Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM071894 MINUTES WEEK OF JULY 18, 1994 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Robert Hinton in the presence of Commissioners Glen Huntingford and Richard Wojt. The Board met in executive session with Prosecuting Attorney Mark Huth regarding litigation from 9:00 to 9: 15 a.m. COMMISSIONERS' BRIEFING SESSION Bob Minty. Emer2enCy Services Mana2er re: Airport Days Special Event Permit: Bob Minty reported that all requirements have been met on the Airport Days permit, but he doesn't have the signed document yet. He asked if the Board could approve the permit and then he will have the document back here for the Chairman to sign later today. Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve the special events permit for Airport Days and that the Chairman be authorized to sign the permit later today. Commis- sioner Wojt seconded the motion. Commissioner Wojt asked if the community is aware of this because there have been noise issues in that area. Bob Minty answered that he hasn't received any complaints about this festival. Chairman Hinton noted that there has been advertising and planning for this event since it was held last year. The Chairman called for a vote on the motion. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. GMA Update: GMA Project Manager Steve Ladd reported that the Board will be meeting tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. with members of the Planning Commission to discuss goals for the Comprehensive Plan. At the regular Planning Commission meeting on Wednesday at 7:00 p.m. the Board has been invited to discuss the relationship of the Planning Commission, the Board and Planning staff. Thursday from 4 to 6 p.m. is the Growth Management Steering Committee meeting in the Commissioners Chambers. Al Boucher, Housing Authority Board member, reported on changes in State laws regard- ing affordable housing. The State has adopted a policy for affordable housing. He noted that Countywide Planning Policy #6 needs to be revisited due to this change. He suggested that the County and City staff meet to redraft Policy #6. Steve Ladd reported that this can be brought up at the Growth Management Steering Committee meeting. Vo¡.;;~20·t~t~ 1ft 76 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of July 18, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Steve Ladd then presented a schematic of how alternative land use scenarios will be developed during the Comprehensive Plan update process. He noted that the following items will be given consideration: Potential for developing sewer, water, access, etc., citizens values, housing demand, existing zoning, etc., existing land use, community plans, resource potential, and critical areas, Approval of Minutes: Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve the Minutes of July 5 as presented and July 11, 1994 as corrected (page 3 on July 11 under Review of liming Code Maps for Hearing Publication changed last sentence to say "as amended," Commissioner Wojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: No public comments. APPRO V AL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commis- sioner Huntingford moved to approve and adopt all the items on the consent agenda with the exception of item #5 (delete), Commissioner Wojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. 1. Recommendation for Bid Award and CONTRACT re: Project MT1130 1994 Pavement Markings; A & C Striping, Inc. Oak Harbor for $43,436.70 2. RESOLUTION NO. 80-94 re: Increasing the Cash Drawer Amount from $675.00 to $700.00; Brinnon and Quilcene Transfer Sites; Solid Waste Fund 3. AGREEMENT, #COCC2970, DOT No. GC-9851 Amendment re: Extending contract term to June 30, 1995; Washington State Department of Corrections 4, RESOLUTION NO. 81-94 re: Creating a County Project Designated as CN1141; Chima cum and Lopeman Road Improvements 5. DELETE Preliminary Short Plat Approval; 4 Lot Subdivision off of Flagler Road; Nordby-Clark (See first item under Planning Department later in Minutes.) 6. AGREEMENT, Space Reservation re: Planning Department Booth at Fair; Jefferson County Fair 7, CONTRACT re: Service Provider for Planning Department; Roger Blaylock 8. AGREEMENT, Temporary Help; Development Review Division of the Permit Center; Patrick Ray McGraner BUSINESS FROM COUNTY DEPARTMENTS PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT Preliminary Short Plat Approval: 4 Lot Subdivision off of FI32ler Road: Nordby-Clark: Commissioner Huntingford moved to issue preliminary approval for the Nordby-Clark Short Subdivision. Commissioner Wojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote, \l0!.. 20 ~~Œ 0 1177 ^~~í~~~~~~¡~~~miliI~~~~ Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of July 18, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Review and Adoption of Proposed Zonin2 Ordinance: Rick Sepler, consultant working on the Zoning Code, reported that a memo dated July 13, 1994 provides a comparison between the Development Code and the Zoning Code, the proposed revisions made to draft 2A as the Board directed, and the findings of fact for the adoption of the ordinance. The definition of amateur radio has been added and it is consistent with federal and State regulations. Chairman Hinton asked why there is a definition of family in the ordinance? Rick Sepler reported that the County must be consistent with Federal Fair Housing Act of 1988 and this definition is included for that reason. Chairman Hinton noted that in the definition of a single family residence the term "immediate" family is used. He asked if there would be different regulations for a person that is not a blood relative staying in a unit adjacent to a single family residence? Rick Sepler answered that the intent on definition #88 is to allow for a "mother-in-law" type of apartment. He noted that the ordinance is more restrictive on out buildings than it is on a main residence. Chairman Hinton asked who would be expected to determine whether there is a blood relative involved? Rick Sepler suggested that the word "immediate" be deleted from definition #88. The Board concurred that definition #88 be changed to say "occupied by one family." Chairman Hinton asked about definition #78, #79, and #80 (page 12) on recreational vehicle parks (seasonal and transient)? There is not a clear definition of what is seasonal, transient and temporary. Rick Sepler answered that the use table on page 24 makes a distinction between seasonal RV parks (up to 180 days) and transient RV parks (up to 30 days), and they are both permitted in the general commercial zone. Both types of RV parks would require a conditional use permit in the vast majority of the County. Rick Sepler asked if a better definition of each is needed or if a better guideline for reviewing these application is needed? Chairman Hinton answered that there have been problems with the definition in terms of the number of days which would be considered temporary. Kent Anderson pointed out that FEMA uses the 180 day limit for temporary in their RV regulations in flood ways and flood plains. Definition #90 Subordinant Use, Chairman Hinton pointed out, does not contain a formula or criteria for determining what a subordinant use is. Rick Sepler pointed out how a definition can be hard to apply in every instance. The definition was written to provide guidance by looking at intensity and frequency, Chairman Hinton pointed out that Page 17, 4,20 Subsection 4b is in conflict with the Zoning Ordinance, as well as the section on reserve parking on an adjacent property. Rick Sepler explained that the intent of this subsection is to prohibit two adjacent properties from using the same area to fill setback requirements. The intent of the subsection regarding reserve parking was to reduce the need to have overly large parking areas and still provide the flexibility to have a reserve area if a problem arose with a smaller parking area. Chairman Hinton asked that these subsections be clarified because there could be several interpretations of the meaning in the future. The matrix on page 22 across from bed and breakfasts of up to two bedrooms doesn't say anything. Rick Sepler stated that it should say home business and those regulations would apply. Kent Anderson reported that two bed and breakfast units in a home would not require any change in the septic or water system for the residence. On page 30, under conditional use review criteria, it says the application must be in harmony with the surrounding area, Chairman Hinton noted, and under home businesses it says structure housing a home business must be architecturally and aesthetically compatible with the surrounding residential area, He asked how a determination can be made on compatibility? Rick Sepler explained that the zoning code is the implementing ordinance for the Comprehensive Plan which contains the guidance of the subarea plans. yot 20 tA{;€ 0 11:78 .d~~~iI111111 .<:¡~~~¡¡¡If~··· .:¡:¡¡¡¡~¡¡~~ Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of July 18, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chairman Hinton stated that he has a problem with designating mineral lands for long term commercial significance and then telling them what hours they can work (see page 32, mineral extraction and processing.) Rick Sepler answered that the intent is that this section only applies when there is a pre-existing residential use within 300 feet. Chairman Hinton asked that this section be rewritten as well as the section on home business that sets the hours of operation, especially for home businesses that don't generate impacts off-site. Section 10.60 and 10.80, Page 44. Chairman Hinton suggested that the timeframe in these two sections, both be made three years rather than having one as three years and one as two years. Page 48, Dimensional and General requirements, Chairman Hinton noted that the setback requirements for some zones may preclude use of the lot. Rick Sepler answered that certain types of uses have impacts which need separation from other uses, especially when they abut against a potential residential zone. A variance can be applied for in unique circumstances. The discussion then turned to ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) and if those regulation would be imposed on existing uses such as a bed and breakfast. Mark Huth reported that the requirements of ADA are enforced privately. Chairman Hinton asked why (Section 20, page 83) the "Owners of Record" for notification of a project are people who own properties within 300 feet, but "Interested Parties" in an appeal are owners of property within 600 feet? Kent Anderson reported that the current policy allows anyone in the County to appeal any project for any reason. This wording is an attempt to narrow that to only affected property owners. Mark Huth reported that any person aggrieved can appeal a project, but they have to prove, under general law, that they have some interest in the property and that they would be injured by the project. He suggested that the wording be changed to say "any person aggrieved," and any reference to distance be taken out of this section, The IZO and the Zoning Ordinance were both predicated on the fact that the Superior Court had nullified the Development Code. Now that the Code has been upheld by the Appellate Court, Chairman Hinton asked if a finding to that effect should be added to this ordinance? He also noted that the West End is not mapped and asked if the Code won't effect that area until maps are adopted? Kent Anderson reported that the whole West End is G 1 zoning because it isn't mapped and it is subject to those regulations. Chairman Hinton explained that in their community plan the West End residents asked for some flexibility and some time before zoning is implemented. He asked if the West End could be allowed to use the Development Code, while the eastern part of the County uses the Zoning Code? Mark Huth reported that a special zoning district would have to be created for the West End along with the incorporation of the Development Code into this or- dinance. Mark Huth added that he feels it would be a fairly unwieldy process to do that and it would involve going back to public hearing with the ordinance. Kent Anderson added that there is a statement in the ordinance that all zones that aren't mapped are G 1 zones. Commissioner Huntingford suggested that the West End Planning Committee be asked to identify areas where commercial activities currently exist and make suggestions for zoning. Rick Sepler will present a clean draft for the Board's consideration at the Board's August 1, 1994 agenda. VOL 2 O. rAŒ o :11'7.9 ..:::§~~~~¡¡¡fJ~¡¡¡¡~~~~¡¡?J~i~ Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of July 18, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Hearin2 Notice: Proposed Stormwater Ordinance: Stormwater Program Manager Bruce Laurie reported that SEP A has been completed on the draft stormwater ordinance and the Planning Commission has submitted their report on it. He asked if the Board would like to set a public hearing date for the draft ordinance? Commissioner Huntingford moved to set the public hearing for August 8, 1994 at 3:00 p.m. Commis- sioner Wojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Appointment re: Jefferson County Representative on the Olympic Area A2ency on A2in2 Advisory Board: After interviewing the persons interested in serving as a Jefferson County representative on the Olympic Area Agency on Aging Advisory Board, Commissioner Huntingford moved to appoint Carlyle Lovewell to a three year term (term will expire July 17, 1997.) Commissioner Wojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. HEARING re: Proposed Ordinance Exemptin2 Jefferson County From the Prohibition of Subsection 4 of RCW 9.41.050 as Permitted Under Subsection 6 Thereof ITo allow the carryin2 of huntin2 and tar2et rifles openly in a vehicle): Chairman Hinton explained that this proposed ordinance is to exempt Jefferson County from the provisions of Subsection 4, RCW 9.41.050. This exemption would allow the carrying of hunting and target rifles openly in a vehicle. He then opened the public hearing. Steve Hanson. Dabob Bay. stated that he has a rifle rack and he loves to hunt. He sees no reason to have to carry his rifle or shotgun in a case where it is not available. Bob Lamborn. Dabob Bay. stated that he is relatively new to the area and one reason he moved here was to get away from this type of rule. He opposes this law and wants Jefferson County to be exempt from it for the following reasons: 1) he wants to see less and less of the law process intruding on his life, 2) it is inconvenient and unsafe for a hunter to carry a gun in a case, 3) this would be inconvenient, and 4) since he moved here there has not been one instance of a long gun stolen from a pickup truck. This is a rural County and he is completely for the exemption. James W. Davis. 1431 Sherman. Port Townsend. stated that he has been in contact with Senator Hargrove and the representatives for this area and they appear to be somewhat ashamed of the bill they passed. The law was originally proposed to impact gang members in areas like Seattle. There is no need for this type of law in a rural com- munity. One thing that bothers him about the law is that he can unknowingly be in violation of the law by going into another County that isn't exempt. The law is am- biguous, it can't be enforced, and has no merit whatsoever. Practically all the Counties east of the mountains have voted to exempt themselves from this legislation. Don Almas. 619 Clay Street. Port Townsend. stated that he feels it is safer to have a gun in a gun rack than in someone's lap. This is an infringement on the second amendment. Ole Kilmer stated that he feels that many old people who like to hunt, do road hunting and if they have to have their gun locked up, they might as well stay at home. James W. Davis. 1431 Sherman. Port Townsend. added that as far as the Fish and Wildlife Service is concerned there is no restriction on carrying a fire arm in the cab of your vehicle if it is unloaded. VOt 20 rAC~ o 1-1-30 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of July 18, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dick Broders. Discovery Bay. stated that when he first heard about this law he felt that there was no good reasons for it. He is opposed to laws that are passed that may harm or make an extreme inconvenience to the general public without a good reason. There are exemptions in the law, but they are so vague that they aren't useful and would be left to interpretation. He feels these are good reasons to not have this law in effect in Jefferson County. Delbert Gilbow, Sequim, stated that he sees no reason that someone can't carry a gun in a gun rack. Lewis A. Euber. Clallam County. stated that he spoke to the Clallam County Commis- sioners last week when they passed this exemption and asked that they notify the Jefferson County Commission of their wish to have the contiguous counties act as one in this instance. He noted that he has a piece of property adjacent to Jefferson County, and the border between the Counties is not always clear. He feels both Counties should be exempted from this statute, George Hansbury. Quilcene. agreed with what everyone else said. George Armstrong. Port Townsend. stated that many people who are bird hunters will carry their shotgun in a case in the trunk of their car or in the back seat. Those people should have the same consideration even though their gun is not in a rack. If the gun is in the car and unloaded, there shouldn't be any need for this statute. He also feels that if the people that represent us in Olympia don't have any more to do than this, then to ought to stay home. James W. Davis. asked if the Board would use their political clout to have this whole law repealed during the next session of the legislature. Chairman Hinton closed the public hearing. Commissioner Wojt moved to approve and adopt ORDINANCE NO. 08-0718-94 exempt- ing Jefferson County from this subsection of the RCW and allow the carrying of hunting and target rifles openly in a vehicle. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote, Chairman Hinton reported that the Washington State Association of Counties will provide the Commissioners Office and the Sheriff's Office with a listing of counties and cities that have passed this exemption before hunting season this year and invited citizens to call in for that information. He noted that next year that information should be available in the game pamphlet. Grays Harbor, Pacific, Clallam, and Jefferson counties are all exempt now. Mason County hasn't made a determination yet. Current Plannio2 Supervisor Kent Anderson and Environmental Health Dir- ector Larry Fay re: Water Policy aUGA Ordinance): Environmental Health Director Larry Fay reported that the discussion today is regarding some of the problems with the implementation of the Interim Urban Growth, Areas Ordinance as it pertains to water systems. Section 5 Extension of existing urban governmental services states that new development occurring outside of Interim Urban Growth areas will be done so as not to cause the extension of existing public infrastructure or the intensification of public services. It goes on to say that this is not intended to apply to in-fill of existing platted areas that are outside IUGA's. Section 2, the level of service standards for water supplies, allows public water systems in rural areas only on a conditional basis (density of one unit per acre or less.) There is a note on "condition" that says they are prohibited except in special VOL 20 ~AC~ O 1·,· AJ .~.:."~ J.J.i. Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of July 18, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . cases (there is a proven public health threat such as contamination of a public water supply.) He noted that what he interprets this to mean is that outside of interim urban growth areas a new public water system cannot be developed. Commissioner Huntingford asked if the text has more weight than the matrix in this case, like in the Shoreline Program? Prosecuting Attorney Mark Huth stated that is correct in cases where the two (the text and the matrix) are in conflict. He clarified that, in an existing plat with a water system, the County would not say that the lot could not hook up to the water system. He feels that the last sentence in Section 5 cannot be interpreted to say that where there is no water system, but there are existing platted lots, a new water system can be created, however. Larry Fay explained that the Drinking Water Regulations (WAC 246.290.020, 1) definition of a public water system is any system excluding a system serving one single family residence. There is an exception for a family farm (four or fewer connections on a family farm is not a public water system,) Public Water systems are broken down into several categories (Group A - regulated under the Federal Clean Drinking Water Act - 15 or more service connections or a population of 25 or more 60 days per year; and Group B - regulated under State laws.) There is no definition and no reference to the WAC defining a public water system in the ordinance, Chairman Hinton pointed out that when the urban growth areas were designated he interpreted the section about not extending or intensifying urban governmental services outside the UGA, as meaning that the City water to the Tri Area could not be extended to Oak Bay, for example. He never interpreted other types of community system as being public, governmental services. Commissioner Wojt added that he feels the purpose of the matrix was to prevent the whole community having to support a water system for somebody that was going to propose projects outside a UGA. He suggested that the ordinance be changed to say that only group A water systems will not be supported outside the UGA's. Mark Huth noted that the goal of the UGA ordinance is to prohibit urban growth outside of urban growth areas. The question is at what point does a water system become an urban water system. State and federal regulations do not have anything to do with whether a water system is urban or rural. Commissioner Wojt stated that the intent of this ordinance was never to prevent a bed and breakfast because the water system serving one is considered a public water system even though it is the same system a single residence uses. Mark Huth suggested that a standard for a rural water system be developed, He advised that Kitsap County has developed a memorandum of understanding with their PUD defining what is considered a rural water system. That may be a useful document to review. Gary Rowe reported that he has a copy of that MOU. Chairman Hinton noted that G.E. Development has had their building permits placed on hold because of Section 5 even though all of the infrastructure and the wells are installed and approved by the State. Mark Huth explained that this project would be vested for their water system when the system was submitted to the State for approval. The discussion continued regarding the G.E. Development project and a project in Quilcene that are both being held because of this ordinance. Commissioner Wojt asked how long it would be before the Board could have wording to change this ordinance drafted to take to hearing? Mark Huth answered about a month. Commissioner Huntingford reported that if the information can be put together to make the VOL 20 UCr 01,-a ~..~~ " ...L \.) ..;'" Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of July 18, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . necessary changes, a hearing notice will have to be approved and published and then the hearing can be held 10 days after the notice is published. After the Board met with Prosecuting Attorney Mark Huth regarding the salaries of the Deputy Prosecuting Attorneys, the meeting was recessed. The meeting was reconvened with all three Board members present on Tuesday morning to meet with members of the Planning Commission regarding goal setting for the update of the Comprehensive Plan. After that meeting they met with Public Works Director Gary Rowe to discuss the option to lease more space at the Castle Hill Mall. MEETING ADJOURNED ~ $C .-, " ' ~ <It '" JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS v> . . ~~ n, Chairman . ~"C, , e. 11 · ~:J,Jt ~ AITbSTr.J . (4 . '.. VOL 20 rAr,~ O "1A1 ''''''"3 .J...'.:h,