Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM120103 District No.1 Commissioner: Dan Titterness District No.2 Commissioner: Glen Huntingford District No.3 Commissioner: Patrick M. Rodgers County Administrator: David Goldsmith Clerk of the Board: Lorna Delaney MINUTES Week of December 1, 2003 Chairman Dan Titterness called the meeting to order. Commissioner Glen Huntingford and Commissioner Patrick Rodgers were both present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve the minutes of November 17, 2003 as presented. Commissioner Rodgers seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. The Board met in Executive Session with the County Administrator, the Chief Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, the Director of Community Development, and an Associate Planner from 8 :30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. regarding actual litigation. Compliance Strategy; Brinnon Sub-area Plan: The Board came out of Executive Session. Commissioner Huntingford moved to have DCD staff consider a rural industries overlay zone in Brinnon based on RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(iii), to examine the UDC for appropriate changes, to document any factual history, to continue with the appropriate SEP A review as directed by the Growth Management Hearings Board order, and that this compliance strategy be completed and to the Hearings Board before February 19, 2004. Commissioner Rodgers seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BRIEFING SESSION: County Administrator David Goldsmith reported on the following: · In recent years, the Gateway Visitors' Center operations have been overseen by the Gateway Corporation, a non-profit organization. Responsibilities need to be clarified as more business owners become active in the tourism industry in unincorporated Jefferson County. Within the next few weeks, a resolution will come before the Board to reestablish the Tourism Coordinating Council to represent and promote tourism development. The daily functions of the Gateway Visitors' Center will be overseen by the County Administrator and the Lodging Tax Advisory Board will give policy direction. Page 1 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 1,2003 · Last week there was considerable flooding on Oil City Road in the Westend and approximately 15 feet of bridge pilings were torn out. The bridge can be salvaged by crossbracing and will be repaired. · The Sheriffs Office union negotiations for 2004 were discussed at the last JeffCom meeting. The JeffCom Board oversees the E911 Department and employees and they want the County to continue to represent them in the negotiations. They have. also requested a signature line on the contract. · GEMS, the new financial accounting system, will begin running parallel with the current system in mid-February, 2004. It is important to have everything in place in order to ensure the new system's success and it is worth taking extra time to accomplish this. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: The following comments were made: The Fort Worden Advisory Board has renegotiated with the State Parks Department to allow Fort Worden to have free parking in 2004 through September; a request was made for the Board to reconsider their decision not to contribute to the Fort's parking fees; the big box stores being built in Sequim will increase the $105 million in retail leakage that Jefferson County experiences because people who make $8 an hour can't afford to shop in downtown Port Townsend; a regional marketer should be hired to come up with a plan to keep the retail money in the County; Fort Worden's parking fees are the State's responsibility and it was important for the Board to draw the line and focus on County priorities instead; the Navy's proposal to expand their testing range in Dabob Bay and Hood Canal will have adverse effects on the boating community and the tourism industry in South County; and the Dosewallips Road needs to be repaired as soon as possible because it is a major arterial into the National Forest and the Olympic National Park and it is also key to the economy in the area. APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Huntingford moved to delete Item #1 and approve the balance of the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Rodgers seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. 1. DELETED PROCLAMATION re: Recognizing Matt Lyons and his Commitment to Promoting Higher Education in Jefferson County (Approved Later in Minutes) 2. RESOLUTION NO. 73-03 re: Updating Official County Road Log: Adding North Lyter Avenue, North Carnegie Avenue, North Stromberg Avenue, and North Victory Avenue 3. RESOLUTION NO. 74-03 re: Creating County Road Project CR1663, Grade and Resurface Existing Gravel Surface with Bituminous Surface on South Gary Avenue 4. RESOLUTION NO. 75-03 re: Creating County Road Project CR1664, Grade and Resurface Existing Gravel Surface with Bituminous Surface on Law Avenue 5. RESOLUTION NO. 76-03 re: Creating County Road Project CR1665, Grade and Resurface Existing Gravel Surface with Bituminous Surface on South Duquesne Avenue 6. RESOLUTION NO. 77-03 re: Creating County Road Project CR1666, Grade and Resurface Existing Gravel Surface with Bituminous Surface on Cascade Avenue Page 2 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 1,2003 '''~ --"... ... ":'../ ,\\.' 7. Approve Request To Use Two (2) of Jefferson County's Allocated Days for McCurdy Pavilion for High School Graduation; June 10 and 11,2004; Chimacum High School PROCLAMATION re: Recognizing Matt Lyons and His Commitment to Promoting Higher Education in Jefferson County: (Item #1 on the Consent Agenda) The Chair read the proclamation recognizing Matt Lyons' contribution to higher education in Jefferson County. Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve the proclamation. Commissioner Rodgers seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Deliberation and Possible Adoption re: 2003 Comprehensive Plan Amendments: (Public Hearing held on November 24, 2003) Director of Community Development Al Scalf noted that the deadline for public comment on these 5 amendments was November 24 at the close of the public hearing. The final action of the Board is required by the second meeting in December per the UDC. Chairman Titterness reviewed the Comprehensive Plan amendments: MLA03-209 This proposal is to develop an agricultural lands strategy including consideration of land use designations, reconsideration ofUDC regulations and additional unfinished agricultural lands, and planning tasks as described in the Comprehensive Plan. The recommendation by staff and the Planning Commission is to adopt the amendment. Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve MLA03-209. Commissioner Rodgers seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. MLA03-210 This amendment proposes the addition of narrative and policy language to the Comprehensive Plan and the UDC related to compliance with the Growth Management Hearings Board order concerning groundwater protection against seawater intrusion. The recommendation by staff and the Planning Commission is to adopt the amendment. Commissioner Rodgers moved to adopt MLA03-210. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. MLA03-182 This amendment is a Comprehensive Plan land use map redesigation for approximately 5 acres from rural residential, I dwelling unit per 5 acres, to Port Hadlock Rural Village Center commercial district. It was submitted by the Northwest School of Wooden Boat Building. The recommendation from staff and the Planning Commission is to approve this amendment. Page 3 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 1,2003 "'.~.. W; " Chairman Titterness read the following questions for the Board to answer regarding MLA03-182: Do any of the Commissioners have an interest in this property or issue? Commissioner Huntingford: No. Commissioner Rodgers: No. Chairman Titterness: No. Do any of you stand to gain or lose any financial benefit as a result of the outcome of this meeting? Commissioner Huntingford: No. Commissioner Rodgers: No. Chairman Titterness: No. Can you hear and consider this in a fair and objective manner? Commissioner Huntingford: Yes. Commissioner Rodgers: Yes. Chairman Titterness: Yes. Has any member of the Board engaged in communication outside this meeting with opponents or proponents on the issue to be heard? Commissioner Huntingford: No. Commissioner Rodgers: No. Chairman Titterness: No. Do you agree that the decision on each of these Comprehensive Plan Amendments will be based solely on the established record and you will be comparing that established record to the applicable criteria listed in the Comprehensive Plan? Commissioner Huntingford: Yes. Commissioner Rodgers: Yes. Chairman Titterness: Yes. Now, to the audience, does anyone object to the participation of any of the County Commissioners in this proceeding? There was no comment from the audience. Commissioner Huntingford asked if this property would have been included in the Port HadlocklIrondale UGA designation? Al Scalf replied that it is currently in the UGA external boundary but the applicant wanted to expedite the process. Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve MLA03-182. Commissioner Rodgers seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. MLA03-189 This is a proposed Comprehensive Plan land use map redesignation amendment for approximately 40 acres from rural residential, 1 dwelling unit per 20 acres, to rural residential, 1 dwelling per 10 acres. It was submitted by ANE Forests ofPuget Sound. Chairman Titterness read the following questions for the Board to answer regarding MLA03-189: Do any of the Commissioners have an interest in this property or issue? Commissioner Huntingford: No. Commissioner Rodgers: No. Chairman Titterness: No. Page 4 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 1,2003 , " Do any of you stand to gain or lose any financial benefit as a result of the outcome of this meeting? Commissioner Huntingford: No. Commissioner Rodgers: No. Chairman Titterness: No. Can you hear and consider this in a fair and objective manner? Commissioner Huntingford: Yes. Commissioner Rodgers: Yes. Chairman Titterness: Yes. Has any member of the Board engaged in communication outside this meeting with opponents or proponents on the issue to be heard? Commissioner Huntingford: No. Commissioner Rodgers: No. Chairman Titterness: No. Do you agree that the decision on each of these Comprehensive Plan Amendments will be based solely on the established record and you will be comparing that established record to the applicable criteria listed in the Comprehensive Plan? Commissioner Huntingford: Yes. Commissioner Rodgers: Yes. Chairman Titterness: Yes. Now, to the audience, does anyone object to the participation of any of the County Commissioners in this proceeding? There was no comment from the audience. Commissioner Huntingford asked staff to read the 2 conditions that were added during the public process. Josh Peters stated that 1) land division must occur through the Planned Rural Residential Development (PRRD) process, including the provision that 75% of the 40 acres be reserved in open space; and, 2) as part of fulfilling the open space in the PRRD land division process, the entire portion of the area west ofSR19 will be reserved as open space. Commissioner Rodgers moved to approve MLA03-189 with the 2 conditions based on the Planning Commission recommendation dated October 15,2003. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. MLA03-225 This Comprehensive Plan amendment was approved by the Board, and later in the meeting, it was brought to their attention that it had been withdrawn by the proponent. The vote was rescinded. MLA03-231 This amendment is a request for a Comprehensive Plan Landuse Map redesignation of approximately 36 acres from a rural residential district to a Mineral Resource Land (MRL) overlay district. It was submitted by the Phillips Family. Chairman Titterness read the following questions for the Board to answer regarding MLA03-231: Do any of the Commissioners have an interest in this property or issue? Commissioner Huntingford: No. Commissioner Rodgers: No. Chairman Titterness: No. Page 5 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 1,2003 "-,,, 'f'",~ ~ Do any of you stand to gain or lose any financial benefit as a result of the outcome of this meeting? Commissioner Huntingford: No. Commissioner Rodgers: No. Chairman Titterness: No. Can you hear and consider this in a fair and objective manner? Commissioner Huntingford: Yes. Commissioner Rodgers: Yes. Chairman Titterness: Yes. Has any member of the Board engaged in communication outside this meeting with opponents or proponents on the issue to be heard? If so, that member must place on the record the substance of any such communication so that other interested parties may have the right to rebut the substance of the communication. Commissioner Rodgers: Yes. Mike Whittaker telephoned him and asked ifhe had any questions about the information that was submitted. Chairman Titterness: Yes. Mike Whittaker and some of his associates met with him at the Courthouse to present concerns that they had regarding this issue. None of those concerns went beyond what was presented in the public testimony and they are already part of the public record. Commissioner Huntingford: Yes. He visited the Whittaker's home and went over the same issues that were presented in the public testimony. He also talked with Ron Nowak a few times and has talked with the Phillips. There was nothing out of the ordinary or new for the public record. Do you agree that the decision on each of these Comprehensive Plan Amendments will be based solely on the established record and you will be comparing that established record to the applicable criteria listed in the Comprehensive Plan? Commissioner HuntingJord: Yes. Commissioner Rodgers: Yes. Chairman Titterness: Yes. Now, to the audience, does anyone object to the participation of any of the County Commissioners in this proceeding? There was no comment from the audience. Chairman Titterness stated that the staff and Planning Commission recommendation is to approve the amendment with 5 conditions. Commissioner Huntingford asked that the conditions be read. Josh Peters read the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission and staff: 1) That a boundary line adjustment process is required involving the combination of parcels 702 224 011 and 702 224 012 and the northeast corner of702 224 003, such that a parcel is created equivalent to 5 acres in order to fulfill the UDC criterion that an MRL overlay be surrounded by parcels no smaller than 5 acres in size on 100% of its perimeter; 2) That a restrictive covenant is required for parcels 702 224 023, 024, 025, 026, 003 and 010 for the purpose of providing that each and every parcel in the MRL overlay be at least 10 acres in size; 3) Submittal ofa proposed reclamation plan to the State Department of Natural Resources that encompasses the entire operation including the current quarry site shall be concurrent with submittal of a mineral resource extraction/storm water management land use permit with the County; Page 6 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 1,2003 " 4) Mineral extraction shall not occur on the new MRL overlay district without a reclamation plan approved by the DNR or an updated Sand and Gravel General Permit from the State Department of Ecology if deemed necessary by that agency; 5) Regarding issuance of County mineral resource extraction/stormwater management permits for the new MRL overlay district, should that occur, the UDC conditions for mineral extraction, mining, quarry, and reclamation shall apply to the full Penny Creek operation, including the existing operation's site and the area previously under County ownership, to protect the general health, safety, and welfare of the public. The conditions address, among other issues, hours of operation, noise, and performance standards, and Best Management Practices for mining and quarrying within designated susceptible aquifer recharge areas. Permit application review may result in additional conditions. David Alvarez noted that he has been working with the Phillips' attorney on the restrictive covenant language in Condition #2 and it is acceptable to him. Commissioner Huntingford stated that the neighbors brought several issues to the Board and he asked how they will be addressed? Will implementing the Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the quarry be enough to address the neighbors concerns? He asked staff to list the conditions for the mining operation in writing and explain how they will be enforced. Chairman Titterness noted that the UDC outlines the County's regulations, but limited staff resources have made it difficult to address complaints in a thorough manner. A Code Compliance Officer is being hired strictly to investigate complaints and part of that job will be following through and resolving issues. Commissioner Huntingford stated that the quarry owners have said that they will give up the grandfathered status and come under the UDC regulations if the expanded MRL designation is approved. However, they have asked for extended hours of operation to load trucks from 6 a.m. to 7 a.m. on weekdays and 8 a.m. to noon on Saturdays. Chairman Titterness pointed out that in the UDC operating hours for quarries are from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Friday. Josh Peters explained that the noise policy is based on the State WAC which the County adopted in the UDC. The State regulation for mineral extraction hours is fTom 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. seven days a week, therefore the County's policy is actually more restrictive. The noise level allowed for off hours is 45 decibels and if loading trucks does not exceed this level, it isn't a problem. However, the quarry owners are required to submit a noise report from the closest receiving objective third party to prove that they are not exceeding 45 decibels. Commissioner Rodgers asked ifthe operating hours are different under the grandfathered status? Associate Planner Greg Ballard explained that the existing operation of 19.3 acres went through the MRL designation process in 1996. The criteria stated that mineral extraction and primary processing was a permitted use. Under the current UDC, the property is zoned rural residential, 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres and 1 dwelling unit per 20 acres. The current MRL overlay is a "yes" use under the UDC. The proposal is to add 31 acres north ofthe existing MRL, causing mineral extraction in the area to go from a conditional use to a "yes" use for the new area. The hours of operation under the UDC are the same whether there is an MRL designation Page 7 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 1,2003 ~1 ;" or not. If the MRL district is not approved, the quarry is limited to 1 0 acres of disturbed area. There are protections for properties under an MRL designation. Under the diminishing assets principle, the stockpiles and scaling station on Parcels 11 and 12 can remain until the quarry is mined out. The Hearing Examiner's decision in 1996 stated that it wasn't anticipated that the quarry would be enlarged beyond the current limits. Greg Ballard suggested that those activities on Parcels 11 and 12 may need to be moved ifthe MRL designation is expanded. David Alvarez added that he would have to research the case law to see if the County can apply the UDC hours of operation to the grand fathered use. Josh Peters stated that this issue has come up before with similar operations and the County's approach has been that for health, safety and welfare, the UDC applies to existing operations, especially those with critical areas. If operations want to expand, they must apply for a permit and it is an opportunity to clarify the conditions. Commissioner Huntingford asked about the stormwater issue for the current operation? Josh Peters stated that the quarry owners have a Sand and Gravel permit with the State DOE and they need to comply with the State's rules. Commissioner Huntingford asked when the reclamation plan for the site will be submitted? Al Scalf stated that DNR is responsible for approval of the reclamation plan and it is not the County's jurisdiction. Josh Peters stated that DNR has told the County that Penny Creek Quarry is out of compliance with the Surface Mining Act, but they expect the operation to come into compliance as a whole unit. The County can make the reclamation plan a condition ofthe permit and it is currently one ofthe proposed conditions for the MRL designation. If a reclamation plan is not submitted, the MRL designation on the expanded area could be rescinded. The DNR has said that it will be difficult for them to shut the quarry down if a plan is not submitted. Al Scalf reviewed the UDC process for coming into voluntary compliance. Chairman Titterness stated that there is certain criteria for the Comprehensive Plan amendment to meet the MRL designation. The other issues are separate. Commissioner Huntingford pointed out that most of the neighbors don't want to see the quarry go out of business. It is his understanding that they want to make sure any expansion ofthe quarry doesn't increase the noise and adverse impacts, that the quarry owners comply with the regulations, and that the County addresses and follows through on any complaints. Commissioner Rodgers noted that the blasts and the crushing equipment probably won't get louder. The noise level at the operation won't change, but the duration may. He said that different people perceive the impacts differently as was noted in the public testimony. The noise from the highway can be very loud at times; and there is more traffic and activity in that area during the hours of operation allowed in the UDC. Commissioner Huntingford mentioned adding another condition that the quarry will come under the UDC regulations when the expanded MRL designation is approved. Page 8 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 1, 2003 ~.".".~..'.. (,.:5) :~¿; ~ Greg Ballard quoted the UDC section regarding the expansion of a mining operation. If offsite impacts are increased such as noise migration, dust, or traffic, a conditional use permit is required. When the quarry owners apply for a stormwater permit, staff will ask about their operation and whether the expansion will increase offsite impacts. The Administrator can require a conditional use permit which would go to public hearing. Al Scalf added that there are currently pre-existing non-conforming activities at the operation including the scale shack, the stockpiles, and the sorter. The quarry owners could be required to move those into a conforming area of the mining operation. Commissioner Huntingord asked if that can be considered as a condition of the MRL designation? David Alvarez answered that there were similar conditions with the Fred Hill Materials MRL designation. Josh Peters explained that upon application to expand the operation into the new area, the conditions would apply. Commissioner Rodgers stated that he does not feel it is appropriate to add conditions on the MRL designation because the future plans for the operation are unknown. Commissioner Rodgers moved to approve MLA03-231 with the 5 conditions as proposed. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion and suggested a 6th condition to have the operation come into compliance with the current UDC regulations and change the hours of operation on approval of the MRL designation. (There was no concurrance for this condition.) Commissioner Huntingford amended the motion to approve MLA03-231 and include a Condition #6 that the sorting and stockpiling ofthe large rock be moved to the other side of Penny Creek Road. Commissioner Rodgers stated that it is his understanding that the majority ofthe complaints by neighbors are about operating noise outside ofthe conforming hours. It has been agreed that the quarry will operate within the UDC hours and there will be a Code Compliance Officer to make sure that this occurs. He questioned the need for this new Condition #6? Chairman Titterness stated that Commissioner Huntingford's amendment is meant to alleviate some of the neighbor's issues. He reviewed the MRL criteria and stated that he feels Condition #6 moves compliance and operations toward the intent. He supports Commissioner Huntingford's motion. Commissioner Rodgers explained that it is his understanding that the MRL designation will not increase the impacts on the neighbors if the quarry owners agree with the hours of operation. The standard allows certain activity and he feels that the condition is making the standard more difficult than the MRL criteria. After a discussion about other options for Condition #6, Commissioner Rodgers withdrew his motion. Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve MLA03-231, the MRL designation with the 5 conditions as recommended by staff and an additional Condition #6 that sorting, stockpiling and loading of materials south of Penny Creek Road be moved into the MRL. Page 9 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December I, 2003 á.';"'-'~' ~~: ~ Commissioner Rodgers pointed out that this proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment has gone through a lot of public process, including Planning Commission review, and it was never advocated that those operations be moved. He is not sure ifthe interest of the whole community is being served by this additional condition. Josh Peters explained that the original proposal included Parcels 11 and 12 as part of the MRL designation. During the process, the non-conforming parcels were removed. In conversations with the quarry owners, the moving of the sorter has been discussed. Chairman Titterness seconded the motion. The Chair called for a vote on the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Warren Steurer, Parks and Recreation Department re: 2004 Quilcene Community Center Park Project: Warren Steurer explained that the outdoor sport court at the Qui1cene Community Center is in disrepair and will probably require a new asphalt overlay. The plan is to redesign it to keep one tennis court and add an area for basketball and skating. Outdoor lighting has also been proposed. Some of the playground equipment also needs to be replaced. Other possible improvements at the park include thinning the forest to help bring in light, and adding interpretive trails, a group camp area, and an outdoor volleyball court. Minor improvements also need to be done to the shelter, the cook stove, and the entrance sign. The estimated cost is between $65,000 and $130,000 depending on the extent ofthe work and how much help they can get from the community. There is $60,000 in the Parks Improvement budget to begin this project. MEETING ADJQURNED SEAL: .. , ' \ ¡' .. ~ l, ,i JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS I ,. . JØP~ " .. " .. . . .' " .. Dan Titterness, Chair \ .' '. ) '.. . ' ,.., ATTEST: %~.( 7Î(jffÆ/~ CIne ~lie Matthes, CMC Deputy Clerk of the Board Page 10