Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources January 25 20051 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Natural Resources Committee January 25, 2005 Committee Member Sharon Roy called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Absent: Seth Fleetwood None Dan McShane Also Present: Barbara Brenner SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS 1. ELECTION OF COMMITTEE CHAIR (AB2005 -022) McShane nominated Councilmember Roy. Nomination carried unanimously. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL 1. DISCUSSION WITH THE ACME /VANZANDT FLOOD CONTROL SUB - ZONE DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE REGARDING CONCERNS WITH WORK BEING DONE ON THE NOOKSACK RIVER (AB2005 -083) Roy stated this is not a County project, per se, so they will focus the discussion on issues in which the County has some say. Fleetwood asked if the Council is being called to take action. Roy stated she doesn't believe it is, unless the citizens have a proposal. It's more a matter of the staff and councilmembers hearing the issue from the citizens. Chris Hatch, Acme /VanZandt Sub -Zone District Advisory Committee Member, submitted and read his comments into the record (on file). Jeff Rainey, Acme /VanZandt Sub -Zone District Advisory Committee Member, stated the concern is the risk to life and property if there were a rupture. The community concern has not been addressed. Property owners are opposed to the proposal because taking out the rock wall will devastate the property downriver. Natural Resources Committee, 1/25/2005, Page 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. The park is valuable property. There is potential for great disaster. Don't allow the park to be destroyed through mismanagement. Work needs to be done immediately to save it. McShane stated someone said the erosion rate is 30 feet per year. He understands that the park property is currently rip rapped with rock. He asked the rate of erosion. Rainey stated there is a chance of the river blowing through, get behind other rock, go to Mosquito Lake Road and the neighbors. There is no rock armament. There is soft, sandy loam soil that is eroding. McShane stated when he saw the area a couple of years ago, rock was on the park property. The river hit the rock hard, turned, and hit the property that used to be the recreational vehicle (RV) park. He's trying to figure out where the 30 feet of erosion is occurring. Rainey stated the erosion is occurring at the south end of the field, close to Hutchison Creek. There are 300 yards downstream from Hutchison Creek. Paula Cooper, River and Flood Division Manager, indicated on a map the location of the erosion. Roy restated the issue, which is the erosion of 30 feet per year. The question is whether the project will affect that erosion, according to the County. There was a request for more detailed information from the consultants on setbacks. Another issue is that the consultant was hired by the tribes. Cooper stated the erosion occurs at the pastureland in the park. At this point, she is not sure how the proposal will affect that erosion. The proposal is to remove riprap in that one area and replace the riprap with engineered log jams to keep the whole river from moving toward the park, and encourage it to make littler channels in the forested areas to encourage habitat. The proposal is to move the river a little bit, which may make things worse there. She doesn't know about the analysis from the tribe. Alan Soicher, Nooksack Tribe Watershed Restoration Coordinator, stated a design parameter of the project was not to increase the rate of erosion, but possibly decrease it if possible. The general parameter is to not make things worse. Roy asked if Mr. Soicher met recently with this advisory committee. Soicher stated they have met over the course of several public meetings. He met with the consultants, Ms. Cooper, the sub -zone committee, and others last week to go over the conceptual design. Roy asked if he will provide more detail on the setbacks. Soicher stated he certainly would. Natural Resources Committee, 1/25/2005, Page 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Roy asked if the issue has been addressed about the river channel changing and going into the old channel. Cooper stated the old Hutchison Creek evulsion site is in the project area the tribes are working in. The latest design incorporates a plug in the old channel to keep portions of the river from getting into that channel and starting a potential evulsion. There are three other places in the park where that same threat exists. She is putting together a contract with the same consultant to look at these hot spots. She will prioritize the spots to direct the consultant's efforts. Evulsion is when the river does a major channel change during one flood event. Brenner stated she visited the location. She is also concerned about removing the rock and replacing it with the log jams. She asked for reassurance that the river won't blow through the log jams. Cooper stated the consulting firm staff is very experienced and has proven successes. The design at this point is conceptual. Once there is general buy -off, the consultant will do the more detailed work. The consultant will review, calculate, and engineer the log jam to withstand forces of water and debris. Roy asked if the County owns the parkland, and if the County will look at potential issues to prevent scouring of the County land. Cooper stated her focus is also on the major channel change and how the project will affect flooding issues. Roy stated the County would look at the Lummi /Nooksack restoration project with that view. She asked how that would affect the park and the river. She's not sure how the jurisdictions will work together. She wants to reassure the residents that the County is working with the tribes on how the project affects the interests of the county. Cooper stated the new revised design is better than the previous design. The advisory committee members expressed good concerns. That feedback was given to the consultant and tribes. She hopes they will incorporate those concerns. Another meeting with all parties is scheduled for February 7. Fleetwood asked the County's authority to shape the project. Cooper stated the County owns the land and has to approve the design before it allows the consultant access to build the project on parkland. Fleetwood asked if the County has authority to stop, alter, and motivate people to modify the project. Cooper stated it does. McShane asked if the erosion will put pressure on the County to act or do something regardless of this project. Cooper stated there are four spots in the park she is concerned about. The average erosion level is more like 15 -feet. The 30- foot erosion is at the extreme end. The revised design puts a plug in one potential problem site. That is one of the spots she is concerned about. McShane stated the river meanders. There will always be pressure spots. The question is where the County draws the line. Anyone who lives near the river is going to be concerned. The County is one of those property owners. When this Natural Resources Committee, 1/25/2005, Page 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. first came up and since then, the Council approved a model. Cooper stated the Council approved a hydraulic model for the South Fork, for work in this project and also for a bridge replacement. The modeling contractor is working with the contractor of this project. The model will be available to the Council to make these design decisions. The consultants have developed the model between Acme and Saxon. They should have a working South Fork model by the end of the year. Fleetwood asked the effect of removing the riprap. Some people are emphatic that flooding will occur without question, because they've seen it happen already. Other people have said that's not the case. He asked what will happen if they remove the riprap at Hutchison Creek. Cooper stated the design is to split little channels off the main river that will snake through the log jams. The proposal is to remove a portion of the riprap and install several log jams. The design will keep the entire river from going to the location from where the riprap will be removed. Eventually, the riprap would have to be removed ultimately because it has a lifespan. It will be hard to repair because of its encroachment into the river. Given the issues being raised in the permit process, she believes getting permits to repair the riprap will be difficult. The log jams will be new, with a whole new life ahead of them. The engineer designing this has a lot of experience designing log jams. John LaMonte, Acme /VanZandt Sub -Zone District Advisory Committee Member, asked who has liability if the log jams don't work. There is potential the water will eat all the way through to Mosquito Lake Road and take half the park with it when they split the flow of the river. They haven't addressed how to stop it from going into Hutchison Creek and going into the old channel. Roy stated Ms. Cooper has said that the new design includes engineering methods that will keep that from happening, and the County will not approve the project from going forward if it feels any if this risk will happen. LaMonte stated the rock wall shouldn't be removed at all. Roy asked Mr. LaMonte about the issue that the rock wall will have to be removed sooner or later because it's life will come to an end. LaMonte stated it will last for a number of years to come. McShane stated there is 30 feet of erosion downstream of the rock wall. Because there is no design, the rapid rate of erosion is a concern of some people. If the County is going to have liability no matter what it does in the river. The other option would be to leave the river alone and not do anything. As a consultant, he's looked at structures built by county governments. It creates a problem for building permits below those structures. There is a question of liability of counties that build a structure, and then permit buildings below it. Don't let the question of liability paralyze them from doing the work. Take the tribal issue out of it. It's clear there is a problem at the river. The question is whether the County should support the sub -zone to try to resolve the problem, or do nothing. LaMonte stated put logs anchored with cable in there to help stop the erosion. They will Natural Resources Committee, 1/25/2005, Page 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. stay. They have done that in the past, and it is slowing the river from digging into that parkland. Whatever they do will affect property downriver, but the question is where they start. He would like to see someone do some sort of action at that location. Everyone there would like to see the erosion stop, but they don't believe this project will do that. Fleetwood stated the consultant engineering the project recognizes that they are to design the project in a way to not create any more problems. Apparently, the consultant is an expert in this area. Yet, Mr. LaMonte still maintains some concerns. He asked what assurances that have been given that Mr. LaMonte doesn't believe. LaMonte stated the plug for Hutchison Creek is not big enough. It will float away during the next high water. Fleetwood asked what the committee members know that the expert doesn't know. LaMonte stated there is quite a bit of timber along the land, but there is no root strength. The land is all sandy silt. He asked what will stop the silt from going down the river. Unless the consultant goes the entire length from where the rock wall comes down to Hutchison Creek and around to the parkland, they won't save it. He's lived on the river since 1980. The Galbreath homestead has been there since 1954, and wouldn't like what is happening. Fleetwood asked if the advisory committee met with the designers to discuss the concerns. Hatch stated the advisory committee met with the consultants last week. The committee members got to see the conceptual plan, which hasn't been publicly distributed yet. The committee is to pass along to the consultants the concerns of the community in time for the consultants to review their design. They are working with a short time frame before the project is scheduled to begin. Construction specifications are to be set soon. Soon, they must identify those construction specifications and assure the community that the design is adequate. Predictability is being taken out of the equation with removal of the riprap and the protection it provides. The community wants to know who will be liable if the project goes bad. They don't know who will be liable. They still haven't clarified the liability issue. The committee would like more information on the setback structure. The committee would like to provide information to the consultants also. Cooper stated one problem is that river engineering isn't rocket science. People have their own feelings of how the river is going to respond. No one person has the right answer. She's somewhat more comfortable with the most current design, but it's a natural system. They can only plan for what they conceive will happen. There are different levels of comfort. The plug is a critical component of the project. The consultants acknowledge that risk. The County will make sure it is comfortable with the design. Roy asked what happens if the County is not comfortable with the design. Cooper stated the County would work with the tribes, or else the project won't go forward. Natural Resources Committee, 1/25/2005, Page 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Roy asked if the Council's approval of this is necessary. She asked the reason for the timeline. Cooper stated there is a window annually for fish. Roy stated it could be put off. She's not comfortable with the sense of pressure. After the next evaluation of the plan, it may be necessary to put it off. She asked if that is negotiable. Soicher stated he's not in a position to say if the schedule can be adjusted. They are aware of the schedule, and the consultants are working constantly to meet the timeline. Fleetwood stated the tribes have expended lots of money on this project already. Soicher stated that is correct. Also, there is a desire to improve fish habitat in the short term. Brenner asked if the County Council or County administration would approve the project. Cooper stated it's administrative, and up to the Executive whether he brings it before the Council. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) Brenner stated that before this is over, she would like to discuss the photos of the river the councilmembers received. She's concerned about the junk cars in the river. McShane stated that issue was not on the agenda and is not appropriate for this meeting. Forward the pictures to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), who ultimately are the ones who have chosen not to act. This issue is unrelated to what is scheduled on the agenda. Brenner stated she would like to discuss it under other business. She would like to hear from the representative from the Nooksack Tribe. McShane stated the photos are of a terrible landfill. He doesn't know if the representative from the tribe who is present knows anything about it at all. The decision - making process on this is an administrative decision. The Council's role is to facilitate some public process, which was one of the community's concern. Roy stated the administration could benefit if it scheduled its approval of the river project for discussion in the Natural Resources Committee. The community feels that the councilmembers are their elected officials and that the Council should take some interest. The County business is run by the administration and County staff. The Council doesn't tell the administration what to do. However, let the administration know that the Council is very interested in this project. Gina Jacoby- Strachila, Mosquito Lake Road, stated she is in line of any impact from this proposed restoration project and from the eroding bank. People who live on the river know they have to take certain precautions. There's never been an issue with the river until last year. The river is changing on its own. Natural Resources Committee, 1/25/2005, Page 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Residents are nervous about having someone poking around. The consultants are not experts over the people who have lived there for years. Leo Sygitowicz, a community elder, said do not remove the riprap. These people have lived on the river their entire lives. They understand the river. They say not to remove the riprap. The Acme residents want to see fish in the river, but safety must be taken into consideration. They need to find out who will put up a bond and be liable when homes and farms are destroyed. Downstream, more homes are in the line of fire as well. The tribes projection of flooding from 2003 is not close to what really happened. The science is not exact. She can only trust her elders who know everything about that area. The residents aren't closed to the idea of a fix, but the proposals still come back with riprap removal. Art Anderson, Deming Diking District Commissioner and County Flood Advisory Committee Member, stated the concern is that this might set a precedence for flood repair for the rest of the river system. Look at the cost of the engineered log jams. If Leo Sygitowicz says there is a problem, they should listen. The money to be spent and construction to be done is very pricey. He supports what the tribes are trying to do to support the fish. In another location, the Nooksack Tribe is working on property south of the casino. They are talking about saving what is left of that property with rock, not engineered log jams. That is another example of saving property with hard surface. Be mindful of the community's comments. He's a civil engineer. He's not a geologist. Wood must be securely anchored to maintain its position. Robert Strachila, Mosquito Lake Road, stated he lives Yz mile north of the proposed project. He read his statement into the record (on file). The project requires removal of an armored rock wall, not riprap. Jim Hanson told the community that he would not approve the project if it weren't safe. The community is opposed to the project and has been left out of the decision - making process. Almost $6 million has been spent on the South Fork of the Nooksack River in the last five years. The tribes have hired new consultants. The community has only very limited information. In this plan, log jams are all over. He has concerns that include safety of life, property, and infrastructure as a result of channel migration, bank erosion, and channel jumping. He is concerned about liability for buildings, land, life, and heritage loss. His last concern is the lack of community involvement prior to April 2004. Most of the people involved in the project don't live in the area. Until his questions are answered, he will remain opposed. The proposed plug is for a wood plug. Wood floats. Jim Strachila, 1385 Mosquito Lake Road, stated this should not have happened. It is wrong. The consultants never talked to the community members. They're talking about saving 200 to 300 fish. This is a 100 -year project that they're trying to do in five years. The fish are pretty much gone. The riprap they want to remove is getting old. If they remove it, then replace it with something they know will work. They need rock or concrete. Wood floats. If the river jumps into the old Hutchison Creek, the river will flow through his yard year- round. Natural Resources Committee, 1/25/2005, Page 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Roy thanked everyone for coming to the committee meeting. Fleetwood stated everyone's been asking the question of liability. He would like the County attorney to do a legal review of liability. It won't be that tough. He moved to request that the Council attorney do a legal review of the liability issue if the project doesn't work and the river destroys people's properties. Motion carried unanimously. Roy asked staff to keep the Council informed on this issue. She wants to hear more before taking a position on the issue. She respects the staff and experts a lot. It's key for the tribes to involve the community. Brenner asked that the committee write a letter to the Executive asking to be involved in the decision. Fleetwood moved to write a letter to the Executive to request that the Council's deliberations and concerns be considered on this issue when the decision is made. Motion carried unanimously. McShane stated this project is primarily funded by the tribes. At the same time, he's hearing concerns about erosion in this area, and homes may be at risk. If this project doesn't go forward, there is still a problem with the river. He asked if the County will then have to spend its flood funds to solve this problem itself. There may be a potential win -win situation. This could be an opportunity here to do good for fish and public safety. The risk of evulsion exists regardless of whether or not they do anything. There may be some opportunity, through this fish project, to save the County and district some money by including a safety component. Everyone should be as receptive as they can to the options. Roy stated the Committee will ask for a legal opinion and request the Executive to consider the Council's deliberations. (Clerk's note: Discussion continued below.) OTHER BUSINESS Brenner asked the committee to request the Nooksack Tribe to inform the Council to clean up this mess on the river. McShane stated the pictures should be forwarded to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), who has the authority, not the Nooksack Tribe. The EPA has chosen to ignore this site. The pictures are enlightening. He will bring this up to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee and follow up on the issue. Natural Resources Committee, 1/25/2005, Page 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Roy stated she will put it on the agenda for the next meeting, just to see what Councilmember McShane finds out. McShane stated the Solid Waste Advisory Committee also talked about putting forward an ordinance on demolition debris. There is a lot of concern that demolition debris is being dropped at this landfill. The County would not accept that as appropriate demolition debris disposal site. Brenner stated send a copy of the EPA letter to the Nooksack Tribe. McShane stated the committee should refer this issue to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee. Brenner stated it is also a Natural Resources Committee issue. Roy stated Councilmember McShane would present an update at the next meeting of what the Solid Waste Advisory Committee decides. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL 1. DISCUSSION WITH THE ACME /VANZANDT FLOOD CONTROL SUB - ZONE DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE REGARDING CONCERNS WITH WORK BEING DONE ON THE NOOKSACK RIVER (AB2005 -083) (Clerk's Note: Discussion continued from above.) Fleetwood stated he would like the tribes to let the councilmembers know whether or not it is even possible to design the project in a way that promotes safety and fish habitat while keeping the riprap. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 10:53 a.m. Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Natural Resources Committee, 1/25/2005, Page 9 1 2 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk Sharon Roy, Committee Chair Natural Resources Committee, 1/25/2005, Page 10