Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM061002CO �gsON C� ti �4L�� z y <« tf pt ING District No. 1 Commissioner: Dan Titterness District No. 2 Commissioner: Glen Huntingford District No. 3 Commissioner: Richard Wait County Administrator: David Goldsmith Deputy County Administrator: Gary Rowe Clerk of the Board: Lorna Delaney MINUTE S Week of June 10, 2002 Chairman Richard Wojt called the meeting to order at the appointed time. Commissioners Dan Titterness and Glen Huntingford were both present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve the minutes of the week of May 20, 2002 as presented. Commissioner Titterness seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. The Board met in Executive Session from 9:00-9:30 a.m. with the County Administrator regarding collective bargaining. There was no County Administrator Briefing Session. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: Comments were made on the following issues. The City of Port Townsend's meeting on Glen Cove: • It appears that the format has changed from a town meeting, to a facilitated meeting, to a debate. • People need a balanced information from the City and the County so it doesn't become a one-sided debate. • Concern about the arrangements for the meeting because some City Council members don't know what's going on. The Legal Council for Fred Hill Materials spoke regarding their gravel pit operations: • He invited the County Commissioners to visit the site. • Submitted a letter dated May 31, 2002 from the DNR Reclamation Section on their existing compliance and information submission. They have attempted to be forthcoming in providing information and they want to be good neighbors. They would agree to any public hearing to discuss the issues on their T -ROC (Thorndyke Resource Operations Complex) site. Invited anyone from the County, including the Commissioners and the Sheriff, to contact their representatives with questions or concerns. Page 1 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of June 10, 2002 V APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Titterness moved to approve and adopt the Consent Agenda as presented. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. 1. PROCLAMATION re: Proclaiming June 16-23, 2002 as Wildland Fire Prevention Week 2. RESOLUTION NO. 33-02 re: Mid Year 2002 Budget Reductions for Various County Departments 3. AGREEMENT re: Reimbursable Work for Parks Maintenance Projects; Jefferson County Public Works; Washington State Parks Department 4. AGREEMENT re: Water Quality Improvement Loan from the Septic Repair Revolving Loan Fund; Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Kelly D. Smith 5. AGREEMENT re: Best Beginnings Program for High Risk Mothers of Children Birth to Three; Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Jefferson Community Network 6. AGREEMENT re: Student Observation of Preceptor Services; Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Laura Barrette, Student and Seattle Midwifery School 7. AGREEMENT, Amendment No. 6 re: Consolidated Contract; Amending Allocation, Contract Requirements and Reports for Health District; Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Washington State Department of Health 8. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING, Interlocal re: Child Death Reviews; Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Clallam County 9. Land Use Proposal Application; Port Townsend Business Park; City of Port Townsend 10. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL #SUB01-00024; Amendment to Lot "C" Located in the Plat of Brinnon Beach Estates - North Residential Subdivision; Richard and Karen Riel, Applicants 11. Twelve (12) Month Extension of Preliminary Plat Approval; To Divide 17.47 Acres into 3 Residential Lots; Located off of Renier Road, Nordland; Ann Klemp, Applicant 12. Advisory Board Re -appointment: 2 Individuals to Each Serve Another Three (3) Year Term on the Fire Code Advisory Board; Ed Davis, Term Expires June 10, 2005, and Levi Ross, Term Expires August 7, 2005 Discussion re: Formulation of Board Sponsored Seawater Intrusion Proposal for Planning Commission Review: David Goldsmith, County Administrator, explained that this proposal was put together to protect the aquifer from degradation from seawater intrusion; to comply with the Hearings Board order; to honor the efforts of the citizens committee; and to develop a system that is cost effective and will have a limited impact on the County Budget. The Hearings Board ruling stated that the regulations in the County's Development Code don't do enough to protect the aquifer from seawater intrusion. There are several policy models in the State including Island County, San Juan County, and Pierce County. Instead of using another County's model, a citizens' Focus Group was convened to provide the sideboards for a policy and corresponding regulations that will meet the specific needs of Jefferson County. Page 2 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of June 10, 2002 / He reviewed the eight goals formulated by the Focus Group and explained that all of the information is compiled into this strategy. There are 2 aspects to the regulations: 1) the procedure when there is a decision to drill a well; and 2) the rules that apply when there is seawater intrusion in a well. Natural Resources Manager Dave Christensen explained that there are 3 levels of seawater intrusion zones. Based on the Focus Group's recommendation, Seawater Intrusion Protection Zones (SIPZ) will be established including aquifers and land areas overlying aquifers that are at some level of vulnerability to seawater intrusion. All land area within 1/4 mile of marine shorelines and all islands that have no history of chloride concentration above 100 mg/L in groundwater sources within 1,000 feet are classified as a Coastal SIPZ, a subcategory of a Critical Aquifer Recharge Area. Regulations will vary by zone and type of SIPZ. There will be more mandatory regulation for "at risk" areas within 1,000 feet of a groundwater source that shows between 100 and 200 mg/L of chloride. The Coastal SIPZ will have less regulation. The PUD will be doing the monitoring and WSU Cooperative Extension will do the education program. There will be costs for monitoring data reports and program overview. The MOU with the PUD currently includes their staff at no cost to the County, but that may change. The cost is estimated at 200 to 300 hours of staff time per year to oversee the evaluation of the data and to work with property owners. Dave Christensen distributed a map that indicates properties within 1/4 mile of a shoreline. The 1/4 mile zone acknowledges water quality concerns and supports the Focus Group's recommendation, as well as information from previous studies (Hon West Report.) He reviewed several scenarios. Commissioner Huntingford stated that he doesn't want the County to increase regulations on a property owner every time a reading changes. He asked if there is a method for reviewing the data at specific intervals to determine if the regulations need to be changed? Dave Christensen advised that this is not included in the current proposal because of the concerns about cost. Commissioner Huntingford added that the County needs to have some way to analyze the data and be able to make a judgement call about whether the problem is getting worse or better and then determine if changes need to be made to the policy and regulations. Josh Peters, Associate Planner, explained that this proposal is written using the data to establish zones. Adaptive management requires an annual review of the data to see where problem areas are being found. Best available science will be used to deal with discrete areas of sea water intrusion. Commissioner Titterness asked who will evaluate the data? Josh Peters replied that when a problem area is identified, a temporary moratorium will be adopted in that area. There are several options regarding the next step: 1) an aquifer protection district can be established but it requires a public vote, or 2) the County can petition the State Department of Ecology to form a groundwater management area. Page 3 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of June 10, 2002 / Commissioner Huntingford asked the threshold for determining a problem area and setting a moratorium? Commissioner Titterness asked who makes the determination that the groundwater is at risk? Al Scalf advised that data will come forward through the PUD's monitoring program to the Environmental Health Department. Environmental Health will draft an annual report, determine if there is a "statistically significant" change, and make a recommendation to the Board. Commissioner Titterness feels that the specific line of decision making needs to be clarified in the proposal. Dave Christensen stated that the additional work created by this program may mean that other natural resource programs will have to be set aside. He added that the County will need to anticipate additional costs and add them to the budget. Josh Peters pointed out that many of the details haven't been worked out because the MOUS with the PUD and Cooperative Extension haven't been finalized yet. Commissioner Titterness directed staff to add clarification language to the policy statement under adaptive management requiring that the report go to the Commissioners and that language be added about how large an area must be to trigger any action. Commissioner Huntingford pointed out that the map shows that many of the wells are not located that close to the salt water. He is concerned about the Administrator having to make some of these decisions. The policy needs to be very clear. The following concerns and questions were brought up: VW Subdivisions - with the current densities subdivision isn't as important unless lots are created that are 5 acres or smaller. VW Rainwater catchment systems - DOE staff says these require a water right. Should the County require monitoring of the water in these systems? VW What is the State's policy on seawater intrusion and how does Jefferson County's policy compare? Dave Christensen answered that the State's policy centers around water rights and hasn't been codified into law. They look at water rights within 1/2 mile of the shoreline and they address larger scale areas. This policy is not inconsistent but it is difficult to compare them because of the difference in scale. Josh Peters reported that the State Department of Health has indicated that areas within 1/2 mile of the saltwater are at risk. Sometimes wells located away from the shoreline can have high chloride readings from relic seawater intrusion and not active seawater intrusion Dave Christensen explained that the State's policy addresses larger wells which means the cone of depression is larger when the well is pumped. Commissioner Huntingford asked how these regulations will affect an applicant who has to drill a well in a water service area because they can't get a permit to hook up to a water purveyor's system? Dave Christensen explained that the best situation is to have new structures hook up to approved public water sources. It doesn't make sense in an area of degradation to allow wells to be drilled. Commissioner Huntingford asked if these details have been worked out so the County doesn't hold up a person's building process? Commissioner Titterness asked if there is a process in the CWSP to address this? Dave Christensen answered that there is a process that is not currently followed because up to this point people have been allowed to drill wells. Page 4 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of June 10, 2002 / Commissioner Huntingford asked about the other policy elements listed on page 4? Josh Peters explained that these elements are happening concurrently, but are not part of this process. When the County goes back before the Hearings Board, the overall strategy needs to be shown, not just the UDC regulations. The Planning Commission's public hearing on this issue has been tentatively scheduled for July 10, 2002. Commissioner Titterness recommended that staff make changes and forward the document to the Planning Commission. Al Scalf said that as the Administrator he wants specific criteria to refer to when making decisions. Commissioner Huntingford stated that he would like to see an overall review of this policy in 5 years done by a consultant including a written report. A review after one year is too short a time period. The PUD monitoring program will use volunteers and take some time to set up, Chairman Wojt pointed out. There won't be a lot of data for awhile. Josh Peters reiterated that a provision will be added for a comprehensive review in 5 years with a report to go to the Commissioners; there will be an exemption added for subdivisions with lots larger than 5 acres and a goal statement will be added to the first page. Commissioner Huntingford moved to send the proposed Seawater Intrusion Policy to the Planning Commission with amendments as proposed. Commissioner Titterness seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Discussion re: Glen Cove Implementation Strategy: (Commissioner Dan Titterness was called to an emergency and was not in attendance during this portion of the meeting.) David Goldsmith explained that this is a followup to a meeting that took place 3 or 4 weeks ago. Randy Kline reviewed the proposed implementation strategy and the proposed boundary. Due to an agreement with the City, the County had Bill Nielsen, a consultant, review the County's work and issue a report. The proposed implementation strategy is a compilation of the information in that report and all of the letters and comments received on the proposed boundary. County staff met with City Manager David Timmons, and City Attorney John Watts last week to update them. The implementation strategy has four components. Randy Kline reviewed the strategies as outlined: 1) A Comprehensive Plan Amendment to revise the existing boundary through the addition of approximately 49 acres (excluding roads, rights-of-way, and water.) 2) Specific amendments to the Unified Development Code related to building size and stormwater (bulk and dimension standards.) Two maximum building sizes will be established - in the area north of Fredericks Street the maximum building size will be limited to 20,000 square feet per structure. The remainder of the Glen Cove Light Industrial District and the existing Light Industrial/Commercial District will have a maximum building size of 50,000 square feet. A conditional use application can be submitted for a larger building. Currently there is no restriction on the size of associated commercial buildings. These are uses meant to serve the industrial area only, not the County at large. 3) The August 2001 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington will be adopted. In the entire Glen Cove boundary, property owners are limited to 60% building coverage on any lot. 4) A County/City policy will be developed regarding maintenance of the Highway 20 corridor from Old Fort Townsend Road to the City limits. The County is concerned about the City's Page 5 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of June 10, 2002 *0,"'-�- management of the corridor from the ferry landing to the City limits because the water views in this corridor are disappearing. The possibility of using Conservation futures Tax funds to acquire conservation easements along the Highway 20 Corridor is being considered. This implementation strategy will involve amendments to UDC Table 6-1, 3-1, and UDC section 6.7. All of the changes to these items would happen at one time. The discussion continued regarding the implementation strategy and some specific examples of how it would impact properties in the Glen Cove area. The format for the City's Town Meeting on the Glen Cove area was also discussed. There was a brief discussion regarding the criteria in the Stormwater Manual, the need to reduce the amount of impervious surface, additional industrial/commercial land and provisions for a sewer system in the Glen Cove area in the 20 year planning process, a building cap in the LAMIRD, if the County will pay landowners for buffer, the status of the Glen Cove UGA analysis, and the square footage requirements on buildings. Commissioner Huntingford noted the need for a conditional use application on buildings over 20,000 square feet and Chairman Wojt concurred that this needs to be added. Commissioner Huntingford asked that this process be expedited. The Board is in agreement that this needs to move forward as quickly as possible. Randy Kline asked for another workshop this week when Commissioner Titterness can be present. He added that the Planning Commission has a public hearing scheduled on this document on June 19, 2002. He asked that the Board take action today. Commissioner Huntingford moved that the draft proposal and implementation strategy be put on the Board's agenda next Monday for final review and that it be sent to the Planning Commission for a public hearing with the one proposed addition. Chairman Wojt seconded the motion which carried. The meeting was recessed at the close of business on Monday and reconvened on Wednesday at 2 p.m. for a workshop on the Glen Cove implementation strategy. All three Commissioners were present. MEETING ADJOURNED r ATT&VT,•-44aP�J orna Delaney, CMC Clerk of the Board JEFFERSON C(�L1T' BOARD OF CO IS Richard _ Dan Titterness, Member Glen Huntmgfor ber Page 6