Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM102593 C:..t~ 'V" ~ö..c: MINUTES WEEK OF OCTOBER 25, 1993 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Richard Wojt. Commissioner Robert Hinton and Commissioner Glen Huntingford were both present. Mary Baldrid2e. Accountant. Auditor's Office re: Establishin2 a Fund to Cover Excess Compensation Payments required bv the State Retirement System: Accountant Mary Baldridge explained that due to a change in the laws for the State retirement system (PERS) and the new way retirement benefits are calculated, she is suggesting that payment of these excess amounts be made from a special fund instead of having each department pay them when an employee retires. Commissioner Hinton moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 94-93 establishing an Excess Compensation Reserve Fund for payments required by the State Retirement System. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. lIa Mikkelsen. Treasurer re: Adoption of the Cash Handlers Policv: Treasurer Ila Mikkelsen presented the Jefferson County Cash Handlers Policy for the Board to adopt. She reported that this policy can be changed if it is found that a portion doesn't work as planned. The Prosecuting Attorney has reviewed the policy and feels it is it covers everything it should. Commissioner Hinton suggested that someone from the Sheriff's Office review the robbery procedures section to make sure that it is in com- pliance with standard practices. Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve the Jefferson County Cash Handler Policy and Procedures Manual as presented. Commissioner Hinton seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Communitv Services Director David Goldsmith re: Update on Discovery Bav Grant Contract and Discussion of City's Position on UGA Boundaries: David Goldsmith reviewed the updated contract for the Discovery Bay Watershed Grant contract that is item 9 on the consent agenda. He then reported that he has reviewed the City's position on the UGA boundaries in the County and suggested that the Board listen to the comments at tonight's hearing and then discuss the issues further with the City at the next GMA Steering Committee meeting. 9 f'A.G£ no :1705 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 25, 1993 Page: 2 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: There was discussion of the following: Statutory vacations within the City of Port Townsend, thanks to the staff who put together the information packet for the surplus real property sale, thanks to the Board for the parking improvements in front of the Courthouse, why City Council candidates have campaign signs up in the County, the possibility of the Tri Area becoming a UGA and what that might mean, the amount that taxes are going up each year, concerns for mandates in UGA's and that there hasn't been enough information on what a UGA means to a property owner, if the County has maps of the aquifer recharge areas that the public can have a copy of, if the county will be spending any funds on planning for sewers in the UGA's and to what extent the infrastructure requirements will studied. APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commis- sioner Hinton moved to approve and adopt the items on the consent agenda as presented. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. 1. Shoreline Permit SDP#93-007; Recreational Mooring Buoy in Mystery Bay; Gene Cox 2. AGREEMENT re: Reimbursable Work; Maintenance of Quinault/South Shore Road, West End; Grays Harbor County 3. RESOLUTION NO. 95-93 re: Establishing the Name for a Private Road; Dathne Lane 4. RESOLUTION NO. 96-93 re: The Statutory vacation of a Portion of Pine Street and of Seventh Avenue; In the plat of Irving Park Addition; Doug Snyder et al 5. Application to Open Right-of-way; A portion of an old deeded right-of-way for Logging Purposes; Un-maintained portion of Penny Creek and Dry Creek Right-of-way (Section 4, T27N, R2W, W.M.); U. S. Forest Service 6. Application to Open Right-of-way; A portion of Carnegie Avenue from the intersection of Prospect Avenue, north 200 feet; to private road standards; Plat of Irondale No.6; Michael Regan and Lili Raiquel 7. Approve Revised By-Laws; Storm water Management Advisory Board 8. Approve Amended Subdivision Plat LP-01-89; Correction of minor errors on the original mylar; Coyle Peninsula Properties BUSINESS FROM COUNTY DEPARTMENTS PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Elmer Paul and Gary Hilbert re: Proposed Property Exchan2e; IrvinS! Park Addition: Elmer Paul and Gary Hilbert submitted a proposal for a property exchange with the County. Public Works Director Gary Rowe reported that the Public Works Department has reviewed the proposal, but the Board has to make a finding that it is in the public interest to make the trade, before they can proceed. He reported that this trade would provide additional right-of-way along Discovery Road and next to a bridge in the area. He added that if the Board makes this finding there must agreement on the actual square footage to be traded, an appraisal of the property, and then the Superior Court Judge must review and approve the trade. Commissioner Hinton moved that the Board find that the proposed land trade between G.E. Development and the County is in the best interest of the County so the necessary processes can proceed. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Application for Assistance from the Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Fund: Commissioner Hinton moved to approve the payment of $500.00 from the Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Fund as submitted by American Legion Post #26. Commissioner Hun- tingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. ¡ .L rAer r~n :1706 ..11" Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 25, 1993 Page: 3 The Board then interviewed three persons interested in serving on the Parks Advisory Board: Rick Tollefson, Lawrence Stevens and Jana Hoffman Allen Appointment to the Parks Advisory Board: C9mmissioner Hinton moved to appoint Rick Tollefson and Lawrence Stevens each to a two year term on the Parks Advisory Board. (Their terms will expire October 24, 1995.) Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Appeal of Final Miti2ated Determination of Non-si2nificance; LL02-92 Lar2e Lot Subdivision; Brinnon; PulaU Point Partners (Continued from October 18. 1993): Chairman Wojt re-opened the hearing on this appeal. The Public Works Department has submitted a memorandum regarding the adequacy of the road. Commissioner Huntingford stated that the memo from the Public Works Department answers his concern regarding the Public Works Department review of the project. Chairman Wojt asked about the concern raised regarding the open space on the sub- division? Commissioner Huntingford noted that at the end of the last hearing it was noted that the habitat plan (Bald Eagle Management Plan) would control the use of the Open Space. Jim Pearson stated that is correct. The Pulali Partners have an agreement with the State Department of Wildlife, which precludes development, logging, and road building on the common area. A notice will be placed on the title to the property that the Bald Eagle Management Plan exists. Commissioner Hinton asked for the definition of "primitive road?" Scott Kilmer of the Public Works Department explained that the a primitive road is a gravel surfaced road with less that 100 cars per day traveling on it. Commissioner Hinton asked if it is typical for the Planning Department to propose conditions on a subdivision based on statements of a non-expert witness who observes the area from an adjacent property with field glasses? Jim Pearson answered that Mr. Gorsline is known to him. The information he presented was checked with the Natural Heritage Program of the Department of Natural Resources. They indicated that the plant com- munities that Mr. Gorsline was referring to are extremely rare in this area. The Planning Department felt that they had information about the proposal regarding a possible sig- nificant adverse environmental impact. The intent was not to have a blanket 100 foot setback, there would, however be a setback in areas where the plant communities were identified. Having the assessment done as a mitigating condition allowed the process to move ahead. Mr. Gorsline has a good reputation for providing factual information. He explained further that comments were sought on the preliminary threshold determination and Jerry Gorsline commented. Based on Ms. Cooke's findings, that these plant com- munities do not exist, the Planning Department recommends that Condition 5 be deleted. Chairman Wojt asked how the traffic was measured on this road? Scott Kilmer reported that six trips per household is a standard figure used for this type of area. There are reported to be three permanent residences on the road now and with the addition of eight more that would increase the trips per day to 70. Traffic counters are not placed on roads with less than 100 car trips per day. The County has no right-of-way on this road except for where the actual road is located and nothing can be done to the road until more right- of-way is obtained. Commissioner Huntingford stated that he reviewed the optimum land use map and the Pulali Point area could be developed, with adequate sewer and water, to a density of one unit per acre which is considerably more than is being proposed. Jim Pearson asked if there were over 100 trips per day if this would still be classified as a primitive road? Scott Kilmer stated that the road would not be classed as a primitive road if there were over 100 trips per day on it. The County would have to post the road with the proper warning signs. L drAG' OD :1707 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 25, 1993 Page: 4 Commissioner Huntingford moved to deny the appeal and to uphold the mitigated deter- mination of non significance with the deletion of mitigation measure 5. Commissioner Hinton seconded the motion. Chairman Wojt asked if the adequate provision for schools has been addressed? Mr. Bakemeier reported that they have a signed agreement with the school district. The chairman called for a vote on the motion. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. Judee William E. Howard re: Domestic Violence Orders and Bids for Indieent Defense: Judge William Howard came before the Board to discuss publication of domestic violence petitions. If an indigent person wants protection from someone who they don't have an address for the law authorizes service by publication, if the County Commissioners authorize payment for this service. This question came up about two weeks ago. The bill for service by publication is approximately $500. Judge Howard stated that it is hard to know how many times this would be used in a year. He advised that the Superior Court is not putting an amount in their budget for these publications. Bids for Indigent Defense: The Judge urged that the Board review the background of any attorneys who submit bids for indigent defense and conflict cases. The meeting was recessed at the conclusion of the scheduled business and reconvened at 7:00 p.m. at Port Townsend City Hall with all three Commissioners present. JOINT HEARING with City Council re: Interim UGA Boundarv Or- dinance: Mayor John Clise called the meeting to order and welcomed the 18 residents present and then turned the meeting over to Chairman Richard Wojt who explained the hearing procedure and then opened the hearing for public comment. County Community Services Director David Goldsmith then reviewed the proposed interim urban growth area boundary and the process used in recommending the boundary indicated. Michael Hildt, City Planning Director reported that the Port Townsend Planning Commis- sion held a hearing last Thursday evening on the Urban Growth Area boundaries. The City Planning Commission's recommendation, in the form of a memorandum from Dave Robison, City Planner, was submitted to the Board and the City Council last Friday. This memorandum outlined the Planning Commission recommendation along with Dave Robison's background information and a number of potential findings. Michael Hildt reviewed the City Planning Commission's four recommendations: 1) Planning Commission recommends that the City Council propose to Jefferson County to designate the City's interim urban growth area along the City's existing boundaries as required by RCW 36. 70A.II 0(1)(2), with certain attached findings. The City Council will develop findings to be attached after this hearing. 2) The City requests that the County and City work cooperatively on preparing a residential land capacity analysis to determine if UGA's are appropriately sized to accommodate the jointly adopted twenty-year growth projection. Similarly, cooperative planning and analysis of capacity for commercial and industrial lands should be accomplished prior to adoption of UGAs. 3) The City recommends that the areas characterized by urban growth which are adjacent to the City limits be shown on any and all maps showing the interim urban growth areas as an area under further study for possible inclusion in the Port Townsend urban growth area. 4) The City of Port Townsend does not concur with the County's proposal for interim UGAs outside the City of Port Townsend's city limits and that it reserves the right to petition such designations before the Growth Hearings Board. 1 [J rAG' 00 1708 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 25, 1993 Page: 5 City Public Works Director Bob Wheeler then responded regarding concerns about UGA boundaries and water supply and availability of water. The City must reserve enough of it's water supply to serve its UGA. The City has excess water for areas outside the City limits in the water service area, as defined by the Coordinated Water System Plan. The Council decreased, on an emergency basis, the outside service area due to concerns related to availability of water. The hope is that the Coordinated Water System Plan update will proceed to help address these concerns. The work on this document needs to move forward because without that they don't know how much water is available in areas outside of the city for water service. This information, they feel, is crucial to determining Urban Growth Areas. He then read from his response to a letter from David Goldsmith (dated October 15, 1993) regarding water service levels and the update of the Consolidated Water Service Plan. Bob Wheeler continued by noting that there may be other purveyors to provide additional water service for a UGA in the Tri Area. At this point in time that entity does not exist and the water availability is not known. The level of service standards have not been adopted yet. City staff is reviewing them. The Chairman then opened the public hearing. Tracy Burrows. 1000 Friends of Washington. 1305 4th Avenue. Seattle. stated that 1000 Friends of Washington is a watchdog organization for the Growth Management Act. Their interest is in preserving the qualities of life in Washington State. She summarized her letter of testimony which outlines the following concerns: · Concerned about the lack of a land capacity analysis for the proposed Interim Urban Growth Areas. · The size of the Tri Area UGA is too large. · The nature of commercial and industrial development permitted outside UGA's. She then read sections of her letter dated October 25, 1993 (See attached). Steve Hayden. Olympic Environmental Council. read from a letter he state he will submit as testimony (see attached). Paula Mackrow. Olympic Environmental Council. continued reading from the letter submitted by Steve Hayden (see attached as above). David Goldsmith stated that the approach that the County has taken is to outline boun- daries to start the discussion and the analysis. Water is a critical issue, but in looking at the Growth Management Act, it directs that the resources, lands, and best development patterns for the County be reviewed and a support system be developed around that. From the County's point of view the approach to be taken is to take the first initial step by looking at, and proposing interim UGA boundaries. These boundaries are interim, they are designed to be that way and they are designed to change. Michael Hildt stated that he understands that the County does not have a resource lands and critical areas ordinance done yet and the County has not done the studies necessary to address carrying capacity and water resources, etc. The County needs to take another look at the approach of proposing interim UGA boundaries based on a 10 year old Tri Area plan instead of the County-wide Planning Policies. He feels this approach may not serve the best interest of the county-wide taxpayers and utility rate payers and people concerned about their living environment. Guv Rudolph stated that the County has a frame work to work with in the community planning committee. He stated that he feels this group should be given the opportunity to do the work. A physical impact analysis for the area is needed up front. He stated he is concerned about when the critical areas ordinance will be available to the public. Planning and Building Department Director Craig Ward reported that the various drafts of the critical areas ordinance have been made available to the public. The final draft of the ordinance cannot be presented until the Board of Commissioners determines its content. L PH:: OQ :1709 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 25, 1993 Page: 6 Steven Havden referred to finding number 39 (in the draft Interim UGA Ordinance). He stated that the language in the joint County-wide Planning Policies say "UGA boundaries may be changed whenever it can be shown that the criteria set forth above, for size and boundary delineation, may no longer be met, provided said expansion shall only occur after the capital facilities is updated and adopted. "This indicates that the only anticipated changes are for expansion of a UGA. This reinforces what Michael Hildt is saying -- start small. Commissioner Huntingford suggested that the wording could be changed to say shrink or expand. David Goldsmith reported that the County-wide Planning Policies were adopted before the legislation requiring interim UGA boundaries was passed. The legislature has asked that the County put a boundary around UGA's to allow the analysis to be started to determine carrying capacities and see if the boundary is appropriate. The Growth Management Act provides three ways to deal with growth that cannot be accommodated in the anticipated area: 1) Reduce expectations (lower the level of service standards), 2) Change the land use assumptions and parameters and UGA boundaries, and 3) change the resource base, look at different ways of financing or increasing the amount of resources available. Ande Grahn stated that she has heard quite a bit of concern about water. She stated she is concerned about level of service standards. She is not sure that the people making decisions on these level of service standards understand what they are or how they will be enforced. This hasn't been adequately explained. How they will affect the City as a purveyor of water in the County has not been explained. She doesn't understand what a conditional water system is in a rural area. There are many questions and details that the matrix (Interim Level of Service Standards) doesn't explain adequately. She asked that the Board direct the staff to create much clearer level of service standards that will adequately describe what will happen with water in the County and what provisions are available for creating density in proposed UGA's and discouraging density outside UGA's. Hearing no further comment the public hearing was closed. The City Council members and the County staff and Commissioners then held a lengthy discussion, questions and answer period regarding the proposed Ordinance and boundaries. The meeting was recessed at the end of the pubHc hearing and reconvened on Tuesday morning at 9:00 a.m. with all three Board members present. HEARING re: Appeal of Final Miti2ated Determination of Non-si2nificance; Firwood Recreational Vehicle Park; Bob Sahli. Proponent (Plannin2 Department): The Chairman opened the public hearing on the appeal of the final mitigated determination of non-significance issued on the Firwood Recreational Vehicle Park proposed by Bob Sahli and reviewed the procedures and 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) No one answered. Q) Do any of the Commissioners have an interest in this property or issue? A) All three Commissioners answered no. Q) Do any of you stand to gain or lose any financial benefit as a result of the outcome of the hearing? A) All three Commissioners answered no. Q) Can you hear and consider this in a fair and objective manner? A) All three Commissioners answered yes. "'lI-t PM;r 00 :17:10 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 25, 1993 Page: 7 Q) Has any member of the Board engaged in communication outside this hearing with opponents or proponents on the issue to be heard? A) Commissioners Hinton and Huntingford answered no. Chairman Wojt reported that he has a distant relationship by marriage to Bob Sahli, who built a house for him years ago. He stated that he doesn't feel that will effect his decision. Associate Planner Jerry Smith reported that the Planning Department issued a final MDNS on this project on September 3, 1993 with 13 proposed mitigative measures. In order to expedite the application, a public hearing was scheduled with the Planning Commission on the preliminary Binding Site Plan for September 15. The day before that hearing, the Planning Department received two appeals; one from Bill Irwin and one from the Attorney for the Chimacum School District. He then reviewed the information included in the Board's packet. Chairman Wojt asked about the School District's contention that the County Commis- sioners have no jurisdiction to hear this appeal? Planning and Building Department Director Craig Ward reported that this is a legal matter that the Prosecuting Attorney should review. He suggested that the Board proceed with the hearing, but before final action they should consult with the Prosecuting Attorney. Commissioner Huntingford asked if the covenant proposed by the Sahli's exempting children from this recreational vehicle park would answer the School District's concern? Jerry Smith reported that mitigation measure number 10 requires that the applicant contact the School District regarding provision for schools. Craig Ward stated that he feels this mitigation addresses that, but whether or not it is an approach that the County can use must be resolved. Commissioner Hinton asked if it is the County's policy to consider a binding site plan prior to rezone approval? Craig Ward answered that Bill Irwin has raised two issues: 1) the legality of the location of the RV Park in a commercial zone, and 2) the incomplete information available on the binding site plan to allow proper evaluation of the project. This proposal, Craig Ward reported, is subject to the Subdivision Ordinance, not the Interim Zoning Ordinance. R V parks are regulated under the Subdivision Ordinance. Exemption number 5, Section 4 of the Interim Zoning Ordinance states "the division or development of land subject to the Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance as may be amended or the Camper Club Ordinance, is an exemption to the Interim Zoning Or- dinance. " Somewhat different standards are applied to subdivisions. Preliminary applications (on binding site plans or plats) are meant to provide adequate information to make the determinations needed for preliminary approval, but it is at the point of final approval that all of the requirements for binding site plan need to be met. The issue is whether or not this application is subject to the Zoning Ordinance. This is a legal issue which the Prosecuting Attorney should be asked to provide advice on. The fact that this application happens to be located within a commercial zone has no standing in this review. Commissioner Hinton asked if a zone change is pending on this site? Jerry Smith reported that there is a zone change pending on Mr. Sahli's property. It has been through the public hearing process and the Planning Commission has made a recommendation on it. The last step in the process, which is having a map prepared, has not be completed, however. Commissioner Hinton asked if this application has been reviewed by the Planning Commission? Jerry Smith reported that the hearing was opened by the Planning Commission on this proposal but, because a SEP A appeal was filed, the Planning Commis- sion voted unanimously to discontinue the hearing and reschedule it once the SEP A appeal is resolved. Craig Ward reported that the Planning Commission will re-schedule the hearing after the SEP A appeal is resolved. Erwin Jones. Attorney for Bill Irwin, stated that Mr. Irwin joins with the School District in questioning the jurisdiction of this Board to hear this matter at this point in time. He stated that he doesn't believe that the application is complete. The County ordinances require engineering data, and his client's engineer has been unable to effectively reply to the application because he doesn't have enough data. There is a serious zoning problem " rAC; no 1_711 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 25, 1993 Page: 8 because the commercial zone excludes uses other than commercial uses. Mr. Irwin questions whether this particular application is really an RV park. They believe it is not. There is no provision in the project for rental fee collection on a daily, or weekly basis. This project is, they believe, intended for long term, residential use. The Interim Zoning Ordinance provides a place for this type of application and excludes this type of use from the commercial zone. If Mr. Sahli wants this type of use in that zone he should ask the Commissioners to down zone the area. Mr. Irwin feels that the County has inadequate data to make any determination. Robert Sahli stated that Mr. Irwin has no idea of the amount of engineering that has been done on this project. They have provided the information requested by the Planners. The Tri Area Community Development Plan, which governs development in that area, says that a mixture of uses within commercial structures is encouraged. This RV Park is primarily meant for retirees who like to spend more than 14 days in an RV space. There is a need for this type of park in the County. These people can come and go as they wish and know that they will have a spot to come back to, as long as they lease it. They can't do this at a State Park. Chairman W ojt stated that one of the concerns is that these parks turn into permanent residences and could then possibly impact the schools. He asked if Mr. Sahli is agreeable to placing a restriction on the lots that would not allow children? Mr. Sahli stated that this park is basically planned for retirees and they are willing to write a covenant that no children are allowed, other than as guests. The chairman then opened the hearing for public comment and asked that anyone testifying swear to tell the truth. Bill Irwin, P.O. Box 521, Chimacum, swore to tell the truth. Mr. Irwin stated that they feel that this should have been reviewed by the Planning Commission first. There are many recommended measures, one of which is that Mr. Sahli will pay a portion of the cost of the road. No one has asked what the road cost and the Planning Commission might want to discuss that. There is no consideration of where the ingress or egress is for this project in relation to his project which has 109 parking spaces. There is no idea if there is an engineering or traffic problem due to this. If this is a long term residential use, has there been any consideration for fire protection, sewage, and water service, for permanent housing? When does the public get the information so they can evaluate the site correctly. The road vacation that was started six months ago, still isn't resolved, and won't be until the site plan is approved. The drainage ditch is within 100 feet of the drainfield which isn't legal. If they could find this error from the incomplete information they have, Mr. Irwin questioned what other problems there may be with the project. He feels there is no way to evaluate the project until an engineered drawing is presented. This is not a transient facility if they are allowing long term permanent residences with leases. Robert Sahli stated that he is amazed that Mr. Irwin would be concerned about the radius for turning inside his park. As far as the drainage system and the septic tank, his engineer has been working with the Department of Public Works on this situation for nearly a year now, and they have resolved all of the issues to meet the regulations. There is a 25 foot greenbelt all the way around the project. Marsha Harris. Chimacum School District, swore to tell the truth and stated that they have a concern about whether children will be living in this R V Park. They also question whether the County can legally restrict children from living there through a covenant, or restrict the ages of people who live in the park. Assuming that can not be done, and since people would be residing there during the school months, they believe there could be an impact on the Chimacum School District. Erwin Jones, Attorney, swore to tell the truth, and then stated that with regard to drainage that is an environmental concern which is what is being discussed here today. The information from the Public Works Department has not been provided today. Most impor- L C'. pre on 1712 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 25, 1993 Page: 9 tantly, Mr. Sahli is talking about long term residences. They are not entitled to the exemption from the subdivision ordinance. They're building a permanent residential facility and for that reason there are environmental concerns that need to be addressed. He doesn't feel Mr. Sahli has addressed any of these concerns. This project will not be used as an RV park regardless of the description of the vehicles. Jerry Smith reported that the Planning Department determined that all of the information was provided in accordance with the County's ordinances, and that the application is complete. Mr. Sahli was asked for more information and he submitted it. He further reported that the Prosecuting Attorney recommended that the Planning Commission not review the preliminary application until the SEP A appeal issues had been resolved. Chairman Wojt stated that it seems that the fine point of the argument is if the RV Park is truly that, if the lots are not rented on a short term basis. Jerry Smith reported that these questions will be addressed when the preliminary binding site plan is reviewed by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Huntingford asked if the septic system is designed for year around use? Jerry Smith reported that is determined by the Health Department. Bob Sahli responded that it is engineered for year around use if that is necessary. Mter further discussion of the project and the information provided by Mr. Sahli, Craig Ward explained that the Board has several options under SEP A including returning the application as being incomplete, and/or requesting additional information pursuant to determining whether there is a likely significant adverse environmental impact. The key issue for environment review is whether or not it is believed that there is a likely significant adverse impact. The Health Department's position is stated in a letter dated May 11, 1993, in which they require on-site septic system design to be approved. Jerry Smith reported that in addition to SEP A mitigative conditions there are certain basic conditions, such as drainage, access, and sewage disposal, that are built into preliminary binding site plan approval and must be satisfied before final approval is issued. Chairman Wojt asked about the concern raised by the School District regarding whether there is any legal way to restrict children or place age requirements on the project? Craig Ward stated that the Planning Department viewed the project as a temporary use, but did require mitigation to address adequate provision for schools because there felt there may be school children at the project. Mr. Sahli's suggestion that a covenant not allowing children would go further toward avoiding the likely adverse impact on the School District. Regarding the issue of this project being a mobile home park instead of an RV Park, Craig Ward stated that this boils down to an issue of State licensing. A mobile home park requires that a structure licensed under RCW 43.22 be placed on the property. It is not simply an issue of the length of time that the structure (RV) is placed on the site. The term "temporary" is not defined in the County's ordinance. The discussion continued regarding the ex- perience the County has had with R V parks in the past. Commissioner Hinton asked for clarification regarding the following conditions: · The condition that the occupancy be limited? He asked if there is a specific amount of time (such as six months as opposed to seven months) which is not an impact? Craig Ward answered that the issue is the impact to public facilities and services by permanent residences, while transient residences would not have that same impact. There may be wording changes that can be made in the mitigation to assure the transitory nature of the project. ,,0 r j:' - n01713 t; . Condition 11 regarding trees on the site being incorporated into the project buffer? Jerry Smith reported that there are significant trees on the site that should be incorporated into the project design. These trees need to be located and worked into the overall design of the project (buffers and open space). Craig Ward reported that the Board can change or incorporate new language in this mitigation. Commissioner Hinton asked who, in the Planning Department, has the experience and training to assess a landscape plan? Craig Ward reported , ..~ f . I Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 25, 1993 Page: 10 that no one has specific training, but they do have on the job training and experience to assess the adequacy of the landscape plans that are prepared by a specialist. . In an RV Park the Subdivision Ordinance requires that the Open Space be dedi- cated in perpetuity. Commissioner Hinton stated that he feels this wording should be changed to indicate it remain in Open Space as long as it's an RV Park. Jerry Smith reported that this wording is required by the Subdivision Ordinance for R V Parks. Hearing no further public comment, the Chairman closed the public testimony portion of the hearing. Commissioner Huntingford moved to continue this hearing to 3:30 p.m. on Monday, November 1, 1993. Commissioner Hinton seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. ~(J-ŸffL¿f1g~ Lorna L. Delaney, . Clerk of the Board SEAL: MEETING ADJOURNED UJ ~M: (}1 t7:14