HomeMy WebLinkAboutM090302District No. 1 Commissioner: Dan Titterness
District No. 2 Commissioner: Glen Huntingford
District No. 3 Commissioner: Richard Wojt
County Administrator: David Goldsmith
Deputy County Administrator: Gary Rowe
Clerk of the Board: Lorna Delaney
MINUTES
Week of September 3, 2002
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Richard Wojt. Commissioner Dan Titterness
was present. Commissioner Glen Huntingford was out of town at a Board of Natural Resources meeting.
Approval of Minutes: Commissioner Titterness moved to approve the minutes of the August
26, 2002 meeting. Chairman Wojt seconded the motion which carried.
PROCLAMATION; Employee Recognition Week: Commissioner Titterness moved to
proclaim the week of September 2 through September 8, 2002 as Jefferson County Employee Recognition
Week. Chairman Wojt seconded the motion which carried.
COUNTYADMINISTRATOR BRIEFING SESSION: David Goldsmith reported on a sad
note that Patrick Boyle, who has worked for the past 6 years in the Auditor's Office, passed away over
weekend.
He reported on the following:
· Last week Commissioner Huntingford suggested that the County have a contest among employees to
submit things they do as part of their duties that they don't see any good reason to do. The validity of
the process can then be checked out and a prize will be awarded to the employee if the process can be
eliminated.
· Next week the budget roundtables are scheduled and on Monday there will be the mediation on the
Teamsters Labor Agreement. Bob Braun will be here representing the County in the mediation
sessions.
· The County's observance for September 1 lth will be a moment of silence in the Courthouse at 9:11
a.m. The start and end of the moment will be signaled by the ringing of 5 bells.
· There has been a change in the law on the definition of veteran which is now any veteran who was
honorably discharged instead of those that served in time of war. The Veterans Service Officers
Association is asking for more funding in 2003 to handle an anticipated increase in the number of
Page 1
Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of September 3, 2002
veterans eligible for relief funds.
The clock tower has made it through the selection process for the Washington State Heritage Capital
Projects Fund. The grant application was ranked 9 out of 58 and funding was recommended for the
first 19.
The project discussed last week on the Quilcene River was a Tribal project, that was not reviewed
under the flood plan. Dave Christensen will review all future projects against the flood plan.
There is a project to install some bank armoring (rip rap) on the Hoh River in the West End.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: There was no public comment.
APPROVAL AND ADOPHON OF THE CONSENTAGENDA: Commissioner Titterness
moved to approve all of the items on the consent agenda as presented. Chairman Wojt seconded the motion
which carried.
1. HEARING NOTICE re: Proposed Ordinance Amending the Enhanced 911 Excise Tax on the Use
of Radio Access Lines; Hearing Scheduled for Monday, September 23, 2002 at 10:35 a.m. in the
Commissioners Chambers
2. AGREEMENT Amendment re: Clarification of Change in the Organizational Structure Governing
Dispatch Employees; JeffComm (Jefferson County 911); Teamsters Union Local 589
3. DEED (2) re: Chimacum Creek Beach Park Acquisition Project No. 5P1429; Jefferson County Public
Works; Washington State Interagency Committee on Outdoor Recreation (JAC) and Washington
State Department of Natural Resources
4. Rural Arterial Program Prospectus for Paradise Bay Road Phase 3; Jefferson County Public Works;
County Road Administration Board
5. Accept Recommendation from City of Port Townsend to Appoint their Representative to the
Conservation Futures Advisory Committee; Barbara McColgan Pastore
Community Development Director, A1 Scaif re: Proposed Tn Area UGA Review of 2002
Comprehensive Plan Amendment; DSEIS issued 8/21/02:A1 Scalf explained that the draft supplemental
ElS has been submitted for the Board to review and it is on the full Comprehensive Plan Amendment docket
of which the Tn Area (or Port Hadlock) UGA is listed on pages 2-71 through 2-91 and appendices 15, 16
and 17 are the areas of the document regarding this Comprehensive Plan amendment. Mark Horton, the
Consultant who worked on this explained that there isn't much new in amendment language. The reason for
that is due to the way this UGA has been constructed. It has been constructed to protect the existing growth
patterns in this area until such time as a sewer system can be implemented. In order to increase density in that
area sewer will have to be addressed in a comprehensive fashion and we are not prepared to do thatnow.
Chairman Wojt asked what the density is in this area now? Al Scalf answered that the density of the
Page 3
Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of September 3, 2002
previously platted area is 4 to 1 (characterized by urban growth.) The density for new development is 1
building per five acres. Commissioner Titterness asked what the population to acre ratio (people per acre) is
at this point?
Chairman Wojt asked what the time frame is for the proposed development to build out to support the
development of a sewer system? Mark Horton then said that the sewer system in this area will develop by a
core frame work due to a large intense development or by commercial development. The residential
development of 4 to 1 is controlled primarily by the State Department of Health standards for septic systems.
The driver to go beyond that lot size (1/4 acre) is failed septic systems or someone desiring to have more
intense development. As he continues the planning that was started out there he is looking at what kind of
core area would support the sewer system at reasonable rates? what kind of uses are appropriate in that area?
what kind of drivers are on the horizon to support that kind of development? what interest is there in the
area? what developments are pending? and what is coming in the future?
Commissioner Titterness noted his perception is that the soils in the Tn Area are fairly course, and we're
probably not going to have classic failure of septic systems there. We do have groundwater as the supply
source for the entire Tn Area. Would this imply a potential problem? Mark Horton answered that the
question is about well head protection zones for existing public supplies in that area. There are very few
domestic wells in that area.
The first concern is for the well head protection zones. The infiltration and recharge areas for those wells
come from the west and south of the Tn Area and the groundwater flow and direction is across and through
the Tn Area with discharge into Puget Sound. Contamination of the aquifer for drinking water is hitting the
aquifer and discharging into Puget Sound. It is not discharging in an area that is being used as a drinking
water source. The second concern is the course soils allowing fairly good flow in that area. The classic
indication of septic contamination of groundwater is high nitrate levels and he doesn't know of any data that
exists showing that in the Tn Area. How much intense development can you have in an area where septic
systems are used? The Health Department has made that determination at 1/4 acre. When you look in the
core area where you want a more commercial environment to support urban uses and a City at some point
then you're talking about a system that can convey larger amounts of sewage for higher development.
The approach used in this Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Mark Horton reported, was not to create a
whole new set of data. We know that things can be accommodated for the populations projected in the
current system with or without a UGA. The UGA allows the process for planning for the more intense
developments with sewer. The Comprehensive Plan Amendments are fairly minor and point to the fact that
the infrastructure is there to support the growth as a UGA over the year term provided the more intense
developments are not allowed to occur without sewer. The Comprehensive Plan Amendments also call for
expenditure of funds to do the planning for sewer. If the planning is not successful or you conclude that it's
not feasible for one reason or another to do, you still have your preventive measures in place where you've
not allowed anything to happen that wouldn't have been allowed under the 1998 Comprehensive Plan, with
a few minor exceptions.
Page 3
Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of September 3, 2002
Chairman Wojt asked if the Development Code will have the kind of protections being discussed? Randy
Kline answered that a new set of development standards will be developed that apply to an urban area.
Things like street setback, etc. would be proposed.
A1 Scalfreported that currently there are 2.5 people per acre in the Tn Area and the 20 year build out will
allow for 3.5 people per acre. Commissioner Titterness asked if there is a definition for urban? Randy Kline
explained that the Hearings Board says that 4 dwelling units per acre is the minimum urban density. This is
pretty much what the land use pattern is in the Tn Area today.
Chairman Wojt asked what the time frame is for the adoption of the Development Code regulation that will
define what can happen in the UGA? The UGA gives the County the option to do the sewer planning, Randy
Kline answered. The debate about the UGA will pale in comparison to the public discussions about the sewer
designs and what type of sewer system will work best in Port Hadlock. The staff is suggesting that the
County enter into a formal discussion with PUD #1 who has the statutory authority to do sewer planning.
Part of that planning is doing a feasibility study which would be done on the Port Hadlock core. This study
would identify the cost per property owner within the boundary so they will know exactly how much they
will be charged before they vote whether or not to approve the sewer system. If they say no to the sewer
system it goes away and potentially the UGA goes away also.
Commissioner Titterness asked if there are other ways to fund a sewer system? There are, Randy Kline
explained and this is why it is hard to come up with numbers. Ground infrastructure improvements for rural
areas seem to be well supported by grants and loan programs.
Chairman Wojt asked what date in 2003 would the Development Code be ready if a UGA was passed on
December 22? Randy Kline said that the Development regulations won't be that hard to develop. They have
a pretty good framework for the rural village center. They will need to sit down with the people in the Tn
Area and ask what they want to see in their Development Code. The sewer planning could be a little more
difficult. If there is not a yes vote on the sewer then they are working on something that won't get
implemented. The course of events is UGA designation, formal sewer planning, a vote of the people
regarding that sewer, and then development regulations. Chairman Wojt asked what the date of the vote on
the sewer would be? Mark Horton said he would guess a couple of years from now. The County needs to
have dialog with the PUD fairly soon. If the PUD is not going to be involved then that responsibility will fall
back on the County.
If the Board determines that it is in the best interest of the County and the Tn Area to have a sewer system, is
it possible to fund it without having to charge the residents? Al Scalf advised that is possible. One way to
fund such a system is to charge the citizens through an LID, another way is not to charge them and get a full
grant from other sources of revenue. It could be done as a capital project in a tier formation. For example
one tier could be the Old Alcohol Plant and they would pay the capital expenditure, or a commercial project
may want to participate in that expenditure. Currently the County wouldn't change the Development
Regulations to allow that until the urban service is available.
Page 3
Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of September 3, 2002
After discussing what types of changes will be made to the development regulations, Mark Horton noted
that there will probably be changes to the Development Code to allow changes in density in the UGA area
which will protect the environment and future options and not violate any of the tenets of GMA. A1 Scalf
added that there is a $75,000 capital cost identified fbr sewer planning. Mark Horton, who has done this type
of planning, developed this figure to be used in the budget. A1 Scalf reported that there is a description of
bringing in the special study and environmental review in the Capital Facilities element of the
Comprehensive Plan.
The Board met in Executive Session with the Deputy Prosecuting Attorney and the County
Administrator from 10:32 to 10:45 a.m. regarding potential litigation.
co a'¥
x"d--4V11c~.ara' Woj~, Chair
(Excused Absence)
Glen Huntingford, Member
Dan Titterness, Member
Page 5