Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM080486 dt!- ~ R(ftt ~"3/o?lJ Ilk .. , ' District No. 1 Commissioner: District No. 2 Commissioner: District No. 3 Commissioner: Larry W. Dennison, Member B.G. Brown, Member John L. Pitts, Chairman H - ~ ~ ~ H _. ~I _I _I _I _I HI HI _I ~, -I ~' JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Clerk of the Board: Public Works Director: Jerdine C. Bragg Gary A. Rowe - - ~ - - - ~ 14 I N tJ T E S Week of August 4, 1986 The meeting was called to order at the appointed time by Chairman John L. Pitts. Commissioner B. G. Brown and Commissioner Larry W. Dennison were both present. PUBLIC MEETING re: Proposed Lease of County Property: Bayshore Enterprises: Animal Shelter: The proposed lease agreement with Bayshore Enterprises that was drafted the Prosecuting Attorney was reviewed by the Board, after the Chairman opened the meeting. The Chairman then read the responsibilities of the County as Lessor and Bayshore as Lessee. Commissioner Brown stated that he feels that the clause regarding the County purchasing the improvements to the property if the contract were terminated, is not acceptable. Commissioner Brown moved to continue the meeting until 4:00 p.m. in order to allow time to have questions regarding the proposed lease answered. Commissioner Dennison seconded the motion. 4:00 p.m. - Pat Slevin, Director of Bayshore Enterprises, came before the Board and advised them that the termination clause of the lease as written by the Prosecuting Attorney's office is standard contractual language. The Board will ask the Prosecuting Attorney to review the lease agreement again to make sure that the County's interest is protected and also asked Public Works Director, Gary Rowe to provide the cost figures for the access and ground construction preparation work that will need to be done on the site before any action is taken on the lease. The Chairman reopened the meeting and asked for comments for or against the proposed lease and being no one present to comment the hearing was closed. Discussion continued with the Public Works Director and the Planning Director regarding the value of the County property to be leased versus the cost to prepare the site for a building. Prosecuting Attorney John Raymond responded after much discussion, that the County could lease the land to Bayshore for a 20 year period and when that time is up any improvements to the property would revert to the County. The discussion resumed regarding the building that Bayshore Enterprises intends to build on the site and how funds will be raised to build it. Pat Slevin reported that the foundation that has granted Bayshore funding for the animal shelter requires that the money be used for the benefit of animals. AGREEMENT re; Peninsula Development Association: Commissioner Brown moved and Commissioner Dennison seconded the motion ~VOL 12 *~!bt . 0 28.17 Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes: August 4, 1986 Page: 2 to approve and sign the agreement with the Peninsula Development Association to provide defined services for $1,900.00 with an additional $1,458.50 to be provided by in-kind services. The agreement will expire September 30, 1986. AGREEMENT re; Payment for Court Services; City of Port Townsend: The agreement with the City for the provision of district court services for 1986 was approved by motion of Commissioner Dennison, seconded by Commissioner Brown. The City will pay the County $35,747.00 for these services. Ron Smith & Joe Kawakv re: Question on Easement; Reuben Johnson Road;Swansonville: Mr. Neil Potthoff and Mrs. Leto, adjacent property owners, were present when Mr. Smith explained this issue to the Board. He said that he is selling his property, to a Mr. Kawaky, which is accessed by the Reuben Johnson Road and an extended portion of that road over an unrecorded easement. A solution to the question of the access easement is needed before the sale can be closed. Mr. Smith continued by noting that the Reuben Johnson Road is currently the only access into the Forest Hill Short Plat and the Leto residence. Mr. Smith reported that Mr. Kawaky's attorney, Mr. Henry, advised him that the Public Works Department has copies of unrecorded Quit Claim Deeds which would grant the County easements for the rest of Reuben Johnson Road. These easements were granted in 1964 by a Mr. Hanson who owned the property at that time. Mr. Henry further advised Mr. Kawaky that an unrecorded easement is completely valid and enforceable between the two parties of the document, but anyone else who purchased the property from Mr. Hanson would not be bound by the unrecorded easement. Since the County has an unrecorded easement, Mr. Smith advised that he declined to give Neil Potthoff an easement across his property, but Mr. Potthoff did go ahead and build a road across his property. Mr. Kawaky has asked for a reduction in the sales price on the property because of the easement situation. After talking with the Prosecuting Attorney, Mr. Smith advised that he is not sure if the County has since recorded the easements. Mr. Smith would like to proceed with a rapid solution to this situation, and reported that he dumped 15 tons of quarry rock in two locations on his property, which blocked the access road. He did this so that people would know that he considers this private property where the access road is located. Mr. Kawaky advised that he discovered the existence of the unrecorded easements in researching information on the property. The Public Works Departm~nt advised him that the Reuben Johnson Road was scheduled for work in 1987. Mr. Kawaky advised that his concerns are: 1) Whether the County plans to record these easements, 2) Why the County is anxious to put in this road that serves three houses, and 3) If easements are not provided could the County condemn the property for a road? Mrs. Leto, 251 Reuben Johnson Road, stated that emergency vehicles do not have access to her property due to the gravel blocking the road. Gary Rowe, Public Works Director verified that the Reuben Johnson Road has been scheduled for repair in 1987 on the Six Year Road Program. The roads included for repair on the Road Program are given a priority based on traffic, types of use, and condition of the road, etc. The Reuben Johnson Road has been on the program for several years and has now worked up to the list for 1987. The right-of-way needs would be researched and negotiated with the property owners when the project is to that stage. The County has not acquired right-of-way by condemnation for many years and has no intent to do so in the future. If right-of-way could not be acquired by negotiation, then as determination would be made to modifying the project in the best interest of the people that use the road and the adjacent properties. The Public Works Department has inspected the rock placed by Mr. Smith and verified that it is obstructing the existing County Road forcing lVOL 12 ~;NG~ ~1.8 20 Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes: August 4, 1986 Page: 3 the property owners who live beyond it to drive around it on to Mr. Smith's property. This rock is a hazard and it needs to be removed. The Chairman then read a letter from the Fire Chief of Fire District #3 to Sheriff Lee Smith which corroborated, Mrs. Leto's testimony that emergency vehicles could not reach her property because of the rock dumped by Mr. Smith. Commissioner Brown advised that if this matter had been brought to the Board's attention earlier, some confusion may have been avoided. The first thing that must be done is the removal of the rock from the County right-of-way. The other questions raised will require more research before they can be resolved. After further discussion of the issues, Mr. Kawaky advised that he would not require any compensation at all, if the Quit Olaim deeds do not apply to him and any County right-of-way acquisition in the future would be negotiated with him. He would require compensation if these unrecorded easements were somehow applied to him, since he was not aware of them when he made his purchase offer to Mr. Smith. The property being discussed is 20 foot by 165 foot strip of land, the other strip which is 15 feet by 165 feet is an existing usage road. David Anderson, who lives at the very end of Reuben Johnson Road, stated that if the County widens the road, it will cut 20 feet into his property, cutting into his front yard and pump house. The Chairman advised him that if such a project were to proceed, all of the property owners in the area would be notifieq. Gary Rowe added that the negotiations for right-of-way for this road will be difficult because there are two pieces of property in the area that both have improvements close to the right of way. ' The Chairman clarified for those present that 1) Any construction proposed for the Reuben Johnson Road is not a foregone conclusion. Details would have to be worked out by the Public Works Department in the future, 2) It is very unlikely that the County will condemn any property for right-of-way with respect to this project and 3) The rock that was placed on the County Road right-of-way will have to be removed. The Board will have to meet with the Prosecuting Attorney regarding the legal questions on the easements before taking any action. Mr. Smith said that he would be agreeable to removing the rock immediately if he c~n be given assurance from the County that the unrecorded easements will be destroyed. Gary Rowe reported that the Quit Claim deeds are currently only papers that exist in the Road file and are not legal documents because they have never been recorded. They can be destroyed in any manner that the Board feels appropriate. Commissioner Brown advised that the first thing the County has to have taken care of is getting the rock removed from the County right-of- way. The Board will discuss the matter with the Prosecuting Attorney and advise Mr. Smith of their determination. . . . Later that day: The Board met with the Prosecuting Attorney regarding the unrecorded easements for Reuben Johnson Road. The Prosecuting Attorney advised the Chairman of the Board to destroy the unrecorded Quit Claim Deeds, which he did immediately in the presence of the Prosecuting Attorney. tVGL 12 U~~ o 281.9 Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes: August 4, 1986 Page: 4 BUSINESS FROM COUNTY DEPARTMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS AGREEMENT re: Right-of-way on Charles Avenue, Alcohol Loop Road; Charles Broders: Public Works Director Gary Rowe reported that Charles Avenue is the access road for the Old Alcohol Plant Resort. If this agreement is approved, the County would initiate an intent to vacate the northerly 10 feet of the Old Alcohol Loop Road that is north of the Oak Bay Road right-of-way, and Mr. Broders would deed the County the property needed for the right-of-way. The County would also agree to construct a road approach for Mr. Broders. Commissioner Brown indicated that the lot lines would have to be vacated as well as the right-of-way on the property under consider- ation. In order to make sure that Mr. Broders is aware of this, Commissioner Brown suggested that a copy of the Intent to Vacate notice be sent to him before the Board takes any action on it or the agreement. CONTRACT re; Personal Services; Appraisal Services for Hastings Avenue West; John Siebenbaum: The personal services contract with John Siebenbaum to perform the appraisals for the Hastings Avenue West right-of-way acquisitions, was approved by motion of Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Dennison. Household Hazardous Waste Collection Day: August 16, 1986 has been set as the day that the landfill will accept various household hazardous wastes from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. Access to Dollar Garage Building next to the County'S VFW Hall: Mr. Neil Slater who owns the Dollar Garage Building which is located next to the County's VFW Hall building at 1020 Water Street has asked if the County would enter into an agreement to construct a rear access for the second and third floor that would accommodate both I' -. buildings, Gary Rowe rePfrted. There are holes in the sidewalk in front of this building which are a hazard and will be patch~d. There is also a hole in the back of the building which accesses ~he basement and needs to be repaired. Since no one is allowed on the I third floor of the building, the inside access to it should be blocked according to the County's insurance company. PLANNING/BUILDING Reauest for Variance from Flood Plain Ordinance; Frank Bob Duffy reported that he will contact Mr. Randall and set a him to meet wi~h the Board regarding his request for I i i I Short Plat Ordinance: Commissioner Dennison asked the status of the Short Plat Ordinance with regard to it being up to date and reflective of the CountYls position? Assistant Planner Rachel Nathanson reported that ~egislative changes have been made over the past two years that are not reflected by the County's Subdivision Ordinance and the County I is required to implement these changes. Commissioner Brown moved I to have the record show that Commissioner Dennison is concerned ab+ut the status of the Subdivision Ordinance. Commissioner Dennison seeonded the motion. Commissioner Dennison further noted he is very concerned about short plats near the water. Randall: date with variance. l Val 12 f.\t~ r 0 2820 Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes: August 4, 1986 Page: 5 The Comprehensive Plan needs to be updated also because the issues that it addresses also have an impact on these areas. -Final Short Plat: Puaet Southern Properties; Anderson Lake Road: This short plat will divide a 14 acre parcel into three 4.7 acre lots, Rachel Nathanson reported. The Public Works and Health departments have both reviewed and approved the short plat. Commissioner Brown moved to approve the Final puget Southern Properties Short Plat on Anderson Lake Road. Commissioner Dennison seconded the motion. Mitigative Measures: Northwest Electric Apparatus, Inc.: (See also Minutes of July 1986) Rachel Nathanson reported on the site inspection she and John Hayes of the Health Department made at the present site of Northwest Electric Apparatus, Inc. in the Port of Port Townsend. This inspection found that the chemicals discussed previously were the only ones that were in use. There are two questions that have to be answered by DOE, Ms. Nathanson advised: 1) How to dispose of the Trichloroethylene residue that is left in the bottom of the decreasing machine because it can not be dumped at the County landfill, and 2) How to dispose of Oakite Q9, a solvent. The pH of this solvent can be reduced by mixing it with another chemical, however it is not known if the resultant chemical can be put in a septic tank without harming it. Commissioner Dennison suggested that the project proponent be required to contract with a certified hazardous waste handler to dispose of the wastes generated. If such an agreement is not required, these materials will end up in the County's landfill which will add to a greater long term problem which could include groundwater contamination. Commissioner Dennison moved to add a mitigative measure to those suggested that requires the project proponent to enter into a disposal agreement with a certified hazardous waste handler who will then be responsible to dispose of any hazardous materials and the sediments from the degreasing machine. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. The Planning Department will give the project proponent the names of certified hazardous waste disposal companies that serve this area. Commissioner Dennison moved to issue and Determination of Non- significance and lead agency status for the Northwest Electric Apparatus, Inc. based on the mitigative measures as revised. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. * * * Application for Assistance from the Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Fund: Commissioner Brown moved and Commissioner Dennison seconded the motion to approve the application for Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Fund as submitted by Elbert M. Fanene in the amount of $500.00. The meeting was recessed at 5:00 p.m. and reconvened at 7:00 p.m. with all Board members in attendance for the following: BEARING re: Highwav 20 Corridor Plan: Ten interested area residents were present when Chairman Pitts opened the Public Hearing regarding the proposed adoption of the Highway 20 Corridor Policies as an amendment to the 'Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. Planning Director David Goldsmith explained for those present that the Planning Commission has submitted the final version of the Highway 20 Corridor Plan which they have been working on for the past six months, to the County Commissioners for their consideration. Mr. Goldsmith lVOl 12 f~t~ {O 2821 Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes: August 4, 1986 Page: 6 then introduced Assistant Planner Rachel Nathanson' to explain the policy further. The specific area under discussion in this proposal would become the new boundaries for the Glen Cove Industrial area. The Highway 20 Corridor is defined as the area between the southerly limits of the City of Port Townsend and the Old Fort Townsend Road. It is bounded on the east by Port Townsend Bay and on the West by the westerly boundaries of the Phillips Bayview Addition and Eisenbeis Bay View Addition and Section 16 and 21,! T30N R1W, exclusive of the portion of Section 16 northwest of Discove~yRoad. The complete area would be designated industrial, but heavY industry would be limited to east of Highway 20 and south of the raillroad right-of-way. The policy corridor: I proposes, Ms. Nathan~on I ! continued, the following for this * , A limited number of abcesses to Highway 20, those being: I Old Fort Townsend Roa~, Frederick Avenue, Thomas Avenue, Seton Road, Glen Cove, Road and Jacob Miller Road. Service roads forint.rior access to properties within the industrial area; Ileft turn, acceleration and deceleration lanes. * * , A looped water line system and utility corridors are also proposed for the! areas along this portion of SR 20. Buffer policies inclu~e such things as: A minimum 30 foot wide buffer along the private property boundaries adjacent to the State! Transportation Department's 100 foot wide right-of-way; compact evergreen plants and I trees native to the a~ea should be planted and/or maintained in such a ~anner as to provide a opaque screen within six years of building occupancy; leaving existing vegetation i~ the buffer area is encouraged; berms may be used in reas where little or no vegetation exists; Conifers and vergreens should be a minimum of two feet at planting;! permanent maintenance of the buffer is required; planting schedule is to be provided to the Planning/Build~ng Department; native rhododendrons should hot be removed from the buffer area; and buffer area~ should be considered "Open Space" for taxation purposes,' Minimum structure set~acks are defined. I , The following policie~ are set out for signs in the corridor: 30 foot setpack required; no off-premise signs are permitted; doublei faced multi-tenant signs are allowed in designatedi areas; individual businesses will be allowed a 4 square I foot space on a multi-tenant sign; and no illumination wall be allowed on signs placed between, the bUildingsi and the Highway 20 right-of-way. I . Parking lots are to b~ setback at least thirty feet from the Highway 20 right-~f-way. I * * * * * I Outside storage of eqUipment and material should be screened from the Hig~way. Drainage should be de~eloped in accordance with local and State standards. * Since the Planning Commission took testimony on this proposed policy, the Planning Department has received additional testimony from the following people with views for and against the proposed policy: Julie Germain, Sara Hudson, Burton Bell, Jean Anderson, the Port Townsend Chamber of Commerce (Motion passed on August 4: Expressing concern for maintaining at least a 30 foot minimum buffer zone in the Highway 20 Corridor) and a petition signed by 500 City of Port Townsend and county , VOL 12 r~f;~ O' 2822 Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes: August 4, 1986 Page: 7 residents (supporting a 30 foot greenbelt buffer zone in the Highway 20 corridor). In response to Commissioner Dennison's question, Ms. Nathanson reported that this policy, if adopted, will be used as a guideline and would be applied as development permits are received for property in the corridor. Any existing structures in this area would be grandfathered, but clear cut areas would have the policies applied to future project permits. Chairman Pitts then asked for public comment for and against the proposed policy. Bill Svensson: Mr. Svensson stated that, in general, he concurs with the recommendations of the Planning Department staff. He is concerned that nothing is done that will mess up the beautiful approach to Port Townsend. A thirty foot buffer does present some 'problems, however, and thought should be given to increasing the buffer to forty feet. An effort should be made to negotiate with the State to keep the clearing of their right-of-way to the absolute minimum, in order to help protect the native rhododendrons in the area. Nora Porter: Ms. Porter believes that this plan will have a great impact and called the Board's attention to the questions of due process. The landowners and abutting landowners have not been and should be notified. She requested a minimum of 30 days for public comment. Michael Levine: 236 additional petition signatures (see statement above about the petition received by the Planning Department) were presented by Mr. Levine. He stated that these petitions represent just the tip of the iceberg regarding how the community feels about a thirty foot wide buffer zone in the Highway 20 corridor. The viable Port Townsend tourist industry needs to be protected. Francis Ludwia: Mr. Ludwig advised that he lives in the Glen Cove area and feels that the residential community in this area has been ignored by this policy. What this policy will do to the taxation in this area has also been ignored. He feels the property owners in the Glen Cove area will be taxed out of their houses. James Worthinaton: Mr. Worthington advised that he would submit his comments in writing. Burton Bell: Mr. 'Bell, who owns the Glen Cove Industrial Park, advised that he does not object to having some sort of a screen, but if it is required that thirty or more feet of property be used for a buffer, he would like to see the County buy that land. Many of the people signing the petitions, Mr. Bell advised, are not from Port Townsend or even Jefferson County. W. E. Seton: Mr. Seton, who owns property in this area, stated that he has attended most of these meetings and up until this meeting, 100 % screening has been discussed. The public understands that business needs to be seen, but what they want to see is the green canopy effect on the entrance to Port Townsend. Mr. Seton said that he wants to see the entrance looking good and by working with business, it will look a lot better than if business is blocked out altogether. The thirty foot buffer is an adequate setback without any additional setback being required. In regard to taking away property from the property owner, Mr. Seton advised that if fifty feet is taken off of each side of a 2 1/2 acre piece of property, half of the property would be taken. Being no further public comment, Commissioner Brown added that he feels that the thirty day comment period suggested by Nora Porter should be implemented. Planning Director David Goldsmith explained that the law requires that general notification be given when changes are proposed to the Comprehensive Plan by publication in the newspaper. Individual notifications were not sent to each property owner in the area, however that could be done if the Board directed. The Board concurred that the tv~ ~~ o 2823 ". ) . Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes: August 4, 1986 Page: 8 Planning Department send notification of this proposed policy to all property owners in the area and advise them that there will be a thirty day comment period, before any action to adopt the policy is taken. Currently there is approximately 450 acres designated as industrial in the County, David Goldsmith reported, and about an additional 350 acres would change from a residential designation to industrial if this policy is adopted. The discussion continued regarding the areas in the County that are currently considered industrial and the tradeoff being made in various residential areas; and how the term "opaque" was arrived at with regard to buffering. Commissioner Dennison said that he sees the basic desired outcome to the adoption of this policy as: 1. Maintenance of the integrity of the Highway 20 corridor. 2. More flexibility of land use, and 3. The Industrial designation defined as stated in the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Brown added that it is his understanding that the policy would require "opaque" screening only at car level height. The policy as written, Rachel Nathanson clarified, states that trees that are planted in the buffer area would be allowed to grow to natural mature heights. The policy does not restrict residential development within this area, but Ms. Nathanson added that it would be appropriate to pull any existing residential developments out, of the defined corridor area. The discussion continued regarding the need to redefine the residential, commercial and industrial areas within the corridor so that they can be dealt with more easily. The amount of commercial use in this area, Commissioner Dennison stated, is a concern because it generally generates more traffic and other impacts which will need to be addressed. Commissioner Dennison moved to set September 2, 1986 as the final date for accepting public comment on the Highway 20 Corridor Policies. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. A date will be set for a decision on this policy during the Board's regular weekly meeting. An unidentified man made the additional comment that most people's interest in this policy is direct proportion to how it (the. policy) effects their pocketbook, and his primary concern is that his taxes will increase because of the value placed on industrial property, not a concern about a buffer. He can live with industry, but has a hard time living with the tax man. Chairman Pitts then closed the hearing and thanked those present for their attendance and comments. MEE~'ABJf)~:a!E.D . , .~"'U n T ,y Ca'<.~' ./ /~~:~;'''a.l.' '?+~:...~" . .~ ~ . . ~. .. j'~. ~: - ..A-~)4 ". ~'\\\ '., f Q · ~.. / . ~ '" I . "J!. I liD ; ;' / ~q "". '; \. " .: ~\' ~n;' " ::" , . ~~ ,~'-_.-..;;.. ./ ~" . :.: ell ' . ~,. \'.\~-":' .,. If ' ,....V'~.t\::J......,..~.,.t:"" ~.. a, l' .- '...... / SEA 'It,'..". ';g;. ~ .1., '/J ~:..i4C' ... . Yt'\/ "t.,-~~.sO" c~.. ';..;"'.'~,"",~. JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS John L. Pitts, Chairman ~/ B.G. Brown, Member AmmEsm'~..,''''', ""'~ ...... ... .""~:..' ':"'-;"':;':~';:;~.i,:"~:;'~::" Jerdi~ C. Bragg. ~ Clerk of the Boar ~VOl 12 tAG~ (} 2824