Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM100289 ~ . :."., A~ 'r .'1 . ~~~~l~~I~B~Ilft~~"I~~:'~~f.~tt.~~~~I~~~~~~~~f:~f.~~~~~~:'ff.~~~I~~~~~f;~}~;t:f~r::~~~:t~:~~~:.~~~~~ :::::::~~::i::i::~::i::::>>::#ii*:iiii*:::::::i::iiii~i::i$~::i::i::i::iiii#ii$~i~i::::i::iiii*::ii::::f:~f:;::$$fi$::ff$$?:ii$~:f::i$:{:f$i::i::~::i$ff:;if$::::i::f::f::$ii:~::'%i$f::if::::-;$::$>>:~::~:$:~:::::f$i:~::~-:$::gf::g$::::#:~:f:::~$::;3:~:::::~::#:~::~::f::::f$f::f$$::i:~f::ii::$::$::::f$f:~:~::i$:~3$>>:~~$"}3i*:fiiiff$ififf::i$:: ....... ~~ ....... MINUTES Week of October 2, 1989 The meeting was called to order by Chairman George C. Brown at the appointed time. commissioner B. G. Brown and Commissioner Larry W. Dennison were both present. Warren steurer, Director, Recreation Department re: 1989-90 Swimming Pool Rental Agreement with Port Townsend School District #50: Recreation Director, Warren Steurer, reported that the swimming pool lease agreement for the 1989-90 season in the same as the previous years except for the union pay scale for the custodian. He then submitted a report of the activities that are provided by the Recreation Department at the pool. The total 1988-89 expenditures for the pool were $38,701.81 with $27,010.40 in revenues. There were 24,104 pool users during this time period. Chairman George Brown asked how many children participated in swimming lessons'? Warren steurer responded that 400 youths used the pool for American Red Cross swimming lessons during the 1988-89 season. Ten weeks of swimming lesson are given during the summer months and the classes are always full. swimming ;l'essonsare also given after school during the school year. The revenues are 'almost 70% of expenditures, Warren added. The pool fees were increased from $1.00 to $1.50 for adults and from $.75 to $1.00 fol;:' youths and senior citizens last year. Commissioner B. G. Brown moved to approve the Agreement with Port Townsend School District #50 for lease of the swimming pool for the 1989-90 season as presented. Commissioner Dennison seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. BUSINESS FROM COUNTY DEPARTMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS AGREEMENT. Supplemental re: ~gineering Servic~s for Upper Hoh Road CRgJ749: EntrancoEngineersf Inc.: Construction Engineer Bruce Laurie explained that this supplement to the agreement with Entranco Engineers for engineering services on the Upper Hoh Road project will increase the consultant time on the project. The original agreement was based on a 70 day contract which has been increased to 98 days due to change orders that have been approved. This would increase the contract cost by $18 , 441.00 for a total agreement of $99,060.44. After discussion of why the estimates for the project were off as far as they were, and the need to hold consultant firms accountable when there are problems, Bruce Laurie stated that he feels Entranco was prudent in the way they handled the problems that have surfaced on this project. Commissioner B. G. Brown moved to approve the supplement to the agreement with Entranco Engineers, Inc. for engineering services.. commissioner Dennison seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. V(l 1~, kKE (J 4732 , ' commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 2, 1989 Page: 2 License re: Use of County Road Right-of-Way: SOuth Bay Lane, Ludlow Point Tracts: Ronald and Jane Reinhart: Public Works Director Gary Rowe reported that this license will allow the Reinharts to use the concrete steps and a rock wall on the county road right-of-way in front of their property on South Bay Lane. This license was issued previously to Mr. Curtis and incl uded a carport which has since been removed. Chairman George Brown then read a letter received from Aubrey and Leonard Pedersen regarding their opposition to the issuance of this license. The concrete steps and rock wall are approximately four to five feet into the right-of-way, Gary Rowe reported. Dr. Reinhart stated that originally they had agreed to remove the rock wall and steps because they plan to relocate the home on the property in the ne~t two to three years. He asked that this license be granted until that change can be made. Gary Rowe reported that the improvement project includes surfacing a 10 foot radius of the cuI de sac. If a ditch is not required there would be room for the rock wall and the steps to be maintained. Commissioner Dennison stated that the license is to allow use of the right-of-way until such time as the county may need it. Dr. Reinhart stated that the house will be moved and the encroachment will be removed within a three year period. Commissioner Dennison added that the issues the County faces are 1) if the encroachment will be in the way of what the county plans for the road and, 2) if a hazard is created. Gary Rowe reported that the County's pOsition license issued for the use of right-of-way is that if the licensed encroachment is in the way of work planned by the county, then the license holder will remove it at their own expense. Dr. Reinhart asked if the trees on the south side of the road will be removed'? Gary Rowe stated that some trees will have to be removed, but he does not know which ones. Dr. Reinhart stated that the trees present more of a hazard than the rock wall and the steps, in terms of a truck being able to turn around in the cuI de sac. A request has been made by Leonard Pedersen that the cuI de sac be improved to its full width, which could possibly cause a problem for this license, Gary Rowe added. It is anticipated that the proposed project plans will be finalized this week and the contract be brought before the Board for their approval next week. Dr. Reinhart stated that he would encourage the County to improve the road as much as possible and he would be willing to take the rock wall and step out right now if those improvements are made. Commissioner Dennison moved to approve the license to use county road right- of-way as submitted, so that the Reinhart's can use the right-of-way legally until such time as the County makes a decision on how to proceed with the proposed improvements to the cuI de sac. commissioner B. G. Brown seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Updating the Official County Road Loq: Addition of North otto street: Gary Rowe reported that this resolution will update the County Road ~og to add North otto Street (#689319). Commissioner Dennison moved to approve and sign Resolution No. 90-89 updating the Official County Road Log by the addition of North otto Street. Commissioner B. G. Brown seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Establishing A NQe For a Private Road: Timberline Road: This road is off of Discovery Road, Gary Rowe reported. Commissioner B. G. Brown moved to approve and sign Resolution No. 91-89 establishing a the name Timberline Road for a private road off of milepost 2 on South Discovery Road. Commissioner Dennison seconded the motion. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. Gardiner Beach Road Workshop: Two opt~ons are available to help control traffic on the Gardiner Beach Road, Gary"'Rowe reported. Gardiner Beach Road is one way from boat ramp to intersection at Rondelay Road. t-. .... 15.1t{,t 00 4733 ! commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 2, 1989 Option 1: Would make the section, beginning at the intersection with Rondelay Road just past Mr. BandY's barn, two way and a sign would be installed that would indicate that the balance of the road would be left one way for "local traffic only". Option 2: Tbe second option would make the one way portion, two way and also include a sign that indicated that where the road narrows just beyond Bandy's barn was for "local traffic only". The residents of the area have also suggested that the road be widened or closed completely. Page: 3 commissioner B. G. Brown asked what right-of-way the County has on this road'? Gary Rowe reported that the right-of-way on this road was acquired through usage and is 20 feet between the fences. This would be wide enough for two way traffic for local residents use only. Lou Madau, a Gardiner resident, reported that a short plat was done that gave the county a 60 foot right of way on a portion of this road. He added that Mr. Bandy's "barn" is now a licensed retail store which could increase the traffic on that portion of the road. Mr. Madau stated that the County Road Department staked the right- of-way at the beach end of the road that was 40 feet wide. I Gary Rowe stated that the residents are concerned about the increase in traffic due to the Bandy activities in the area. The local residents, more than tourists, were causing problems driving the wrong way down the one way road because it is inconvenient for the homeowners on this road to use Rondelay Road. Lou Madau stated that the Sheriff was out to see him regarding complaints they had received that he was driving down the road the wrong way and the person complaining was using the road in this manner himself. Commissioner B. G. Brown stated that when this road was originally made one way it was to accommodate the boat traffic. A study should be done to determine the costs for widening and improving the drainage if this road is to be made two way again. Gary Rowe added that there was a suggestion that the road be blocked. off and the Department recommends that this DQt be done. Making only the portion by the barn two way is appropriate because the road is wide enough at this point. The road narrows after that point which is a better place to make it one way and install "local traffic only" signs. If this is done and there is still a lot of traffic on the road, Gary Rowe aqded, this road may have to be improved. Commissioner Dennison asked how we will know if this option will help the problem'? Gary Rowe stated that a traffic count can be taken that will tell if these changes are successful. The Board concurred that a resolution be drawn to change the traffic on this road as suggested by the second option. Discussion: Vacating Usage of South Bay Lane outside Platted Right- of-Way: county Engineer, Bob Nesbi tt, explained that Pope Resources has indicated that a portion of South Bay Lane that they are improving will require a trade of right-of-way because the road will be straightened. This matter will be researched and brought before the Board at a later date. FACILITIES MANAGEMENT Recommendation for pid Award: Port Townsend community Center Project: Architectural Coordinator, Frank Gifford, reported that after reviewing the bids received on the Port Townsend community Center project, the Architect recommends that the bid be awarded to Western Construction with the base bid of $965,886.00 and Alternate 1 for $4,000.00 which is a total, with tax, of $1,045,537.00. once the Board approves the bid award the State Department of community Development and the Farmers Home Administration will also have to approve the bid award. The county proposes to reduce the contingency fund in order to stay within the project budget. The contingency fund is used to fund change orders. The change orders that arise will be added to the FmHA loan. .. 15'- m 473'4 . ' commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 2, 1989 Page: 4 commissioner Dennison moved to award the bid to Western Construction as recommended. Commissioner B. G. Brown seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Appointment to Parks Advisozy Board: Commissioner B. G. Brown moved to appoint Ben Pederson to a two year term on the Parks Advisory Board. Commissioner Dennison seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. PLANNING AND BUILDING Presentation of the Final Draft of the Develop;ment Code: (See also Minutes of september 18, 1989) Planning and Building Department Director, David Goldsmi th, presented each Board member with a copy of the draft Development Code that includes the changes requested by the Board at the last review. Commissioner B. G. Brown confirmed and David Goldsmith verified, that this document is now ready to go to press. The document will published in the Port Townsend Leader as a supplement this week, and a final vote will be taken on the document on October 16, 1989 at 11:00 a.m. Shoreline Permit SSDP88-0017 Revision Reqpesti Reorient Floating Shellfish CUltivation A9tivity on Site from East/West to North/South: Thorndyke Bay: All Seo.sons .Aquafarms, APplicant: Bart Phillips, representing the project proponent, was present when Assistant Planner Jim Pearson reviewed the Shoreline Permit revision request submitted by All Seasons Aquafarms to reorient their floating shellfish cultivation pens on the site issued a Shoreline permi t on January 23, 1989. The original si te, as proposed, was over commercial geoduck beds and it was originally thought that would be no problem. The state Department of Fisheries has since found that these pens need to be reoriented to allow access to the geoduck beds. The request is to move the site to a north/south alignment and to allow the width to be increased from 250 to 269 feet while the length would be reduced from 1,000 to 929 feet. The permitted area of the site would not be increased. Jim Pearson reported that the Board needs to determine if the revision is major and significant. If that is the case, the request would have to be denied and a new application would be required for the site. A determination must also be made that the revision is within the scope and intent of the original Shoreline Permit. Jim Pearson then read the criteria that must be met for the revision to be within the scope and intent of the original permit as well as his findings with regard to these criteria. Based on the findings proposed the Planning Department recommends approval of the request to reorient the permitted site. Commissioner B. G. Brown moved that the Board finds that there is not a major or significant impact from the proposed reorientation of the facilities and that the requested revision is within the scope and intent of the original shoreline permit and that the requested revision be approved. Commissioner Dennison seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Update on First Meeting: of the Port Townsend Watershed Advisozy COJplDittee and APpointment of Counj:y Member to tha,t Committee: Pat Rubida, Water Quality Planner, reported on the first meeting of the Port Townsend Watershed Advisory cOmplittee, held last week. The State Department of Health is mandating that if water is drawn from the surface, the water must be filtered. This Committee is going to develop a plan to manage the city's watershed. They will meet once a month and the city would like a representative of the county to serve on it. Commissioner B. G. Brown moved to appoint Commissioner Dennison to the Port Townsend Watershed Advisory Committee. Chairman George Brown seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. David Goldsmith and Pat Rubida will attend meetings if Commissioner Dennison can not. , y~~ I? $IIi! 001735' commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 2, 1989 Page: 5 Discussion of Results of the Paget Sound Water OUality OUestion- naire: Water Quality Planner Pat Rubida presented,the Board with a copy of the results to the puget Sound Water Quality questionnaire. This questionnaire is to provide information to aid the PSWQA to summarize the findings from the Puget Sound counties to be included in their 1990 Management Plan. The County recei ved the questionnaire and Pat Rubida distributed them to the affected county Departments to answer their portion (i.e. Public Works, Flood Plain management; Planning, Land Use and Shoreline questions). Pat Rubida presented the Board with a copy of the questionnaire and the answers so that they could review the responses to make sure they are acceptable. Request for Variance from Building Code Reg:u.irements: Mrs. Phillips, 60 Huckleberry Place, Cape George: David Goldsmith reported that Mrs. Phillips is building a two story house designed with two baths upstairs and one bath downstairs. During the plan check it was found that the distance between the toilet and an adjacent wall did not meet the Building Code requirement of a 30 inch separation. The bath was re-designed, and still does not meet the Code requirement for a 30 inch separation and there is no way that the problem can be solved by further re-design. Since this is not a life safety issue and the homeowner is satisfied with the redesign, commissioner B. G. Brown moved to approve the variance as requested and directed that a notice be placed on the property title that states thau the bathrooms do not meet the requirements of the Building Code. Commissioner Dennison seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. TREASURER Cancellation of Unclai~ed Wcu;:rants: Commissioner B. G. Brown moved to approve Resolution No. 92-89 authorizing the cancellation of the unclaimed warrants as requested by the County Treasurer. Commissioner Dennison seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. JUVENILE AND FAMILY COURT SERVICES 1989 Budget Transfers: Juvenil~ and Family CQurt Service.: commissioner Dennison moved to approve and sign Resolution No. 93-89 authorizing the 1989 budget transfers requested by Juvenile and tamily Court Services. commissioner B. G. Brown seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. * * * pcb Hendersonre: Claim C-05-89 (Kiesel): Bob Henderson reported that the Public Works Department has reviewed this claim for damage caused by trees that were blown down in a windstorm and recommends that it be denied. This claim has been submitted previously and rejected because it is an act of God. Commissioner B. G. Brown moved to deny the claim submitted by MiChael J. Kiesel. Commissioner Dennison seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. ~eqpest for Payment from the Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Fund: Commissioner B. G. Brown moved to approve the applications for Assistance from the Soldiers' and Sailors Relief Fund submitted by Herbert V. Tennell for $40.00 and American Legion Post #26 for hall rent in the amount of $240.00. Commissioner Dennison seconded the motion. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. Reqpest for ProP9~als: criminal Defense Contracts for 1990: commissioner B. G. Brown moved to have the Chairman sign the request for .WC IS,}_ no, ,4936 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 2, 1989 Page: 6 proposals for both District and Superior Court criminal indigent defense services for 1990. Commissioner Dennison seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. The meeting was recessed at the end of the business day and reconvened with all Board members present on Tuesday morning at 10:00 a.m. commissioner Dennison was not present for the afternoon appointment. Lois smith, J"uvenile & Family Court services Director re: Presentation of G~ant Proposal: Lois Smith came before the Board to review the grant proposal submitted for the Consolidated Juvenile Services funded through the State Department of Social and Health Services. This grant proposal is larger this year than it has been in the past. This grant provides funding fol;:' juvenile diversion, counselling, diagnostic seJ::'Vices, parole services, guardian ad litum program, as well as supervision services on saturdays. The entire biennium allocation for Jefferson County is approximately $53,000.00. Lois smith also reported on the use of a computer monitored, home detention program for juvenile offenders. This type of system is cheaper than placing a juvenile in a detention center, however the cost of a complete system is prohibitive for Jefferson County to purchase alone. There may be a possibility of purchasing the equipment in the future with Clallam and Kitsap Counties. This will be researched further. Shoreline Substantial Development Permits ISDP89-0013.1-12 (12): Mooring BuQyS on Mystezy Bay: Various 1\pplicants: 28 interested area residents were present when Jim Pearson explained that this proposal is fOr permits for 12 mooring buoys in Mystery Bay for private recreational use. 10 of the buoys seeking a permit a+e already in place and two are proposed. The applicants are: Robert L. de Beauchamp, Dan L. Cameron, Ray Jeffery, Ray & Katie Johnson, Paul B. & Roberta Marks, G. Wayne & Barbara Maxwell, Daryl A. Paddock, Judy & Dave Pratt, Charles C. Smith, Earl Solie, Greg & Christine Vietenhans, and Thomas H. Westlake. Jim Pearson then reviewed the staff report and findings. There are currently several mooring buoys (4 to 6) at the State Park on Mystery Bay. Numerous shoreline property owners have placed mooring buoys in the Bay. $horeline property owners are exempt from having to obtain a shoreline permit to place a buoy in front of their property. Jim Pearson then reviewed the map that identiftes the placement of the mooring buoys seeking permits. Mystery Bay does not have inner and outer harbor lines to regulate where structures are placed. The maximum depth of Mystery Bay, at the mouth of Kilisut Harbor, does not exoeed 25 feet and the areas in the south portion of the Bay go dry when the tide is out. It is not a well flushed bay. Many of the property owners along the bay own tidelands and cultivate shellfish. There is no marina in Mystery Bay which means that there is no provision for permanent moorage, Jim Pearson reported. There is provision for transient moorage at the State Park dock and adjacent mooring buoys. This proposal has generated a lot of interested on Marrowstone Island and many letters of comment have been received. Jim Pearson then reviewed the written comments received. He then reviewed and explained the eight conditions suggested for these permits. He explained that the suggested conditions do not imply that the permit will be issued. The Board must first decide if the proposed project meets the intent of the Shoreline Management Master Program. Condition number 4 will make it so that people can not live on their boat as a residence in Mystery Bay. Jim Pearson reiterated that there are no permanent docking facilities in Mystery Bay, but there are adequate transient mooring facilities. He suggested that the owner of buoy number 12 on the permit, Tom Westlake, lives in Seattle and has acquaintanceships in Jefferson County. He has only used the buoy five times during the past year, which is really a transient use. Jim Pearson then reported that Tom Westlake's application does not meet the intent of the Shoreline Program, because he is seeking transient moorage. W1.. 15 r~fI GO 4737 commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 2, 1989 Page: 7 stan Lybeck: Mr. Lybeck asked if there is a limit on the time that a boat can be moored on the buoy'? Jim Pearson stated that a boat can be moored at the buoy for as long as the owner needs. People can not live on the boat, however. Bob Van Etten, Chairman of the salt Water Committee of the Marrowstone Island Community Association: Bob Van Etten reported that the Salt Water Committee of the Marrowstone Island Community Association, wrote a letter on June 12 which was not included in the written testimony reviewed by Jim Pearson. Mr. Van Etten then read the letter into the record. Since this a precedent setting situation and the Board's decision will have an impact on other buoy permit applications in the County, Mr. Van Etten asked why the Shoreline Commission did not review these applications'? Jim Pearson explained that primary uses, such as these applications, are not required to be reviewed by the Shoreline Commission. All of the information that would be presented to the Shoreline Commission has been presented to the Board. W~yne Maxwell: Mr. Maxwell asked if there were buoys grandfathered into this system'? Jim Pearson stated that a buoy in place before 1971 would have been grand fathered under the Shoreline Management Master Program. Commissioner B. G. Brown stated that the Board has the authority to place conditions on a shoreline permit to protect the environment, but you have to keep in mind that the permit is to place a buoy in State waters. Jim Pearson added that there is no regulation that allows an expiration date on a shoreline permit. A permit can only be revoked if the conditions of approval are violated. Wayne Maxwell: Mr. Maxwell stated that he doesn't feel that this subject is proper at this meeting. Stan Lybeck: Mr. Lybeck stated that he doesn't feel that shoreline property owners should have the right to dictate that an upland property owner can't have a place to moor their boat in the Bay. A person that owns property on the Island should have a right to moor a boat in the Bay. Why restrict people just because they don't own a piece of the beach. Bob DeBeauchamp: Bob DeBeauchamp stated that he has gone through a lot of trouble to apply for this pe~it, and now it sounds like some people want to make it like a permit that can be retracted if someone complains. Dave Pratt: Dave Pratt stated that we have a large popUlation out there now and it would be nice if a buoy that is open could be used by someone else. He said that he has considered placing a sign on his buoy when it is not in use, advising people that they can use it. He realizes that the County may not have the authority to tell people that if their buoy is not in use, someone else should be allowed to use it. Margie O'Hare-Kossian: Margie O'Hare-Kossian asked what the procedure is for transferring ownership of a permitted buoy, if the person who has the permit moved or was willing to release their ownerShip of it'? Jim Pearson stated that the Shoreline Program allows the County to grant a permit to use a specific buoy and the person that has a permitted buoy can allow someone else to use it. Ralph Rus~: Ralph Rush stated that he supports the conditions that are proposed for these permits because clean water is important in Mystery Bay. Karen Robinson: Karen Robinson expressed concern that permit holders can make a determination of who they will pass . their permit to when they no longer want it. She suggested that the county re-allocate a permit that is relinquished, to be more fair. Wayne Maxwell: Mr. Maxwell stated that he thought this meeting was just to approve these permits'? Jim Pearson stated that this meeting is to address the concerns raised regarding these permit applications and th~ issues brought up a~e all relevant. Mr. Maxwell stated that some of these issues would be better addressed to the people that make the rules for the Shoreline permi ts. Commissioner B. G. Brown stated that the County makes the rules for shoreline permits and the meeting today is for the Board to listen to ~ va -15,t~ no 4738 , "r . I ~.. commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 2, 1989 Page: 8 testimony regarding these permits. Mr. Maxwell urged the Board to stay on the sUbject at hand and get this finished. stan Lybeck: stan Lybeck stated that his buoy is grandfathered under the current system and it is his understanding that he cannot lease or rent his buoy to anyone else, but he can let someone else use it. Jim Pearson stated that section 5.10 refers to buoys placed by exemption (buoys placed by people who own property on the shoreline), not to permitted buoys. Commissioner B. G. Brown stated that the rights that people have when their permit is granted have to be determined. Charlie Smith: Charlie Smi th thanked Jim Pearson for his work on these permi t applications. All of the applicants are good people that are interested in their community and they are interested in keeping Mystery Bay nice. Chuck Samples: Chuck Samples called to the attention of the Board a memorandum sent to them on November 30, 1988 which culminated in this meeting. He congratulated everyone involved in having the meeting. That letter asked what do you do to get a permit and how do you control pollution in the inner Bay. He believes that what he has heard today from Jim Pearson and the conditions suggested for these permits are achieving the things that were looked forward to, which is clean waters in the State of Washington for all of us to utilize, not just a few. He recommends that the Board follows the advise that they have received from the planning department and proceed. Christine veitenhans: Christine veitenhans stated that she is one of the applicants and she stated that she would like to respond to some of the testimony given. The comment that the fishing vessel, Daniel G, is moored to a float. It is not moored to a float. There are two floats out at the boat that are work floats. He husband fishes in Alaska and is gone probably seven months out of the year. When the boat is gone the floats are left, but they can be taken out because they are work floats that attach to the boat. She advised that she talked with Mr. Young of the Washington State Department of Ecology as well as Commander Russell of the Coast Guard, at Point Bennett. Commander Russell would like to be here today, but could not be, but he asked that she advise the Board that they could talk with him if they have any questions on pollution and the applicants. She then submitted a copy of the Best Management Practices for boats at moorage. She added that when she and her husband moved to Marrowstone Island they called who they felt was the authority on mooring buoys, the Army Corps of Engineers, who told they that they did away with buoy permits six years ago and advised them not to bother with it. The people here who are applying, with a mooring buoy in place, were not doing it flagrantly, they weren't violating any laws that they knew of. In regard to pollution, she and her husband do their job to make sure the environment is protected when they work on their boat. She asked that when the Board is looking at their permit applications, that these conditions are starting anew, and not referring to what was done in the past. Jim Pearson stated that with regard to recommended condition #3 (Vessel maintenance activities which may cause water pollution, including hull chipping and painting, shall be performed at designed facilities), the Best Management Practices provided by Mrs. Veitenhans address measures to assure that pOllution does not occur. Dave Pratt: Dave Pratt asked if condition #3 would preclude him for sanding a wood railing on his boat'? Jim Pearson stated that condition #3 states that those activities should not be done. He asked if the Board would want to adopt the State's Best Management Practices regarding maintenance of boats at moorage in the bay? He added that the conditions as he proposed could be interpreted as meaning that any maintenance work be down at a haul out facility. Jan Jeffery: Jan Jeffery asked what the next step in this procedure is'? Commissioner B. G. Brown advised that the peJ:'mits that are approved will be issued. 'VOL 15 ~JG~ GO 4739 .'. " Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of October 2, 1989 :Page: 9 Bruce Tipton: Bruce Tipton stated that he builds boats in Port Townsend and he feels that the conditions are excellent and that is all the County can do. Daryl Goodwin: Daryl Goodwin stated that there is nothing in the conditions that address adequate ground tackle. He suggested that Chapman's recommendations for adequate tackle be used, to assure that these moorings are adequate. Jim Pearson responded that he has gone through the applications with this concern in mind. Mr. Goodwin then reviewed, from memory, what is recommended to moor a particular size boat. Charlie smith: Mr. smith stated that requiring a certain type of tackle is beyond what the County has authority to do. There is a whole field of maritime law that addresses these matters. He suggested that a condition be added that the moorings be inspected annually. Charles Samples: Mr. Samples stated that the Best Management Practices has been taken out of context and applies to boats at moorage in a boat yard. Everyone agreed that condition #3 was appropriate as it is written. Jim Pearson then reviewed his recommendation which is to approve the following permits: Robert L. de Beauchamp, Dan L. Cameron, Ray Jeffery, Ray & Katie Johnson, Paul B. & Roberta Marks, G. Wayne & Barbara Maxwell, Dal;:'yl A. Paddock, Judy & Dave Pratt, Charles C. Smith, Earl Solie, and Greg & Chl;:'istine vietenhans. He also recommend that the permit for Tom Westlake be denied based on the finding that his moorage is transient in nature and that there is transient moorage available in Mystery Bay. Commissioner B. G. Brown moved to approve the 11 permits as recommended by the Planning Department and that the 8 conditions of approval be adopted, also, due to the transient nature of Mr. Westlake's moorage that his permit be denied. The Chairman seconded the motion in the absence of Commissioner Dennison, and called for a vote on the motion. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. Jim Pearson then asked that the recommendation from the Planning Department that any additional mooring buoy applications for the southern portion of Mystery Bay (south of a line from the northwest corner of Tax 24 across the Bay to the boundary between Tax 61 and 62 on Griffith Point) not be accepted or approved, be adopted by the Board. Commissioner B. G. Brown stated that he is not ready to make a decision regarding this recommendation. He would like more information before taking action on it. JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ~~ "'George C. rown, Chairman ~ B. G. Brown, Member ~n?~ Larr;~nnison, Member .~ 15 tA{;. GO 4740