Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM121905 District No. 1 Commissioner: Phil Johnson District No.2 Commissioner: David W. Sullivan District No.3 Commissioner: Patrick M. Rodgers County Administrator: John F. Fischbach Clerk of the Board: Lorna Delaney MINUTES Week of December 19,2005 Chairman Phil Johnson called the meeting to order in the presence of Commissioner David W. Sullivan and Commissioner Patrick M. Rodgers. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S BRIEFING: County Administrator John Fischbach reported that the County has received a $500,000 Historic Courthouse grant from the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. This is in addition to a $450,000 appropriation from the State for the project that was received earlier this year. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Sullivan moved to approve the minutes of December 5, and 12,2005 as presented. Commissioner Rodgers seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: The following comments were made: comments about the County's project for the proposed sewer system in Port Hadlock; a solution for the State Park parking fees is to have the State form an LID; the Auditor spoke to a resident concerning an email regarding the Election Fund budget extension that the Board approved on December 5 and found that the person had misunderstood about the use of the funds; there are less people working in the Public Works Department than in 1997; the County should apply for a Homeland Security grant to build a new Courthouse because chances are the building will not survive an earthquake; the section in the Solid Waste Ordinance regarding junk vehicles singles out people and puts a hardship on residents; and the County needs to have a complaint form that property owners can fill out if an employee comes on their property and harasses them. APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Rodgers moved to delete Item #7 and approve the balance of the Consent Agenda as presented. Commissioner Sullivan seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. 1. RESOLUTION NO. 74-05 re: Adoption ofthe Annual Budget Including the General Fund, Public Works, Special Funds, Jefferson County Road Construction Program and County Tax Levy Page 1 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 19,2005 ~"'":''' ;"'"',~'~ ~(\'IIJ~'~:'\'<,"!' 2. RESOLUTION NO. 75-05 re: Increase in the Jefferson County Road Levy for 2006 Taxes 3. RESOLUTION NO. 76-05 re: Increase in the Jefferson County General Fund Levy for 2006 Taxes 4. RESOLUTION NO. 77-05 re: Increase in the Jefferson County Conservation Futures Levy for 2006 Taxes 5. RESOLUTION NO. 78-05 re: Clarification of the Commissioners Intended Effective Date for the .1 % Sales Tax Under Ordinance 08-1003-05 6. AGREEMENT re: Technical Support for Web Based Design, Programming and Consulting; Jefferson County - WSU Extension Office; Glenn Hughes, dba Homework Design, LLC 7. DELETE: Agreement re: Shoreline Master Program Update; Department of Community Development; Adolfson Associates, Inc. (See later in Minutes) 8. AGREEMENT re: Community and Public Outreach; Department of Community Development; CP Communications 9. AGREEMENT re: Port Ludlow Proj ect Review; Department of Community Development; Mike Bergstrom 10. Request for Pre-payment of Specific 2006 Expenditures from the 2005 Budget; Various Departments 11. Letter Concerning 2006 Real and Personal Property Levy Amounts; J ack Westerman, Assessor AGREEMENT re: Shoreline Master Program Update: (Item #7 on the Consent Agenda.) John Fishcbach noted that the County's deadline for the Shoreline Master Program update will not change if the County accepts the 2006-2007 biennial grant funding from the State. Director of Community Development Al Scalf explained that the County's current Shoreline Master Program was adopted in 1989 and is outdated. The State is requiring that all jurisdictions update their programs by 2014, and the deadline for several other jurisdictions is 2005 and 2009 . Jefferson County's deadline is 2011. A prior Board of Commissioners had directed that the Program be updated by 2008; and the County received funding from Coastal Zone Management to do a shoreline inventory which was completed in August. Best Available Science (BAS) needs to be brought into the Shoreline Master Program. This is a major project and the State has made biennial grant funding available. The County is not required to submit the finished update before the 2011 deadline. Commissioner Rodgers stated that, in the past, when Jefferson County was slated to be one of the first jurisdictions to adopt regulations mandated by the State, those regulations have been appealed. This has cost the County a lot oftime and money. He thinks it would be more prudent to wait and let other jurisdictions submit their SMPs first since the deadline isn't until 2011. The Board discussed whether they should take the funding from the State now and begin the project in 2006 or wait until other jurisdictions have submitted their final drafts to DOE. Al Scalf noted that this project will dominate the workload for Long Range Planning Staff and the Planning Commission over the next two years. As an advocate for public policy, he thinks that it would be best to move forward with the project at this time. The current document is outdated, there is strong public interest, Page 2 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 19,2005 ~.,,:"'" "'...., >,./.:,'1 ~f'l'llr..('-\~'~ there is statutory direction from the State Legislators, and funding is available. He recommended that the Board approve the contract with the consultants. Commissioner Sullivan moved to approve the contract with Adolfson Associates, Inc. Chairman Johnson seconded the motion. Chairman Johnson and Commissioner Sullivan voted for the motion. Commissioner Rodgers voted against the motion. The motion carried. Discussion re: Unified Development Code Omnibus Amendments: Al Scalf explained that the Board has received a docketed list of items in the UDC that need to be revised. Staff generated this list from issues brought forward by the public, a Planning Commission UDC Sub-committee held 17 meetings to review the Code, and the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed changes. He asked that the Board bring forward any concerns they may have about the revisions or any other issues that they would like to see addressed at this time. The Code is complex because a revision in one section may apply to several other sections. The Board will have a public hearing on the final document in early January. More than one public hearing may have to be scheduled ifthe Board brings up new concerns. Kyle Aim, Assistant Planner, stated that 3 additional issues have been raised by DCD and Public Works Staff. · a reference to an Army Corp of Engineers certification that was never implemented by the Army Corp can be deleted from the Code · the minimum standard in the Code for pedestrian circulation is 4 feet and Public Works Staff asked that this be changed to 6 feet to be consistent with the Non-Motorized Transportation Plan · clarification that DCD does not have the authority to replat tidelands Jim Hagan, Planning Commission UDC Sub-committee, explained that they began meeting in 2004. There were also several Planning Commission meetings on the revisions to the Code. DCD Staff did a tremendous job of taking the suggestions from the Planning Commission discussions and putting them down on paper. For the most part, Staff and the Planning Commission agreed about the changes. Al Scalf explained that a major change is the numbering of Sections 1 through lOin the UDC. When the Board adopts the changes, the UDC will be codified as Section 18 ofthe Jefferson County Code (JCC18.) This new reference is a requirement of the Courts and the Hearing Examiner. Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney David Alvarez added that 2 other legal issues recently came forward: · no time period ban on political signs · the addition of specific circumstances when an intensification of mining would require a hearing before the Hearing Examiner Page 3 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 19,2005 The Board began their review of the draft document. Commissioner Sullivan noted some inconsistencies in the capitalization of certain words throughout the document, areas where words ran together, typos, and the need to format tables when they continue onto the next page. Jim Hagan replied that, when the document is codified, this type of error will be addressed. Chairman Johnson asked for clarification of the sentence structure in Chapter 18.15.410 on page 70 (To apprise, put new property owners and developers on notice.) Commissioner Rodgers asked about the process for making revisions to the UDe. Who suggests the need for the change? In his opinion, a law or rule shouldn't be changed unless there is a specific reason that accommodates the public interest. Al Scalf replied that there is a docket list from Development Review Staff that has been generated from working with applicants. There are also suggestions from Long Range Planning staff, from the Planning Commission, and from public comment through the public process. Commissioner Rodgers stated that he does not believe in making rules because someone in the backroom thinks it is a good idea. Al Scalf reiterated that the suggestions for changes can be made by the County Commissioners on behalf ofthe public, the County Administrator, the Planning Commission Members, and the County Departments that work with the Code. Stacie Hoskins, Development Review Manager, explained that her division has given Long Range Planning several comments over the year because they deal with the public and the Code doesn't always agree with the intended implementation. The specific comments by the Board continued. · Chairman Johnson asked about Chapter 18.15.180, page 35 (The following shall not be considered a nuisance; mineral resource extraction and processing activities, operations [except between 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m..........]) He continued his comments on the subject in Chapter 18.20, Performance and Use-Specific Standards, page 43 (t). (All mineral extraction, processing and related activities that take place between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on weekdays shall not exceed the limitations....) Chairman Johnson stated that he doesn't want the Code to allow 24 hour mining and processing. Al Scalf explained that a mine can operate 24 hours a day as long as it meets the noise standards in the State law for the time of day. Commissioner Sullivan noted that the Board has had repeated complaints from residents about the noise from nighttime mining operations. Chairman Johnson asked if the County has the ability to check decibel levels? Al Scalf replied that the County does not have a certified noise person or the equipment. David Alvarez added that the noise is measured at the recipient's location. The duration ofthe noise is also important. Al Scalf explained that the Growth Management Act protects resource lands from the neighbors, and this must be considered. Jim Hagan added that the Planning Commission had discussed buffers on mineral lands, but chose to defer to Legal Counsel. Commissioner Sullivan asked ifthis issue is going to be resolved? Al Scalf replied that Staff would need to have direction from the Board if they want to amend a section ofthe UDC that doesn't have a suggested amendment. Commissioner Sullivan asked if enough of the resource could be provided for the County if mining operations are limited from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., except in emergencies? Al Scalf stated that most industries operate 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., 5 days a week, but there are exceptions. The State DOT paves at night in many cases to accommodate public transportation. Legal Counsel for Fred Hill Materials stated that many agencies are requiring Page 4 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 19, 2005 '+. . nighttime operation (6 p.m. to 6 a.m.) in order for the trucks to avoid traffic. Chairman Johnson continued his comments on Chapter 18.20, Performance and Use-Specific Standards, page 3, (Outdoor storage of 13 or more junk motor vehicles is prohibited.....) He mentioned that this number is not consistent with the Solid Waste Ordinance recently approved by the Board of Health. Chairman Johnson added that there maybe some changes to the BOH ordinance, but the UDC and the final BOH ordinance should reference the same number of vehicles. There was also a discussion about the definition of a junk vehicle and an abandoned vehicle. Commissioner Sullivan commented on Chapter 18.10, Definitions, page 1 (The words "shall, " "must, " "will," "may not, "and "no....may" are always mandatory.) What is the no.......may? The explanation given was "No cars may be stored within....." The definition for Junk Motor Vehicle (page 20) needs to be consistent with the BOH ordinance. Why were several definitions deleted: preliminary drainage plan on page 29, septage on page 35, and substantial improvement on page 38? The sentence structure regarding surface mine on page 38 needs to be clarified. The definition of surface mine was discussed. Commissioner Sullivan continued his comments of Chapter 18.15. The table on page 13 shows that accessary dwelling units will be allowed at Glen Cove Light Industrial Park. Chairman Johnson said that he thinks there needs to be a cap on the number of ADUs that can be built there. Jim Hagan explained that an ADU in Glen Cove can only be an accessary to a business. Al Scalf cited Chapter 18.20.020, pages 2-3, which lists the performance standards for an ADU. The ADU must be occupied by the owner or an employee of the owner. Chairman Johnson referenced Chapter 18.20, page 45, (x) (Mineral extraction and processing located within a designated critical recharge area shall at all times comply with Olympic Air Pollution Control Authority permit requirements.) He pointed out that the agency has changed their name to Olympic Region Clean Air Agency (ORCAA) and this needs to be corrected. He asked if mining operations have to abide by ORCAA regulations only if they are located in aquifer recharge critical areas? Al Scalf answered that in that particular Code reference, they have to abide by those regulations. Chairman Johnson asked ifthey have to abide by the ORCAA regulations in other Code references? Al Scalf said, ''yes.'' Commissioner Sullivan referenced Chapter 18.20, page 34 regarding the preservation of both forestland and mineral lands. In locations where both resources exist, is there a way to way to make sure that we don't take too much of one at the expense of the other? Al Scalf answered that this is more of a Comprehensive Plan Policy issue. Commissioner Sullivan referenced Chapter 18.15, page 70 regarding Airport Overlays I and II. Overlay II overlaps with a few parcels in the UGA which limits the use of those parcels. How was the overlay developed? Jim Hagan stated that Overlay II corresponded to the actual landing pattern of planes at the airport and was generated by testimony from pilots during the public hearings. Commissioner Sullivan said that the Airport Overlay issue has been through a lot of public process and he did not want to open this up for change. Chairman Johnson referenced Chapter 18.15, page 81 regarding the density bonus for critical areas in a Planned Rural Residential Development (PRRD.) Stacie Hoskins stated that Staffwants to . . . . . . Page 5 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 19,2005 encourage cluster developments (PRRDs) whenever possible. If a critical area is put into the reserve tract in a PRRD, a 20% bonus density on the overall project will be given. · Commissioner Sullivan referenced Chapter 18.15.485, page 79 (2)(a) (b) and (c). He asked how the maximum land area required for PRRDs was calculated? Al Scalf explained that, when the UDC was developed, Staff reviewed past platting to arrive at a pattern of size of projects. Commissioner Rodgers questioned why there is a maximum of 45 dwelling units in a PRRD? Al Scalf replied that there was concern about allowing urban growth in rural areas. The Board agreed that they want to encourage PRRDs and this subject may need to be reviewed. · Commissioner Sullivan referenced Chapter 18.30, page 25, (b) (ii) regarding signs. He noted the change for perpendicular wall signs above grade from 6 feet 8 inches to 7 feet. He asked why it wasn't changed to 8 feet? Kyle Aim explained that 7 feet was chosen to catch the structure underneath the wall. · Commissioner Sullivan referenced Chapter 18.30, page 28 where the language was changed to read can easily wash off equipment in used in mixing in production. He noted that there is an extra in that needs to be removed. Al Scalf suggested that the Board may want to have another discussion on the UDC changes before they have a public hearing. The Board agreed that they want to have more time for discussion at their January 3 meeting. Commissioner Rodgers moved to schedule the public hearing on the UDC Omnibus for January 9,2006 at 10:30 a.m. and that the County Administrator be authorized to sign the hearing notice. Commissioner Sullivan seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. The meeting was recessed at the close of business on Monday and reconvened on Tuesday at 10:00 a.m. All 3 Commissioners were present. The Board met in Executive Session from 10:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. with the County Administrator, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, and the Senior Planner regarding actual litigation. They came out of Executive Session and took the following action. Second Settlement Agreement, Washington Environmental Council (WE C): Deputy Prosecuting Attorney David Alvarez explained that the Executive Session concerned the language in Sections 4.1 and 4.2 ofthe second settlement agreement with WECo The latest version is acceptable to WEC's new legal representation. The action before the Board is whether to authorize Mark Johnsen, the County's outside land use attorney, to sign the agreement. Mark Johnsen is the attorney of record for the County in the petition which is before the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board. Commissioner Rodgers moved to direct Mark Johnsen to sign the second settlement agreement with WEe. Commissioner Sullivan seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Page 6 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 19, 2005 ~"~'.':.'" ~ ",.,;. 'I ;.. ,... ~-'\I;i'~:."~'" Request for Pre-payment of Specific 2006 Expenditures from the 2005 Budget; Commissioners/County Administrator: John Fischbach explained that a second business item is a memo to the Auditor authorizing payment of$100 from the County Commissioner's 2005 Budget for a 2006 expenditure. The expenditure is a facility deposit for a retreat that will be held in January with the Board, the County Administrator, and the Central Services Director. Commissioner Sullivan moved to approve the payment of a 2006 expenditure from the 2005 Budget. Commissioner Rodgers seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. The meeting was recessed at the close of business on Tuesday and reconvened on Wednesday, December 28 at approximately 2 p.m. Chairman Johnson was present and Commissioner Rodgers was available by telephone. Commissioner Sullivan wasn't present due to an excused absence. The following action was taken. RESOLUTION re: In the Matter of a Declaration of Emergency: The Deputy Clerk of the Board explained that the Public Works Director had requested this Declaration of Emergency from the Director of Emergency Management due to erosion damage to South Shore Road as the result of flooding in the West End. Commissioner Rodgers moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 79-05, in the matter of a Declaration of Emergency. Chairman Johnson seconded the motion which carried. JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF C MISSIONERS ~fJiV.. -11 ttflN~~ ) elf( (j <i Julie Matthes, CMC Deputy Clerk ofthe Board David~~ . ~Member Page 7