HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Works July 11 20001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee
July 11, 2000
The meeting was called to order at 1:30 p.m. by Committee Chair Barbara
Brenner in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
9
10
11
12
Also Present: Absent:
Marlene Dawson None
Dan McShane
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
48
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
1. DISCUSSION WITH RON BRONSEMA REGARDING CURRENT AND
FUTURE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT (FCZD) WORK PROGRAMS
AND PRIORITIES FOR THE FCZD 2001 BUDGET (AB2000-236)
Ron Bronsema, 8135 Northwood Road, Flood Control Zone District Advisory
Committee Chair, stated the Public Works Committee's request was that the
Advisory Committee come up with a prioritized list of projects and activities that the
flood districts should do. There are concerns of limited staff resources. There is a
multitude of responsibilities and not enough staff to do it with. The Advisory
Committee held a work session on June 29. Staff put each thing they are doing on
a card, and the cards were moved around on a board. The work program in the
Council packet is the result. With each task, there is a full-time equivalent
regarding staff. As the Board of Supervisors, it is their call on where to draw the
line. It is a difficult job. They are not going to make everyone happy. They have
the equivalent of four full-time staff people, including a clerk. Some of these tasks
are ongoing maintenance and operations types of tasks, such as an early warning
system, a community rating system, the national flood insurance program, and
other programs that have been implemented or are in the process of being
implemented and take staff time to maintain.
Brenner stated the draft talks about the prioritization. The tasks are not
done in the same way as the general budget priorities. She questioned how the
budget priorities can be in order if the tasks are not in the same order.
Paula Cooper, Special Projects Manager, stated it was a challenge to figure
out how to present this. Staff looked at the big-picture ticket items. Those are the
first nine items. In the overall frame, those are the general priorities. There are
also the smaller components of those nine things.
Brenner questioned whether the general budget priorities are not in order.
Cooper stated they are, but it is a general, vague thing. Obviously, they would
respond to a flood before they would provide technical assistance to an individual
for a small problem.
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 7/11/2000, 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
48
Brenner stated she envisioned her limit on full-time equivalent (FTE)
employees. It is not that many. She questioned whether they go by the nine-item
thing or the task thing. Cooper stated they go by the task thing.
Bronsema stated the FTE total is a pie-in-the-sky figure if they are going to
do everything. That would total six to eight positions. That is the Rolls Royce
package. There are other things that are not on this list. There are things that will
come down the road later on. This is not something they can accomplish in the
next four or five years. It is a changing list. There will be new responsibilities and
items. Coastal issues are becoming a hot item. He questioned whether they would
have to do a plan for coastal areas. Those are things they have to worry about.
There are 19 drainage districts in the county. He questioned whether it would be
the flood district staff responsibility to help those districts implement a plan. In the
past, they've helped whoever has screamed the loudest. He questioned whether
they would still operate that way or have an organized plan instead.
McShane stated he went to this work session. It is complicated to break
things out. The overwhelming thing to look at is the level of responsibility in just
maintaining what the County is already doing. There are some items that the
County really needs to move forward on. It would be difficult to move forward on
those if the County is going to take responsibility for what it has already done.
Brenner questioned whether McShane promoted getting work done to
complete the current projects.
McShane stated they are not going to be able to do some of the important
tasks right away because they have to do other tasks first. Moving forward on the
larger plan issues will be important because it provides a service to the community
that is critical. It gives the County a framework to deal with the squeaky wheels.
The County has a plan now for the main stem of the Nooksack, but the County is
also looking at possible shoreline issues. They don't have any plan for how to deal
with that. It is important that they move forward on this.
Brenner agreed that they need to move forward. Number four deals with
completion of these projects. She didn't know how long that would take.
McShane stated that is why he wanted to raise that item.
Brenner questioned whether they ever get to completion on these. If they
get to completion, the partial position could be used elsewhere.
McShane stated that as these projects are completed, other projects are just
getting started.
Cooper stated these projects are already built. There are conditions in these
permits that require monitoring over the next several years. The County has to
have a consultant do the monitoring and reporting two or three times per year.
Some of the maintenance regarding the re-vegetation requires weekly
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 7/11/2000, 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
48
maintenance. They are finding that every project they get to build comes with a
long-term price tag.
Hoag stated the Flood Control District should be adequately staffed. It has
been very short-staffed in the past. The fund tends to get robbed for other things
that really don't have to do with floods. She wanted to ensure that the things that
need to be done regarding floods are funded. She questioned the number of FTE's
that this adds up to. There are five full-time employees now. Cooper stated the
first two pages, packet pages 133 and 134, require the staffing that exists now.
Packet page 135 lists the projects that require additional personnel. Page 136 is a
list of projects, called the parking lot, which can begin when other projects are
completed.
Hoag stated she was concerned about the parking lot items. If they don't
begin the sediment management strategy, so much else of what they do is wasted.
People have been asking for the County to do that. It keeps getting put on the back
burner.
Bronsema stated the Advisory Committee shares that concern. The problem
is that they are required to get five years of aerial mapping of the Nooksack River
sediment as it is transported down the river. They don't have that yet. They have
started collecting that. They are on year four. The meander limit is also extremely
important, but they can't do that until they have the computer modeling of the river
done.
Hoag questioned whether they have the five-years of data to do the
sediment management. Cooper stated they do. This ended up in the parking lot
because it would take a lot to get it implemented, especially with the permitting
environment being as it is.
Hoag stated they have the photos they need and questioned whether they
only need the personnel. She questioned whether that involves long-term
personnel. Cooper stated it would take some initial, up-front staff time. She has
not thought about that item in a lot of detail because it has been on the back
burner.
Brenner asked Cooper to look at that item in relationship to the fact that they
have the five years' worth of data and see whether the County might want to
include it. She wanted to understand more about why these were done in that
order.
Hoag asked Cooper to let her know the length of time for this project. It is
not an ongoing project. It comes up with a strategy. Cooper stated it would entail
a lot of monitoring. The only place she's ever seen anything done successfully
regarding sediment management was in Snohomish County, where they did cross-
section surveys and had a geo-morphologist review the entire system.
Hoag questioned how long that would take. Cooper stated she didn't know.
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 7/11/2000, 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
Hoag stated she wanted to know how long that would take.
McShane stated the sediment management strategy is a good example of
what the Flood District is facing. If this moves forward, then they have to add staff
or bump other projects.
Hoag stated she would rather add staff.
Brenner stated she would support some staff, but not major staff until the
Advisory Committee comes back with a better breakdown of how to do the taxing.
It is a tax, not a fee. It is based on property value, which makes it a tax, not a fee.
It doesn’t take contribution into consideration. It is not fair the way it is now.
There is such a huge amount borne by people who have fewer impacts and
contribution. That is her biggest concern. If someone is making a larger
contribution, they should pay for it. It doesn't work out this way at this point.
Cooper stated that request was sent to Jeff Monsen instead of the Flood Committee.
Brenner stated someone told her the committee didn't want to revisit the
issues.
Art Anderson, Flood Control Zone District Advisory Committee Vice-Chair,
stated he is also chair of the Sediment Management Committee. What
Councilmember Brenner is talking about is important, but it wasn't the Flood
Committee's task. The committee really wrestled with the list of priorities. It was a
cut and paste project. They struggled. Some of the things they talked about was
completion of some projects. Regarding monitoring the lower river, a question is
what exactly Sumas can take and be acceptable. Personally he believed they need
direction on sediment management. This is the laundry list. They tried to prioritize
it somewhat. The Council's decision is on this. He's never been an advocate of
throwing a lot of staff at projects. However, the Council has to decide whether it
wants the committee and staff to continue with this list of issues or cut the work
back to an acceptable, manageable level. When he has many tasks, he does a
terrible job at everything. He has to have a reasonable amount of tasks to do in a
reasonable amount of time. This is the committee's best cut using the staff. The
scope of work changed much since it began in 1991, when the scope of work was to
manage the river. Now, they have to deal with different tributaries, Endangered
Species Act (ESA) issues, and coastal issues. The County staff is challenged. They
have directions to do a particular task. The phone will ring about someone's
personal issue and the staff has to react to that also. He encouraged the
councilmembers to stick with whatever decision they decide.
Brenner stated that the committee is doing a great job and provided just
what the Public Works Committee asked for. She is concerned because they keep
saying they have to keep enough money for any emergency. This is a lot of
money. She also wanted the committee to look at how the funding is done and see
if it could be adjusted to be fairer. Anderson questioned whether she wanted the
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 7/11/2000, 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
48
committee to evaluate how it assess the levies per the residents of Whatcom
County.
Brenner stated it is not supposed to be based on property value. It is
supposed to be based on contribution to the problem. She envisioned a small flat
fee for everyone in the county. All contribute. Beyond the small fee, she asked for
specifics about who contributes the most. She understood that something like that
was to come back to the Council and it hasn’t.
McShane stated the County flood fee is a flat fee across the board. There are
other district fees. He has some concerns about the fairness of the way the district
fees are levied. He questioned which fees Brenner wanted the committee to look
into.
Brenner stated they are both done the same way. She didn't like how either
of them are done. She was talking about the countywide fee. Everyone in the
County should contribute some. It should be the same for every parcel. It is a fee
for service. On the district fees, the people who should be charged are the ones
who contribute to the problem, not those who aren't contributing any more and
who are being double-taxed. Bronsema stated he lives next to Nooksack River. He
lives next to a diking district and a flood district. He has three fees that he pays,
rightfully so.
Brenner stated the person who is far away, whose property is fully treed, and
who is not contributing more than anyone else shouldn’t be taxed because of the
value of the assessment of his or her property. It is not related to the contribution.
A person may have an expensive house, but the property is small or not
contributing. It is not right to tax people that way.
McShane stated it is something to look at in the future.
Brenner stated she liked how the committee put the list together. This is
what she wanted.
Bob Knutson, Flood Control Zone District Advisory Committee and Acme/Van
Zandt Sub-Flood Control Zone District member, explained what the staff have to go
through. The Saxon project virtually had an okay to go. Overnight, the Army
Corps of Engineers shut down the project. The issue is too much rock in the river.
Now the staff is dealing with the Corps again trying to put the project back into
shape again. The staff can’t do that every day constantly and maintain their sanity.
He is concerned about the staff. The only way to take the pressure off is to
increase the staff.
McShane asked what happened. Cooper stated the Corps officials saw the
rock. There is a study that says fish use rocked banks less than natural banks.
Staff agreed to pull back the rock and put in large root balls so all the fish see is
wood. Then, the Corps responded by instead requiring biodegradable rope. That is
where the County has to draw the line. Biodegradable rope wouldn't be permanent.
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 7/11/2000, 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
48
Staff had National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) up to the area and showed them
the old growth cedars that are where the bank is located now. They are hinging on
the fact that it is at the historical 100-year meander limits. That may be the only
thing that will still allow them to go.
Knutson stated the trees were cut in 1900. They were 800-900 years old.
The stumps are still there. This is as far as the river has ever gone. If they let the
river get that far, then it should be stopped. That has been his argument. He felt
for the engineers.
Brenner asked what McShane felt about the situation because he is a strong
supporter of environmentalism.
McShane stated this is a project he has been in favor of. It's a good idea,
and he is the environmental fanatic on the Council. The biodegradable rope issue is
laughable. They are in a difficult environment, but it doesn’t mean they should
bury their heads in the sand.
Bronsema stated that, as the tasks are laid out, it is complex. Task 5A is
hydraulic modeling. If they don’t do the modeling, they can’t establish the
meander line. If they don’t establish the meander line, they can’t do any more
projects in the lower river. If they get a flood this year, they could have 50
projects waiting. They are going to just watch farmland and homes fall into the
river. If they can't even get a permit to do anything at Saxon, which is totally
environmental and fish-friendly in every way, then they don't have any chance
down river.
Brenner stated the Council could fund this with 100 staff members, and still
not get it permitted. Cooper stated it isn't that the County would never get a
permit. They are dealing with agencies that are trying to figure out how to do their
jobs in this entire new world. The County was sold a short stick from the Corps,
who said that this is a great job and would go through. The County had the project
to the Corps in February, and NMFS didn't see the project until mid-June.
Dawson questioned whether the County could give them a deadline.
Brenner stated that since this is a classic case, the Council should file a
lawsuit on this case. It is a good project worth pursuing.
Dawson stated the County should give them a deadline for providing a
permit.
Brenner stated they wouldn't do it.
McShane stated it is easy to get upset. The advisory committee and staff
have been on a roller coaster ride. They are hearing the same roller coaster of
emotion. Getting the meander limits done is critical. They can't move on it now
because other things have to get done first. If they get the other things done, and
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 7/11/2000, 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
48
then get the meander limits done, he was optimistic that projects like this could
move through the permit process easier.
Brenner stated the reason they said no to the project was unreasonable, not
because the County was moving too slowly through the process.
Cooper stated they are setting policy as they go along. They are developing
their rules. The 4(d) rules came out and they told the County staff that the only
way it would work would be if the rope was biodegradable. The County seems to
be a guinea pig. They developed the policy during the County's project permitting
project. They said that if it is bank stabilization, it has to go through formal
consultation. Had she known that six months ago, the project would have made it
through this process.
Brenner stated the rules would always change. They are never going to be
set.
McShane moved that 2.2 FTE be added to the flood staff.
Brenner stated she wanted to include task 6C, permits imminent, but with a
.2 FTE. Cooper stated she didn't know how to do a .2 FTE. They have one .2 FTE
because a full-time FTE on staff now works 80 percent of the time on drainage
complaints and 20 percent of the time with the flood staff.
Brenner suggested a friendly amendment to make it two FTE's. Usually,
when they have a .2 FTE, it is someone who is hired to do other things at the same
time. This was supposed to be worked into the budget at budget time. She
assumed that the Engineering Division or Public Works Department has other needs
that they are going to come forward with. She suggested two FTE to 2.2 FTE, and
see if the .2 FTE can be squeezed in at budget time.
McShane agreed.
Brenner stated the sediment issue has been a big issue. Since it is ready to
go, she would like that it be looked at.
McShane stated that if they move the sediment item forward, it should be
three FTE. Cooper stated the first item on packet page 135, the South Fork
Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan (CFHMP) is something she intends
to get to someday, but it never happens. She has an FCAP grant on which one year
is left. She has a $125,000 grant for it. They've been able to spend $5,000 on a
summer intern. Task 6D is the Design/Permits Unknown. Mosquito Lake Road is
one she would like to work on. She is afraid that they will lose that road.
Dawson stated she was comfortable going up to three additional FTE.
McShane stated that if there is a good program over time, the costs of the
emergencies should be less. That is the intent.
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 7/11/2000, 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
48
Brenner asked for a more specific, fine-tuned project list if the flood staff was
increased by two to 2.2 FTE. Cooper stated she could get through the tasks on
packet page 134 with the existing staff.
Brenner restated the motion that two to three new FTE be added to the Flood
Control Zone District.
Anderson thanked the committee for its consideration.
Brenner asked the committee to revisit the funding mechanism. Bronsema
stated they would. He thanked the committee and Council for their time.
Regarding the sediment management, it is the number one thing the public brings
up to him. It is important for the public's support of the flood fund.
Knutson also thanked the committee.
Motion carried unanimously.
2. DISCUSSION REGARDING POTENTIAL IMMINENT FLOOD THREAT TO
THE MT. BAKER HIGHWAY NEAR MILEPOST 27 (AB2000-271)
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
Bill Devine, 8040 Mt. Baker Highway, introduced himself.
Monica Gowen, 8040 Mt. Baker Highway, thanked the committee for looking
into this matter.
Devine stated the committee received a packet of information that included
numbers.
Brenner stated she met with Devine and Gowen a week ago for 1 to 1.5
hours. The packet that everyone received is what was presented during her
meeting. She is not an expert, which is why this presentation is coming forward.
She was glad that flood staff was present to hear the presentation.
Devine stated he purchased his property at 8040 Mt. Baker Highway in 1973.
Since that time, there has been considerable deposition of sediment in this reach of
the stream from runoff on Boulder and Canyon creeks. In 1973, the river's main
course was against the right bank of the stream, as it is now. At that time, it was
eroding through a section of the stream. The County joined him in a riprap bank
protection project along this reach. Since that time, Boulder and Canyon creeks
deposited large amounts of additional sediment into the reach, which hasn't been
carried out.
Brenner questioned whether the riprap was made of limestone. Devine
stated it was a sandstone riprap. As the deposition continued to occur, the stream
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 7/11/2000, 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
48
continued over to the right bank. In the last year, it began severe erosion. All of
the original riprap is gone. There is a large cut into the field, which is rapidly
eroding. The gradient between the corner and the highway is such now, with the
main stem of the river coming at the corner, that it is steeper than it is in the
channel of the river. That is a severe problem. On June 14 and 15, water was
flowing into the field and heading toward the highway. The flow at that time on the
Nooksack gauge was 3,500 cfs. They could easily have floods twice or triple that
amount in November. If that occurs, this river will completely cut out the Mt. Baker
Highway. There is no bank protection along the highway at all. It will go right in to
his neighbor's home. If it happens in November, the river will continue to cut
through the area below, follow the river, and there will be a massive amount of
work to do. He guessed that the highway would be closed for a long period of time
if there is a significant flow event.
Dawson questioned whether there have been any permit requests for this
stretch. Devine stated they haven't requested a permit at this time. They are
asking the County to join them in a permit acquisition or an emergency permit
acquisition. They are also attempting to get the state Department of
Transportation involved in joint effort.
Brenner stated that a state highway is involved.
Hoag agreed with the seriousness of the situation. She questioned the
protocol when someone has a concern and whether a person is supposed to go
through the Flood Advisory Committee.
Brenner stated the committee would address that question after the
presentation. First, the committee needed to decide if this is something that the
Council wants to pursue.
Gowen stated a few members of the Flood Advisory Committee visited the
property. They are aware of the situation. Bill Devine has been trying to get aid
for some time. This past June, there was a dramatic bank erosion episode.
McShane questioned the year in which the elevations were taken. Gowen
stated they were taken on April 15, 1998.
McShane stated the gradient seems about the same in the river as it runs,
versus going across the field to the base of the highway. Gowen stated it is
steeper.
McShane stated there is a ditch or low drainage area. He questioned
whether there is a culvert that runs under the highway. Devine stated there is a
culvert next to a highway curve sign, as shown in the photograph of the 1997 flood.
A very small amount of water comes through that culvert, which is about 12 inches
in diameter. It is part of an original drainage system that was installed in the
homestead in the 1890's, when this thing was cleared. It didn’t have to do with the
road.
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 7/11/2000, Page 9
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
48
Gowen provided history on the physical conditions of the site. There are
three large old-growth snags in the field next to the river. They were harvested
around the turn of the century. Those stumps demonstrate the fact that this is an
ancient lowland that hasn't been actively occupied by the river for hundreds of
years. The material has been fine since the river has been eating into the cut bank.
It is all very fine silt and clay. Because of that, there are two types of hazards.
One hazard is over-bank flooding. When the water gets high enough, the water will
spill over and create the wet conditions. The other hazard is because of the loose
material. It won't take long for the river to scour and make a rapid retreat. Since
they met with Brenner 10 days ago, it has retreated another ten feet to the north.
Giant blocks of rock from a prehistoric landslide off of Slide Mountain to the south
armor one corner by the highway. Because of that bank armor, that point has been
protected. The threat to the highway is not only at the Hanson home. It could
make an island out of the corner where the bank is now protected. Two years ago,
the bank was riprapped to the west of this corner.
Paula Cooper, Special Projects Engineer, stated she went out there.
Crawford questioned whether the fruit stand is at the 575 to 577 elevation
level. Devine stated there is a four-foot drop there.
Crawford questioned whether being in a flood area was an issue when the
County permitted the structure. Devine stated it is not in the flood plain on the
County flood zone map. It is higher right there. Historically, the people have lived
there since the 1930's and it has never flooded in that area.
Cooper stated the project review committee went to the location in January
or February. The area has changed considerably since then. It is a lot like the
Mosquito Lake Road problem.
Brenner stated the difference is that this is a major state highway. Cooper
stated she talked to Roger Nichols, who works for the Forest Service and who works
with DOT. Nichols called her to tell her they looked at this area. Apparently, there
is a railroad grade downstream that backs up the flow and creates a pond
condition. That is where they see water over the highway. He didn't think there
was a grade that would cause a rapid channel shift. The type of erosion is the type
that will keep taking ten feet. Roger Nichols is a geologist who works for the Forest
Service and who designs a lot of bank protection work for the Forest Service. For
some reason, he ends up working with the DOT on many of their streams. The
North Fork is almost an Endangered Wild and Scenic River. He has done a lot of
work with Skagit County's river systems and the North Fork in the Forest Service.
He has a lot of experience with this system. They've been trying to talk with the
man who maintains this portion of the highway for DOT. There are two types of
erosion. One type is short, gradual erosion. The other type is a major channel
shift. When there is a major channel shift, there is typically a gradient during a
flood event. When she first looked at this map, there was a serious gradient from
the river to the ditch. If the overland flow has a high enough velocity, and then it
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 7/11/2000, Page 10
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
48
gets into the channel, it could begin eroding and travel upstream, causing a rapid
channel shift. If there is something downstream that is backing up the water and
ponding it, they will not have the energy grade and it will be less likely to occur
rapidly.
Gowen stated the incident that Cooper is referring to is quite a distance east
up the highway. It is not the spot they are talking about for this condition. They
are not the same spot.
Cooper stated she has no experience seeing this river flood and how it
actually happens. She's been trying to imagine which way it will go. That is when
she relies on people who have been here longer. Roger Nichols talked about this
area being the Devine property.
Gowen stated Mr. Nichols is referring to the area near the driveway near
their home, which is directly opposite the farm stand. They are talking about the
area to the west, in front of the Hanson home. It is a completely different physical
and hydrological condition. They are not related.
Cooper stated she wanted to talk to the man from the DOT who has been out
there for years and has all the information.
Brenner stated there is someone from DOT who Devine and Gown have
talked to. Devine stated they've talked to most of the DOT people. Rod Morgan is
superintendent of the area. Cooper stated that is the person she wanted to talk to.
Devine stated Mr. Morgan referred the area to the engineers in Seattle. They
are looking at it. They've also talked to Stan Bigler and Jim McDonald. Stan Bigler
has been to the site.
Cooper stated this is a perfect example of the questions they face, such as
should they drop the Saxon project and do this project.
Bob Knutson, Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District Advisory
Committee and Acme/Van Zandt Sub-Flood Control Zone District Chair, stated they
looked at many projects. He felt for these people because he faced this for years
on his side. However, there are many places like this along the river.
Brenner asked how many other places affect a major state highway.
Knutson stated there are no others that affect a state highway, but some affect
county roads. There are places that affect the state highway. The answer in the
past from the state is that they will do something when the blacktop falls in.
Brenner stated she didn't want to pit one project against another. Knutson
stated that this situation is not different than about ten other places on the rivers,
except for the state highway. Fortunately, there are no houses involved on this
side of the highway. There are places elsewhere where houses are involved. When
they start prioritizing these and deciding what they can and can't do, some projects
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 7/11/2000, Page 11
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
48
don't have enough pressure to move the federal agencies off of dead-center. Like it
or not, that is what they are up against.
Brenner stated she would be very sympathetic to people in houses, but this
is a major lifeline for more than just people in houses. Knutson stated it would be
lovely to get the DOT to change its precedent or policy. He didn't know whether
this is sufficient. Any of these projects take two to three years to move off-center.
Dawson suggested writing a letter to the state legislators and copying it to
the DOT. The letter could ask what the County needs to do to address regulation
that would prevent problems like this. They are paying extra large sums after the
fact. They have a lot of economic deprivation going on.
Brenner stated that if they get something done, it wouldn't be after the fact.
Dawson stated they have to wait until the damage is done.
Brenner stated they don't if the County declares it an imminent threat and
decide it is going to move on it. Cooper stated that opens up internal doors. That
is what the County did on the Truck Road project, and it avoids the easier hoops to
jump through. She and James Lee looked at this and discussed other ways to stay
out of the water and do things on the bank, which would fall into the river. It is
experimental.
McShane stated it is similar to Truck Road. There is some wood there, but
they are running out. The problem on the Truck Road is that there is no wood.
Wood was provided. Cooper stated they used a rock wall behind it on Truck Road.
She was thinking about putting the structures next to each other on this project. It
would be pure fish habitat when it goes in. They have some ideas so they could
conceivably do something here before it is too late.
Gowen stated this is a repair project. This was armored in the past. It was
armored twice. That is what they are seeking again. There is a difference between
policy and law. In the current Washington Administrative Code (WAC) and Revised
Code of Washington (RCW) clearly permit this type of activity. They are not naïve
about the permit process. They understand the circumstances that the agencies
and the advisory committees are working under. That doesn't mean that one
cannot promote a reasonable and effective solution. In her experience as a
professional geologist, she has done many sediment and erosion control plans in
National Forests in both Oregon and Washington State. She's been a consultant in
many flood hazard areas. Material that is organic, which is what the state required
on past projects, does not hold up effectively. There is no reason they can't find a
complementary way to do things. This could easily migrate into a serious situation.
If the County wants to put the money in ahead of time to protect it, then it would
be very admirable.
Cooper questioned whether Gowen and Devine are interested in pursuing
something like what the County did on the Truck Road.
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 7/11/2000, Page 12
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
Gowen stated they are interested in pursuing something that is effective.
They may have differences of opinion on what may be an effective strategy.
Dawson questioned whether rock is considered natural and organic. Cooper
stated that putting rocks instream takes about two years.
Devine stated his package of information contained a proposal. That is
something that is rational, the quickest, and would cost the least amount of money.
Brenner stated it might be physically the quickest, not politically the
quickest.
Cooper stated the road would be gone before they get to do it.
Devine stated that it is the quickest and most effective way from an
engineering perspective. If they only put in logs, the flow will undercut the logs
and the logs will float.
Cooper stated the logs are anchored and ballasted down.
Devine stated the water level in the flood condition will go right at the
highway. It will take the highway out. No rational engineer will say anything
different. They have to do it now or when it hits the highway and the house.
Ron Bronsema, Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District Advisory
Committee, stated there is a lot of similarities to this with Canyon Creek.
Physically, it is much different. The outcome there is the Mt. Baker Highway. The
DOT doesn’t care. He was afraid the County would get the same response from the
DOT in this situation.
Brenner stated they might, but they can't throw their hands up and not try.
It is important to find out where the DOT stands on this.
Dawson stated the DOT is made up of bureaucrats. The citizens are in
control of this.
Brenner stated that if the DOT supports this kind of thing, they are going to
have much more access to state funding and support. It's very important that they
try to work with other state entities.
Brenner moved to recommend that a letter be sent to the DOT asking them if
they would be interested in pursuing an emergency hydraulics permit to allow
repair work to be done because of the imminent threat to the Mt. Baker Highway.
They could copy the letter to the Corps of Engineers and all parties at the state and
federal level.
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 7/11/2000, Page 13
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 7/11/2000, Page 14
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
McShane suggested a friendly amendment. There is not a flood mitigation
plan on this stretch of the river. They could add a comment to the letter saying
that the County is working on a flood mitigation plan and that this project will fit
into that plan.
Brenner accepted the friendly amendment.
Motion carried unanimously.
McShane asked who would write the letter.
Brenner stated she would ghost write the letter and have it before the
Council for approval at the evening meeting. She questioned whether they have to
act as the Board of Supervisors. Cooper stated the typical process for these
projects is that they go through the Advisory Committee. If it is an 80/20 or 85/15
project, then they can authorize expenditures if there is a local sponsor. If there is
any other split, and the County is not willing to pick up the additional 15 or 20
percent, then it would go through the Council. There isn't a cost until a permit is
close to being in hand.
Brenner moved to send this project to the flood committee as a high priority
while getting information from the DOT.
Dick Prieve, Assistant Director of Administrator, stated that the state doesn’t
see this as an emergency. He urged the Council to wait for a response from DOT
before sending it to the committee.
Brenner withdrew her motion.
ADJOURN 31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
The meeting adjourned at 2:57 p.m.
______________________________
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
______________________________ ___________________________
Dana Brown-Davis, Council Clerk Barbara Brenner, Committee Chair