Dry Creek Coalition

Results of WWGMHB Compliance Hearing January 28, 2009 in Sequim

The Compliance Hearing found that the Laird’s East and West LAMIRDs were non-compliant and scheduled another compliance hearing in 180 days.

This compliance order directed further Clallam County actions to meet compliance.

The WWGMHB compliance order is found at the following :  http://www.gmhb.wa.gov/western/decisions/2007/07-2-0018cDryCreekComplianceOrder20090130.pdf

Issues: 

1.  DCC Objects to Clallam County lack of GMA required definition of existing development as of 1 July 1990 regarding the type, scale, size, use and intensity.  Without this definition by the County, a developer could request a development permit for a new saw mill or a Super Wal*Mart at the site of the Wagner Store in Laird LAMIRD East.  This would violate the GMA State Law requirement that the new development be similar to the type, scale, size, use and intensity that existed on July 1, 1990.  This has not been resolved.

2.  The WWGMHB declared that Clallam County Ordinance required changing to remove the “prior to” wording from Ordinance 827 and Resolution 77, 2008.  DCC contended that this wording allowed designation of a LAMIRD development on any land in the County, since a pile of logs, stacked at a location and sold to a commercial activity at any time since the mid-1800’s would qualify as a LAMIRD.  The GMA law is clear in stating that development of an activity on a LAMIRD must be of the type, scale,size, use and intensity of structured activity existing on July 1, 1990.  Prior to is not recognized in the law.

3.  The land area of Laird LAMIRD East was reduced by 50 acres by the Hearing Board.  The boundaries of the LAMIRD were not properly drawn by the County.  Laird East and West issues start at page 16 of the referenced Order.

DCC has filed a new petition for further clarification of issues contained above.  It is felt that unless County Ordinances and development regulations fully define requirements of the GMA, there will be two long term problems for land use in Clallam County:

1.  Future developments will, without adequate definition of type, scale, size, use and intensity of activities existing on July 1, 1990, slip through the administrative system at Department of Community Development, creating adverse impact upon existing landowners without recourse.  The Crown Pacific sawmill development being an excellent example, a Heavy Industrial activity was dropped into the middle of a Rural Conservation Character zoned, low density, residential neighborhood.  Existing landowners were just “out of luck.”

2.  Clallam County has failed to develop specific development regulations and zoning uses which match surrounding property land uses, the result is chaos and unpredictable property owner issues.
As an example:  Failure to maintain 4.8 acre rural character densities , a requirement of the State Legislatures GMA law,  has resulted iin Clallam County being directed to rezone land from R2 to R5 or other downzoned categories.  The result of this is that many landowners are now upset over reduced development densities on their land.  This would not have occurred if the County had followed State GMA law.  Current efforts at “fixing” this situation are tremendous and expensive and could have been avoided if Clallam County had adhered to the spirit of GMA law.

Comments

Dry Creek Coalition and Futurewise vs Clallam County Final Decision and Order (FDO)

The Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board issued its decision (FDO) on April 23, 2008 finding that Clallam County Comprehensive Plan, maps and development regulations adopted under Ordinance No. 827 and Resolution No. 77, 2007 were not compliant with the GMA.  The FDO document is contained here.

This Final Decision and Order (FDO) found that the Laird’s East and West LAMIRD’s were non-compliant with the State Growth Management Act.  Dry Creek Coalition issues are outlined in detail on pages 12 thru 27.  Clallam County was directed to bring its Comprehensive Plan and development regulations into compliance with the Growth Management Act with a new hearing on Compliance set for 1 Dec 2007.  This was later postponed to January 2008.

Comments

DCC Motion for Reconsideration and Motion to Amend Schedule 5 May 08

DCC Council filed a Motion for Reconsideration and Motion to Amend Schedule regarding Case # 07-2-0018c of Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board.

I have been tardy in posting this document and others following its issuance.  Other documents will follow in order of date issued.

DCCLAMIRDReconsider.pdf

Comments

Your Property Tax Dollars (Well?) Spent

Clallam County Commissioners expended $22,845.89 tax dollars to Hillis, Clark, Martin & Peterson, P.S for legal services in connection with the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board legal proceedings in Dry Creek Coalition and Futurewise v. Clallam County, case # 07-2-0018C.  This DOES NOT ACCOUNT for Clallam County funds expended by the Planning Department, Prosecuting Attiorney’s Office assistance and Commissioners staff.

WHY?  Because Clallam County Commissioners and Clallam County Staff continue to ignore the requirements of State Legislature generated law, i.e., requirements of the Growth Management Act.  Had Clallam County adapted Land Use ordinances and policy to the REQUIREMENTS of the Growth Management Act in 1990, they would not be faced with the complex and expensive efforts now required to make Clallam County land use and zoning meet State Law. Your Tax dollars are being wasted!!!

LAMIRDCost.pdf

Comments

DCC Board Meeting Minutes 11 June 2008

DCC Board Minutes for 11 June 2008 are attached.

DCCMin11Jun08.pdf

Comments

DCC Board Minutes for May 08

Minutes of the DCC Board Meeting of 14 May 08 attached.

DCCMinMay08.pdf

Comments

Email To DOE Jeff Stewart

An Email sent by Jim Jewell to DOE regarding the toxic materials in the City of Port Angeles Dump was shunted to another section of DOE.
This Email readdresses the original Email and Harley Oien focuses action back to DOE requesting that the State of Washington address
the problem of toxic materials at the City of Port Angeles more directly or the matter will soon migrate to the Federal Court system under
a Clean Water Act lawsuit.

JeffStewartDOEH.pdf

Comments

DCC Requests DOE Address Toxic Materials in Port Angeles Dump

The following is an email to DOE and their response in passing that email off to another section of the bureauacracy.

DCCmsgDOEToxicMatls.pdf

Comments

Toxic Materials Leaching From Port Angeles Dump Exceed Acute Salt Water Levels by State Standards

Dry Creek Coalition collected drainage from Strait at very low tide 3 June 2008.
Chemical analysis by certified laboratory reveals extreme concentrations of Copper, Lead and Zinc:  all toxic to marine life.  Other metals:  Antimony, Chromium, and Mercury are very elevated when compared to our control sample from Freshwater Bay, FB-3.
Sample team noted total lack of marine life in the retaing wall area and the area of the mouth of Dry Creek at the Port Angeles Dump.
Control sample from Freshwater Bay, FB-3, served as a control or standard for comparison with toxic metal concentrations leaching from the Port Angeles Dump.

At a very low tide on 3 June 2008, three members of the Dry Creek Coalition took a sample of running water approximately 150 yards offshore of the PA Dump retaining wall.  This running water was coming from the retaining wall at the dump and running around huge masses of fused garbage materials lying offshore.  That sample is DW-1, see attachment below.  Analysis of DW-1 shows massive amounts of very toxic inorganic metals by DOE saltwater standards. Sample DC-2 was taken from water running from the mouth of Dry Creek at a location approximately 100 yards offshore and approximately 200 yards West of the retaining wall.

TwissPADumpAnalysis.pdf

The following is a table of standards for toxic metals in salt water cited by Washington State DOE

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=173-201A-240

Dry Creek Coalition presented a package of Port Angeles Dump information generated over the past four (4) years and a five minute presentation to the seven councilpersons on 8 May 2008, in Council Chambers.  We emphasized that marine life is all but missing offshore the dump and that we would conduct chemical tests at the next low tide for INORGANIC METALS.  Our testimony is the next attachment.

CityCouncilMay08.pdf

The Dry Creek Coalition did NOT test for organic leachate coming from the dump.  This is an open issue.
The Coalition has asserted for several years that the design of test wells for sampling any dump leachate would and could not show any materials being leached from the unlined garbage.  The design of the new retaining wall sample wells preserves that inability to make true sampling for toxic leachates. 

We feel that continued inaction by DOE and the City of Port Angeles in removing the garbage in the unlined dump (1,000,000 cu yds) perpetuates contamination and poisoning of the entire Strait and Puget Sound water system.  We are exploring resolution in Federal District Court under the Federal Clean Water Act at this time.

Comments

DCC Minutes 9 April 2008

Minutes of the DCC Board meeting of 9 April 2008.

DCCMin9Apr08pdf.pdf

Comments

Dry Creek Comprehensive Plan Revision Remains In Limbo

Letters to Director of Community Development, Mr John Miller and Clallam County Commissioner Mike Doherty remain unanswered in regard to the status of the Dry Creek revised Comprehensive Plan submitted in August 2006.
DCC has now sent a letter to the Clallam County Planning Commission requesting their assistance in resolving this impasse.
That letter is contained below:

PlanComltrMay08.pdf
CompPlnDohertyltr.pdf
CompPlnMillerltr.pdf

Comments

DCC Presentation to Port Angeles City Council

DCC presented a “latest status” on the Port Angeles City Dump at the 20 May 2008 council meeting
Survey of offshore rock and cobble was conducted at low tide on 8 May 2008 by DCC members.
The results of that survey were dramatic in that the area is basically devoid of all marine animal life:  mollusks, starfish, barnacles, bottom crabs, etc.  The comparison to marine life at Freshwater Bay is dramitically different.
DCC Pollicy remains the same as that stated in our 12 October 2005 testimony to the Port Angeles City Planning Commission, i.e., the 1,000,000 cubic yards of garbage in the “old” section of unlined dump should be removed and sent to toxic materials dumps.
Testimony to the Port Angeles City Council is contained below.

CityCouncilMay08.pdf

Comments

PA Dump-Cross Section Two Versions

The following page shows two Cross Sections of the Port Angeles City Dump.  The first is in 2002 and was done by Parametrix in an engineering study.
The second is the same cross section filed with the SEPA for the retaining wall project in 2005.  Important to note:  Somehow about 2/3 of the garbage disappeared between 2002 and 2005.
Could it have been someone’s eraser??
With a perfection of this technique the whole world could be cleaned up with just a single eraser. Yellow area in lower figure added to show “lost” garbage.

DumpCrossSectDiagMay08.pdf

Comments

Port Angeles City Dump Toxic Materials

The City of Port Angeles unlined dump on the bluff of the Strait of Juan de Fuca contains 1,000,000 cubic yards of garbage some of which has fallen and leached into the marine waters of the Strait.
Dry Creek Coalition has assembled data for several years through Request for Disclosure from the Clallam County Environmental Health Divisiion and the City of Port Angeles Public Works Department.  Pictures contained in this package are of Dry Creek Coalition origination.  Additional pictures are contained in the Galleries Section of our web site.  DCC testified to the City of Port Angeles Planning Commission on 12 October 2005 that the garbage in the unlined dump should be removed and disposed of in a toxic landfill.  City Engineer Gary Kenworthy, now retired, stated that the dump contained 1,000,000 cubic yards and that removal was cost prohibitive.  The City of Port Angeles filed a SEPA finding a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) environmental impact for building a retaining wall to prevent garbage from falling into the Strait as the bluffs erode.

Highlights of the pdf package below are contained on the first three pages of the attachment.  The remainder of the package is documentation of dump issues and include:

An analysis of city generated assay of the garbage in the unlined garbage dump consisting of thousands of tons of lead, zinc, copper and substances toxic to marine life.
City engineering studies which show lack of concern for violating the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) jurisdictional Mean Highest High Waterline (MHHW) boundary for construction.
A letter from USACE citing the City of Port Angeles for violation of Federal Clean Water Act
Letter to Governor Gregoire regarding toxic leaching into the Strait
Letter to Department of Ecology regarding dumping stormwater from the dump into the mouth of Dry Creek
Letter to the Department of Fish and Wildlife with concerns for the Hydrologic Permit issued for construction that damaged Dry Creek flow

This package was delivered to the Puget Sound Partnership at the Workshop at the Jamestown Tribal Center in 7 March 2008
This is the first half of the package given to PSP and Port Angeles City Council

PADumpPkg1of2.pdf

This is the second half of the Port Angeles Dump package presented to PSP and Port Angeles City Council
PADumpPkg2of2.pdf

Comments

DCC Gerald Steel ltr to Clallam Community Development Laird’s East & West

Tis letter is critical to understanding the Dry Creek Community concerns for preservation of rural character and residential tranquility for our neighborhood.
There is a lot of background information which shows how poorly zoning and long term planning are accomplished in Clallam County.  In a nut shell, the Clallam County Community Development planners disregarded the State Legislatures direction in handling Growth Management Issues and “ignored the law” regarding setting LAMIRD boundaries based upon 1 July 1990 existing conditions.  When called to account, they use tax payer funds to try to cover over their poor planning practices.

DCCGSLtrCD13Jul07.pdf

Comments