Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout040912_SWorkshop Regular Agenda 9:45 am JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REQUEST TO: Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) Philip Morley, County Administrator Stacie Hoskins, Department of Community Development (DCD) Interim Director & Planning Manager ~ ~ David Wayne JohmlOn, Associate Plann April 9, 2012 Workshop on Wastewater Treatment Options in LAMIRDs FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: A workshop will be held at 1:30pm April 9, 2012 at the Cotton Building in Port Townsend to discuss options for treating wastewater within three of the County's Local Areas of More Intense Rural Development (LAMlRD), and will include members of the BoCC, DCD, Jefferson County Environmental Health and the State Department of Commerce. The issue initially arose as a result of the installation of a wastewater treatment facility (sewer) for the Dosewallips State Park south of Brinnon. Because of the location of the final treatment facility north of Brinn on, the conveyance lines from the State Park pass through the Brinnon LAMlRD, making it possible for some development within Brinnon to hook-up to the sewer. The question then becomes, "are these hook-ups allowable under the Growth Management Act (GMA)," since LAMlRDs are designated defined as rural development and sewers are defined as being levels of service typical of urban development. The workshop is conceived as a starting point for community discussion of this issue as well as the potential economic benefit that could result from sewers in LAMIRDs and will also include discussion of the Glen Cove and Quilcene LAMIRDs. ATTACHMENTS: BoCC Workshop Agenda - Wastewater Treatment Options in LAMlRDs Department of Commerce outline of issues DCD Memorandum - Dosewallips State ParkIBrinnon Sewer System ANALYSIS/STRATEGIC GOALSIPROS and CONS: DCD Analysis to date indicates that there is a "three-part test" to determining if sewers are allowed under GMA within LAMlRDs or any rural area. These three criteria as defined under GMA (RCW36.70A.l10(4)) are: 1. Is it (sewer) necessary to protect basic public health, safety and the environment? 2. Is it financially supportable at rural densities? 3. Does it permit urban levels of development? Also, the State Supreme Court, in the relevant case of The Cooper Point Associate v. Thurston County defined ''necessary'' as "absolutely required" or "indispensible." The workshop will attempt to answer those questions and/or refine them within the context of each of the subject LAMlRDs. Additional 1 Regular Agenda 9:45 am questions for consideration are: . How much more economic development is possible when a LAMIRD can utilize a sewer or alternative wastewater treatment such as a Large On-site Septic System? . If it is not feasible to sewer a LAMIRD, what is required to convert the LAMIRD into an Urban Growth Area (UGA)? FISCAL IMPACT/COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS: The workshop will be conducted as part of the Board of Commissioner's Monday public meetings. DCD staff time is covered under Long Range Planning as part of the General Fund RECOMMENDATION: DCD recommends the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Conduct a workshop scheduled for April 9, 2012 at I :30pm to examine the issue of alternatives to on-site septic systems within LAMIRDs. REVIEWED BY: Philip Morley, County Administrator Date 2 Jefferson County Sewering a LAMIRD RCW 36.70A.110(4): In general, cities are the units of local government most appropriate to provide urban governmental services. In general, it is not appropriate that urban governmental services be extended to or expanded in rural areas except in those limited circumstances shown to be necessary to protect basic public health and safety and the environment and when such services are financially supportable at rural densities and do not permit urban development. WAC 365-196-425(4) Rural governmental services: (b) Rural services do not include storm or sanitary sewers. Urban governmental services that pass through rural areas when connecting urban areas do not constitute an extension of urban services into a rural area provided those public services are not provided in the rural area. Sanitary sewer service may be provided only if it: (i) Is necessary to protect basic public health and safety and the environment; (ii) Is financially supportable at rural densities; and (iii) Does not permit urban development. 1.Necessary to protect public health and safety and the environment Is there a documented health, safety or environmental issue that sewer would address? ? Cooper Point – State Supreme Court defined “necessary” as “absolutely required” or “indispensible.” ? LAMIRD outside Belfair UGA - Mason County had a letter from the Washington State Department of Health in 2002 declaring a severe health hazard declaration due to sewage treatment issues and high levels of fecal coliform. 2.Financially supportable at rural densities (capital facilities plan with funding sources) A.Has the county done a financial feasibility analysis? What would the cost to residences and businesses be to hook up and maintain the system? ? Mason County hired a consultant team to do a financial feasibility analysis for the Belfair UGA system, including extension of sewer outside the UGA to a potential LAMIRD along the North Shore of Hood Canal. With subsidies of $34 million in state and federal grants, and $11 million in low-interest loans, final costs are $3,000 for hook up of an equivalent residential unit (ERU) and $96 in monthly sewer rates inside the UGA. These subsidy amounts are unprecedented in Washington for a community the size of Belfair. As of January 2012, hook up charges went up to $5,000 and are scheduled to continually increase. North Shore is not included in the service area due to residential concerns with cost, concern about infill and redevelopment potential, and monitoring data that showed on-site repairs and maintenance had already improved water quality. ? Packwood LAMIRD in Lewis County has been working on a sewer system since 1998, with no system planned or built to date. Two financial feasibility studies have been done in two different service areas, finding sewer financially infeasible. B.What is the commitment of the community to hook up such that the system would be financially supported? Sewer is difficult to support financially unless you have the commitment to hook up from both business and residents. 3.Does not permit urban development What were the existing densities at the time Jefferson County was mandated to or opted into the Growth Management Act (1990)? A sewer system cannot be used to support densities higher than what was in place at the time the County began planning under the GMA. BoCC WORKSHOP AGENDA Wastewater Treatment Options in LAMIRDs Monday, April 9, 2012 1:30 P.M. Cotton Building, 607 Water St, Port Townsend 1:30 pm A. Opening Business: ? Purpose of Workshop – Philip Morley ? Introductions - Group B. Background: ? Similar projects statewide – GMA issues – Heather Ballash, Department of Commerce ? Characteristics of each LAMIRD ? Glen Cove ? Quilcene ? Brinnon C. Discussion: ? How does each LAMIRD meet the GMA three-part test? 1 ? Can the sewer be shown to be necessary to protect basic public health, safety and the environment? ? Is it financially supportable at rural densities? ? Does it permit urban levels of development D. Other relevant topics for discussion: ? Economic development within LAMIRDs ? Septic drainfield limitations/requirements ? Large On-site Septic Systems (LOSS) ? Cost/Benefit of sewers in terms of economic development ? Create new UGAs ? Density 3:00 pm E. Adjournment ? Next steps 1 Absolutely required or indispensible – Thurston County v. The Cooper Point Ass’n 148 Wn. 2d 1, @ p. 12-13 (2002)