Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM101992 c..t~ <;;;? '";::::..ò..c: MINUTES WEEK OF OCTOBER 19, 1992 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Larry W. Dennison. Commissioner B. G. Brown and Commissioner Richard E. Wojt were both present. PUBLÌC COMMENT PERIOD: The County's involvement and what portion of Union Wharf the County owns was discussed. APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Wojt moved to adopt and approve the items on the consent agenda as presented. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. 1. RESOLUTION NO. 95-92 re: Establishment of a Jefferson County Law and Justice Council 2. RESOLUTION NO. 96-92 re: The statutory vacation of a portion of platted Cedar Avenue in the plat of Irving Park Addition 3. RESOLUTION NO. 97-92 re: The statutory vacation of a portion of certain streets and an alley in the plat of Eisenbeis Bayview Addition 4. RESOLUTION NO. 98-92 re: Establishing a name for a private road; Cormorant View Drive 5. RESOLUTION NO. 99-92 re: Establishing a name for a private road; Bureaucracy Boulevard 6. RESOLUTION NO. 100-92 re: Establishing a name for a private road; Red Tape Way 7. Resignation of Member of the Parks Advisory Board; Tom Embree 8. PROCLAMATION re: October 23 and 24, 1992 as HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE COLLECTION DAYS 9. RESOLUTION NO. 101-92 re: Appointing Bond Counsel Ole Brekke and Anita Reynolds. Brinnon Seniors of Brinnon re: 1992 Bud2et for the Brinnon Senior Center: Anita Reynolds stated that the Brinnon Seniors have been told that they need to explain their "Non-budget" account before their fourth quarter allocation of County funds will be approved for payment. Mary Baldridge, Accountant for the Auditor's Office explained that the "non-budget" account was discovered during a routine audit, and she feels there is enough money in that account to carry them through the last quarter of 1992. Commissioner Brown asked what a "non-budget" account is? Ole Brekke explained that this account is used for the funds that the Senior organization raises from sources other than the County. Mary Baldridge reported that any money received by the Brinnon Senior organization (especially from UGN and or the Community Action Council) is to be deposited directly with the County Treasurer. Commissioner Brown asked what the sources of the money in the ..~ 18 a~! 00 984 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 19, 1992 Page: 2 "non-budget" account are? Ole! Brekke reported that some of the money was from donations, but the source of the balance of the money in unknown. Commissioner Brown asked why there needs to be two accounts~ when the Brinnon Senior's are to use the money for Senior programs at the Center? Ole Brekke stated that the "non-budget" account funds don't have the same use limitations that t~e County money does. Mary Baldridge stated that when this was discussed last year, the agreement was that the account, which was called the "rainy day" account, was to be used before the County provided any more money to the Brinnon Seniors. Commissioner Brown stated that all the funding provided to the Brinnon Seniors is for Senior programs at the Center, regardless of the source of the funds. The discussion continued regar4ing the need for more County funds for the Senior Center and the use of the Center. Ole Brekke reported that he feels the money in the "non-budget" account is for use by the BriJ!lllon Seniors for anything they want. The money from the County is for the operation of the Senior . Center. Commissioner Brown stated that the County is funding the programs for th¢ Brinnon Seniors, which includes the operation of the Center (per contract). Anita Reynolds asked if the Bdnnon Seniors could be paid the last quarter allocation from the County with the understanding :that if they run out of money before the end of the year, they would use their own funds? Commissioner Brown clarified that the agreement during the final budget hearings for 1992 was: that the funds in the "rainy day" (now called "non-budget") account would be used before! the County pays it's allocation. Anita Reynolds asked how long it would take to get a chþck if the funds in the "non-budget" account are used before the end of the year? Mary Ba,ldridge reported that she would hold the check for the fourth quarter allocation until the BriImon Seniors provide the required documentation to show that their funds have been expended. BUSINESS FROM COUNTY DEPARTMENTS PUBLIC WORKS Memo to Board re: Subdivision Ordinance Standards: Public Works Director Gary Rowe explained that his ¡ memo dated October 9, 1992 reviews the problem that will occur for some subdivisions if the new Subdivision Ordinance is passed today. In some cases for subdivision applications submitted prior to July 1, 1992 (which would be vested under the old ordinance), the road construction requirements to access lots in the new Ordinance are less onerous than the prior OrdinaIilce. There are instances where the applicant would have to apply for a variance to meet what is acceptable under the new ordinance. The Board concurred that Gary Rowe deal: with the subdivision applications, on a case by case basis, and review them under the old an4 new ordinance simultaneously and apply the lesser standard. PLANNING AND BUILDING HEARING re: PrQPosed Buildin2 Code Ordinance: Eric Toews, Assistant Planner, explained that a public hearing was already held on August 3, 1992 for this proposed ordinance which at that time ~ncluded provisions relating to residential setbacks and height restrictions. All of the publiþ testimony received at the August hearing related to these provisions and was opposed td the language as written. The staff and the Board met after the hearing and the Board directed that these sections be removed from the ordinance. Consideration will be given tþ incorporating setbacks and height restrictions into another ordinance at a later date. The Prosecuting Attorney has reviewed this revised draft of the building code ordinance. He reports there are still some revisions that should be made: d . 18 H~'r 00 985 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 19, 1992 Page: 3 Findings (Page 1) Amend date of second hearing to read October 19, 1992. Section 3. Item #5 (page 2) Provision relating to Washington State regulations for barrier free facilities. These provisions are within the State Building Code, so this item will be deleted. Section 5.30 (bottom Page 3) Incorrect reference to Ordinance 26-82. The proper reference is to Ordinance 09-0727-92 (regulating Road Approach Permits). Section 6.30 Board of Appeals (page 4) The State Building Code sets up a Board of Appeals. This section will be deleted. Agricultural structures, Eric Toews reported, are exempt from this ordinance (page 3) as follows: "Buildings or structures erected exclusively for the storage of livestock, feed, and/or farm implements, provided said structures: are free standing, unless attached to another agricultural building; do not contain plumbing, except as necessary to maintain farm animals; do not contain a heat source, such as a woodstove or electric heat, unless specifically permitted. " Chairman Dennison opened .the hearing for public comments for or against the proposed ordinance. John Boulton stated that several people here today have small sawmills that have access to supplies of cull logs which they use to mill specialty products. His understanding is that this ordinance would not allow the use of the lumber produced by these sawmills. Chairman Dennison stated that Mr. Boulton is referring to the Building Code sections that require the use of graded lumber. Building Inspector Mike Ajax reported that the building code requires that lumber to be used in residential structures be graded by a properly certified lumber grader. Chairman Dennison asked if the County must use this portion of the building code, if the code is adopted by reference? Mark Huth reported that for the County to amend this section of the Code, an amendment must be submitted to the State's Building Code Council for their review and approval. Mike Ajax added that lumber is graded to determine its strength for use in construction. Eric Toews reported that the State Building Code has been in effect since July 1, 1992. He noted that the County could amend the Building Code to use non-graded lumber in non- residential structures without getting approval from the State Building Code Council. John Boulton stated that the problem is that small sawmills don't produce enough lumber to pay to have a certified lumber grader come to their mill to grade it. He asked about the use of un-graded cedar siding? Mike Ajax reported that cedar siding is a non-structural material so it can be used in structures. The grade of siding has to do with the clarity of the material. Chairman Dennison reiterated that the County can write an amendment to the County's Code and submit it to the State Building Code Council for approval. Silas Houghton asked if a certified lumber grader is readily available? Another man reported that a certified lumber grader can be hired to provide this service for approximately $35 per hour. Mark Huth reported that the County cannot drop below the minimum performance standards that the State has already enacted. Chairman Dennison suggested that the County consider writing an exemption to the State Code which says that ungraded lumber can be used in residential structures if a notice is placed on the title to the property to that effect. Fred Tuso asked if the County's Code can say that ungraded lumber can be used in non- agriculture and non-residential structures? He suggested that the County have an employee of the Planning Department trained and certified to grade lumber. Mark Huth reported that the County cannot go into competition with the people that provide this service in the private sector. Harold Newman stated that he would like to see the County be responsible for grading lumber. VOL 18 rMJ' ·00 98tì Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 19, 1992 Page: 4 Dan Newman stated that he has been in the sawmill business for years and he used to be a PLIB lumber inspector. He reported on how the grade of lumber has deteriorated over the years. He asked that he be allowed to cut and use his own lumber. John Boulton stated that if there is something that the County can tell the small sawmill owners to do (as a group) to help get this change in the Building Code. They are willing to help. They are willing to back up any action that the County can legally take to change this situation. Mari Phillips stated that she is concerned that this represents further erosion of rural county economics and civil liberties. She asked what Clallam County is doing about this? Mark Huth reported that every County in the State is subject to the State building code. Fred Tuso asked that two amendments be added to Section 4 of the Ordinance: 1) to allow the use of ungraded lumber in non-residential structures and 2) have the Prosecuting Attorney and the Building Inspector write up an amendment that allows the use of ungraded lumber in residential structures. Commissioner Brown reported that the Building Code already allows the use of ungraded lumber in agricultural structures, and an amendment can be added allowing its use in non-residential structures. The discussion continued on allowing the Building Inspector to grade lumber and the types of structures in which ungraded lumber can be used. Silas Houghton said he reviewed the penalties because he believes that people can advertently or inadvertently break this law everyday in their own households. For every day that the law is broken there is a $1,000 fine. He suggested that common sense be used in setting these penalties. Fred Tuso asked if the penalties are part of the UBC (Uniform Building Code)? Mark Huth stated that the UBC requires that a criminal and civil penalty be imposed. The penalty in the County's Code is the least amount prescribed. Alvin Ackerman asked where a person can get a copy of the Building Code? Mike Ajax reported that the UBC costs about $75 to $80, but there is another book called Dwelling Construction under the UBC which is sold by the Planning Department for about $12. Hearing no further public comments the Chairman closed the public hearing. Commissioner Brown moved to approve the ordinance with an amendment to allow ungraded lumber to be used in non-residential (Le. garages, carports, utility sheds) structures and directed the Plannîng Department staff to draft an amendment to submit to the Building Code Council for approval which will allow ungraded lumber in residential structures. Commissioner Wojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Eric Toews reported that he will draft the language requested and review it with the Board before the ordinance is signed. Final Short Plat Approval #SP10-91; Two Lot Short Plat; Pleasant Harbor; Wayne Harris: Permit Technician Michelle Wood reported that all required departments have signed off on this two lot short plat. Commissioner Brown moved to issue final approval of the Pleasant Harbor Short Plat. Commissioner Wojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanim ous vote. Request for an amendment of the Comprehensive Plan; Frank Hyde: Planning and Building Department Director Craig Ward reported that Frank Hyde is asking to be allowed to subdivide some property north of Quilcene (Lot 4 of the Hyde Short Plat) which ~(\t 18 ~Aç;c 00 987 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 19, 1992 Page: 5 is designated Resource Land. The Resource Land designation allows parcels no less than five acres in size. The property Mr. Hyde wants to divide is 7.9 acres in size, which means that one parcel would be less than five acres. Mr. Hyde has noted that this property is surrounded by other properties that are less than five acres in size. He has asked for a change in the optimal land use map designation of this parcel. Craig Ward reported that he reviewed the record of the Hyde Short plat which indicates that this area is designated as rural on the Optimal Land Use map. Commissioner Wojt moved to submit Mr. Hyde's request to the Planning Commission to review the request to change the Comprehensive Plan Optimal Land Use Map designation of Lot 4 of the Hyde Short Plat from Resource Land to rural. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. Craig Ward reported that the Planning Commission will hold a hearing on this request and make a recommendation to the Board. The Chairman called for a vote on the motion. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. Representatives of Skookum Jump Rope Company re: Community Development Block Grant Application: Jim Westall, Carl Nomura and Bonnie Lichty representing Skookum Jump Rope, submitted a packet of information about a Community Development Block Grant Application for a project to build a 10,000 square foot building on property at the Port Townsend marina. This building will house a multi-faceted transitional center for disadvantaged people. Commissioner Brown moved to set a public hearing and community meeting for November 2, 1992 at 4:30 p.m. to discuss the block grant application for Skookum Jump Rope. Commissioner Wojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. The meeting was recessed at the end of the business day on Monday and reconvened on Thursday at 1 :00 p.m. All three Board members were present. Review of the Preliminarv Draft Environmental Impact Statements; Mixed Use Residential. Commercial and Recreational Development (SDP91-0017); Inn at Port Ludlow; Pope Resources: Planning and Building Department Director Craig Ward reported that the scoping process for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the Inn at Port Ludlow project was done several months ago. The Board determined that an assessment of cumulative impacts from the overall development at Port Ludlow was also necessary. The Board also granted a request from Pope Resources that the EIS be bifurcated into: 1) a cumulative impact assessment of the overall Port Ludlow Development, and 2) a project specific EIS on the Inn a Port Ludlow proposal. The preliminary drafts of these two documents were submitted to the County simultaneously. He then introduced Susan Thomas who was hired by the County to review the preliminary drafts of these documents. Craig Ward noted that if the Board feels comfortable with these draft documents in their present form they can determine when the documents should be released to the public. Susan Thomas explained that her approach to reviewing these documents has been to assure that they are complete and address all of the issues brought up in the scoping process. She also tried to assure that the documents present the information in a manner that is straight forward and clear to the public. Overall Development Plan EIS: Susan Thomas explained this is a conceptual document for the overall development of Port Ludlow by Pope Resources. The proposal is for development of 1,200 acres over a 10 year period including: 700 residential units, of which 531 are single family and 169 are multi- family; 45,000 square feet of commercial space at the intersection of Oak Bay and Paradise Bay Road. The first phase of development is anticipated to begin as soon as 1993 which will include the hotel, 72 residential units and 2,500 square feet of commercial space associated with the Inn. The next phase would include more residential units and the expansion of the '~DI~ 18 fA~r, 00 988 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 19, 1992 Page: 6 marina (100 slips). The existing golf course and clubhouse would be expanded in a future phase. Out of the total 1,200 acres of development the single family residential sites would occupy about 1,118 acres (of that area 751 acres would be dedicated open space). The remaining 82 acres would be mixed use, multi-family and commercial dwellings. A portion of each of those areas would also be kept as open space. The total open space in the 1,200 acres of this development would be approximately 800 to 815 acres. In the no action alternative no development would take place and this land would be available for logging. In the alternative proposal the same number and type of residential units and commercial development would occur. The development would be clustered to a smaller total area of about 853 acres (29% less). The southwest portion of the site wouldn't be developed. The important difference between the proposal and the alternative is the amount of land designated "open space" and the land available for future development. In the alternative, a minimum of 10% of each development area would remain as open space (in accordance with the County Subdivision Ordinance). This would be a total of 85 acres. Most of the 387 acres not used would be available for future applications, so there could be development after the 10 year period of this document. Earth: The main impacts are from the grading (590,000 cubic yards), compression of soil, and the potential for increased runoff and soil erosion during construction. There is a formula (the Universal Soil Loss equation) used to determine the amount of soil lost from a site each year. Without any development on the site about 42 cubic yards of soil would be lost through erosion on this site per year. Without any erosion control measures the construction planned for the development would increase that amount to about 374 cubic yards per year during the project build out. The alternative would reduce these amounts by approximately 29% because there is less clearing, grading, etc. The concern is that the mitigative measures will address the erosion and sedimentation problems. There is a strict program of maintenance, monitoring, evaluation and readjustment of the mitigative measures as well as a person on site during construction who will be accountable to make sure that all of the erosion and sedimentation control practices are working. Water: This includes water quality and water quantity. Many of the pollutants of concern are carried in stormwater runoff. About 10% of the total area will be covered with impervious surfaces. The same program for maintenance, monitoring, evaluation and re- adjustment of mitigative measures have been suggested for water quality. Shellfish sampling as well as water quality sampling is required with a quarterly report. The marina expansion will increase the number of boaters in the area which will impact the water quality. Mitigative measures to enforce boating regulations have been suggested. Water Quantity: Maps showing the four major aquifers have been provided. The water availability has been projected using assumptions about the recharge of wells that have not been tested. These are speculative figures. A monitoring program has been included. The consultant has estimated that the capacity of the water supply would be adequate for the yearly and quarterly use for the development as well as the 877 lots that have been sold, but not built upon. There is a specific recommendation to compensate for a projected deficit of 53 gallons per minute for peak day use at full build out. There is a recommendation in the consultant report that the State Department of Health rate of 800 gallons of water per day for single and multi-family dwellings, be changed to 480 gallons per day because there is a good conservation program in place which has decreased the demand for water. Plants and Animals: There is a good assessment and inventory of wildlife and plants on the site. There will be a loss of wildlife and displacement of certain species as well as fragmentation of the habitat that is left. The proposal with 815 acres of open space leaves a lot of diverse habitat to the species that exist there now. Recommendations are included on how to buffer and restrict damage to the wetlands. Archaeology: This was added to the scope of the EIS after bones were found in the Port Ludlow area. A procedure has been set up to follow if a construction worker digs up something. There are maps to indicate where items 'have already been found. 'iÛt. 18 r~r:' on· 989 · . Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 19, 1992 Page: 7 Housing: This project adds 700 housing units to the area which are targeted to be purchased by moderate to upper income people (50 years or older) who are semi-retired or retired. The real concern is for housing employees of this development. The list of types of employees does not include construction workers. The underlying assumption is that there is construction going site now and that construction would continue at about the same level. These workers are living somewhere now and it is assumed that will not change. The clerical, office, and sales positions that will be hired by Pope Resources directly are considered the primary employees for this development. The estimate is a net of 51 new primary employees over the next 10 years. All of the people to do maintenance of yards and homes and serve the homeowners are considered secondary employees. It would be too speculative to try to estimate how many secondary jobs this project will generate. The salary level for the primary jobs runs from $9,000 a year (maid at the Inn) up to approximately $32,000 a year (hotel manager). Mitigation has been proposed that the developer could construct a mobile home park within commuting distance for employees. 20 of the slots in the existing R V Park could be made available for workers and in the off season an additional 10 spaces could be opened. Transportation: The traffic analysis for the proposed development indicates that there won't be a problem within the development. The problem will be at the SR104/Paradise Bay Road intersection and the SR104/Teal Lake Road intersection. Without this project, by the year 2000, there will be close to 20,000 vehicles per day (service level F or stop and go traffic) at these intersections. With this development traffic service level F will be reached by 1995. It is hard to suggest improvements that will really solve this problem. The mitigative measures indicate that the proponent will contribute their share to whatever projects are done to improve these intersections. Public Services: This review includes fire, schools and hospital. Most of the summary is based on a fiscal impact analysis, which includes many assumptions. The Assessor's Office found the estimate of 132,680,000 dollars of additional assessed value to be a reasonable figure. Fire and Emergency Services: The existing services were assessed in terms of the number of paid and volunteer firemen compared to the population and the number of calls generated currently. A straight numerical relationship was developed based on the estimated increase in population. When the fiscal analysis is based on this type of relation, it shows that a proportionate share of the operating and capital costs of fire and emergency services are more than paid for by the increased tax revenues. The question is whether or not a straight numerical extrapolation is valid. The developer has built into the design of the hotel and surrounding structures, prevention features to prevent and suppress fires quickly. Some measure to allow the staff of the hotel to address emergency situations quickly as well as a system for quicker notification of the fire department have also been included. Schools: A low rate of student generation is indicated. They estimate that 45 students will come from the development with another 16 coming from employees families. The revenues generated from the property tax base are estimated to cover this increase. There could be a need in the future for more classroom space. A remedy suggested is to have of the developer help the school district find a new elementary school site or help with the cost of acquiring a new site. There are many assumptions in the chapter including: That the student generation rates are low, the employee population considers only the primary group, the State method of projecting population was used to estimate the student number and that the School District's maintenance and operation level and capital improvement levies will be renewed at their present rates. Library: The expansion of the library took into account the future expansion of the whole district. vat 18 Hr:, on 990 , . Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 19, 1992 Page: 8 Hospital: The assumption is that the Hospital's bond which didn't pass the last time, will be brought up again and again until it does pass. It is also assumed that since this is a hospital that charges for services, any change in services will be paid for by the users. Project EIS: The project is the Inn at Port Ludlow. It includes a 36 unit hotel, 72 residences (23 single family and the balance town houses or other multi family dwellings), 2,500 square feet of commercial space, a new marine manager's office, renovation of the marina restrooms, expansion of the Mill Pond, parking for 400 vehicles, landscaping, installation of rip rap along the marina and moving a fuel tank from underground to above ground. This project will be developed on 17.5 acres with about 10 1/2 acres in open space. The Inn is a three story structure with 35 guest rooms. There is a 50 foot high tower designed into the Inn that will house a ladder for fire fighters to get up to the roof of the building from the outside. The tower is also a feature to make this a landmark building. In the alternative proposal the marina and the Inn remain the same, but there would only be 56 residential units (16 would be single family). There would be a different configuration for the Mill Pond. Earth: Issues are similar to those discussed for the overall development plan, but they are site specific. There is a conceptual erosion control plan which includes a component for maintenance, a person accountable and responsible on site, and re-evaluation. Water Quality and Quantitv: Adding a parking lot area and structures concentrates the stormwater runoff, so the water quality will be monitored as well as shellfish and sewage effluent in the manner described for the overall development. A specific plan for monitoring and accountability will be developed for the final EIS. The Mill Pond will be redesigned in an effort to avoid having to treat the algae build up chemically. The features planned are an attempt to keep the mill pond balanced in oxygen level and salinity. Plants and Animals: There is some displacement of wildlife, particularly waterfowl. There is balance because some habitat will be eliminated while better habitat is added. Environmental Health: There have been several test pits excavated on the site to determine if there are any contaminated soils left from the mill operations. A process has been outlined to handle the testing, removal, and disposition of contaminated soils. Aesthetics: This section says that the views will be changed. A specimen viewpoint is taken and then an explanation of how it will look different when the development is complete is included. Transportation: SR 104 and Paradise Bay Road traffic is a problem. This EIS looks only at the impact from this project. The peak hour traffic turning at the intersection is discussed, and the mitigative measures indicate that the project proponent will contribute a proportionate share to alleviate this problem. Public Services: Fire Service is the only public service addressed in this EIS. The hotel structure and density of development are out of scale with the typical structures and densities addressed by this fire district. The proponent has said that they will make this project a less burdensome prospect to the Fire District by investing in prevention and fire suppression by automatic means. Chairman Dennison commended Susan Thomas, the Planning Department staff and Pope Resources for their commitment to this process. Commissioner Brown moved to release the draft Environmental Impact Statement as presented. Commissioner Wojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. 'tal 18fAí;¡; on 991 .. { \. Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 19, 1992 Page: 9 David Cunningham, Pope Resources, stated that there is a provision in the statute that the Board can hold a public hearing on the draft EIS. Craig Ward stated that the date that the DEIS is issued is the date that copies are sent to the State Department of Ecology and made available to the public. A distribution list has been prepared of the agencies with jurisdiction and a mailing list of people who have requested to be notified when the document is available. Pope Resources will run 100 copies of each document and 50 of the appendices. Copies will be made available for public inspection at locations in the Port Ludlow area and at the County Library. There will be a charge for copies which will be available from the Planning and Building Department or Pope Resources. David Cunningham stated that they plan on having the copies sent to the DOE and agencies on Monday October 26, 1992. Commissioner Brown moved to set a public hearing on the draft EIS for November 17, 1992 at 7:00 p.m. at the Port Ludlow Fire Hall. Commissioner Wojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. MEETING ADJOURNED Int JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1 8 uu .on Q92 ., '"