Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM061295 MINUTES WEEK OF JUNE 12,1995 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Glen Huntingford. Commissioners Robert l-Iinton and Richard Wojt were both present. COMMISSIONERS' BRIEFING SESSION Bob Minty, Emergency Services Coordinator re: Special Event Permit; Olympic Music Festival; June 24 through September 3,1995: Bob Minty reported that all requirements have been met for this special event permit. Commissioner Hinton moved to approve the special event permit as submitted for the Olympic Music Festival. Commissioner Wojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. The Board interviewed Mike Matthews and Donald Corey who are interested in serving on the Dosewallips Flood Control District Board. GMA Update: Gary Rowe gave each Commissioner their own copy of the Discussion Draft of the Comprehensive Plan. He reported that the public copies will be available later today. He then reviewed the schedule of meetings for the week. The discussion turned to the upcoming public hearings on GMA ordinances, the Charter for the Jefferson County Water Resources Council, and WUCC meeting staffing and public notification concerns for those meetings. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: The following items were discussed: A meeting between Guy Rudolph, Gary Rowe and Chairman Huntingford regarding the Tri Area community plan; the recent meeting of the Tri Area Community Plan steering committee and questions raised by that meeting; the appeals before the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board regarding the Tri Area and the Port Ludlow JUGA; and the use of a lower population figure for planning purposes. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Wojt moved to approve the minutes of May 22 and 30, 1995 as submitted. Commissioner Hinton seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. VOL 21 rAŒ720 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of June 12, 1995 IIa Mikkelsen, Treasurer re: Update on Pioneer Building: Treasurer Ila Mikkelsen submitted and read (see microfilm record) a memo which outlined procedures for selling the Pioneer Building. This recommendation came from a consensus of the participants of a meeting to discuss the best way to sell the building. She asked that the Board approve the recommended procedure. Commissioner Hinton stated that he would like to try a public auction again. Ila Mikkelsen answered that she would not want to run an auction for just one property. The Board postponed any action on this recommendation until they have more time to review it. Later that Day: Commissioner Hinton asked what percentage is paid to Stokes Auction for their services? Ila Mikkelsen answered that she doesn't know the exact percentage without looking at the contract, but it is reasonable on real property. He asked ifthe Treasurer could do an auction in July? The RCW has specific time lines that must be met which would make it hard to do by July, Ila Mikkelsen explained. Prosecuting Attorney Paul McIlrath said that he needs to do more research on the sale of this building, whether the County can offer a minimum bid that is below the appraised value, and the process which is required to sell it. He asked that their office be allowed to review whatever process the Treasurer is directed to proceed with. Commissioner Hinton recommended that the Treasurer hold an auction at their earliest convenience. The Board concurred that Paul McIlrath provide more information on this matter at their June 19, 1995 meeting. APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Hinton moved to delete item lOon the Consent Agenda and to approve the balance of the items as submitted. Commissioner W ojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. 1. RESOLUTION NO. 48-95 re: Authorizing Funding Assistance for an Outdoor Recreation or Habitat Conservation Project; State Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation of the Washington Wildlife Recreation Program 2. RESOLUTION NO. 49-95 re: Order Vacating Portions of a Certain Alley in the Plat of Hessian Garden Tracts; Wallace J. Bowman, Petitioner 3. HEARING NOTICE re: Interim Agricultural Lands Ordinance No. 08-0525-95; Hearing set for Monday, June 26, 1995 at 3:00 p.m. 4. HEARING NOTICE re: Interim Mineral Lands Ordinance No. 09-0525-95; Hearing set for Monday, June 26, 1995 at 3:00 p.m. 5. HEARING NOTICE re: Amendment to the Jefferson County Camping and Park Lands Ordinance No. 3-83; Addition to Section 9, Noises and Other Nuisances; Hearing Set for Monday, June 26, 1995 at 11: 15 a.m. 6. Application for Assistance rrom the Veteran's Relief Fund; VFW Post #3213 for $211.72 7. Appoint Senior Representative to the Port Townsend Community Center Advisory Board; Unexpired Term Ending March 16, 1996; William Barth 8. AGREEMENT, Supplement No.2 re: Engineering Services; Road Project #CRI148; Time Extension for Completion of Right of Way and Existing Condition Plans; Paradise Bay Road; MAP, Ltd. 9. Approval of Road Project Design and Plans, #CRI205; Improvements to 6th Avenue; Tillman Engineering , VOL 21 rAG~ 721 PAGE: 2 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of June 12, 1995 10. DELETE Approval of Organizational Charter; Jefferson County Water Resources Council; Management of Water Resources in East Jefferson County; CH2M Hill BUSINESS FROM COUNTY DEPARTMENTS: PLANNING AND PERMIT CENTER Decision re: Appeal of Conditional Use Application; to Construct a Cellular Communication Facility; Building and Steel Tower with Antennas; Located on Camelot Road, Quilcene; U.S. West New Vector Group (Continued from June 5,1995): Associate Planner Jerry Smith explained that a question was raised by the Board about whether alternative sites C and D can be considered by the Board because they were not reviewed by the Hearing Examiner. The Prosecuting Attorney submitted the results of their review to the Board. Commissioner Wojt moved to remand this project back to the Hearing Examiner for possible consideration of alternative locations. Chairman Huntingford seconded the motion. Commissioner Wojt and Chairman Huntingford voted for the motion. Commissioner Hinton abstained rrom voting. The motion carried. Request for Fee Waiver; Shoreline Permit Exemption Application, $50.00; Herbert F. Beck: Associate Planner Dennis Thomason reported that Mr. Beck is requesting a waiver of the fee for a shoreline permit exemption application. The Planning Department staff recommends that the fee waiver be denied. Herb Beck pointed out that after the winter storms he spent his own money to clear a logjam out of the river which benefited public agencies (the County) and everyone along the river. He then reviewed a series of pictures showing the condition of the river and the work that needs to be done. Chairman Huntingford stated that he has been in the area and reviewed the damage done by the winter storms. He noted that he feels that Mr. Beck's removal of the gravel bar will not provide any relief downstream because there are other places in the area where the stream can break through and cause damage. Mr. Beck estimated that the work he plans to do will cost approximately $1,100.00. He believes the work will take the strain off the County road in the future because it will remove some of the material from the stream bed. He wants to do this removal as soon as possible so that the area has a chance to settle and harden before the winter storms. Chairman Huntingford said that he feels that there is other work that needs to be done in this area. Commissioner Wojt stated that while this project does have benefit for the County and the people who live along the river, the Board has, in the past made a commitment that permitting must pay for itself. If this permit fee is waived it would set a precedent for waiver of fees for others in the future. Chairman Huntingford noted that there needs to be coordination of the work done in this area so that what one person does on their property doesn't impact another person in the same area. Commissioner W ojt noted that in the past the County has held the permit in this type of situation. Commissioner Hinton asked if the Public Works Department will be doing a gravel removal project in this area? The staff present didn't know what was planned by the Public Works Department. Mr. Beck stated that he feels this project will benefit the County and the State Department ofPisheries as well as his property. Commissioner Hinton recommended that this request be tabled until it can be determined if a project will be done by the Public Works Department in this area that could coordinate with the work planned by Mr. Beck. Mr. Beck stated that he would like to get started because there is only a certain time frame for this work this year. The Board will discuss the plans for work in the river with the Public Works Department this week and then let Mr. Beck know their decision. Request for Administrative Waiver from Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance, Subsection 5.212 "Resubdivision;" Vern and Candy Garrison: Assistant Planner Michelle Grewell reported that a separate tax number was given to a portion of this property for "mortgage purposes" \JOL 21 Í'~F722 PAGE: 3 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of June 12, 1995 only. Chairman Huntingford asked what would happen if the bank had to foreclose on a parcel like this? Michelle Grewell answered that the banks have had to go through the subdivision process in this type of case. Commissioner Hinton moved to deny the waiver of the subdivision ordinance. Commissioner W ojt seconded the motion. He asked why this waiver should be denied? Commissioner Hinton explained that this subdivision was not ordered by the Court and he doesn't feel the County has any reason to grant this subdivision without going through the process. Commissioner Wojt asked the difference between going through the subdivision process and doing a "resubdivision?" Michelle Grewell answered that the basic difference between the two processes is the fee. The Chairman called for the question. All three Board members voted for the motion. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT The Board interviewed Mari Phillips who is interested in serving on the Quilcene Flood Control District Board and at the conclusion of that interview they met in Executive Session with the Prosecuting Attorney and the Public Works Department regarding litigation. The interviews of individuals interested in serving on the Dosewallips Flood Control District Board continued with the following people being interviewed: Charles Fox, Stan Johnson and Ted Corey. LETTER OF INTENT: Acquisition of Property; Big Quilcene River Flood Control Project: Prosecuting Attorney David Skeen reported that pursuant to the agreement for this project it is important that a letter of intent be submitted to Mr. Shahda regarding acquisition of his property. He suggested that the Board approve a letter of intent which will include a deposit amount, to be determined by the Board, and wording to the effect that the offer would be contingent on the County's right to make final arrangements no later than a specific date. In return for the letter of intent, the County would have access, provided by a road to be constructed during the summer months, on to the dike area north of the river so that work, according to the agreement, can be completed. Commissioner W ojt moved to send a Letter of Intent to Michael Shahda offering him a 5%, non- refundable, deposit on a purchase price of$238,500.00, for his property at the mouth of the Quilcene River. The County will make a final election to purchase the property no later than September 15, 1995. Commissioner Hinton seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. HEARING re: Proposed Amendments to Sections 3~ 7~ 11 and 13 (Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas) of the Jefferson County Interim Critical Areas Ordinance #05-0509-94: The Chairman opened the public hearing. Public Services Director Gary Rowe reported that the ordinance amendments were published on May 31,1995 and some of the strikeouts were deleted that should have been left in. The Prosecuting Attorney has reviewed the advertised ordinance and found it to be adequate for the purpose of public notice and recommends that the Board proceed with the public hearing. Gary Rowe noted that this hearing is on the draft ordinance with changes made as a result of testimony presented at the previous hearing. A comment letter was received from the City of Port Townsend and Gary Rowe suggested that the letter be made part of the record ofthis hearing. Environmental Health Director Larry Fay submitted and reviewed a memo (dated June 7, 1995) to the Board regarding the Best Management Practices (BMP's.) The memo breaks the issue into two areas of discussion: 1) On-site sewage BMP's, and 2) Sea water intrusion BMP's. He noted that the on-site sewage BMP's that are recommended in the critical aquifer recharge areas would require installation of lined intermittent sand filters with shallow pressure or gravity drainfields. The on-site sewage provisions will be relatively easy to implement. It will require some workshop training sessions with the designers and engineers to explain the ordinance requirements. They will be required to review the VOL 21 rAG~723 PAGE: 4 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of June 12, 1995 Critical Aquifer Recharge Area maps and then, if the property they are dealing with is in such an area, they will have to comply with specific design requirements. The sea water intrusion BMP's remain to be developed. There is a six month time frame in the ordinance for the development of these BMP's. The tasks for the Health Department during the first six months after the ordinance is passed are: I) Develop the methodology for determining what areas are vulnerable to sea water intrusion, 2) Develop a system for gathering the baseline information on all new wells, 3) Prepare initial delineation of susceptible areas based on existing well data, and 4) develop the Best Management Practices. After the initial six months, additional susceptible areas will need to be assessed, new information that's coming in will be tracked to identify potential new susceptible areas, and then follow up sampling of the potentially susceptible areas will be done to determine if they should be delineated as susceptible areas. Once a delineation of susceptibility is made for an area, then a vicinity wide assessment must be done to determine the extent of the sea water intrusion and if the condition supports a need, the vulnerable area must be mapped, long term water quality monitoring will need to be established. Once the vulnerable areas have been delineated, mapped, and the BMP's have been established, those BMP's will become conditions of any subsequent permit applied for within a vulnerable area. The draft BMP's for sea water intrusion were developed from recommendations in the State Department of Ecology Bulletin 59 (Sea Water Intrusion ReDort for Marrowstone Island) He noted that rules and policies developed to implement the Critical Areas Ordinance, per Chapter 4 of the Ordinance, will require review by the Planning Commission and approval, modification or rejection by the Board. Chairman Huntingford questioned the suggested BMP which requires retrofit to low volume fixtures for all new construction, when remodeling is done,and when change of ownership occurs. Larry Fay answered that it is a recommendation in the DOE Bulletin 59, which he used as a model for the draft BMP's. Some of these recommendations may not be appropriate for Jefferson County. He feels that is a point for discussion. Chairman Huntingford stated that he feels it would be difficult to implement these regulations on change of ownership. Larry Fay explained that he put them together and they have not been through any process for review and comment which is required for this type of regulation. Chairman Huntingford asked if the low threshold for sea water intrusion being set by the County will cause a problem for people trying to sell their houses because it may impact the value of these properties? Larry Fay reported that he had not considered what impact this may have on property value. Gary Rowe advised that the County has to assure that the water supply is adequate, but adequacy is not what is being monitored with this regulation. The County, through these regulations, is trying to monitor, manage and identify water situations to determine if there is a water quality problem. Water supply adequacy is a function of volume and whether the water meets drinking water standards. There is a distinction between assuring adequacy and water quality assurance. The purpose of the thresholds and monitoring program are to be a step ahead of water quality degradation. John Swallow asked about the wording in a portion of the draft BMP's. Larry Fay reported that he used a Department of Ecology report as a starting point for drafting these BMP's. The recommendations in that report may not be adequate as regulations. Carol Swallow, asked what the time frame is for the development of the BMP's for on site sewage? Larry Fay stated that for sea water intrusion the time frame is 6 months, but for on site septic systems the BMP's can be done sooner. Collette Kostelec, CH2M Hill representing the City of Port Townsend, stated the City of Port Townsend is asking that their May 24, 1995 letter be added to the record of this hearing. Chairman Huntingford asked her to review the three points made in that letter. She reviewed the points as follows: 1) Refers to the change made to densities that would trigger vulnerable aquifer recharge area designation. The trigger had been areas with a density greater than 1 unit per 3 acres. It was changed to one unit per 2 1/2 acres. The City is asking that the wording be changed to say "greater than or equal to" one unit per 2 1/2 VOL 21 r~G; 724 PAGE: 5 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of June 12, 1995 acres which would then include 2 1/2 acre parcels in that designation, 2) A change was made in relation to designating susceptible and vulnerable sea water intrusion areas to require more than one well in an area to trigger such a designation. The City has asked that if the area is serviced by one Group A or Group B well and if that well showed the triggering chloride levels it would be sufficient to designate the area as susceptible or vulnerable, and 3) Return language for the on-site disposal regulations to what it was in the February 24, 1995 draft. The City's concern is that the well head protection areas which were automatically programmed under the previous on-site sewage disposal protection standards have been limited with the new language to only those areas that are currently mapped as susceptible. This puts a great burden on the maps being correct in those critical areas. The City feels those areas are critical enough to warrant designation as vulnerable aquifer recharge areas in and of themselves. She then demonstrated on the susceptibility map what this change would mean. Gary Rowe explained that in the initial draft of the ordinance there was language that said that BMP's would apply to well head protection areas. Based on testimony at the previous hearing the Board changed that wording to say that BMP's would not apply in well head protection areas that are not geologically susceptible or vulnerable. Collette Kostelec added that it is based on the current susceptibility mapping which puts a great burden on the maps being correct. Bruce Tillman, stated that the designation of the critical aquifer recharge areas (especially in the area of the Sparling and Kiveley wells) is based on the DNR report. This DNR report was done by a man named Birdseye in 1976 and was based on three wells (Sparling, Kiveley and the City of Port Townsend well.) Since that report was done there have been additional wells drilled in that area. The Birdseye report says that the zone, on which the critical aquifer recharge area is based, is in an "inferred contact" area based on information from three wells. No one really knows what the soil looks like in that area. He feels that there is a lot of regulation being based on very little information. If Birdseye's report is based on information of inferred contact from a report done in 1964, which he believes is the case, then the County is basing the critical aquifer recharge area report on information that is 30 years old. Updated information needs to be developed for this designation. Guy Rudolph asked if anyone knew what information Mark Edding used for his report? Gary Rowe answered that the same information was used in his report. Don Cote stated that Mark Edding's study was based on well logs. Mr. Cote than asked why the five or six studies that have been done on water in Jefferson County haven't been brought together, compared, and used? He wanted to know why this information isn't brought together before this designation is done? He noted further that roof water catchment systems are not addressed in this ordinance. This is a major source of water that isn't being addressed. He asked why Marrowstone Island is included totally in the vulnerable section of this ordinance? The sole source aquifer designation is strictly a federal designation which is for getting federal funding. Peter Schwartman reported that he works for Mark Edding. He clarified that Mark Edding used information from well logs of wells in every square mile of the area. He agreed that sole source aquifer designation is a federal designation that has to do with funding requirement for projects, and shouldn't change the qualifications for status in this regulation. Dick Broders, Discovery Bay, stated that regulations imposed at the time of change of ownership, he feels, may be considered a regulatory taking. He then reviewed two, of possibly many, strange things that have happened with the maps for this ordinance which point out that the maps are not reality. There are problem areas all over the County. He is concerned that extra costs for protection be put on for a good reason. He doesn't feel the information is available or if it is available it hasn't been put together in a usable form. Wendy Wrinkle, representing the Shine Community Action Council (SCAC), requested that all oral and written comments provided by representatives of the Shine Community Action Council during the CARA workshop process and all public hearings and Planning Commission hearings relative to that process be included as part of their testimony in this hearing. The SCAC agrees with the proposed amendments to Section 7.20 and 7.30, with the exception of the addition of "and quantity" to Section VOL 21 rAG~ 725 PAGE: 6 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of June 12, 1995 7.20, number 2, line 32 and "or quantity, "to Section 7.30, line 20. The other proposed amendments, the SCAC feels, greatly compromise the ability to uphold the items set forth in the purpose section (Section 7.20) of the ordinance. The SCAC supports the use of documented thresholds set by professional experts, consultants and State agencies. This information was replaced in the ordinance on the advice of Planning Commission members and PRA members with blatant financial interests in avoiding regulation. The low threshold for chloride levels is low for cutting off the use of a water source, but it is not low for protecting degradation. The SCAC requests that the county get legal advise on the County's financial responsibility if the critical aquifer recharge areas are not protected, especially from salt water intrusion. There is at this time in Shine, two water systems (Bywater Bay and Bridgehaven) that are in problem situations. A water system was developed illegally in the Bywater Bay area. The Bridgehaven system has expanded to serve water to additional areas outside of their original service area. That system had salt water intrusion levels above the standards being set in this ordinance, at the time that expansion occurred. The Shine PUD is looking at a water system for the people of Shine. The cost to bring water to the people of Shine who have salt water in their wells is $6,000 to $9,000 per household. There are such situations in Mats Mats, Quilcene, and Discovery Bay which are areas that are outside of water service areas, where no research has been done on public water availability. Chairman Huntingford asked if the State takes responsibility to set low protection standards and what is their liability? Wendy Wrinkle stated that the Board would have to talk with the State about that. Chairman Huntingford noted that the State exempts single family residences from their water regulations. Steve Hayden, representing the Olympic Environmental Council, said that the process of reducing the thresholds, that the Planning Commission went through, was totally arbitrary. There was no evidence or science produced to substantiate the numbers in the ordinance. Once an area is degraded it is expensive to fix again. An area designated as susceptible may well reduce the property values in that area. It does no one any good to pretend that salt water intrusion is not happening, or that it's not a problem until it gets over 50 parts per liter. Chairman Huntingford noted that there have been several letters of comment submitted, from reliable sources, which have given good information on why those limits should be raised to 50 or 75 mg/liter. Mr. Hayden urged the Board to err on the side of caution for the future and not on the side of current market value of properties. Peter Schwartman, Pacific Groundwater Group, stated that 50 mg per liter is a reasonable limit for the cut off for screening for salt water intrusion. Between 50 to 100 has been used as a threshold by the USGS. It has been their experience that there are background concentrations in some area of low groundwater development near coastlines that can get chloride rrom saltation through the air of 25 mg/liter, and that limit may be too conservative. Carol Swallow asked what the process is now? Hearing no further oral testimony the Chairman closed the public hearing. He reported that written testimony will be accepted until 5 p.m. today. The Board will meet again to discuss this proposed ordinance at 10:30 a.m. tomorrow. Distribution Cost of the Comprehensive Plan Draft: Commissioner Hinton moved that the full cost of reproduction of the Comprehensive Plan draft will be charged for copies of the draft. Commissioner W ojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. VOL 21 ?f,;.726 PAGE: 7 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of June 12, 1995 Interviews continued of the following individuals interested in serving on the Quilcene Flood Control District Board: Donald Ward, Lorna Ward, Cindy Corey, and Don Lee. The meeting was recessed at the end ofthe scheduled interviews and reconvened on Tuesday morning at 9:00 a.m. All three Board members were present to continue interviewing persons interested in serving on the Quilcene and Dosewallips Flood Control District Board (Michael R. Kreutzer, Quilcene; Diane Hearst, Quilcene; Wade Johnston, Dosewallips, and Tom McClanahan, Quilcene.) Letters (2) of Support to Members of the US House of Representatives for Increase in the PILT (Payment in Lieu of Taxes) Program and Letter to State Commissioner of Public Lands re: Jobs for the Environment Funding: Commissioner Wojt moved to approve and sign the letters to members of the House and Senate Appropriations Committee in support of an increase in PIL T Program payments and a letter to the State Commissioner of Public Lands urging immediate grant payments for the '95/'96 Jobs for the Environment program. Commissioner Hinton seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Adoption ofthe Proposed Amendments to Sections 3, 7,11 and 13 (Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas) ofthe Jefferson County Interim Critical Areas Ordinance #05-0509-94: Commissioner W ojt moved to adopt the amendments to the critical areas ordinance as amended with the three items as stated in the City of Port Townsend's letter dated May 24, 1995 included 1) wording be changed to say "greater than or equal to" one unit per 2 1/2 acres, 2) if an area is served by one Group A or Group B well and that well shows a triggering chloride level, that is sufficient to designate the area as susceptible or vulnerable, and 3) Return language for the on-site disposal regulations to what it was in the February 24, 1995 draft. There was no second to the motion (the motion died.) Chairman Huntingford asked what the City has done as far as defining the 10 year well head protection area? Collette Kostelec reported that the City has submitted the well head protection area to the State Department of Health using the calculated fixed radius (circular or Dixie Cup) method. The City has until next summer to do a more sophisticated analysis of well head protection areas which will probably result in more of an elliptical shaped well head protection area. Chairman Huntingford asked if the circular calculation method is for the 10 year area of travel? Collette Kostelec answered that is correct. Commissioner Hinton asked if there have been annual tests on the City wells? The City tests their wells, Collette Kostelec answered, in accordance with State Department of Health requirements for Group A wells. Commissioner Hinton asked what the results of those tests have been? Collette Kostelec answered that the only constituents that have exceeded the drinking water standards are iron and manganese, for which the City has a treatment plan established. The City has tested for nitrates and chlorides and those constituents haven't exceeded drinking water standards. The other issue is density, Chairman Huntingford noted. When changes were made to the earlier draft the Board agreed to allow one house per 2 1/2 acres, instead of one house per 3 acres. Now we're talking about the difference between 2.4999 acres and 2.50 acres. If this ordinance is passed and people are required to pay more for a septic system in a susceptible area and then the mapping is found to be incorrect, what do we tell those people? Do we have actual evidence to show right now that we have a problem? Commissioner Wojt stated that he feels the problem is that unless this ordinance is passed, there will never be the information available to make the kinds of judgments that will protect the groundwater. Gary Rowe presented copies of proposed findings for the amended ordinance. He then reviewed the findings noting that Findings 1 through 16 cover the process of hearings, meetings, and the appeal process, and 17 through 56 discuss the issues that have been raised and how they are being addressed in the ordinance. Regarding the change in the threshold rrom 3 to 2.5 acres: Finding 17, 18, 19,20,21, and 22 all relate to this change. VOL 21 ',rr·727 r ,,\;~ PAGE: 8 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of June 12, 1995 Regarding the threshold for sea water susceptibility area: Findings 23,24 and 25 relate to the changes made to the ordinance. Commissioner Wojt asked if there is any finding addressing the City's concern that people splitting their properties into parcels down to 2 1/2 acres in susceptible areas will increase the chance that the degradation will occur? Do these findings indicate that there isn't evidence to support the City's request? Gary Rowe reported that there is evidence that high densities create more problems with potential contamination. The information provided by the City is for areas of high density (2 or 4 units to the acre from Thurston and Pierce counties.) There is no information that a specific contributes to degradation of ground water. The State Department of Health has indicated that a 1/2 acre minimum lot size is necessary in Type 1A soils. In an area with a well there is a requirement for a one acre density. The science is not exact in this area. There is no evidence, at this point, of ground water being contaminated by on-site septic systems. Regarding susceptible sea water areas and whether or not one well or a combination of wells is necessary to make a determination: Findings 26 and 27. Commissioner Wojt asked what would trigger a susceptible determination? Gary Rowe explained that when a well is drilled they will be required to do testing that will identify if there are chlorides above the threshold levels. If there are levels in a newly drilled well and the same levels are in a previously identified well nearby, then the Health Department would investigate to see ifthere is an area of susceptibility which should be identified and mapped. Commissioner Wojt asked what would happen if people hide problems with their water quality because they're afraid that the Health Department will shut them down? Gary Rowe answered that there was testimony that in both the Shine and Marrowstone Island areas people voluntarily provided information from testing done on their wells. There wasn't evidence that people were hiding information. Chairman Huntingford asked who implements the BMP's for Marrowstone Island for sea water intrusion which are outlined in DOE Bulletin 59? Gary Rowe reported that the sole source aquifer is a federal designation and the BMP's would only be implemented ifthere is a project which would require federal review or involvement. The County's BMP's would only apply for certain permits under the Critical Area Ordinance and the Board will have to identify and adopt BMP's for Marrowstone Island that they feel are appropriate. Regarding mapping: Finding 28, 29, and 30. Commissioner Hinton asked who determined that the mapping is adequate (finding 30)? Gary Rowe answered that there was testimony in the hearing that the mapping is not adequate. Without more information and reports which analyze the information in detail, the County is relying on the work done by the DNR, others, and the US Geological survey. Commissioner Wojt asked if the maps can be corrected as new information comes in? Gary Rowe answered that there is provision for that in the ordinance. Regarding special aquifer protection areas (well head protection areas): Findings 31, 32, 33, 34, and 35. Regarding sole source aquifer: Findings 36, 37, 38, and 39. Regarding triggering applications: Findings 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, and 45. Regarding economics: Finding 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, and 52. Regarding need to protect the health and safety ofthe citizens of the County: Findings 53 through 56. Gary Rowe reported that he feels the only issue that was raised which still needs to be addressed by the Board is in Section 11.504. He recommends that this section be deleted because it is not consistent with the rest of the document. The Prosecuting Attorney has asked that a finding be added identifying the publications that were done, Gary Rowe reported. He explained that the ordinance was appealed and that appeal has been held in abeyance while this work has been done. The City of Port Townsend or the Shine Community Action Council could continue with their appeal. VOL 21 rAC~ 728 PAGE: 9 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of June 12, 1995 Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Paul McIlrath reported that he has reviewed the proposed findings and made some comments which still need to be incorporated into this document. He reported that the City Attorney has expressed to him the City's concern that their comments as outlined in their letter be included in this draft ordinance. Ifthese items aren't included or a compromise isn't reached, their appeal could go forward. Prosecuting Attorney David Skeen stated that he feels there is room for further negotiation with the City. Paul McIlrath noted that there are several additional findings that he feels need to be added before this ordinance amendment is considered for adoption. Commissioner Hinton asked what the window is on this amendment? Gary Rowe reported that the Board extended the sunset on the ordinance to 5:00 p.m. today. Commissioner Wojt asked ifthe Board can pass the ordinance with direction to the staff to finalize the findings of fact? Gary Rowe explained that the Board can add findings as long as they are developed as part of the record, but to add findings after a decision has been made on the ordinance can't be done. Commissioner Hinton said that the only thing everyone can agree on is that water quality is one of the most important issues there is. He has many concerns regarding this ordinance. If we fast track this ordinance to avoid an appeal to the Hearings Board we may come up with an ordinance that won't protect what we want to protect. There is a preponderance of evidence presented by experts, engineers, etc. that the technical data and the mapping of the soils, are flawed. The findings show that there is no evidence of contamination of any wells in this County. We need to continue to work to get more good data to be able to draft an ordinance to protect what we want to protect. Regulation for the sake of regulation is worthless. The data provided on the Tri Area well area may be out of phase which would mean that we would be protecting areas in this ordinance that wouldn't provide protection for the water that we are trying to protect. Commissioner Hinton proposed that the sunset date of the Critical Area Ordinance be extended and that the County continue to work with the City staff to look at developing an agreement over the next year on getting the data needed to develop a good ordinance. Commissioner Hinton then moved to extend the Critical Area Ordinance sunset to July 3, 1995. The Prosecuting Attorney suggested that because of the July 4 holiday, the Board may want to schedule this matter for review on July 10, 1995 at 10:35 a.m. Commissioner Hinton amended his motion to extend the sunset provision of the Critical Areas Ordinance to July 10 and for the Board to continue their review of these amendments at 10:35 a.m. Commissioner Wojt stated that he doesn't see any reason to extend this matter for that long. Chairman Huntingford seconded the motion for discussion. Chairman Huntingford said that the decision on these ordinance amendments will impact the whole County not just the well head protection area for the City's well. He questioned what is going to be done if the sunset date is extended? Commissioner W ojt answered that the extension of time is to develop the findings and fact for review and consideration by the Board. He then recommended that the motion be amended to change the sunset/review date from July 10 to June 19. Commissioner Hinton stated that he would not amend his motion. After further discussion of how the Tri Area may be effected by these regulations if conditions in the area change, Chairman Huntingford asked the Prosecuting Attorney how much time he would need to review the findings of fact? David Skeen answered that two weeks would give him sufficient time to review the findings. Commissioner W ojt then moved to amend the motion to change the sunset date and review from July 10 to June 26, 1995 at 10:35 a.m. Chairman Huntingford seconded the amended motion. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. The Board concurred that the current ordinance will sunset at midnight on June 26, 1995. Later that day: The Clerk of the Board reported that there is already a hearing scheduled on June 26 at 10: 3 5 a.m. and suggested that the review time be changed to II: 3 0 a.m. Commissioner W ojt moved to VOL 21 rAL~ 729 PAGE: 10 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of June 12, 1995 reschedule the review of this ordinance amendment to 11 :30 a.m. on June 26, 1995. Commissioner Hinton seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. The meeting was recessed at the end of the scheduled interviews and reconvened on Tuesday morning at 9:00 a.m. All three Board members were present to continue interviewing persons interested in serving on the Quilcene and Dosewallips Flood Control District Board (Michael R. Kreut- zer, Quilcene; Diane Hearst, Quilcene; Wade Johnston, Dosewallips, and Tom McClanahan, Quilcene.) Hearing Examiner's and Planning Commission's Recommendation re: Binding Site Plan and Planned Unit Development Application #SUB94-0042; to Develop an R.V. Park; Located near Hoh River, West End; Big Spruce R.V. Park: Jim Decker. Applicant: Commissioner Wojt moved to approve the Binding Site Plan for the Jim Decker Big Spruce RV Park as recommended by the Planning Commission and the Hearing Examiner. Chairman Huntingford seconded the motion. Chairman Huntingford and Commissioner Wojt voted for the motion. Commissioner Hinton abstained from voting. The motion carried. The interviews of individuals interested in serving on the Quilcene Flood Control District Board continued with interviews of the following: Mary O'Connor and Hugh Hansen. Appointments to Dosewallips Flood Control District Board and the Quilcene Flood Control District Board: Commissioner Hinton moved to appoint the following people to the Dosewallips Flood Control District Advisory Board: Mike Matthews, Stan Johnston, and Wade Johnston. Commissioner Wojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Commissioner Hinton moved to appoint the following people to the Quilcene Flood Control District Board: Lorna Ward, Cindy Corey, Mari Phillips, Diane Hearst, and Mary O'Conner. Chairman Huntingford seconded the motion. Chairman Huntingford and Commissioner Hinton moved for the motion. Commissioner W ojt voted against the motion. The motion carried. MEETING ADJOURNED SEAL: JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMbßSIONER~! if //;/ / ! ATTEST: . . . ". '11:) Ç) '" ~ \ ...~.....,., . "c cicY/llt«M Lorna Delaney, CMC ~ Clerk of the Board VOL 21 rAG~ 730 PAGE: 11