of 32
III. SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
A. Review Process
The proposed CUP for Caswell-Brown Village requires State Environmental Policy Act review. Jefferson
County is the Lead Agency pursuant to WAC 197-11-055. Due to the complexity of this project, physical
and mental health needs of need of some proposed occupants, offsite impacts associated with
individuals who were unsheltered and camping during the pandemic at the Jefferson County
Fairgrounds broadly covered in the local newspapers, and the public service calls identified in Table 1,
the Lead Agency determined that this project requires reauthorizing the Unified Development Code
requirements in JCC 18.20.385 as SEPA mitigations to reduce, minimize or eliminate the potential
increased demand for public services. On August 9, 2023, the county posted a second notice of
application, public hearing, and Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) supplementing the
May 3, 2023 notice, and acknowledging that the optional DNS process of the State Environmental Policy
Act (SEPA), Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197-11-355 had been used. Review of the proposal’s
probable adverse environmental impacts resulted in an MDNS on August 9, 2023. This determination
was based upon a review of the SEPA Checklist, project submissions, and other available information.
Policies and performance standards found in the Unified Development Code inform permit conditions;
only those impacts not addressed by the UDC result in mitigations, as more fully set forth in the MDNS.
Conditions or measures not required under SEPA are set forth in this staff report.
B. SEPA APPEALS
Jefferson County established administrative appeal procedures pursuant to WAC 197-11-680 (3) in JCC
18.40.330 (3) SEPA Decisions, which states: “the responsible official’s DNS or MDNS may be appealed to
the hearing examiner by the applicant or anyone commenting on the environmental impacts of the
proposal (as further set forth in JCC 18.40.780). The appeal must be in writing, in conformance with
Chapter 2.30 JCC and the Hearing Examiner Rules of Procedure Appeals of environmental
determinations under SEPA shall be consolidated with any open record hearing on the project permit.
(See RCW 36.70B.110(6)(d).) Pursuant to this requirement, any SEPA appeal shall be consolidated and
heard at the Public Hearing scheduled on August 29, 2023 at 1pm for consideration of this Conditional
Use Permit. Comments submitted after August 23, 2023 may not be considered in the final staff report.
In the event that there is a SEPA appeal or comments submitted on or before August 23, 2023, a
supplemental staff report shall be issued by 4:30pm on Friday, August 25, 2023 and available online at
https://test.co.jefferson.wa.us/WeblinkExternal/0/fol/4745293/Row1.aspx.
IV. Project Phasing
As previously mentioned, OlyCAP submitted an application to construct a Temporary Housing Facility
(THF). The THF is authorized by the June 2022 adoption of Ordinance No. 05-061322, which is a newly
adopted Unified Development Code section that added JCC 18.20.385 to the UDC and JCC 15.05.065 to
Title 15 Buildings and Construction. The permit Temporary Housing Facilities for the unsheltered and
unhoused as a Type II discretionary process in JCC Table 8-1. Among other amendments, the Temporary
Housing Facility expands the county’s definition of temporary structures, creates performance and
development standards including substantive requirements such as a submittal checklist; equity
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 9 of 32
considerations related to siting and operations, and transportation, perimeter, safety and security plans
to implement Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) and reduce spillover impacts.
Under this prior permit, OlyCAP commissioned clearing, excavating, grading, utilities, road approach,
addressing and siting of 20 tents and recreational vehicles (RV) on the site designated later to be the
new emergency shelter (See Exhibit 5 – prior approvals). Permitting in this phase included addressing
(ADR2021-00142) to ensure that first responders could easily find the site; stormwater management
(ZON2021-00060) to ensure that surface water is adequately managed; septic system technical support
(OTH2021-00017) and approval (SEP2021-00229) to ensure the adequacy of the septic system; access
(RAP2021-00099) to ensure safe access to the site by users, visitors and others; utility placement
(UTL2022-00029) to provide onsite utilities; septic operation and management (SOM2023-00045) to
ensure ongoing maintenance and operational support.
FIGURE 2: Phasing Plan
Phase I – Temporary Housing Facility’s Upper site - (Previously permitted and constructed pursuant to
Ordinance 05-061322. This site will be repurposed as the Emergency Shelter in phase III) Phase I included
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 10 of 32
20 tents and recreational vehicles (RV) inspected by the Jefferson County Community Development
Department as part of the Temporary Housing Facility.
Phase II – Temporary Housing Facility’s Lower site- (Previously permitted and constructed pursuant to
Ordinance 05-061322. This portion of the parcel has already been repurposed as the new site of the
Temporary Housing Facility, recommended to be approved under Phase III, as a permanently sited
Caswell-Brown RV/Tiny Shelter Park.) For phase II, construction related work included: clearing,
excavating, grading, utilities, campsite development, utilities to each campsite, installation of the
temporary shelters, septic system and conversion of tent campers into tiny shelters and moving them
from the upper site to the lower site along with the recreational vehicles. Previously permitted.
Phase III – Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing & RV/Tiny Shelter Park (Caswell-
Brown Village) – The 40-bed emergency shelter with permanent supportive housing is planned for
construction on the parcel’s upper site that formerly contained the Temporary Housing Facility.
Additionally, the Temporary Housing Facility will transition from a temporary use for RVs/Campers and
Tiny Shelters for those individuals who are unhoused or unsheltered to a permanent site.
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 11 of 32
V. Site Context, Previous Site Usage, and Zoning
A. Site Context and Description of Surrounding Uses
The red line roughly delineates the Port Townsend City limits. Caswell-Brown Village is proposed to be
located on Accessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 001 162 001 which is 21.81 acres and is the largest of the
parcels to in the graphic below. Zoned rural residential with a base density permitting one dwelling unit
for every 20 acres (R:
1/20), the parcel abuts
several significant land-
uses either in long term
operation or planned.
The Port Townsend
Paper Mill established in
1927 and its associated
buffer parcel(s) are
situated to the east. The
future Evans Vista
Master Planned
Community and
associated supporting
infrastructure lie directly
to the northeast.
Figure 3: Aerial Site Photo
To the South
Six parcels abut Caswell-Brown Village to the south. From east to west along the parcel’s southern
boundary, four of the six parcels are owned by Jefferson County (three of these are highlighted in white
lettering above with the words, “outside of village” and include APN 001 162 002, 001 162 003, 001 162
004). The fifth parcel is owned by Discovery Timber Company, and the sixth parcel lying adjacent to
Highway 20 and furthest west is owned by the Jefferson Land Trust. This parcel abuts Highway 20, and
remains vegetated which is consistent with the county’s long-term goal of reducing the potential for
strip development on both sides of Highway 20 from the city limits to Old Fort Townsend Road
characterized by a linear pattern of individual commercial uses along state Highway 20, made up
CASWELL-
Brown Village
APN 001 162 001
County-owned property
(Outside of village)
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 12 of 32
primarily of single-story buildings each with a separate driveway and parking area (see Exhibit 27 -
Resolution Regarding Highway 20).
In the Caswell-Brown leasehold, Jefferson County reserved rights to maintain access to parcels under
county ownership through Mill Road and the Caswell-Brown Village site to ensure future consistency
with the above resolution. Lease provision 45 (See Exhibit 26, page 20 of 29) embodies this and states:
“OlyCAP shall allow reasonable access across the Leased Premises from the entrance to the Property on
Mill Road Southward to the adjoining and nearby parcels owned by the County, namely Parcel Nos.
001162002, 001162003, 001162004, 001162004, 001162015, and 001161001.” (See Caswell-Brown
Lease – Attachment E)
To the North
The proposed Caswell-Brown parcel abuts the Port Townsend city limits to the north and west. Moving
clockwise from the 0.59-acre City Entrance Park which contains the city’s official welcome monument
and is highlighted below in white, there is a 0.58-acre parcel occupied by Coon Plumbing that is within
the city limits and is zoned Mixed Commercial – Light Manufacturing. Further clockwise, there’s the City
of Port Townsend’s regional stormwater facility (see Exhibit 12). On the other side of Highway 20 across
from the Caswell-Brown Village, there is a 0.27-acre commercial parcel containing Mary’s Picture Frame
Shop which is sandwiched between Discovery Road, and West Sims Way, and is officially part of the City
of Port Townsend and is zoned C-II General Commercial.
Figure 4: North East Aerial
Port Townsend Regional Stormwater Facility adjacent to site (dated 4/21/2021)
Caswell-
Brown
Village
Coon
Plumbing
Park
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 13 of 32
Most significantly, the City of Port Townsend envisions a new neighborhood to the site’s immediate
north. Future plans include a new sewer pump station for the proposed Evans Vista neighborhood.
Currently in the preliminary design and fiscal analysis phase, the proposed 14.4-acre Evans Vista campus
is envisioned to include 100 to 150 affordable, workforce and mixed-income housing units.
Figure 5: Evans Vista Master Plan
To the West
Lying immediately to the west is an undeveloped 69.69-acre parcel that serves as a buffer from the Port
Townsend Paper Mill’s heavy industrial uses. Zoned Heavy Industrial by Jefferson County, the site’s
existing performance standards require a minimum 100-foot setback. Construction of the Mill began in
1927 according to the official website https://ptpc.com/about/history/ The Mill’ unimproved land lies
directly to Caswell-Brown Village’s east. In the aerial photo below, one can clearly see the Paper Mill’s
settlement ponds, which are about 1,300 feet from the Caswell-Brown Village.
Figure 6: Port Townsend Paper Mill & Settlement Ponds
Caswell-
Brown Village
Caswell-
Brown
Village
Caswell-
Brown
Village
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 14 of 32
To the East
A forested strip of land that’s designated as a buffer and reduces the potential for strip development is
on both sides of Highway 20. The buffer serves to visually separate the village site from roadway. The
Larry Scott Trail also known as the eastern terminus of the Olympic Discovery Trail starts on the
waterfront in downtown Port
Townsend and enters the
proposed Caswell-Brown
Village parcel to the north. The
two aerial photos document
that the trail is just outside of
the leased portion of the parcel
and that it traverses the parcel
just northwest of Caswell-
Brown Village’s entrance (see
Figures 7 & 8). Advanced since
the 1980s, non-motorized
connectivity across the Olympic
Peninsula through the Olympic
Discovery Trail now has wide-
ranging support across the 14
jurisdictions it crosses (see,
Matheson, Cory. 2021.
“Connections of Land, Sea and
Sky: Olympic Discovery Trail.”
Rails to Trails Conservancy. Due
to the trail’s regional
importance and the desire to
improve the trail’s safety, key
provisions within the lease
document the easement, and
the Public Works’ department
‘design changes to the sharp
corners on the Larry Scott Trail,’
as more fully set forth in Lease
Provisions 5 and 7
Figures 7 & 8: Larry Scott Trail Easement in Caswell-Brown Village
https://www.railstotrails.org/trailblog/2021/september/07/connections-of-land-sea-and-sky-olympic-
discovery-trail/ accessed August 6, 2023).
.
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 15 of 32
B.Previous Site Usage
According to the Phase 1 Site Assessment conducted by Environmental Data Resources (EDR) that
investigated the proposed Caswell-Brown site, no identified contaminants are listed in any of the
fourteen databases searched specifically at the proposed location (see Exhibit 6 – Phase 1
Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), Executive Summary page 3 (PDF page 56 of 503)).
While there are thirteen hazardous waste sites within 0.5 miles of the subject site documented on the
Department of Ecology’s ALLSITES list, the Port Townsend Paper Mill appears to be the only site that
continues to generate. It is listed as a small quantity generator on the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984 RCRA-
SQG list and is located approximately 0.25 miles from the Caswell-Brown site (See Exhibit 6, ESA
Executive Summary pages 7 and 11).
The Port Townsend Paper Corporation was issued an air operating permit on August 17, 2022 with an
expiration date of August 31, 2027 because it emits, or has the potential to emit, 100 tons per year or
more of one or more air pollutants (See, Exhibit 8 – Air Operating Permit 0000922). Accordingly, the Port
Townsend Paper Mill Corporation is required to promptly submit a report of any deviations from permit
conditions. [WAC 173-401-615(3)(b)]. Recently, one such deviation is noted as documented by the
December 12, 2022 Department of Ecology penalty letter related to exceedances of particulate matter
originating from their recovery furnace, as documented by a third party, the Montrose Air Quality
Services LLC. (See Exhibit 28 – Penalty Letter). Nonetheless, the air permit supports a finding that
hazardous air pollutants are reduced to less than a significant level.
C.Zoning
The site is currently zoned rural residential one dwelling unit per twenty acres (RR 1:20). Based on the
public purpose and documented need for emergency shelters with supportive housing discussed in the
history section of this staff report, staff reviewed JCC 18.30.050 Table 6-1 Density, Dimension, and Open
Space Standards, and JCC 18.30.100 Table 6.2 Minimum Number of Parking Spaces Required for
Different Land Uses, to verify that the proposal is consistent with the county’s development standards
and recommends approving this proposal with the conditions of approval contained in the criteria
section.
TABLE 2: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PROPOSAL AND UDC
Unified Development Code UDC Requirements or CUP
approval guidelines
Proposed by Applicant
Zoning / Use Category •Rural Residential
•Density: 1 Dwelling Unit for 20
Acres
•Table 3-1, JCC 18.15.040
Categories of land use
•Discretionary use pursuant to
Table 3-1 for all Unnamed
institutional uses, as this Public
Purpose Facilities would be
classified
No changes to zoning
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 16 of 32
Number of Residents Until city sewer is available, the
approved septic permit determines
maximum load, as set forth below
1)Shelter: 50 beds / up to 75
persons or the approved septic
permit capacity, whichever is
less
2)40-Space Park/ up to 75 persons
or the septic capacity, whichever
is less. (Existing capacity is 48
people pursuant to SEP2021-
00229, as set forth in the
Augusta 8, 2023 Environmental
Review Memorandum issued
using SEPA’s substantive
authority )
40 bed shelter with (50 beds would
be the maximum capacity by
including a double bed or bunk bed
in the three one-bedroom units,
and a bunk or double in the two
emergency shelter rooms)
Site Area 20 acres, Tax Parcel: 001162001 21.81 acres (source: Assessor’s
Website)
Lot Coverage Not Applicable
Impervious Surface 25% IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE: 17%
(source: Phase 2 site plan as built
5-10-2023)
Building Height 35 feet 23 feet 8 inches pursuant to
Attachment A
Setbacks
Side (west)
Front (south)
Rear (north)
Side (east)
35
35
35
100
305 feet
507 feet
568 feet
428 feet
Minimum Front and Road
Setbacks
Highway 20 (principal arterial)
Mill Road (formerly Glen Cove Road)
50
20 (local access road)
305 feet
428 feet
Landscaping Must be in conformance with
recommendations in Exhibit 11,
CPTED Best Management Practices
Implementation of CPTED Best
Practices identified as a condition
of approval
Parking Spaces Required for
Unnamed institutional uses
Determined by the Administrator 27 and 19 spaces for the shelter
and 40-lot park respectively
D.History
The Conditional Use Permit (CUP) authorizing construction of an emergency shelter meets a verified
community need. According to a Point in Time count which occurs yearly, and quantifies the county’s
population of individuals who are unsheltered, 199 people were experiencing homelessness in Jefferson
County just prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. According to the county’s five-year plan to reduce the
unsheltered population, this pre-pandemic number is not reliable for it only includes 41 of the 96 youth
in Port Townsend and Chimacum School Districts who self-identified as homeless and does not address
the 191 individuals in need of shelter that Dove House, a county shelter provider, has had to turn away.1
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 17 of 32
Just as lack of housing for the unsheltered in Jefferson County has a long history so too does the active
involvement of community to address the problem. COAST (Community Outreach Association Shelter
Team) was founded when five women joined forces because they believed Port Townsend did have
people experiencing a lack of housing.2 Sometime around 2004, a community member named Alison
Capener learned that no shelters existed in Jefferson County, yet knew there was a need in the
community. By August 2006, with still no place available, COAST met with Commander John Ettensberg
of the American Legion Post 26, who offered COAST space in the Legion basement at the corner of
Monroe and Water streets.3 Over the next few years, 600 volunteers, support from businesses, civic
groups and seemingly almost everyone in Jefferson County participated to meet needs of individuals
needing shelter.4
According to the Legion’s manager, the shelter initially only provided housing during inclement weather,
and then sometime after the great recession expanded to year-round operations.5 With this 2017
change from a winter shelter to a year-round shelter managed entirely by OlyCAP without COAST, the
mission expanded from getting people out of the cold to getting people back on their feet.6 In 2018, the
City of Port Townsend considered joining Jefferson County to support the shelter’s $120,769 summer
program which had 67 men and 19 women for a total of 2,425 bed nights; sixteen were veterans while
18 were seniors.7 Contrary to what some may believe, social services agencies document that most
individuals on the Peninsula who are unsheltered are local or have local connections through ties that
may include jobs, family, personal history or housing.8
Then came the pandemic’s social distancing requirements9, 10, eviction moratorium11 and new
uncertainty on the ability of law enforcement to rein in illegal drug activities.12 First, the urgency for a
larger Jefferson County emergency shelter with supportive housing increased during the COVID-19
pandemic. During this period, unsheltered individuals began camping at the Fairgrounds without the
county’s explicit permission; in fact, Commissioners noted that the Jefferson County Fair Association has
control of the property through a contract that runs through December 2022.13 The 30-something or so
individuals who were unsheltered and staying overnight at the American Legion were moved by OlyCAP
with funding from a $345,000 Washington State COVID-19 Outbreak Emergency Housing Grant to the
Tides Inn & Suites.14 Volunteers, and local businesses assisted by providing food, monitoring and getting
sundries.15 At the same time, Jefferson County authorized funding to the Fair Association, as they
complained extensively about a loss of revenue due to the campers who had no other housing other
than their tents and recreational vehicles now at the Fairgrounds.16
In these new settings, individuals could be separated from others to maintain safe social distances and
local businesses provided food. Just prior to their move, in March of 2020, Governor Jay Inslee issued a
proclamation establishing a moratorium on evictions due to the major economic impacts of the
Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19).17 Effective March 18, 2020 to June 30, 2021, the eviction moratorium
was then extended by an Eviction Moratorium Bridge from July 1, 2021 to October 31, 2021. With the
state-mandated eviction moratorium, spillover impacts to the surrounding community increased and
was widely reported in the local newspapers. A complaint filed on behalf of some of the campers,
resulted in a Washington Attorney General’s Office statement that campers could not be evicted from
the fairgrounds under the state’s moratorium against evictions if they had been living at the fairgrounds
for two weeks or more.18 In February 2021, and then under a request for reconsideration in April 2021,
the Washington State Supreme Court ruled and then reaffirmed their ruling in the now famous Blake
decision that “Washington’s strict liability drug possession statute, RCW 69.50.4013, makes possession
of a controlled substance a felony punishable by up to five years in prison, plus a hefty fine; leads to
deprivation of numerous other rights and opportunities; and does all this without proof that the
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 18 of 32
defendant even knew they possessed the substance…., compel us (Washington State Supreme Court) to
conclude that the answer is yes—this exceeds the State’s police power.”19 This further reduced the
ability of local law enforcement to address issues arising out of illicit activities at the fairgrounds.
With the eviction moratorium ending on November 1, 2021, the County Commissioners began crisis
planning by identifying locations within the county and near services to house those individuals who
were experiencing homelessness. Three sites were reviewed, including a county owned parcel near Cape
George, another on 4 Corners Road near the Jefferson County PUD and Transit Center about three miles
outside of town, and a third on Mill Road at the city limits.20 With American Rescue Plan funding, the
County purchased the Mill Road site for $600,000.21 With space for the shelter nearing the end of its
useful life and out of recognition that the site may not meet the needs of many individuals who are
unsheltered and that fail to thrive in a congregate or indoor space without any privacy and often
support animals, it seemed paramount that county leaders find a new site.
During the pandemic, two notable deaths of individuals experiencing lack of shelter or supportive
services occurred. Victoria K. Brown was found lying face down on the ground outside her trailer at the
Fairgrounds in December 2020.22 Then in June 2021, John Caswell, 62, died in a grassy area in the Port
Townsend QFC parking lot.23 His death was attributed to the record heat wave that occurred. With this
as a backdrop, OlyCAP named the new site the Caswell-Brown Village.
1.Jefferson County and City of Port Townsend, Affordable Housing and Homelessness Taskforce,
Making Homelessness a Singular Occurrence, accessed July 26, 2023, Page 4,
https://test.co.jefferson.wa.us/WebLinkExternal/0/edoc/2801323/JC%20Homelessness%20Plan
%202019-2024%2010.5.pdf
2.O’Neal, Joyce. “Perspective: Here’s how COAST began the homeless shelter.” The Port
Townsend Leader. December 25, 2012. https://www.ptleader.com/stories/perspective-heres-
how-coast-began-the-homeless-shelter,47253 accessed July 27, 2023.
3.Ibid.
4.Ibid.
5.Saring, Bob. Brent A. Butler, History of the American Legion Shelter. Telephone Interview with
the Legion Manager, July 21, 2023
6.McFarland, Cydney. “Groups addressing details of a new Port Townsend homeless shelter.” The
Peninsula Daily News. March 31, 2017. https://www.peninsuladailynews.com/news/groups-
addressing-details-of-new-port-townsend-homeless-shelter/ accessed July 27, 2023.
7.McMacken, Jeannie. “City of Port Townsend to help with warm weather program.” The
Peninsula Daily News. March 23, 2018. https://www.peninsuladailynews.com/news/city-of-
port-townsend-to-help-with-warm-weather-program/ accessed July 27, 2023.
8.Gottlieb, Paul. “North Olympic Peninsula homeless mostly home-grown, according to official.”
The Peninsula Daily News. August 17, 2018. https://www.peninsuladailynews.com/news/north-
olympic-peninsula-homeless-mostly-home-grown-according-to-
official/#:~:text=North%20Olympic%20Peninsula%20homeless%20mostly%20home%2Dgrown%
2C%20according%20to%20official,-
by%20Paul%20Gottlieb&text=PORT%20ANGELES%20%E2%80%94%20Contrary%20to%20popula
r,Health%20program%20manager%20said%20Tuesday accessed July 27, 2023.
9.Gottlieb, Paul. “Shelter being set up on Peninsula during COVID-19 pandemic.” The Peninsula
Daily News. April 10, 2020. https://www.peninsuladailynews.com/news/shelters-being-set-up-
on-peninsula-during-covid-19-pandemic/ accessed July 27, 2023.
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 19 of 32
10.Office of the Governor of Washington State, Stay Home Stay Healthy 20-25, Proclamation By the
Governor Amending Proclamation 20-05, Jay Inslee, March 23, 2020.
https://governor.wa.gov/sites/default/files/proclamations/20-
25%20Coronovirus%20Stay%20Safe-Stay%20Healthy%20%28tmp%29%20%28002%29.pdf
accessed July 27, 2023.
11.Revised Code of Washington 59.18.630 Eviction moratorium – Unpaid rent – Repayment plans –
Rental assistance. https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=59.18.630 accessed July 27,
2023
12.Washington v. Blake, No. 98873-0 (WA. February 25, 2021)
13.Kelly, Brian. “Neighbors angry over homeless shelter at fairgrounds.” The Leader. September 21,
2020. https://www.ptleader.com/stories/neighbors-angry-over-homeless-shelter-at-
fairgrounds,71315#:~:text=Neighbors%20near%20the%20campgrounds%20continued,impacts%
20came%20back%2C%20as%20well accessed July 27, 2023.
14.Haight, Lily. “Tides Inn hosts homeless shelter residents to ease social distancing.” The Leader.
April 29, 2020. https://www.ptleader.com/stories/tides-inn-hosts-homeless-shelter-residents-
to-ease-social-distancing,69037 accessed July 27, 2023
15.Ibid.
16.McCauley, Mark. Fair Board concerns. Brent A. Butler, In person discussion, July 18, 2023
17.Ibid. Jay Inslee
18.Ibid. Kelly
19.Washington v. Blake, Washington Supreme Court, Denial of Motion for Reconsideration,
https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/968730.pdf
20.Brotherton, Greg. Site selection process. Brent Butler, Telephone interview 2nd quarter 2023
21.Kelly, Brian. “Jefferson County takes first step to buy land for homeless campground.” The
Leader. July 22, 2021. https://www.ptleader.com/stories/jefferson-county-takes-first-step-to-
buy-land-for-homeless-campground,76244 accessed July 27, 2023
22.Twietmeyer, Nick. “Drugs likely caused death of woman camping at fairgrounds.” The Leader.
January 22, 2021. https://www.ptleader.com/stories/drugs-likely-caused-death-of-woman-
camping-at-fairgrounds,73260 accessed July 27, 2023
23.Twietmeyer, Nick. Homeless man dies of heatstroke during record setting heat wave.” The
Leader. July 1, 2021. https://www.ptleader.com/stories/homeless-man-dies-of-heatstroke-
during-record-setting-heat-wave,75890 accessed July 27, 2023.
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 20 of 32
VI.The Criteria (appear in italics)
1)The conditional use is harmonious and appropriate in design, character and appearance with the
existing or intended character and quality of development in the vicinity of the subject property
and with the physical characteristics of the subject property;
As illustrated in Figures 1 and 9, the shelter appears as a single-family structure, which is clearly
harmonious and appropriate in design, character and appearance with existing or intended character of
the Rural Residential zoning district Rural Residential 1:20. Furthermore, recreational vehicle parks are
already permissible in the RR 1:20 zoning district, as codified in 18.15.040, Table 3-1 Allowable and
Prohibited Uses. This table designates the approval process for recreational vehicle parks as a C(d),
meaning conditional uses, subject to criteria, public notice, written public comment and at the
discretion of the administrator, a public hearing procedure.
According to 18.15.015 (1) (c), as mentioned previously, “The purpose of this district [Rural Residential 1
Unit/20 Acres (RR 1:20)] is to provide a buffer in areas adjacent to UGAs and designated forest and
agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance, as well as protecting areas identified as
possessing area-wide environmental features which constrain development such as shoreline areas or
areas of steep and unstable slopes. The district also protects land from premature conversion to higher
residential densities prior to an established need.” Since this zoning district is intended as a butter, and
remains under county ownership, the combination of 40-space park, and emergency shelter on the
parcel abutting the city limits does not appear incongruous, as visually the site remains largely
surrounded by forested lands to the south and east, and heavily landscaped.
Figure 9: Rendering of Shelter
Generally applicable conditions, as set forth in the Unified Development Code, that need clarification, or
are included for emphasis are listed in the recommended conditions.
-------------------------------
2)The conditional use will be served by adequate infrastructure including roads, fire protection,
water, wastewater disposal, and storm water control;
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 21 of 32
Requirements for roads, fire protection, water, wastewater disposal, and storm water control as
recommended for approval are set forth below. Recommended SEPA conditions related to public
infrastructure are expressly stated, as SEPA conditions.
-----------------------------------------
3)The conditional use will not be materially detrimental to uses or property in the vicinity of the
subject parcel;
The conditional use will not be materially detrimental to uses or property in the vicinity as any offsite
impacts are addressed by the mitigations adopted in the MDNS, Crime Prevention Through
Environmental Design implementation, and conditions.
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)
CPTED (pronounced sep-ted) suggests that the design of buildings, landscapes and outdoor
environments can either encourage or discourage crime. The proper design and effective use of the built
environment can lead to a reduction in the fear of crime and the incidence of crime, and to
improvement in the quality of life. The three elements of CPTED are Territoriality, Surveillance and
Access Control. When used together, these elements strengthen total premise security and personal
safety. The Temporary Housing Facilities provisions contained in Jefferson County Code Section
18.20.385 implement key provisions associated with CPTED, including a) exterior lighting – while focused
on reducing glare in the premises, typically CPTED focused on increasing opportunity for natural
surveillance
Territoriality - Territoriality is a persons' desire to protect territory that they feel is their own and have a
certain respect for the territory of others. The extent to which someone will defend territory depends
on his or her personal investment in or responsibility for that property. Some considerations for clearly
defining property, include:
1)Is the property being used as a short cut?
2)Does the property have an unkempt appearance?
3)Are there seldom-used parts of the property where people loiter?
Findings: As part of the Temporary Housing Facilities approval, county staff including Chief Strategy
Officer Butler and Fire Marshal Cecere inspected the site and noted that some residents had established
that sense of territorial control though plantings around the Tiny Shelters. We also observed that
OlyCAP is keeping the site in a generally organized and clean state. The Larry Scott Trail is separated by
large hedges from the village, and generally directs passersby away from the site.
Surveillance - Criminals do not want to be seen. To defend property, one must be able to see any illegal
acts taking place. Placing physical features, activities and people in ways that maximize the ability to see
what is going on discourages crime. To evaluate the visibility of the Caswell-Brown Village, we asked: 1)
Does landscaping obscure the view to the property from neighboring properties? 2) Are all entrances,
exits and parking areas illuminated? 3) Are there areas around doors or windows where a person could
hide?
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 22 of 32
Findings: Consistent CPTED concepts the shelter’s floor plan illustrates that the office also serves as a
monitoring station that is centrally situated around the reception and common rooms, a prevention
strategy that increases natural surveillance. The common rooms/reception area enable monitoring
through clear sight lines of the communal areas, the building entry, the building exterior, and the doors
to the men’s and women’s dormitories. The building will incorporate interior glazing (transparency) to
allow sight lines, while balancing the privacy of the residents. Additionally, the building is designed so
that it can be monitored 24/7 by OlyCAP on a limited operations budget.
Additionally, while buffers prevent visual access from surrounding roads, CPTED is implemented by
preserving those lines of sight (LOS) deemed necessary. These include LOS within the emergency shelter
by the central positioning of the office and also within the 40-lot park through the office’s location and
security cameras. Site access is through one road, which implements CPTED for the northern periphery
of the site.
Figure 10: Caswell-Brown – Emergency Shelter Site Plan
Figure 11: Caswell-Brown – Tiny Shelter and Recreational Vehicle Park
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 23 of 32
Findings: CPTED is implemented in the lower site through lighting and vegetation. First, the lighting is
established throughout the site, as illustrated above by + which is visible at six different locations in the
above RV /Tiny Shelter site plan. The lighting used includes a range of high lumen devices, specifically
the TFX2 LED flood luminaire delivering 13,200 lumens equivalent to 250W metal halides on poles that
are ten to thirteen feet in height.
Figure 12: Lighting Devices
Additionally, a condition will require OlyCAP to use
hostile vegetation which are plants that are by nature
harmful to animals and humans. For example, vegetation
that is prickly upon the touch so that you bleed or itch
could reduce unauthorized camping. Some security firms
such as OPS Security Group recommends
Firethorn/Pyrachantha, Needle Palm Trees, and the
Yucca plant to address unauthorized access and
camping.
Access Control - Properly located entrances, exits,
fencing and lighting can direct both foot and automobile
traffic in ways that discourage crime. Access Control
denies or restricts access to a crime target, and it
increases the perceived risks of the offender by
controlling or restricting their movement. Factors to
consider in reviewing the application include: 1) Can
people trespass on the property without being seen by
others? 2) Are there many entrances and exits to the
property? 3) Do people access property in ways other
than intended?
Figure 13: Access
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 24 of 32
Findings: As you can see in the site plan to the right, the roadway provides clearly marked transitional
zones that indicate movement from public to semi-private to private space.
------------------------------------
4) The conditional use will not introduce noise, smoke, dust, fumes, vibrations, odors, or other
conditions or which unreasonably impact existing uses in the vicinity of the subject parcel;
Outside of during construction, the project will have limited impacts. As set forth in the traffic analysis
submitted by PBS Traffic Consultants, the impacts of traffic will be minimal. Additionally, conditions of
approval, including will reduce, eliminate, or avoid any impacts during construction.
------------------------------------
5) The location, size, and height of buildings, structures, walls and fences, and screening vegetation
for the conditional use will not unreasonably interfere with allowable development or use of
neighboring properties;
As discussed in this staff report, the thresholds for height, bulk, and impervious surface maximums are
not to be exceeded, and therefore it is constructed within the parameters of the Unified Development
Code.
------------------------------------
6) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the conditional use will not be hazardous to
existing and anticipated traffic in the vicinity of the subject parcel;
As attested to in the MDNS, and the supplemental traffic letter, this project will not create a hazardous
condition to existing or anticipated traffic in the nearby vicinity.
------------------------------------
7) The conditional use complies with all other applicable criteria and standards of this Code and any
other applicable local, state or federal law; and more specifically, conforms to the standards
contained in 18.20 and 18.30 of this Code;
As set forth in this staff report, the proposal complies with all other applicable criteria and standards.
------------------------------------
8) The proposed conditional use will not result in the siting of an incompatible use adjacent to an
airport or airfield;
The site is not adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of an airport or airfield.
------------------------------------
9) The conditional use will not cause significant adverse impacts on the human or natural
environments that cannot be mitigated through conditions of approval;
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 25 of 32
The conditional use will provide human services to individuals experiencing housing insecurity, and who
are unable to obtain housing due to the documented county’s and the peninsula’s housing affordability
crisis.
------------------------------------
10) The conditional use has merit and value for the community as a whole;
As mentioned earlier in this staff report, Jefferson County continues to experience a housing emergency
and this CUP is therefore clothed in a public interest.
------------------------------------
11) The conditional use is consistent with all relevant goals and policies of the Jefferson County
Comprehensive Plan; and
There are three broad goals in the comprehensive plan’s housing element that speak to the needs of
individuals experiencing houselessness. This project implements all three. First, by supporting an effort
to increase housing availability for the population most difficult to serve, as set forth in Goal HS-G-1
below, this CUP meets a critical need filling the county’s void.
Goal HS-G-1 Encourage and support efforts to increase housing availability for county residents
of all income groups.
This will be the first purpose-built shelter, and 40-lot park for those experiencing housing insecurity and
implements: “Policy HS-P-1.1 Identify locations where housing development can be promoted and work
with inter-jurisdictional and public-private cooperative groups to increase a broad spectrum of housing
supplies including market-rate homes, moderately-priced homes, and housing for lower income
households.”
Additionally, this implements goal HS-G-2 by promoting a new type of housing that’s safe and easier to
construct. Referred to as Tiny Shelters, which are distinct from Tiny Homes, the shelters are constructed
for safety, and do meet other building code requirements such as the Energy Code. Instead these
structures are constructed with an eye toward minimizing cost and meeting life and safety
requirements. Tiny Homes, constructed in accordance with Appendix Q of the State Building Code, are
as costly to construct, and may actually be more costly per square foot than the average sized home, so
this alternative fills the void. Implementing the MDN requirements for a group of plans, implements
Goal HS-G-2 by promoting alternative development standards.
Goal HS-G-2 Promote a variety of housing choices throughout the county with innovative land
use practices, community redevelopment strategies, development standards, design techniques,
and building and infrastructure permit requirements.
Policy HS-P-2.1 Explore regulatory opportunities that help minimize costs to developing
affordable housing while ensuring that public health, safety, and environmental quality
standards are not compromised.
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 26 of 32
Policy HS-P-2.5 Review and revise development standards and land use codes to allow for
manufactured home parks, other types of residential parks such as parks for tiny homes, and
community land and housing trusts in order to increase housing supplies
Goal HS-G-4 Pursue housing programs that address homelessness and encourage the development of
housing for people with special needs (individuals who require assistance for disabilities that may be
physical, medical, social, or psychological)
Policy HS-P-4.1 Allow for a continuum of care for special needs populations, in UGAs and Rural
Village Centers, including emergency housing, transitory accommodations, transitional housing,
assisted living, group homes, developmental disability housing, senior housing and low-income
housing.
Policy HS-P-4.2 Encourage and support the development and implementation of a transitory
accommodation permitting process that considers the variety of transitory accommodations
that may be deployed, for single-family, small and large indoor and outdoor transitory
accommodations in cooperation with willing public and private landowners
Policy HS-P-4.3 Coordinate with Olympic Community Action Programs, the Peninsula Housing
Authority, nonprofit housing providers, and other public and private housing interests to ensure
that low income and special needs housing is sited in locations that are adequately served by
necessary support facilities and infrastructure
12)The public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. Consideration shall be given to the
cumulative effect of similar actions in the area
Staff does not see any substantial detrimental effect through the approval of an CUP for this project.
Nor does the county identify any other similar actions in the region, whose cumulative effect is
detrimental. Most significantly, the public interest has been served by implementation of
Environmental Justice.
Environmental Justice
According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency website, Environmental Justice is the
fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or
income, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies. This goal will be achieved when everyone enjoys
•The same degree of protection from environmental and health hazards, and
•Equal access to the decision-making process to have a healthy environment in which to live,
learn, and work (see, EPA website. Accessible August 4, 2023,
https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice ).
Arguably, environmental justice is served by housing those individuals who are experiencing chronic
housing insecurity, and including them in design and planning. According the OlyCAP’s Housing
Manager, Kathy Morgan, this occurred; specifically, she states: “OlyCAP worked with our partners and
monitors along with input from our client/customers currently in our shelters on the function and
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 27 of 32
design.” She also said that they have transitional, emergency and permanent supportive housing, all on
the same campus, as a way to incorporate this input in Caswell-Brown’s phase 2 to make it full
functioning campus. In conclusion, the Housing Director stated: “All our partners and customers gave
voice to what they like and what they would want changed. We incorporated what we could into the
design.” This is a critical component of environmental justice, i.e., including the users in the design.
Additionally, there are other property owners in close proximity to the site. In fact, some of these
properties are available for prices higher than the county’s median income. Additionally, peer reviewed
journal articles attribute higher rates of mortality for individuals experiencing homelessness suggesting
that the impacts of living in close proximity to a generator, such as the Port Townsend Paper Mill, is
offset by benefits of being housed. (See Montgomery, Ann Elizabeth et. al. 2016. “Homelessness,
Unsheltered Status, and Risk Factors for Mortality.” Public Health Reports 131 (6): Nov-Dec 765-772.
Accessible online August 4, 2023 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5230839/) (See also,
Krieger, James and Higgins, Donna. 2002. “Housing and Health: Time Again for Public Health Action.”
American Journal of Public Health. May. Accessible online August 4, 2023
https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.92.5.758 )
The Phase 1 Site assessment finds the following: Historical records indicate the subject site was
undeveloped forested land that has been logged numerous times over the past 70 years. Until the
installation of septic system in 2022, and the Olympic Discovery Trail in 2013, there is no documented
site development other than the railroad line and the logging activities. The Olympic Discovery Trail was
constructed in approximately 2013 and has an easement
VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the preceding findings and conclusions, staff recommends finding that the proposal is consistent
with the applicable plans and ordinances and that it meets the Conditional Use review criteria. Approval
of the Conditional Use Permit should be granted subject to the following conditions.
Recommended condition number 1
The uses of the subject property are limited to the uses proposed by the Applicant and any other uses
will be subject to further review pursuant to the requirements of the Jefferson County Code. Unless in
conflict with the conditions stated and/or any regulations, all terms and specifications of the application
shall be binding conditions of approval. Approval of this project shall not, and is not, to be construed as
approval for more extensive or other utilization of the subject property.
Recommended Condition Number 2
A decision set forth herein is based upon representations made and exhibits contained in the project
application (ZON2022-00152). The site plan as submitted with the Zoning Conditional Use Permit
application on October 25, 2023, as updated by the as-built 5-10-2023 has been reviewed for consistency
under the UDC, and approved by Jefferson County Department of Community Development. Any
modifications, changes, and/or additions to the stamped, approved site plans shall be resubmitted for
review and approval by Jefferson County Department of Community Development. Any change(s) or
deviation(s) in such plans, proposals, or conditions of approval imposed shall be subject to further review
and approval of Jefferson County and potentially the Hearing Examiner.
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 28 of 32
Recommended Condition Number 3
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED):
The Community Development Department has reviewed this proposal for compliance with CPTED
principles and determined that they comply with plans that support safety and security regarding
natural surveillance, territorial behaviors and natural access controls. The Applicant shall be responsible
for maintaining these items because CPTED is not a one-time evaluation. Evaluation of vegetation and
lighting shall continue to take place postconstruction, and any additional access to the Larry Scott Trail
the (Olympic Discovery Trail’s eastern terminus) other than at the main entry point to the site shall be
reviewed by Public Works, and approved by the Department of Community Development after
consultation with police and fire regarding CPTED access control requirements. The Applicant shall
address any issues identified by the Director. Applicant shall upkeep the facility and grounds around the
facility, including controlling vegetation and maintaining lighting levels so that areas remain visible
without extensive light pollution. Few undesignated places shall exist for people to hide from public
view, and cameras are not blocked.
Recommended Condition Number 4
After five years of operation, and every five years thereafter, the Jefferson County Department of
Community will conduct a comprehensive evaluation to ensure that the project is being implemented as
designed and conditioned.
Recommended Condition Number 5
The Applicant agrees that, in the event the Applicant is determined by the Director to be incapable of
operating the facility for financial or other reasons, or if the facility is determined by the Director to be a
public nuisance, the conditional use permit may be immediately suspended by the Director on a
temporary basis and the facility shall remained closed until the hearing examiner determines whether to
revoke, suspend, or modify the conditional use permit pursuant to JCC 18.40.325. This condition does
not limit other remedies that the property owner may elect to enact.
(SEPA) condition Number 6
Public Services:
The applicant shall submit for review and approval to Jefferson County Department of Community
Development five plans substantially similar to the requirements contained in Jefferson County Code
Chapter 18.20.385, including:
1) Safety and Security Plan,
2) Operations Plan,
3) Transportation Plan,
4) Perimeter Plan, and
5) Communication and Coordination Plan.
Specifically, the applicant is required to complete these plans in consultation with the first responder
agencies (Jefferson County Department of Public Health, City of Port Townsend Police Department,
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 29 of 32
Jefferson County Sherriff’s Office, East Jefferson Fire Rescue) and shall submit them to the Department
of Community Development one year after operation between April 15 and June 1, and every year
thereafter within this timeframe so long as the shelter or 40-lot park remain operational. Based on the
annual report, the Community Development Department may require amendments to the plan or
conditional use permit to address these issues.
SEPA Condition Number 7
A lighting element shall be incorporated in the Safety and Security Plan, and submitted and approved
prior to the issuance of a building permit to ensure incorporation of CPTED principles, and that there is
no off-site glare to the street or adjacent properties.
Recommended Conditional Number 8
All required permits shall be obtained prior to commencement of land clearing, construction and/or
occupancy for phase III
Recommended Condition Number 9
Construction plans and profiles for all roads, storm drainage facilities and appurtenances prepared by
the developer’s engineer shall be submitted to Jefferson County for review and acceptance. No
construction shall be started prior to said plan acceptance.
Recommended Condition Number 10
Stormwater quantity control, quality treatment, and erosion and sedimentation control shall be
designed in accordance with the geotechnical recommendations, as set forth in Exhibit 7, and pursuant
to Jefferson County Code 18.30.070 Stormwater management standards, and the Jefferson County
Public Works Department shall issue final approval. The submittal documents shall be prepared by a civil
engineer licensed in the State of Washington. The fees and submittal requirements shall be in
accordance with Jefferson County Code in effect at the time of application or Building Permit if site
development review is required. Payment of fees or approval of a fee waiver by the Board of County
Commissioners shall be required prior to county review.
Recommended Condition Number 11
Any work within the County right-of-way shall require a Public Works permit and possibly a maintenance
or performance bond. This application to perform work in the right-of-way shall be submitted as part of
the Building Permit process. The need for and scope of bonding will be determined at that time.
Recommended Condition Number 12
All structures, tents, RVs, tiny shelters, and common use structures, shall be subject to annual
inspections by the fire marshal per International Fire Code Section 104.
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 30 of 32
Tiny Shelter and 40-lot Park Conditions consistent with JCC 15.05.065
Recommended Condition Number 13
RVs, tiny shelters, and common use structures containing a sleeping area must contain one operable
window that allows for user-controlled ventilation. The window must meet egress requirements and be
located on a separate wall from the door. Alternatively, an outswing door allowing egress from the tiny
shelter may be substituted for the operable egress window. If egress requirements are met by an
outswing door, a landing appropriately sized for the swing of door is required, and a handrail must be
provided if the landing is over 30 inches in height.
Recommended Condition Number 14
Locks or latches on doors and windows that might inhibit an emergency escape from within the unit are
prohibited. A single cylinder deadbolt lock or lever-handled door latch is permitted, as long as it does
not require the use of a tool or key to lock or unlock it from inside the unit.
Recommended Condition Number 15
Tents must have a minimum separation of 10 feet from other tents or structures, including but not
limited to RVs, tiny shelters, and other buildings. If tents or other membrane shelters are made of fire-
retardant material, they may have a minimum separation of five feet from each other or from other
structures. Tiny shelters, RVs, and buildings require a minimum separation of five feet. If the site has a
mix of tents, RVs, and tiny shelters, the most restrictive minimum separation between the two types
applies. Separation distance is measured from the end of any protrusions from the structure such as
awnings.
Recommended Condition Number 16
Each temporary structure and any common use building must contain a combination smoke/carbon
monoxide detector with 10-year lithium batteries. The operating entity shall ensure that all such
detectors are properly placed and maintained.
Recommended Condition Number 17
Each temporary structure and any common use building must contain a fire extinguisher with a
minimum rating of 1-A:10-B:C. The operating entity shall ensure that all such detectors are properly
placed and maintained. Fire extinguishers shall be inspected annually as required by the International
Fire Code.
Recommended Condition 18
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 31 of 32
The following items and activities are prohibited within or adjacent to any tent or tiny structure: any
open flame including candles, burning of incense or other types of open flame or fuel gas appliances or
other equipment, convection or toaster ovens, or hot plates. Microwaves are allowed. Cooking
activities, outside the use of a microwave, are only allowed in an officially designated cooking area.
Recommended Condition Number 19
The site plan shall include roadways throughout the site that provide adequate emergency response
vehicle access and turnaround, including a hammerhead turnaround.
Recommended Condition Number 20
If there is a gate to the Caswell-Brown Village, an established Knox box with a master key will be
provided for fire officials. If the buildings have locks, a master key to all units will be placed in a Knox box
for fire officials.
Recommended Condition Number 21
No smoking or vaping is permitted within any temporary structure as defined in JCC 18.10.200, including
tents, RVs, tiny shelters, and any other structure designed to provide personal and private shelter to an
individual or family. The operating entity must provide a separate dedicated smoking area which is
strictly enforced at all times to reduce, minimize or eliminate impacts to adjacent property owners and
occupants of the tiny structures.
Recommended Condition Number 22
Combustible waste material shall be controlled in accordance with the current adopted International
Fire Code Section 304.
Recommended Condition Number 23
For any tiny shelter, an exterior porch light is required if dusk to dawn exterior lighting is not provided
on the grounds of the temporary housing facility. The exterior porch light must be hard-wired with
outlets.
Recommended Condition Number 24
Any in-wall mounted heaters or freestanding heaters must meet national standards such as UL and
auto-tilt shut off. All tiny shelters must be permanently affixed with an “Emergency Shelter” label on the
door frame of each unit.
Recommended Condition Number 25
Any tiny shelter must have a Class C interior fire rating (painted plywood) or drywall.
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 32 of 32
Recommended Condition Number 26
The fire marshal may determine that hazardous environmental conditions warrant the temporary
restriction or prohibition of smoking or vaping per International Fire Code Section 310.8.
Recommended Condition Number 27
All structures shall be provided with a landing, with steps and a handrail when necessary as specified in
the International Building Code.
Recommended Condition Number 28
Tiny shelters must have a door with a minimum opening of 32 inches.
Recommended Condition Number 29
Common use structures like restrooms, bathing facilities or kitchens must be labeled by Washington
State Labor and Industries or built to International Code requirements and permitted by Jefferson
County. All emergency shelters will be supported by a temporary foundation as approved by the
building official.
Recommended Condition Number 30
Any tiny structure, or structure with more than one sleeping area, must be built to International
Residential Code Appendix Q – Tiny Homes or be affixed with a label from Washington State Labor and
Industries
Recommended Condition Number 31
A fire flow availability letter shall be provided.
Recommended Condition Number 32
Site fire hydrants shall be provided if required by the Fire Marshal. Existing hydrants will be considered,
if within approved locations.
Recommended Condition Number 33
Fire access shall be provided for all on site structures and shall be provided in approved locations.
Recommended Condition Number 34
Fire access roads shall be a minimum of 20 feet in width, 13 foot 6 inches clear height and shall be
constructed of an all-weather surface designed to tolerate the load of a 60,000-pound apparatus. Any
fire access road that dead-ends and exceeds 150 feet in length, shall be provided with a turnaround. The
intended fire access routes shall be clearly indicated on civil plans. Approved marking of fire access
roads will be required.
ZON2022-00152
Caswell-Brown Village Emergency Shelter with Permanent Supportive Housing
Page 33 of 32
Recommended Condition Number 35
Separate structures constructed on site shall meet the requirements of Chapter 6 of the IBC for
separation distance, unless specifically exempted.
Environmental and Public Health Conditions
Recommended Condition Number 36
The Applicant’s permit is conditioned upon meeting the requirements of JCC Chapter 8.05 regarding
Food Service Sanitation, if applicable.
Recommended Condition Number 37
The Applicant’s permit is conditioned upon meeting the Solid Waste regulations contained in JCC
Chapter 8.10.
Recommended Condition Number 38
The Applicant’s permit is conditioned upon meeting the regulations outlined in the On-site Sewage
Code, JCC Chapter 8.15, and occupancy shall not exceed for the Shelter: 50 beds / up to 75 persons or
the approved septic permit capacity, whichever is less and for the 40-Space Park/ up to 75 persons or
the septic capacity, whichever is less.
10a_PC Recommendations Final Docket 4-19-2023
10b_PC Recommendation Letter Miles MRLO Application
10c_ZON2021-00013 Miles MRLO Application
Attachment 1, Ordinance No. ______________
10d_ZON2023-000004 Gifford-Yep Application
10e_ZON2023-00006 Midori Farm Application
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 1 of 17
SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Purpose of checklist
Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your
proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance,
minimization, or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an
environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal.
Instructions for applicants
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please
answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult
with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use “not applicable” or
"does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is
unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and
accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the
decision-making process.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of
time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your
proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to
explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may
be significant adverse impact.
Instructions for lead agencies
Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to
evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse
impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to
make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is
responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents.
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals
For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable
parts of sections A and B, plus the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions (Part D). Please completely
answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site"
should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency
may exclude (for non-projects) questions in “Part B: Environmental Elements” that do not contribute
meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 2 of 17
A. Background Find help answering background questions
1.Name of proposed project, if applicable: 294152 Hwy 101 rezone to AG
2.Name of applicant: Marko Colby, Midori Farm LLC
3.Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
10 Old State Hwy, Quilcene, WA 98376 360.531.4579
4.Date checklist prepared:
2-28-23
5.Agency requesting checklist:
Jefferson County Dept of Community Development
6.Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
7.Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
No
8.List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be
prepared, directly related to this proposal.
NA
9.Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
NA
10.List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
NA
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 3 of 17
11.Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the
size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you
to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on
this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information
on project description.)
The proposal is to change two parcels of property totaling 14.7 acres currently zoned for
Rural residential 1 in 5 to AG zoning.
12.Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the
precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section,
township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the
range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and
topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by
the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any
permit applications related to this checklist.
Parcel# 702133028 Address: 294152 Hwy 101 Quilcene WA 98376 Section 13
Township 27 N Range 2W
Parcel # 702133029 Address: 200 W Columbia St. Quilcene WA 98376 Section 13
Township 27 N Range 2W
Site map attached
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 4 of 17
B. Environmental Elements
1. Earth Find help answering earth questions
a. General description of the site: 14.7 acres flat farmland with no buildings.
Circle or highlight one: Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: FLat
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 1%
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat,
muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them, and note any agricultural
land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of
these soils. Quilcene alder complex. Sandy to sandy gravel loam.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so,
describe. No
e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any
filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill.
None
f. Could erosion occur because of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
NA
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
None
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any.
NA
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 5 of 17
2. Air Find help answering air questions
a.What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation,
and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate
quantities if known.
None
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe.
No.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any.
NA
3. Water Find help answering water questions
a. Surface Water: Find help answering surface water questions
1.Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round
and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names.
If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
There is a seasonal drainage ditch on the SW corner of parcel # 702133028. It flows into Quilcene
Bay.
2.Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If
yes, please describe and attach available plans.
No
3.Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed
from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate
the source of fill material.
None
4.Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give a general description,
purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 6 of 17
5.Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan.
No
6.Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so,
describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
No
b. Ground Water: Find help answering ground water questions
1.Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a
general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the
well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give a general description, purpose, and
approximate quantities if known.
There is currently a well on each parcel that are used for low use agricultural purposes.
No more than 3000 gallons per day.
2.Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources,
if any (domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals…; agricultural; etc.).
Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be
served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
NA
c. Water Runoff (including stormwater):
a)Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any
(include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If
so, describe.
NA
b)Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
NA
c)Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so,
describe. NO
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 7 of 17
d) Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage
pattern impacts, if any.
No changes to existing agricultural practices are planned.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 8 of 17
4. Plants Find help answering plants questions
a.Check the types of vegetation found on the site:
☐deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
☐evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
☐shrubs
☐grass
☒pasture
☒crop or grain
☐orchards, vineyards, or other permanent crops.
☐wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
☐water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
☐other types of vegetation
b.What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? None
c.List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. None
d.Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation
on the site, if any. Continue to enhance perimeter with Native species plantings
e.List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site.
Canada thistle, Teasel and Himalayan blackberry
5. Animals Find help answering animal questions
a.List any birds and other animals that have been observed on or near the site or are known to be
on or near the site.
Songbirds, hawks, eagles. Deer.
Examples include:
Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
b.List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site.
c.Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. NO
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 9 of 17
d.Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any. No changes
e.List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. NA
6. Energy and Natural Resources Find help answering energy and natural resource questions
1.What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the
completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing,
etc. Electricity for basic farm needs. Already exists.
2.Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally
describe. No
3.What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other
proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any. None
7. Environmental Health Find help with answering environmental health questions
a.Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and
explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur because of this proposal? If so, describe.
No.
1.Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses.
None known.
2.Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development
and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines
located within the project area and in the vicinity.
None
3.Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced
during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating
life of the project.
None.
4.Describe special emergency services that might be required.
None.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 10 of 17
5.Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. None.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 11 of 17
b. Noise
1.What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:
traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Proximity to Hwy 101
2.What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term
or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours
noise would come from the site)? No change to existing noise levels.
3.Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any. No changes
8. Land and Shoreline Use Find help answering land and shoreline use questions
a.What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land
uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe.
Current use of site is organic agriculture. No change of use is planned. Adjacent properties are AG
zoned farm land on the West, Rural residential properties to the N and S and Hwy 101 to the East.
b.Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How
much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other
uses because of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many
acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use?
The project site has always been entirely in working farmland and there is no change to the proposed
use.
1.Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal
business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling,
and harvesting? If so, how? The proposal is to continue its use as working organic farmland.
c.Describe any structures on the site. There are two shipping container for storage and a
1200 sq ft hoop house for growing crops.
d.Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No.
e.What is the current zoning classification of the site? Rural Residential 1 in 5.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 12 of 17
f.What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
g.If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
h.Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so,
specify.
i.Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
The existing farm has a seasonal staff of 5. No current plans for residences.
j.Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None
k.Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. NA
l.Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land
uses and plans, if any. The plan is to continue existing land use.
m.Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term
commercial significance, if any. NA
9. Housing Find help answering housing questions
a.Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-
income housing. None
b.Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing. None
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any. NA
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 13 of 17
10. Aesthetics Find help answering aesthetics questions
a.What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is
the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? No proposed structures at this time
b.What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
None
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any.
No to change to existing aesthetics.
11. Light and Glare Find help answering light and glare questions
a.What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur?
None
b.Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
No
c.What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
None
d.Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any.
NA
12. Recreation Find help answering recreation questions
a.What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
Quilcene Bay, Olympic National Forest.
b.Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
No
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities
to be provided by the project or applicant, if any.
NA
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 14 of 17
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation Find help answering historic and cultural preservation
questions
a.Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old
listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers? If so, specifically
describe.
No
b.Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This
may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas
of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the
site to identify such resources.
No
c.Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on
or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of
archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc.
There are no potential impacts.
d.Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to
resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required.
NA
14. Transportation Find help with answering transportation questions
a.Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe
proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
Hwy 101 is the main access to the farm. There is a mostly un-uses access on W. Columbia
b.Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If
not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop?
No.
c.Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle,
or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate
whether public or private).
No.
d.Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe. No
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 15 of 17
e.How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If
known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be
trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models
were used to make these estimates?
This proposal creates no changes to existing traffic or vehicle use.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 16 of 17
f. Will the proposal interfere with, affect, or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest
products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. No
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any. NA
15. Public Services Find help answering public service questions
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection,
police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
No
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
NA
16. Utilities Find help answering utilities questions
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service,
telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other:
Currently there is power and an existing septic system.
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service,
and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which
might be needed.
No additional utilities required.
C. Signature Find help about who should sign
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead
agency is relying on them to make its decision.
X
Type name of signee: Marko Colby
Position and agency/organization: Co-owner Midori Farm LLC, representative for this project.
Date submitted: 2/28/2023
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 17 of 17
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33E13A0E-6E06-4CE4-8B1C-B6D9F9E9C810
11_2024 PC Budget 8-31-2023