Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources January 28 20031 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 28, 2003 The meeting was called to order at 9:30 a.m. by Committee Member Sharon Roy in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Absent: Seth Fleetwood None Laurie Caskey- Schreiber Also Present: Barbara Brenner L. Ward Nelson Dan McShane SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS 1. ELECTION OF COMMITTEE CHAIR (AB2003 -023) Caskey- Schreiber nominated Councilmember Roy. Motion carried unanimously. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL 1. DISCUSSION OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND FLOOD HAZARD MANAGEMENT ITEMS CONTINUED FROM THE 1/21/03 COUNCIL WATER RESOURCES WORK SESSION (AB2003 -025A) Paula Cooper, River and Flood Division Manager, stated erosion has affected Mosquito Lake Road. She submitted a map (on file). Erosion has been happening for a few years. The County hired Interfluve to look at alternatives. A high bank complicates this site. Interfluve found that the road would be impacted unless they go with alternative two. The 1995 flood event caused the river to shift closer to the road. It has been advancing for the last few years. They don't have any good options that are affordable at this point because the road is so close to the top of the failed bank right now. Interfluve presented alternatives to the Flood Control Zone District Advisory Committee (FCZDAC), which decided to pursue road relocation. The State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is agreeable to this. Roy asked if it is considered a permanent alternative. Cooper stated it is. They would acquire the right of way and relocate the road. Natural Resources Committee, 1/28/2003, 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 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. Fleetwood asked if that is land that is subject to timber harvesting. Cooper stated it is. Roy asked if they would do stabilization. Cooper stated they would not. They would work to realigning the road permanently. Their advice is to monitor the situation. If things pick up, then move actively to relocate road. This is not on annual work program now. She wanted the Council to be aware of the situation in case an emergency happens. Brenner asked if they are going to explore alternative two as a permanent solution, and then alternative three. Cooper stated alternative three is prohibitively expensive. They will go with alternative two. This will come forward on the work program next year unless something happens before then. The next item is the Jones Creek alluvial fan hazards. An item is before the Finance Committee today, and the paperwork begins on Council packet page 295. The flood district is working on several alluvial fans right now that will come to the Council with recommendations for potential land use regulations and flood hazard reduction projects. She presented the history of the situation. The community that is not in the high -risk area has raised issues about the remaining risk in the area. The land use question is whether the County should allow development. A recent risk analysis was done, using hard science to determine the risk. They had to define the level of protection they were trying to map the risk for. The advisory committee is going through some 1996 reports and is trying to come up with a mitigation strategy to make sure the hazards don't get worse with new development. The committee has been struggling with the question of the level of protection they want to provide out there. The flood code is aimed at preventing damage to structures. Hazards are different on an alluvial fan, which is more hazardous. A higher level of protection is warranted on alluvial fans. The committee recommended planning for a 500 -year event. There is a ten percent chance of a 500 -year event happening every 50 years. Now, the consultant is mapping a 500 -year event on Canyon Creek. The Finance Committee may decide today to do the same analysis on Jones Creek. Brenner asked if they plan for 500 -year event for every area that is a flood hazard. Cooper stated they usually plan for 100 -year flood level. The advisory committee felt that the difference in the type of flooding warranted a plan for a 500 -year flood event. The advisory committee wants to see the maps before they make a formal recommendation for land use and mitigation. The Planning staff has also participated in these discussions. The action plan from the County's Comprehensive Plan calls for a public process to establish a recommended level of public risk. Those risk levels should be adopted by the County Council and Planning Commission as the level to which future development must be regulated. From a land use standpoint, that is what the Comprehensive Plan calls for. The existing critical areas ordinance requires all projects on alluvial Natural Resources Committee, 1/28/2003, 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. fans to be engineered and constructed to withstand hazards equivalent to the largest known event evident in the alluvial fan, as determined by a knowledgeable professional. If the County moves forward with this, it will require some revision to the critical areas ordinance. Nelson asked the benefit of planning for a 500 -year event instead of a 100 - year event. Cooper stated the event can wipe out an area, and the risk to public life is higher on an alluvial fan. It is a catastrophic event. Nelson stated the public will get wiped out by a 100 -year event, also. Cooper stated this decision is to do the map so people will have to build their developments with mitigation. Roy stated it is an alluvial fan that is very specific and they will know what it will do. All they are saying is that they need to be five times more cautious in what the County and public will do. Brenner asked if they want people to mitigate against a 500 -year event or to prevent people from building there. It is hard to see how someone on an alluvial fan can mitigate against a 500 -year event. If the County is considering preventing people from building in those areas, she would rather do prevention than mitigation. Cooper stated that is a policy issue they will talk about in the future. There are options. Brenner asked if they are optimistic that they can mitigate a 500 -year event. Cooper stated she won't know until she sees what it looks like. Caskey- Schreiber stated this is a way to bring awareness to the people by letting them know the risk. Roy asked if the Finance Committee would decide about going forward with this study on Jones Creek. Cooper stated that is correct. Roy stated this committee would have these discussions again after the study is done. They are getting ahead of themselves. Cooper stated that is correct. She just wanted to make the Council aware that is where they are headed. Brenner asked for a reason to continue studying mitigation options for a 500 - year event. People won't survive a catastrophic 500 -year event. Cooper stated there are two types of mitigation. One type is mitigation proposed in the development proposal. Another mitigation option is what the County would do as part of the flood control program. Mapping a 500 -year event is the first thing they need to have to decide whether or not they want to mitigate for it. McShane stated he does a lot of alluvial fan work. In the absence of a study while working with Jones Creek or an alluvial fan, he has to make worst -case scenario assumptions for people who are studying whether or not they should Natural Resources Committee, 1/28/2003, 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. develop on the alluvial fan. People could survive a 500 -year event. Portions of the alluvial fan would be affected, but the event might not destroy the property. Debris flow would be the factor that would destroy property. That won't happen on the entire alluvial fan. The study will make some reasonable determinations of where things will happen. From there, the County can make some good planning decisions that will save people money. Right now, people are reliant on whatever consultant they hire because there isn't an in -depth study of the alluvial fan. This consultant is a good one and the price of the study is reasonable. Nelson asked if Jones Creek is the same situation as Canyon Creek. Cooper stated it is similar. It has a lot of smaller landslides. It is a classic alluvial fan. Nelson asked how much of that area now is developable. Cooper stated a good bit of the area could be developed. The bulk of the town of Acme is on the fan. Nelson asked if this is something they want to do as a standard or just for this instance. Cooper stated the County Planning staff looked at the risk potential for things to go and for people to be on the fan. Canyon Creek and Jones Creek were two that are high on that list for potential risk. The County will have to determine how far down they want to go on that list. McShane stated a good question is whether it is worth it for only two or three houses. However, there is a significant number of houses on Jones Creek. There aren't any other areas that have that potential for development and risk. Bruce Roll, Water Resources Division Manager, stated there are issues related to stormwater, particularly regarding the National Pollution Discharge and Elimination System (NPDES) regulations, phase two. He would describe what it is, the boundaries of where the regulations apply, what is included, the timing, and policy questions that would come forward in the coming months. The boundaries are based on the 2000 census data. The census doesn't track through drainages. Staff and the State Department of Ecology (DOE) will discuss the issue of the small location boundary that goes up to Ferndale. As long as there is a census unit of one thousand people or more per square mile, the area is connected. They are also meeting with the City of Bellingham staff because they are also involved. The Council needs to consider where, in addition to those areas, it wants to apply more active stormwater management. There are six minimum control measures. Staff will draft an application to bring to the Council at its February Water Resources work session. The regulations are written so that certain words mean that they have to, should, or might have to do certain things. All six of these measures have wording that says they "must" do the controls. There are other measures that should be done or are encouraged to be done. Natural Resources Committee, 1/28/2003, 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. They are in good shape in places like the Lake Whatcom watershed in terms of these regulations. They are doing a lot of what is required already. These are new federal regulations. The County has to have an application into the DOE by March 10, 2003. Caskey- Schreiber asked if County oversees Bellingham's participation. Roll stated the County does not oversee the City's participation, but coordinates with the City. The plans must be consistent. Brenner asked if different areas have different considerations. Roll stated staff is determining the pollutants in each area. From that, staff will need to determine the requirements and the geographic relationship in each of the areas. As staff fills out the application, they will determine different factors such as land uses and primary pollutants. Only allow the best management practices (BMP's) that should be applied to happen. Roy asked if this applies only to the three special districts. Roll stated this only applies to the geographic areas identified by the census. Fleetwood asked the qualifications for the areas to be included. Roll stated the areas are based on communities that have a census size of 10,000 or more, and all contiguous census units radiating from that center area that have 1,000 or more people per square mile. Fleetwood asked if that is why they don't see Everson included, for example. Roll stated Everson doesn't have a center area that has 10,000 or more people. Brenner stated it seems odd that it doesn't go further into Ferndale. Roll stated the approach is confusing. Continue to look at what they need to be doing in the entire watershed. Unfortunately, federal and state regulations don't always mesh with what would be considered the most appropriate approach in a particular geographic area. Roy asked if they are going to discuss the odd boundaries with DOE. Roll stated he is interested in that area east of Ferndale. There are a lot of questions that need to be asked. The first minimum required measure is public education and outreach. There is a section in the application for this. They can read about it on Council packet page 16. A key piece is to distribute educational materials to the community. That is what they must do. Staff is working to determine that the County is doing what is requested. The County has done an exceptional job already on the public education piece in Lake Whatcom. Outreach is to see that the material gets into the hands of people and they are digesting the information. The second minimum required measure is public involvement and participation. Examples of that is done with integrated pest management (IPM). Natural Resources Committee, 1/28/2003, 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. They must have public involvement by following state and local notice requirements of public involvement activities. They do that actively now. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) The third minimum required measure is illicit discharge detection and elimination. This is more complex. Staff will need some coordination with the Health Department, which has regulatory authority to deal with most of these issues. The requirements don't say they have to do all within the five -year period the permit is issued. They only have to make progress toward the measures. For this required measure, lay out a well- thought out strategy. Brenner asked if all areas in the boundary have to have a sewer system. Roll stated not necessarily. They have a way to go before they have a map that clearly defines a stormwater system for those geographic areas. They have to have the control measures. This would allow a septic system to stay put if there is something to monitor the system. Nelson asked who is responsible for Water District 10 sewers. Roll stated it would be those regulations that the County can apply and enforce on private land. In the case of Sudden Valley where there is an overflow on private land, then it would be where the County has jurisdiction. It becomes problematic because they aren't on a public right -of -way. It is more to deal with the cause and effect of conveyance into a public water supply. He can't give any recommendations other than to say they are working with the Health Department on the current regulations, how they deal with the requirements, and if there are gaping holes. Staff will be working on ordinance they need as a result of illicit discharges. Many businesses already have a discharge elimination permit. They have their own requirements. Some of the challenge is to identify all those that have permits. There is an indication that some of these things exist, but they don't know where. The County needs to prioritize potential places where they need to do it, which means spending a year mapping out the areas that may influence illicit discharges. The fourth minimum required measure is construction site stormwater runoff. Staff is wrestling with this now. He feels good about what the County has in place now, which is right in line with what is required. Brenner asked if expanding the program in Lake Whatcom to countywide would address this fourth measure. Roll stated they should focus on areas required by law, and then decide where they want to expand from there. If the Council wants to add other areas, he would have to determine the kinds of resources the County would need to apply it everywhere. It is an issue of needing the resources to do it countywide instead of in specific geographic locations. Brenner asked why they wouldn't have the same requirements countywide. Roll stated they have to determine the major beneficial uses that the receiving Natural Resources Committee, 1/28/2003, 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 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. waters are used for, such as a drinking water supply. It will take new staff positions to expand the program elsewhere. Look at water strategies for each of the drainages. Brenner asked if there is a countywide standard for cost ruction site stormwater runoff control. Roll stated staff is working to identify what the County is already doing that will meet the requirements. Roy stated this exercise is to identify what the County is already doing that will meet the minimum required measures for a phase II permit. The fifth minimum required measure is post- construction stormwater management in new development and redevelopment. They key is defining new development versus redevelopment and defining the term "retrofit." Not listed is any requirement to do a retrofit. Roy asked if redevelopment is considered remodeling. Roll stated that would be something they would define. McShane stated this keeps showing up to a degree in the overlay for Lake Whatcom. It comes up at the Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC) and FCZDAC. The County needs a standard definition of what the trigger will be for upgrading. He doesn't want a different definition for each County department. Roll stated he would make note of that, and determine if the regulations provide a definition. Brenner stated she is concerned that this is so complicated they will never be able to develop affordable housing. Roll stated he agreed with the concern, but these are federal regulations that he has no control over. Roy asked if Dr. Roll is working with Planning Department. Roll stated the team working on this includes staff from Flood Division, Health Department, Water Resources Division, Public Works Department administration, Engineering Division, and Planning Department staff. The team members are being coordinated to gather the information needed on the application. Roll stated they will have to start making decisions on development requirements for stormwater controls maintenance and enforcement. That question won't need to be answered before filing the application, but they should be making progress toward it. One of the fundamental pieces is a very good inventory of what they have, and then have an adaptive management strategy. They don't have the tools they need to know what they have and understand how it changes over time. They need appropriate geographic information system (GIS) maps, data in common formats, and the ability to track the status between the County departments. They need those things for good water resource management. Natural Resources Committee, 1/28/2003, 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. Caskey- Schreiber stated the maintenance goals for each area might be different because the boundaries are not based on drainages, but on census. Roll stated he agreed. Roll stated the sixth required measure is for pollution prevention and good housekeeping for municipal operations. This is about making sure that a road project has the BMP's installed appropriately and are maintained. It is also about how often the County cleans out vaults and other things in the watersheds, whether they want a street sweeping program, and where it would apply. The County is training operations people to know how to do different measures and appropriate maintenance activities. They've made a good start on this the past two or three years. There will be additional costs in the road program of 10 to 20 percent to install proper BMP's and make sure they are maintained. Staff is working with filling out the draft application for Council review at the February Water Resources work session. The County will have to submit the application on or before March 10, 2003. Staff will be able to do that. The DOE will receive these applications, but it still has a lot of work to do to create the permit. Until he has a definition of the permit from DOE, he will stick to the minimum federal requirements. Don't commit to anything beyond the minimum requirements until the County staff knows what the DOE will require in addition to the federal regulations. All regulations are intended to have a level of action per the federal mandate. State and local governments can make it more restrictive. The trick here is to apply the regulations in a way that makes sense. Brenner stated she would like the County to lobby to have the boundaries determined by drainage and not by census. Roll stated he has been fighting that battle for 18 years. It is a federal regulation. Something to think about is that the federal regulations allow DOE to expand the boundaries based on issues related to the Clean Water Act and 303(d) listings, related to the total maximum daily load (TMDL) programs. Roy asked about the shellfish closure areas and if they are included in that group. Roll stated he would have to look into it. Shellfish regulations are a different, lower set of regulations. The standards are completely separate. There are issues related to locations for applying resources, Lake Whatcom, geographic boundaries, and transitioning to the water resource inventory area (WRIA) implementation. Fleetwood asked if DOE has any recommended guidelines to make this phase two process stricter. Roll stated it does not now. They are strapped with budget cuts. Their strategy was originally to bring forward their Western Washington stormwater manual. That is available. The DOE needs to decide the role of that manual in terms of carrying out federal and state requirements. There will be an Natural Resources Committee, 1/28/2003, 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 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. independent science panel review of the Western Washington stormwater manual. Many municipalities question whether it is the best available science. A question is whether they can tie that manual to Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed salmon. OTHER BUSINESS Roll stated he was very impressed with the Drayton Harbor open house this weekend. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 10:55 a.m. Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription ATTEST: Dana Brown- Davis, Council Clerk WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Sharon Roy, Committee Chair Natural Resources Committee, 1/28/2003, Page 9