Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM090694 .. ..... ......................................... .....:.;.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.;.:.;.:.;.;.;.:.;.:.;.:.:.:.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.:.;.;.:.;.;.;.;.;.;.:.;.:.:.;.;.:.:.:.:.:.;.;.;.;.;.:.;.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. ~ ( MINUTES WEEK OF SEPTEMBER 6, 1994 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Robert Hinton in the presence of Commissioners Glen Huntingford and Richard Wojt. COMMISSIONERS' BRIEFING SESSION Discussion of Interim Measures Ree-ardine- GMA Compliance: Prosecuting Attorney Mark Huth reported that the order from the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board will be 30 days old next Sunday. If the County is going to both appeal and comply with the order, some action needs to be taken immediately. Commissioner Wojt asked what development can be done in the County that will be in compliance with the order? Mark Huth answered that if the JUGA's are deleted after 30 days, then what can people do with their property in the rural areas in question. What reg1.llations will a project proponent who applies next week be vested under? A single family residence on five acres or better with approved sewer and water could probably be permitted, but even that permit would be subject to challenge because there is no way to know if the permit was issued appropriately. The discussion continued regarding what interim measures the County can take to comply with the Board's order. Commissioner Wojt asked if the short plats on the consent agenda today can be approved if they are to divide five acres into lots smaller than one acre? Mark Huth answered that the Hearings Board order left the JUGA Ordinance in place for 30 days and projects could vest under that ordinance during that time. Applications received after the 30 days will be in legal limbo. It's not the applications that are already in the process that are of concern. People with lots that don't have sewer and/or water approval may have a problem. Commissioner Huntingford reported that there was some discussion with Keith Dearborn about imposing a moratorium 0}1 new subdivisions and rezone .1& ?O fI~ 01469 ~ . Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 6, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . applications only. He stated that he does not want to put a moratorium on applications that are in the process and pre-existing lots. Placing a morator- ium on new applications and rezones, Mark Huth advised, shows that the County is attempting to comply with the order, but that compliance with the order is costing the citizens of the County. Even though the Hearings Board order includes very short timelines, the Hearings Board can't order the County to violate the GMA statutory requirements for public participation. He advised that this moratorium should be less than 60 days in duration and in that time the Board should direct staff to create the regulations that provide certainty to the development process. Chairman Hinton asked what regulations could be developed to provide certainty? Mark Huth answered that the regulations would clarify what is urban and rural in terms of industrial and commercial, and levels of service for water systems, etc. If the IUGA Ordinance is voided, Chairman Hinton asked what regulations the County would revert back to? Mark Huth reported that if the IUGA ordinance was voided the effective regulation would be the Comprehensive Plan, but the County would be out of compliance with the GMA deadline for establishing UGAs if that ordinance is voided in its entirety. Commissioner Huntingford moved that the County not accept any new sub- division or rezone applications for 45 days and that currently existing lots which meet sewer and water regulations can be developed. Chairman Hinton stated that he doesn't see how the County can do anything to comply with the Hearings Board order and suggested the County revert back to the regulations in effect before the IUGA ordinance was adopted. He asked if the suggestion that this moratorium be for less than 60 days is so that a public hearing isn't required? Commissioner Wojt added that whatever regulations are developed within the 45 days would be subject to public hearing. Mark Huth added that the County should know something about the possibility of a stay in the Kitsap County case sometime after September 26 which is the date of their court hearing. Commissioner Wojt seconded the motion. Commissioner Huntingford amended his motion to include a moratorium on all applications for commercial and in- dustrial projects. Commissioner Wojt seconded the amendment to the motion. The Chairman called for a vote on the amended motion. Commissioner Huntingford and Commissioner W ojt voted for the motion. Chairman Hinton voted against the motion. The motion carried. Mark Beaufait asked that an effective date be stated for this action. Commis- sioner Wojt moved that the moratorium be effective immediately. Commis- sioner Huntingford seconded the motion. Commissioner Huntingford and Commissioner Wojt voted for the motion. Chairman Hinton voted against the motion. The motion carried. The Prosecuting Attorney will draft a resolution stating the emergency and the details of the moratorium. Later in the day: Commissioner Wojt moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 97-94 declaring an emergency to preserve the status quo, pursuant to Chapter 36.70.790 and 36.70A.390 RCW. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion. Commissioner Wojt and Commissioner Huntingford voted for the motion. Chairman Hinton voted against the motion. The motion carried. :ìI. ..~ 01470 ~ Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 6, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve the Minutes of July 25, August 8, 15, and 22, 1994 as written. Commissioner Wojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. GMA Update: Growth Management Project Manager Steve Ladd submitted a new completion schedule for the update of the Comprehensive Plan. He noted that the time frame for the work necessary to comply with the GMHB Order has not been included in this schedule. Gary Rowe reported on the update of the Coordinated Water System Plan. He noted that the first meeting of the Water Utility Coordinating Committee is scheduled for September 20, 1994 at the Tri Area Community Center. There was a meeting with representatives of the State Departments of Health, Ecology and Community, Trade and Economic Development, and since there is disagreement in the interpretation made by these State agencies regarding the provision of water in rural areas, they will have to meet and resolve their differences and present a unified interpretation. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: The following issues were dis- cussed: decision by the Board to impose a moratorium on new subdivision applications and rezone for 45 days; the role of the State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development in GMA; the Board was urged to clarify the water issue as soon as possible; and affordable housing. APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Wojt moved to approve the consent agenda with the exception of Item 25 which is to be deleted. Commissioner Huntingford seconded which carried by a unanimous vote. 1. Hearing Examiner's Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation; Conditional Use Permit #IZA94-0038; Establish a Home Business to Include Design of Electronic Equipment and Computer Programs; Alton Otis, Jr. 2. Hearing Examiner's Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation; Conditional Use Permit #IZA94-0036; Establish a Home Business to Manufacture and Prepare Specialty Deserts and Deli Items for Whole- sale Only Distribution; Mary and Stan Southworth 3. Findings, Conclusions, and Decision; Conditional Use Permit #IZA94- 0041; Construct a 150 Foot Lattice Tower, Antennas, Microwave Dish and an Equipment Building; U.S. West NewVector Group, Inc. 4. Findings, Conclusions, and Decision; Conditional Use Permit #IZA94- 0044; Construct a 150 Foot Lattice Tower, Antennas, Microwave Dish and an Equipment Building; U.S. West NewVector Group, Inc. 5. Final Binding Site Plan SUB94-0073; Minor Amendment; Evergreen Coho Escapee Resort Recreational Vehicle Park 6. AGREEMENT re: Public Safety Product Sales and Installation for E911 System; U.S. West Communications Services, Inc. 7. Plan Approval CR1135; Center Road Overlay from M.P. 13.83 to 14.61 8. Final Short Plat #SP03-93; Great Scott Short Plat; 3 Lot Short Subdivision off Oak Bay Road; Lou Scott, Applicant 9. Final Short Plat #SP07-93; Oak Bay Short Plat; 3 Lot Short Sub- division; Pope Resources, App~icant .. àf1 f&! 0 S.47.1 ..:::~:11 ~ Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 6, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA - Continued: 10. Final Short Plat #SPA94-0011; Gooch Short Plat; 2 Lot Short Sub- division; Bob Gooch, Applicant 11. PROCLAMATION; Proclaiming September 8, 1994 as Jefferson County United Good Neighbor Day 12. Letters to U.S. Senators Murray and Gorton re: Support of Funding for the 1994 Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) title IIC Appropria- tion 13. Approval of Application for Veterans Relief Funds; $100 from American Legion Post #26 14. Findings, Conclusions, and Decision SUB94-0034; Preliminary Long Subdivision; 2 Lot Long Subdivision; Mort Robinson, Applicant 15. RESOLUTION NO. 98-94 re: Providing a Loan to the E911 Fund for Implementation Costs 16. AGREEMENT, Extension re: Use of Swimming Pool from September 1, through December 31, 1994; Port Townsend School District #50 17. AGREEMENT, Exhibit A & B; Reimbursable Work - Chip seal Buck Run; Pope Resources 18. RESOLUTION NO. 99-94 re: Revising a County Road Project #CR0606; Realignment to Avoid Slide Area; South Bogachiel Road from M.P. 1.33 to 1.51 19. RESOLUTION NO. 100-94 re: Establishing the Name of a Private Road; Maritime Road 20. RESOLUTION NO. 101-94 re: Establishing the Name of a Private Road; Moondance Drive 21. Grant Application; Safe Drinking Water Action Grant for Quilcene Well Project; State Department of Ecology 22. Water Rights Application; Quilcene Well Project; State Department of Ecology 23. Letter to Mmjorie Rogers, Tri Area Planning Committee; Hearings Board Order and the Interim Urban Growth Area 24. Approval of Payment of Quarterly Allocation; Tri Area, Quilcene and Forks Community Centers, RSVP and Health Care Access Programs; Clallam Jefferson Community Action Council 25. DELETE AGREEMENT, for Professional Services with the Planning Department; Madrona Planning & Development Services 26. CONTRACT #1-95-369-014 re: Jefferson County Health & Human Services Department Community Mobilization Against Substance Abuse Program; State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development BUSINESS FROM COUNTY DEPARTMENTS: PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT Valley Hills Subdivision Moratorium: Mark Huth reported that the applicant submitted a letter requesting that the Board waive a portion of the moratorium (see Minutes of August 1, 1994.) He has not been able to contact the applicant's Attorney. He suggested that this discussion be res- cheduled. .. . .. '" .va.., ~btAÇ! 01472 .. Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 6, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Commissioner Wojt moved to postpone this discussion until September 19, 1994 at 10:35 a.m. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. (After contacting the Attorney, the meeting was re- scheduled to Tuesday September 20, 1994 at 10:00 a.m.) Discussion/Adoption Proposed Ordinance Repealine- and Replac- . inŒ Ordinance No. 15-1228-92 SettinŒ Fee for the Jefferson County Permit Center - Development Review Division: Development Review Supervisor Kent Anderson stated that the Department recommends dropping the hourly fees for review. He then noted that the fee for pre-application conferences is necessary and he recommends that it be included. Chairman Hinton stated that he is concerned because he sees the fee schedule increas- ing, but he doesn't feel that it will increase the efficiency of the Permit Center. Commissioner Huntingford asked if there would be a problem if the fees are kept the same and the new ordinance is not adopted? Kent Anderson reported that some items in the new Zoning Ordinance are not covered under the old fee ordinance. The Board asked that more information be provided justifying the fee increases being requested and how the process and programs are being improved. AGREEMENT. for Professional Services with the Plannine- Department; Madrona Plannine- & Development Services: Chairman Hinton asked why Madrona Planning and Development Services has been assigned project review by the County when he hasn't been able to find a contract for this work? Kent Anderson reported that is correct and the contract he submitted to the Board was originally to cover this work. The discussion continued regarding the work that Rick Sepler, Madrona Planning and Development Services has been and would continue to provide the County under this contract. Later in the day: Community Services Director David Goldsmith reported that the Madrona contract is only for drafting the language necessary for the County to comply with Item 2 of the Hearings Board order. There is a maximum dollar amount on this work of $5,000. The next day: Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve the agreement with Madrona Planning & Development Services as submitted. Commissioner Wojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Shoreline Manae-ement Commission's Recommendation; Shore- line Substantial Development Permit Application #SDP93-0011;· Edward Mills. Applicant: Jim Pearson reported that the Shoreline Commission recommends approval of this permit with three conditions: 1. Private, non-commercial for the joint use of the owners of the proposal site and the owners of one adjoining shoreline property. 2. Restrictions on overnight use by vessels with holding tanks and overnight use by vessels without holding tanks is prohibited. 3. Prohibition on discharging sewage or other wastes by vessels moored at the site. Jim Pearson reported that the County has no regulation requiring that creosote pilings cannot be used. Commissioner Hbntingford moved to approve the WI. .' 'ACt Ó i.473 . .,:=:~ ..;.:-:.:. ."i:rfftr ..éíífl~:~1:~:llM Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 6, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Shoreline Permit with the conditions as recommended by the Shoreline Com- mission. Commissioner W ojt seconded the motion which carried by a un- animous vote. Approval of Administrative Rule; Jefferson County Interim Critical Areas Ordinance: Senior Planner James Holland explained that this administrative rule is to clarify a vague term in the Critical Areas Ordinance. After reviewing the rule, the Board concurred that it is their deter- mination that the administrative rule meets the intent of the Critical Areas Ordinance. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HEARING re: Chane-ine- the Name of a County Road; Luck Road Chane-ed to Fortuna Drive: The Chairman opened the public hearing. Hearing no public comments, the Chairman closed the hearing. Commissioner Wojt moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 102-94 changing the name of a County road named Luck Road to Fortuna Drive. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. HEARING re: Petition to Vacate a Portion of 10th Avenue and a Portion of an Alley in Hessian Garden Tracts; Wallace Bowman, Petitioner: The Chairman opened the hearing and read the hearing procedur- es. He asked the following questions: Q) Is there anyone in the audience who objects to the participation of any of the County Commissioners in these proceedings? A) Noone objected. Q) Do any of the Commissioners have an interest in this property or issue? A) All three Board members answered no. Q) Do any of you stand to gain or lose any financial benefit as a result of the outcome of this hearing? A) All three Board members answered no. Q) Can you hear and consider this in a fair and objective manner? A) All three Board members answered yes. Q) Has any member of the Board engaged in communication outside this hearing with opponents or proponents on the issue to be heard? A) Commissioner Wojt stated that he had conversations with Mr. Bowman regarding this property. He warned Mr. Bowman that such com- munication might color the outcome of the hearing with respect to his position. Prosecuting Attorney Mark Huth asked Commissioner Wojt the following questions: · Did you make any representation to Mr. Bowman about the outcome of to day's hearing? Commissioner Wojt answered that he did not. · What did Mr. Bowman talk about? Commissioner Wojt reported that he talked about the Treasurer's report that says that you pay taxes on the land and all vacated streets and alleys. · When did that conversation occur? About two weeks ago, Commissioner Wojt answered. ~vØt ... 20' tAGt; O. 1.474 "'i Ai Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 6, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Did that conversation in any way effect your ability to hear the evidence today and decide the matter fairly based on the evidence? Commissioner Wojt answered no. Do you feel that you have any bias for or against any party from that conversation? Not from that conversation Commissioner Wojt answered. . Commissioner Huntingford reported that he had talked with Mr. Bowman more than two months ago and before that Mr. Bowman had been before the Board a couple of times during the public comment period trying to gather information. This issue as been around for awhile. Prosecuting Attorney Mark Huth asked him the following questions: · Did any of those conversations effect your ability to hear the evidence today and decide based on the evidence? Commissioner Huntingford answered no. Chairman Hinton reported that he to has had conversations regarding the same information and he does not feel it will effect any decision he may make today. Public Works Administrative Assistant, Eileen Simon, reported that the Board has material from the last meeting when this was considered. Since then the following notifications have been made about today's hearing: Publication August 24 and 31 in the Jefferson County Leader, the site was posted on August 16, and the adjacent property owners within 300 feet were notified by mail on August 15, of the hearing. Mark Huth added that the Hearing Examiner recommended that this be approved, but left out a portion of the intersection which was not square with Turner Avenue. This small portion would be left unvacated in the middle of a previously vacated street. Tom Maihan, Attorney representing Wally Bowman, stated that the petition is to vacate 10th Street north of Turner and certain alleys within Blocks 1 and 6. The Hearing Examiner contended that the vacation of 10th Street would landlock access to portions of Hessian Garden Tracts. In 1983 the County Prosecuting Attorney issued an opinion that everything south of block lines was vacated in the Hessian Garden Tracts. All of the property south of Turner was then considered acreage. Commissioner Huntingford asked if, when Turner was vacated, the abutting property owner acquired the right of way? Tom Majhan indicated that the vacated property on Turner Street north of the halfway mark and east of 10th Street belongs to Mr. Bowman. North of the halfway mark and west of 10th Street belongs to whoever owns Lot 16. Everything south of the halfway mark and east of 10th Street also belongs to Mr. Bowman. Everything west of the halfway mark attaches to Mrs. Grays property. Even though the plat was vacated and the property was declared acreage it is still possible to sell the property by lot and block because the legal description on the land uses the vacated plat designations. Because this property is acreage, Tom Majhan pointed out that he doesn't feel that landlock- ing property is a major concern. There is one potential concern which is the portion of 10th Avenue north of Kennedy Street because people are using it for legal access. Mr. Bowman has applied for the vacation of all of 10th Street, but the denial of access only applies north of Kennedy and not south of Kennedy. Mr. Bowman has title to pr.operty from Charles W. Hanson which VIt· atp f~GE: 0 ~475 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 6, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . conveys to him the alleys and portions of 10th Street that he is requesting be vacated, but a right-of-way that the County owns cannot be conveyed to someone. You cannot convey easements or rights-of-way to properties that you don't own. Mark Huth reported that there were two vacations in this plat - one in 1918 and one in 1949. The letter Mr. Majhan referred to from the Prosecuting Attorney to the County Engineer discusses both of those vacation orders and states that all of Turner Street, because it lies inside the platted area, is vacated. Once it was petitioned and ordered that the entire plat be vacated, that included all of the internal boundaries and streets of the plat. The Chairman then opened the hearing for public comments. Jim Lindsay, (120 West Dayton, Edmonds) representing Don and Mary Spigore- lli, was sworn in. He stated that there are a number of disputes about what was vacated previously. The vacation that occurred in 1918 was for the properties south of Turner Street. The area to the north of that was vacated in 1949. In 1954 the lots owned by Mr. Bowman were sold as separate parcels and did not include a portion of 10th Avenue. That vacation was made to the southern portion of Turner Street, because the order says that all contiguous streets lying between blocks and Turner did not lie between blocks being vacated, therefore it was not vacated. It wasn't vacated until 1983. Mr. Spigorelli owns the portion of 10th Street that abuts his property. Mr. Lindsay stated that he feels that, according to the vacation order, 10th Street was only vacated to the southern portion of Turner Street. If, when Turner Street was vacated, 10th Street to the south was also vacated, then Mr. Lindsay stated he feels this was an inappropriate action for the County to take. That portion was left open to provide access. There is no record to show ownership of 10th Street. He doesn't believe that the vacation of a street automatically vacates a street intersecting the vacated street. If 10th Avenue is vacated south of Kennedy, the property owned by Mrs. Gray and Judy Johnson will be land- locked because they have no other access outside their properties. He agrees with the Hearing Examiner's recommendation and disagrees with the Prosecut- ing Attorney's conclusion about what has been vacated at the intersection of 10th Avenue and Turner. There is nothing in the vacation of 1949 that indicates that any portion of Turner was vacated and there is nothing in the vacation of Turner Street that says that the intersection of 10th and Turner was vacated. There are deeds that go back to 1954 that clearly show that Lot 8 was not transferred with any portion of vacated 10th Avenue. Mark Huth explained that deeds simply transfer property between private individuals and if there is a problem with a deed that's the property owners problem, not the County's problem. What Mr. Bowman owns has no bearing on the Board's consideration of this request. Mr. Lindsay stated that the only portion of the 10th Avenue vacation he is protesting is at the intersection with Turner Street. He does not feel that portion was ever vacated. Mark Huth then read the following from the vacation order attached to the Prosecuting Attorney's letter to the County Engineer in 1983: "All the streets, alleys and avenues contiguous to, bordering on or lying between any of said lots or blocks, being the same, are hereby vacated." This language, Mark Huth advised, included Turner Street and the intersection. If there is an argument as to who owns the property or any easements' that exist, then that is between va.. >2O Utf 0 ~476 ..;:~ ,,:::::::: ~ Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 6, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . the property owners. Property ownership isn't part of a vacation. The vacation is for the County to say the right-of-way is not needed for public use any longer. Mr. Lindsay argued that Turner Street provided legal access to lots that weren't vacated. It provided legal access to all the lots south of Kennedy Street. If Turner Street had been vacated in 1949, the County would have violated its own ordinance. Commissioner Huntingford asked how these lots have access now? Mr. Lindsay answered that Turner Street was vacated in 1983, not in 1949 or 1918. He stated that they don't want the County to vacate any portion of 10th Avenue. The property disputes can be resolved in Superior Court. Tom Majhan stated that he agrees with Mark Huth when he says that the only portion with a question about legal access, is the portion of 10th Avenue north of Turner Street. Mr. Bowman has deeds that show he owns Lots 8 and 9 which say". . . that portion of 1 Oth Street east of the centerline." The only issue for the County to decide is if that portion 10th Street for which the vacation is requested, is needed for the public transportation network. When the blocks, and lots, and streets were vacated they were declared to be acreage. If someone wanted to build houses on this property, the County could require them to replat the property. There is no law saying that you cannot sell a piece of property that doesn't have a legal access. Chairman Hinton asked the width of the right-of-way on 10th Avenue? Gary Rowe reported that it is 50 feet wide. He explained the County's current policy for describing areas to be vacated, but noted that there is no specific way to interpret old vacation orders. Jim Lindsay stated that he believes that this is an issue of whether 10th Avenue is vacated south of Turner or through the intersection. He read from a Statutory Warranty deed from Alfred C. Sparling to Windle B. Mitchell, which he feels provides proof that 10th Avenue was vacated through Turner, and that Mr. Spigorelli owns that property. Tom Majhan reported that deeds don't necessarily prove ownership. The whole chain of title of this property is not before the Commissioners. If there is a dispute regarding ownership, that is a matter for Superior Court, not the County Commissioners. Almer Anderson was sworn in and explained that he has a deed he received from the County in 1951. If 10th Street is vacated north of Turner it will cut off access to his two lots. He feels its an imposition for the County to sell 50 feet of 10th Avenue north of Kennedy Road and cut him off from his property. Commissioner Huntingford asked if the County would have sold 50 feet of an unvacated road? Mark Huth reported that the County would not sell an unvacated road. Judith Burkes Johnson, Box 1689, Port Townsend, was sworn in. She stated she owns property to the south of Turner which has an access easement over 10th Avenue. She has also sold property to Ms. Gray and Mr. Anderson, and granted easement over 10th Avenue to those properties. To have it vacated at this point would adversely effect numerous families. She requested that the Board deny this vacation request and advised that the property owners will work out the rest. .vlL 20.·..)0 Ut~ ,.(" o 1.477· .4(i::'llllil/¡¡111 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 6, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Commissioner Huntingford asked what portion of Turner Street is vacated? Mark Huth answered that all of it is vacated. Nancy Grav, P.O. Box 1741, Port Townsend, was sworn in and stated that she purchased Block 5 from Judith Johnson. She owns six lots, two of which border on 10th Avenue. When she purchased the lots it was with the under- standing that she had a 25 foot easement to her lots, a portion of which is across 10th Avenue. If you chose to vacate 10th Avenue, it will landlock her lots. She urged the Board not to landlock her properties because it would cause an undue hardship on her. Steve Anderson, 402 Sommerville Road, was sworn in and stated that his property is located at the southern end of 10th Avenue. He was given the impression that he had an easement all the way up to Kennedy. If 10th Avenue is vacated, he has no access to his property. The City has built a reservoir on the other side and he has no access to his property through that side. Jim Lindsay asked why there was a vacation of Turner Street in 1983 if, as Mr. Huth states, it was vacated in 1949? He believes that the County owns that intersection. If the County vacates that portion of 10th Avenue without dealing with the intersection, it will landlock these property owners. If Turner Street had been vacated in 1949 that would have blocked access to the lots (in Block 1 and Block 6) to the south. He doesn't believe that was the intent of that vacation. Tom Majhan added that the County only has a right of passage on the right- of-way. It does not own the land. The abutting property owner owns the land in older plats. More than the streets were vacated in these old vacations. The lots and blocks were also vacated. Marilvn Seton was sworn in and explained that Discovery Timber Company owns property in this area and they object to the vacation of 10th Avenue north of Kennedy Road because it would not leave them access to their property. Commissioner Wojt noted that there are three sections to this request: 1) the vacation of the alley, which there doesn't seem to be any objection to being vacated, 2) there are objections to the vacation of 10th Avenue north of Turner because of the access it provides to adjacent properties" and 3) 10th Avenue south of Kennedy Road, which there are objections to vacating also. Hearing no further public comment the Chairman closed the public hearing. Commissioner Huntingford asked Mr. Bowman if he would agree with the condition of the Hearing Examiner regarding the vacation of the alley? Mr. Bowman stated that he owns the lots on both sides of the alley. Commissioner Huntingford stated that he feels there needs to be some clarifica- tion of ownership in the area south of Turner. He moved to deny the vacation of 10th Avenue at this time and allow the vacation of the alley with the conditions as recommended by the Hearing Examiner. Commissioner Wojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Mark Huth asked if the reason for denying the vacation of 10th Avenue is due to the County's need for this right-of-way for public use. The Board concurred that is correct. .VØ- . 20 rAG! 0 .1.478 .'~~ .~:tf~¡¡~ ~: ..::::li¡:¡;ii¡IIII~:~iit¡¡{:!:!¡~ Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 6, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jack Orr re: Petition to Set Aside Resolution No. 27-94; The Statutory Vacation of a Portion of Third Street in the Plat of Irvine- Park Addition: This item was postponed until 3:00 p.m. on September 12, 1994 at the request of Mr. Orr. CONTRACT re: Professional Lee-al Services; Boe-Ie and Gates: Commissioner Huntingford moved to sign the agreement for the legal services with Bogle and Gates. Commissioner Wojt seconded the motion. Commis- sioner Huntingford and Chairman Hinton voted for the motion. Commissioner Wojt voted against the motion. The motion carried. Emere-ency Services Coordinator Bob Minty re: Permit and Request for Waiver of Fee; Quilcene Fair and Parade: Bob Minty reported that the insurance for the Quilcene Fair has been handled through the Puget Sound Schools Risk Pool which is currently in the process of chang- ing carriers. He discussed this with the School Superintendent this morning and they are working on getting this insurance coverage for the Fair. All of the required County Departments have signed off on this permit. He sug- gested that the permit be approved contingent on the submittal of the neces- sary insurance papers before the Fair. The Fair has also asked for a wavier of the permit fee. Commissioner Wojt moved to: 1) approve a donation of $100 from the County's contingency portion of the Hotel/Motel Fund to the Quilcene Fair, 2) to deny their request for a waiver of the permit fee, and 3) to approve the permit contingent on the submittal of the required insurance papers before the Fair. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Juvenile Services Director Lois Smith re: CONTRACT #2515- 95291 (1) re: New Prol!ram Fundinl!; State Department of Social and Health Services: AND Administrative Clerk Position for Juvenile Services: Lois Smith reported that a grant for one time only funding for an at risk youth program has been awarded to the County. Commissioner Wojt moved to approve the contract with the State Department of Social and Health Services for new "at risk" youth program funding. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. The office duties will be re-arranged with the hiring of a new counsellor. One counsellor will handle all of the non-offender population while the other will handle the offender population. The other position being recruited is a part time Senior Administrátive Clerk. She asked if this position could be increased to full time? There would be no budget impact in making this position full time for 1994 because it was budgeted for a full year and is just now being hired. The Board concurred that the position be advertised as a full time position. The meeting was recessed at the end of the scheduled business on Tuesday and reconvened with all three Board members present on Wednesday. The Board attended a workshop with Henderson and Young, Consultants and Planning Commission regarding level of service standards and capital facilities VDt eo u~ 01.479 ~ Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 6, 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . planning. In the afternoon the Board met with David Skeen regarding some budget items he is requesting for 1995 for the Prosecuting Attorney's Office. ~... JEFFERSON COUNTY ARD OF COMMISSIONERS ~C:Seiy~~--- Clerk of the Board Ó \\ ., ...20 tAft 0 1480 ..:J ,'::::::;"-::: .';':':':':':0:' A1~;i!:;j:ii!!!!~' ..::::d:¡!11Ifill~:1111