Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 96-049-CCBOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON IN THE MATTER OF ADOPTING THE GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE LANDS AND CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH RCW 36.70A.060 OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT RESOLUTION NO. 93 -49 -CC WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Grant County has been advised by the Grant County Planning Commission of the need for adoption of the Grant County Resource Lands and Critical Areas Ordinance, to comply with RCW 36.70A.060 of the Growth Management Act of 1990, and, WHEREAS, the proposed ordinance was discussed at Planning Commission meetings held on the following dates - July 1, 1992; September 5, 1992; October 7, 1992; November 4, 1992; and March 3, 1993, and, WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners, having received the report from the Planning Commission, has given due legal notice this matter would be discussed at a public hearing to be held on May 18, 1993. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of County Commissioners for Grant County, Washington, does, by this Resolution adopt the Grant County Resource Lands and Critical Areas Ordinance in compliance with RCW 36.70A.060 of the Growth Management Act of 1990. DONE THIS ��� DAY OF�. ,1993 CHAIRMAN COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER Constituting the Board of County Commissioners of Grant County Washington ATTEST: Q,,,eWZU COOVfthe Board County Ordinance # 93 -49 -CC RESOURCE LANDS AND CRITICAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE SECTION 1.0 STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION, FINDINGS OF FACT, PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES 1.1 STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION The legislature of the State of Washington has, in RCW 36.70A.060, mandated local governments who plan under 36.70A.040 to adopt development regulations to ensure the conservation of agricultural, forest and mineral resource lands and to adopt development regulations precluding land uses or development that is incompatible with critical areas designated under RCW 36.70A.170. 1.2 FINDINGS OF FACT (1) Growth management, resource land conservation, and critical areas protection share problems related to governmental costs and efficiency. (2) Sprawl and the unwise development of resource lands or areas susceptible to natural hazards may lead to inefficient use of limited public resources, jeopardize environmental resource functions and values, subject persons and property to unsafe conditions, and affect the perceived quality of life. (3) It is more costly to remedy the loss of resource lands or critical areas than to conserve and protect them from loss or degradation. (4) The inherent economic, social and cultural values of resource lands and critical areas should be considered in the development of strategies designed to conserve and protect such lands. (5) This ordinance implements the goals and policies of the Resource Lands and Critical Areas Elements of the Comprehensive Plan. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE - 6/18/93 1.3 STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES It is the purpose of this ordinance to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in specific.areas by provisions designed to: (1) protect human life and health; (2) further the public's interest in the conservation and wise use of our lands; (3) assure the long term conservation of resource lands; (4) preclude land uses and developments which are incompatible with critical areas; (5) classify and designate critical areas and resources lands; and (6) to develop appropriate regulatory and non -regulatory actions in response. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE - 6/18/83 2 r TABLE OF CONTENTS RESOURCE LANDS AND CRITICAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE SECTION 1.0 Statutory authorization, findings of fact, purpose and objectives SECTION 2.0 Definitions SECTION 3.0 Establishment of critical areas and resource lands: Provision for data maps SECTION 4.0 Interpretation of data maps SECTION 5.0 Effect of data maps: Applicability SECTION 6.0 General provisions SECTION 7.0 Resource lands and critical area; standards for site-specific analysis; development standards SECTION 8.0 Warning and disclaimer of liability SECTION 9.0 Non -conforming developments SECTION 10.0 Administration SECTION 11.0 Severability SECTION 12.0 Effective date GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE - 6/18/93 3 SECTION 2.0 DEFINITIONS 2.1 DEFINITIONS (1) Administrative Authority - means those public officials authorized by this ordinance to administer the provisions and employ the procedures set forth in this chapter. (2) Agriculture Lands - lands that are not already characterized by urban growth and are of long-term significance for the commercial production of horticultural, viticultural, floricultural, dairy, apiary, vegetable, or animal products or of berries, grain, hay, straw, turf, seed, Christmas trees not subject to excise tax, or livestock. 1. Prime Farmland Soil is land with the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics for production and is available for these uses as determined by the Soil Conservation Service, U.S.D.A.. 2. Unique Farmland Soil is land other than prime farmland that is used for the production of specific high value food and fiber crops as determined by the Soil Conservation Service, U.S.D.A.. 3. Agricultural lands of Statewide Importance are those lands designated by the State of Washington that is other than prime farmland but is determined to have value as agricultural lands, as designated by the Soil Conservation Service, U.S.D.A. 4. Rangeland is land that is used for the grazing of livestock, having a high value for the production of forage vegetation or with a high holding capacity of livestock as determined by the Soil Conservation Service, U.S.D.A.. 5. Pasture lands are those rangelands that are irrigated. 6. AUM - Animal units per Acre/ Month is a unit of measure defined by the Soil Survey of Grant County as the amount of forage or feed required to feed one animal unit (one cow, one horse,one mule, five sheep, or five goats) for 30 days. (3) Board of Adjustment - means the Board of Adjustment of Grant County, Washington. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6/18/83 4 (4) Critical Areas - means one or a combination of wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas or geologically hazardous areas, and fish and wildlife habitat conservation area. (5) Commercial Significance, Long Term - means the growing capacity, productivity, and soil composition of the land for long-term commercial production in consideration with the land's proximity to population areas and the possibility of more intense uses of land. (6) Commission, Planning Commission - means the Grant County Planning Commission. (7) Conservation Easement - means a reservation, buffer or encumbrance on a particular piece of real property that precludes building improvement(s) intended for human habitation or other structures or activities that would frustrate the primary purpose of the easement as a buffer. (8) Critical Aquifer Recharge Area - those areas that have been identified as having a critical recharging effect on aquifer use for potable water in community.water systems. (9) County - means Grant County, Washington, a municipal corporation. (10) Cultural Resource Area - those areas that have been identified as having lands, sites and structures that have historical or archaeological significance. (11) Data Maps - means that series of maps maintained by the Grant County Planning Department for the purpose of graphically depicting the boundaries of resource lands and critical areas. (12) Development Application - means an application tendered under the provision of the Grant County Zoning Ordinance, Platting and Subdivision Ordinance, and the Short Plat and Short Subdivision Ordinance for a conditional use permit, rezone or planned development, to the Grant County Zoning Ordinance, and the Short Plat and Short Subdivision subdivision or short plat. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6118193 or an application submitted pursuant Platting and Subdivision Ordinance, Ordinance for a preliminary major 5 (13) Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas 1. Areas with which State and Federal endangered and threatened plant and animal and fish species exist, or where State sensitive, candidate and monitor plant and animal and fish species have a primary association. 2. Habitats and species of local and regional importance which include a seasonal range or habitat element with which a given species has a primary association and which, if altered, may reduce the likelihood that the species will maintain and reproduce over the long term. These might include areas of high relative density or species richness, breeding and rearing habitat, winter range and movement and/or migration corridors. These might also include habitats that are of limited availability or high vulnerability to alteration such as cliffs, talus, in stream gravel deposits (salmon spawning beds, and wetlands riparian areas. Species of local and regional concern, including those fish and game species of local and regional concern, are those species that are of local and regional concern due to their population status or their sensitivity to habitat manipulation. 3. Naturally occurring ponds under twenty acres and their submerged aquatic beds that provide fish or wildlife habitat. These do not include ponds deliberately designed and created from dry sites such as canals, detention facilities, waste -water treatment facilities, farm ponds, temporary construction ponds (of less than three years duration) and landscape amenities. However, naturally occurring ponds may include those artificial ponds intentionally created from dry areas in order to mitigate conversion of ponds, if permitted by a regulatory authority. 4. Lakes, ponds, streams and rivers planted with game fish, including fish planted under the auspices of federal, state, local or tribal programs or which supports priority fish species as identified by the Department of Wildlife or the Department of Fisheries. (14) Frequently Flooded Areas - means floodplains and other areas designated as being within a one hundred year flood plain by the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Federal Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM). (15) Geologically Hazardous Areas - all lands within the Grant County Comprehensive Plan study area will be classified as either: (1) known or suspected risk, (2) no risk, or (3) risk unknown - data are not available to determine the presence or absence of geological hazards. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6/19/93 6 r Geological hazards include: 1. Erosion Hazard - areas identified as having high or very high water erosion hazard by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service as supplied by the Soil Conservation Service area office. 2. Landslide Hazard - areas potentially subject to landslides based upon the following combination of geologic, topographic and hydrologic factors. a. Areas of historic failure including: (i) Those areas delineated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, as having "severe" limitation for building site development. (ii) Those areas mapped as quaternary slumps, earthflows, mudflows, lahars, or landslides on maps published by the United States Geological Survey or Department of Natural Resources Division of Geology and Earth Resources. b. Areas with all three of the following characteristics: (i) Slopes of fifteen (15) percent gradient or greater; and (ii) Hillsides intersecting geologic contacts with a relatively permeable sediment overlying a relatively impermeable sediment or bedrock; and (iii) Springs or groundwater seepage; C. Areas that have shown movement during the Holocene Epoch or which are underlain or covered by mass wastage debris of the epoch; d. Slopes that are parallel or sub -parallel to planes of weakness in subsurface materials; e. Areas with slopes that have gradients greater than eighty percent subject to rock fall during seismic shaking; f. Areas potentially unstable as a result of rapid stream incision, stream bank erosion and undercutting by wave action; GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6118/83 7 g. Areas located in a canyon or an active alluvial fan presently or potentially subject to a one percent or greater chance of inundation by debris flows or catastrophic flooding; h. Areas with slope gradients of forty percent or greater not composed of consolidated rock. These will be of at least ten feet of vertical relief. 3. Seismic Hazard areas - include areas subject to severe risk of damage as a result to earthquake -induced ground shaking, slope failure, settlement, soil liquefaction or surface faulting. 4. Other Geologic Events: a. Volcanic hazards including areas subject to pyroclastic, lava debris, mud flows or related flooding resulting from volcanic activity. (16) Ground waters - means all water that exists beneath the land surface or beneath the bed of any stream, lake, or reservoir, or other body of surface water. (17) Lot of Record (Parcel of Record, Tract of Record) - a lot as designated on a plat which has been approved and filed for record with the Auditor of Grant County, Washington. Also, any parcel having a metes and bounds description lying outside of any plat as the same existed pursuant to the records of the Grant County Assessor's Office as of the effective date of this ordinance. (18) Mine Hazard Area - areas underlain by, adjacent to, or affected by, mine workings such as adits, gangways, tunnels, drifts or air shafts. (19) Mineral Lands - lands that are not already characterized by urban growth and are of long-term commercial significance for the extraction of aggregate and mine resources, including: sand, gravel and valuable metallic substances. (20) OAHP - means the Washington State Department of Community Development, Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. (21) Qualified Professional - means an accredited or licensed professional with a combination of education and experience in the discipline appropriate for the subject matter that is being commented on; someone who would qualify as an expert in their field. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE - W18/93 8 f (22) Resource Lands - means agricultural , mineral, and forest lands that have long-term commercial significance with regard to growing capacity, productivity, and soil composition, in consideration with the land's proximity to population areas, and the possibility of more intense use of the land. (23) S.C.S. - means the United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. (24) Species of Local Importance - means those species that are of local and regional concern, including fish and wildlife species of local and regional concern, due to their population status or their sensitivity to habitat manipulation. (25) U.S.D.A. - means the United States Department of Agriculture. (26) Urban Growth - means activities that make intensive use of land for the location of building, structures, and impermeable surfaces to such a degree as to be incompatible with the primary use of such land for the production of food, other agricultural products, or fiber, or the extraction of mineral resources. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE - 6/18/93 z (27) Urban Growth, characterized by - means lands having urban growth on it, or to land located in relationship to an area with urban growth on it as to be appropriate for urban growth; or any and all incorporated areas. (28) Wetlands Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is covered by shallow water. For the purpose of this classification, wetlands must have one or more of the following attributes: (1) at least periodically, the majority of the land supports predominantly hydrophytes; (2) the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil; and (3) the substrate is non -soil and is saturated with water or covered by shallow water continuously during the year. (4) be naturally or artificially created and not exempt under Bureau of Reclamation - Columbia Basin Project lands or agriculture related activities. (29) Wetland habitats are permanently flooded lands where surface waters are permanent and often deep. For the purpose of this ordinance, wetland habitats are limited to ponds and lakes less than twenty surface acres in size. (30) Wetlands, Grant County classification system A. Type 1 Wetlands 1. Wetlands providing habitat for federal or state threatened, endangered plant and animal species and, plant and animal species of concern. 2. Wetlands that meet the criteria of the Washington Natural Heritage Program for pristine wetlands. B. Type 2 Wetlands 1. Deep -water lakes or ponds between 1/4 acre and less than 20 acres in size. 2. Wetlands associated with perennial flowing waters less than 20 cubic feet per second. 3. All wetland systems classified as associated wetlands of waters under the jurisdiction of the Grant County Shorelines Master Program. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE - 6118/83 10 C. Type 3 Wetlands 1. Wetlands more than 1/4 acre in size but less than 1/4 acre of open water. 2. Wetlands associated with intermittent flowing waters less than 20 cubic feet per second. D. Type 4 Wetlands 1. Wetlands less than 1/4 acre in size. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6118193 11 SECTION 3.0 ESTABLISHMENT OF CRITICAL AREAS AND NATURAL RESOURCES LANDS: PROVISION FOR DATA MAPS 3.1 LIST OF CRITICAL AREAS The incorporated area of the Grant County is hereby divided into the following critical areas, where appropriate: A. Wetlands B. Critical aquifer recharge areas C. Fish and wildlife conservation areas D. Frequently flooded areas E. Geologically hazardous areas 3.2 LIST OF RESOURCE LANDS A. Agricultural Resource Lands B. Mineral Resource Lands C. Cultural Resource Areas D. Forest Resource Lands E. Where applicable, the incorporated areas of the County of Grant shall be designated as lands adjacent to unincorporated and unique farmlands. 3.3 DATA MAPS Resource lands and critical areas are hereby designated on a series of data maps maintained at the Grant County Planning Department. These maps contain the best available graphic depiction of resource lands and critical areas and will be continuously updated as reliable data becomes available. These maps are for information and illustrative purposes only and are not regulatory in nature. The resource lands and critical areas data maps are intended to alert the development community, appraisers, and current or prospective property owners of a potential encounter with a use or development limiting factor based on the natural systems. The presence of a critical area or resource designation on the data maps is sufficient foundation for the designated county official (i.e., Director, Grant County Planning Department) to order an analysis for the factor(s) identified prior to acceptance of a development application as being complete and ready for processing under the Grant County Zoning Ordinance, Platting and Subdivision Ordinance, and the Short Plat and Short Subdivision Ordinance or any other regulatory authority - i.e. Shorelines Management, S.E.P.A., etc.. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE - 608193 12 SECTION 4.0 INTERPRETATION OF DATA MAPS 4.1 INTERPRETATION OF DATA MAPS The designated county official of Grant County is hereby declared the Administrator of this ordinance for the purpose of interpreting data maps. An affected property owner or other party with standing has a right to appeal the administrative determination to the Grant County Planning Commission, using the same procedure identified in the Washington State Planning Enabling Act for the changing of a zone and amendment of. the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The application for appeal is made through the administrator of the ordinance, with the applicant supplying supporting documentation as to the justification for the appeal, such as a notarized affidavit from a qualified professional. The data maps are to be used as aegg neral guide to the location and extent of resource lands and critical areas. Resource lands and critical areas indicated on the data maps are presumed to exist in the locations shown and are protected under all the provisions of this chapter. The exact location of resource lands and critical areas shall be determined by the applicant as a result of field investigations preformed by qualified professionals using the definitions found in this chapter. All development applications are required to show the boundary(s) of all resource lands and critical areas on a scaled drawing prior to the development application being considered "complete" for processing purposes. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6/18183 13 SECTION 5.0 EFFECT OF DATA MAPS: APPLICATION 5.1 EFFECT OF DATA MAPS The conclusion by the administrative authority that a parcel of land or a part of parcel of land that is the subject of a proposed development application is within the boundary(s) of one or more critical areas or resource lands as shown on the data maps, shall serve as cause for additional investigation and analysis to be conducted by the applicant. The site specific analysis shall be limited to those resource lands and critical areas indicated on the data maps. In the event of multiple designations, each subject matter will be addressed independently and collectively for the purpose of determining development limitations and appropriate mitigating measures. 5.2 APPLICABILITY This ordinance applies to all real property within the corporate limits of Grant County, Washington, as it is now configured or may, from time to time, be altered. When any other chapter of the Grant County Zoning, Platting, Subdivision, Short Plat or any other regulatory ordinance conflicts with this chapter, the more restrictive provision will apply. SECTION 6.0 GENERAL PROVISIONS 6.1 GENERAL PROVISIONS A S.E.P.A. Checklist will be required prior to accepting a development application tended pursuant to the Grant County Zoning Ordinance, Platting and Subdivision Ordinance, the Short Plat and Short Subdivision Ordinance and any other regulatory ordinances, the data maps shall be consulted for the purposes of determining whether or not the property subject to the application is within any area shown as a resource land or critical area. When such areas are encountered, the applicant will immediately be notified and the type(s) of resource or critical areas disclosed. Instructions shall be provided to the applicant on the type of evaluation and site- specific analysis that will be required as a supplement to the application materials necessary to bring the application up to a standard that can be characterized as "complete" and eligible for processing. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6/18/93 14 If the subject property does not lie within or partly within the resource lands or critical areas as depicted on the data maps, the application will be considered complete, provided the application requirements of the ordinance governing the process at issue are satisfied. From the effective. data of this ordinance, no development application processed under the Grant County Zoning Ordinance, Platting and Subdivision Ordinance, the Short Plat and Short Subdivision Ordinance or any other regulatory ordinances shall be approved without a written finding that this ordinance has been considered, additional information has been assembled under this chapter or was not required, and that the purpose and intent of this ordinance has been accorded substantial consideration. The requirements set forth in Section 7 of this ordinance shall be considered minimum requirements in the processing of development applications under the Grant County Zoning Ordinance, Platting and Subdivision Ordinance, the Short Plat and Short Subdivision Ordinance or any other regulatory ordinance and are to represent standards in addition to those requirements set forth in those ordinances. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE - 6/19193 15 SECTION 7.0 RESOURCE LANDS AND CRITICAL AREAS; STANDARDS FOR SITE-SPECIFIC ANALYSIS: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 7.1 RESOURCE LANDS A. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCE LANDS Preserve areas identified as productive farmlands to the maximum extent possible. a. Areas of Prime agricultural lands as designated by the U.S.D.A.-S.C.S. "Land Evaluation for Irrigated Croplands of Grant County" shall be designated "Exclusive Agriculture - Irrigated" and shall be protected to the maximum extent possible and protected from the encroachment of incompatible uses. b. Unique agricultural lands as designated by the U.S.D.A.-S.C.S. "Land Evaluation for Irrigated Croplands of Grant County" shall be designated as "General Agriculture -Irrigated" and shall be preserved to the extent practical until that time that demand for higher density residential or other uses is established to warrant the change. C. Prime agricultural lands as designated by the U.S.D.A.-S.C.S. "Land Evaluation for Dryland Cropland Areas of Grant County" shall be designated as "Exclusive agriculture -Dry" and shall be protected to the maximum extent possible and protected from encroachment of incompatible uses. d. Agricultural lands of Statewide Importance as designated by the U.S.D.A.-S.C.S. "Land Evaluation for Dryland Cropland Areas of Grant County" shall be designated as "General Agriculture - Dry" and shall be preserved to the extent practical until that time that demand for higher density residential or other uses is established to warrant the change. e. Rangeland areas as designated by the U.S.D.A.-S.C.S. Land Evaluation in Groups 1 and 2, which have range production ratings over 1000 pounds per acre, shall be designated as "Exclusive Rangelands" and shall be protected to the maximum extent possible and protected from the encroachment of incompatible uses. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6/18183 16 f. Rangeland areas as designated by the U.S.D.A.-S.C.S. Land Evaluation in Groups 3 through 8, which have range production ratings of 350 to 999 pounds per acre shall be designated as "General Rangelands" and shall be preserved to the extent practical until that time that demand for higher density residential or other uses is established to warrant the change. g. Pasture lands and irrigated range areas as designated by the Soil Survey for Grant County, Table 5, "Yields per Acre of Crops and Pasture," with yields rated at 12 AUM or more, shall be designated as "Exclusive Pasture Lands" and shall be protected to the maximum extent possible and protected from the encroachment of incompatible uses. h. Pasture lands and irrigated range areas as designated by the Soil Survey for Grant County, Table 5,"Yields per Acre of Crops and Pasture," with yields rated between 7 and 11 AUM shall be designated as "General Pasture Lands" and shall be preserved to the extent practical until that time that demand for higher density residential or other uses is established to warrant the change. i. In the event of a conflict between residential uses and the normal agricultural activities of a preexisting agricultural use, County support shall be in favor of the agricultural use to the extent possible in acknowledgement of the Grant County Right to Farm Ordinance Grant County Ordinance number 90 -92 -CC adopted September 10, 1990. 2. Urban Growth adjacent to productive agriculture lands. a. Site Analysis - May be required b. Development Standards 1. Residential development occurring on lands immediately adjacent to prime or unique farmlands shall observe a 60 - foot front, 60 -foot rear yard setback and a 60 -foot setback on side yards between the foundation of primary residential structures and the property line of the agricultural lands. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6/18/93 17 B. MINERAL RESOURCE LANDS 1. Protect areas identified as probable mineral resource areas from encroaching incompatible uses. a. Mineral resources shall have the highest use priority where their removal is compatible with established uses. b. Incompatible uses shall be discouraged from encroaching upon mineral resource areas. C. Sites used for the extraction of mineral resources shall be reclaimed in a manner consistent with all applicable laws and ordinances. C. FOREST RESOURCE LANDS [ Section Reserved - No Applicability ] D. CULTURAL RESOURCE AREAS 1. Preserve areas identified to contain valuable historical or archaeological sites of Federal, State or local significance. a. When it appears that development activity will take place on or near a known archaeological or historic site, the County will determine exact site location and mitigate possible impacts. 1. For archaeological sites, the property owner or project proponent will engage a professional archaeologist to investigate and report to the County upon the location, condition, extent of the site and any recommendations in regard to treatment. 2. Based on the information contained in the written report of the archaeologist, the County will condition project approval in a manner to avoid impacts to the site. Avoidance and conservation of the site is the preferred treatment. 3. The County will forward to OAHP copies of the written report or additional site forms prepared by the professional archaeologist. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE - 6118193 18 4. The property owner or project proponent shall consult with concerned tribes to solicit their comments on the proposed measures to avoid, protect or mitigate the effects of the proposed project upon the archaeological site. b. During the course of the development process, and particularly during actual construction, should human remains or archaeological resources be unexpectedly encountered, work should be halted immediately. The project proponent shall contact the appropriate Native American tribal organization(s) or other appropriate group, the County and OAHP. This contact shall initiate a consultation process for determining subsequent actions. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6/78/83 19 7.2 CRITICAL AREAS A. WETLANDS 1. Exempt Activities a. Operation, maintenance and construction of Columbia Basin Project related facilities, by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation as they pertain to the unintentional creation of wetland sites, namely those unintentional wetlands created after 1952 as a result of the Columbia basin Irrigation Project. b. Ongoing and existing farming, and ranching activities such as grazing, plowing, seeding, cultivating, harvesting for the production of food, or upland soil and water conservation practices; maintenance of farm or stock ponds, irrigation ditches, drainage ditches and farm roads in accordance with best management practices to assure that wetlands and/or their buffers are not adversely impacted. C. Maintenance, repair, or operation of structures in existence on the effective date of this amendment. d. Maintenance, repair, operation or minor improvement of existing public streets, highways, or roads within the right-of- way. e. Maintenance, repair, or operation of existing public utilities and noxious weed control. 2. Regulated Activities Filling, dredging, draining, vegetation removal and pollutant disposal are regulated activities. Determination of regulated uses will be based on one or more of the following criteria: (1) No alternative sites (2) Substantial public benefit (3) Results in minimum alteration or impairment (4) Results in an extraordinary hardship on the landowner GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE - 5118193 20 3. Wetland Development Permit and Procedure a. If upon review of any permits, plans or processes that are under the jurisdiction of Grant County it is determined that the project or activity may result in wetlands being filled, dredged, drained, polluted or vegetation removal, then a Wetland Development Permit Application will be required to be filed with the County prior to final actions. b. Upon receipt of the Wetlands Development Permit Application, the County will review the application and respond within fifteen (15) days to determine whether the project is an exempt or a regulated activity. C. If the project is a regulated activity under this ordinance, then the permit application will be submitted to the Grant County Shoreline Review Board for review and within 45 days will issue either a denial, approval and/or mitigative conditions. d. The applicant may appeal either the permit application denial and/or the mitigative conditions before the Grant County Board of Commissioners. 4. Performance Standards Development in wetlands will be subject to the following performance standards. a. Buffers A wetland buffer zone is an area which provides sufficient space to prevent unacceptable impact on the integrity and value of the wetland. In terrestrial system, the buffer is a band of vegetation outside of, but immediately adjacent to a wetland ecosystem. Within the county, wetlands shall be required to provide the following buffer areas: 1. Type 1 Wetlands - 50 feet 2. Type 2 Wetlands - 25 feet 3. Type 3 Wetlands - 20 feet 4. Type 4 Wetlands - 10 feet GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6/19/93 21 Note: To the extent possible, Type 1, 2, 3, and 4 wetlands and their associated buffers should be encouraged to be designated as open space only after public hearing. b. Mitigation Consultation with the agencies of expertise is strongly encouraged for all development activities in wetlands, to insure that adequate mitigative measures will be addressed. "Mitigation" has been broadly defined to include the following in progressive order of preferred consideration: 1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking an action or parts of an action. 2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree of magnitude of the action and its implementation. 3. Compensatory Mitigation is required when all efforts to avoid and minimize wetland impacts have been exhausted and may include one or all of the following activities: (a) Restoration: To re-establish functional characteristics and processes of a wetland which have been diminished or lost by development alterations or activities. (b) Enhancement: Alteration of a wetland to improve or increase one or more of the wetland functions, as long as it does not increase the area of the wetland. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE - 6118/93 22 (c) Creation: An activity which intentionally brings a wetland into existence where it did not formerly occur after public hearing. Note: A "Mitigation Plan" is required when compensatory mitigation is necessary for wetland impacts. The Mitigation Plan must be completed and approved by the Grant County Board of County Commissioners prior to any construction activities and must include the following requirements: 1. A detailed proposal of impacts on wetlands. 2. A detailed proposed plan to replace any loss of wetlands or their functions. 3. Schedule of mitigation activities. 4. Standards to measure mitigation plan's success. S. Means with which the planned mitigation is to be monitored. b. Details of a contingency plan to determine actions taken if standards of mitigation are not met. 7. Operations and maintenance plan (if needed). B. FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS 1. Site analysis - required only for the purpose of establishing a pre - construction site elevation at the lot's highest point at the proposed building foundation. 2. Development Standards a. All developments must follow the provisions of the Grant County Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance, Zoning Ordinance, Platting and Subdivision Ordinance, the Short Plat and Short Subdivision Ordinance and all other applicable ordinances and codes as required and any amendments to these ordinances. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6118/83 23 C. GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS 1. Erosion Hazard a. Site analysis - required to determine the exact location and circumstances that might be expected to precipitate a significant erosion event. The type and effectiveness of mitigating measures available to safeguard the public safety and welfare shall be addressed. The analysis shall also discuss the proposed development's influence on the erosion hazard and suggest appropriate design and development measures that might be taken to minimize such hazards. b. Development Standards (i) Erosion hazard areas shall be avoided as locations for building construction, roads or utility systems where mitigation is not feasible. (ii) Development activities or their support infrastructure shall not be allowed that would directly or indirectly worsen the erosion hazard identified in the site analysis. 2. landslide Hazard a. Site analysis - required to identify and quantify geologic, topographic and hydrologic factors that might contribute to slope instability. The rate and extent of potential hazards to development activity must be assessed and mitigation measures, if any, evaluated. The.proposed development must be analyzed in light of the hazards and effects represented by the landslide exposure on proposed private and public investments. Development operational factors should be included in the analysis to account for the effects of residential landscape irrigation storm water generation from impervious surfaces and the influence of street conveyance on slope stability. b. Development Standards (i) Documented landslide hazard areas shall be avoided as locations for building construction, roads or utility systems where mitigation is not feasible. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6119/93 24 (ii) If the degree of hazard warrants some development activity, post construction slope stabilization and appropriately upgraded road construction specifications shall be employed to eliminate as completely as practicable, any public or private exposure to landslide hazards or abnormal maintenance and/or repair costs. 3. Seismic Hazard [Section reserved/No applicability] 4. Other Geologic Events [Section reserved/No applicability] D. FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION AREAS 1. Site analysis - required to identify endangered, threatened, candidate, monitor and sensitive and priority species, species and habitats of local and regional importance and the nature and extent of their primary association with the habitat conservation area. The investigation shall include relative density and species richness, breeding, rearing and spawning habitat, seasonal range dynamics and movement and/or migration corridors. The analysis shall address the relative tolerance by species of human activities. The development proposal shall be evaluated in terms of its influence on the above wildlife factors and recommended mitigative measures shall be required for any area that would potentially degrade base -line populations and reproduction rates over the long term. 2. Development Standards a. No development approval shall be granted unless mitigation of adverse effects can be provided that will ensure continuation of base -line populations for all endangered, threatened, candidate, monitor, sensitive and priority species. b. Development may be allowed when only species and habitats of local importance will suffer population declines or interruption of migration routes provided that adequate regional populations are maintained. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6/1 B/83 25 C. Development reviews shall include regional species occurrence and movements and will avoid creating isolated sub -populations where warranted. E. AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS 1. Site Analysis - required for the purpose of delineating the recharge areas on a scaled development plan and providing detailed information on the following items: a. hydro -geological susceptibility to contamination and contaminant loading potential. b. Depth to ground water C. hydraulic conductivity and gradient d. soil permeability and contamination attenuation e. a vadose zone analysis including permeability and attenuation properties f. an analysis of the recharge area's toleration for impervious surfaces in terms of both aquifer recharge and the effect on water quality degradation g. a summary of the proposed development's effect on the recharge area, concentrating on items "d" and "f" of this section h. existing water quality analysis 2. Development Standards: a. The site analysis will create a water quality baseline which will serve as a minimum standard that shall not be degraded by proposed development. b. The creation of additional impervious surfaces shall be limited to that amount described in the site analysis that will ensure adequate aquifer recharge and water quality protection. C. Development approvals shall ensure that all best management practices are employed to avoid introducing pollutants into the aquifer. This includes the complete collection and disposal of storm water outside of the aquifer recharge area for all development of impervious surfaces. d. In addition, all development within Grant County must be in compliance with all of the following requirements: GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE - 6118/83 26 1) The Grant County Potable Water Ordinance, Number 92 -44 -CC, passed by the Grant County Board of Commissioners April 13, 1992. 2) Any and all applicable ground water management areas (G.W.M.A.'s) regulations, as designated by the State of Washington (including Chapter 173-100 WAC, Chapter 173-124 WAC, and Chapter 173-128A WAC, Chapter 173-130A WAC, Chapter 173-134A WAC, as well as other sources, such as the provisions for other GWMAs such as the Moses Lake G.W.M.A.). 3) State requirements regarding protection of upper aquifer zones and ground water quality (Chapter 173-154 WAC and Chapter 173-200 WAC, respectively). 4) Any and all applicable regulations set forth by any Irrigation Districts regulated by the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. 5) Any and all regulations set forth by the Washington State Department of Health, the Grant County Health District and the Washington State Department of Ecology. 7.2 PROVISIONS FOR SITE ANALYSIS No site analysis required by Section 7 of this ordinance will be considered complete without a detailed resume of the principal author(s) which disclose(s) their technical training and experience and demonstrate their stature as a qualified professional. SECTION 8.0 WARNING AND DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY 8.1 WARNING AND DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY The degree of hazard protection required by this ordinance is considered reasonable for regulatory purposes and is based on scientific and engineering considerations. Catastrophic natural disasters can, and will, occur on rare occasions. This ordinance does not imply that land outside the critical areas or activities permitted within such areas will be free from exposure or damage. This ordinance shall not create liability GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA ORAF7 ORDINANCE • 6/18193 27 on the part of Grant County, and officers or employees thereof, for any damages that result from reliance on this ordinance or any administrative decision lawfully made hereunder. SECTION 9,0 NON -CONFORMING DEVELOPMENTS 9.1 NON -CONFORMING DEVELOPMENTS Within the natural resource lands and critical areas established by this ordinance or subsequent amendments thereto, there exists developments and lots of record which were lawfully established or approved, but which would be prohibited, regulated or restricted under the terms of this ordinance or future amendments. It is the intent of this ordinance to permit these non -conformities to continue and to allow previously approved developments to reach the development conclusion anticipated in their approved applications. The lots of record within major subdivisions that have received preliminary plat approval and short plats filed for record at the Grant County Auditor's office will be considered building lots in all respect and exempt from the provisions of this ordinance. Planned Developments, conditional use permits and other land use applications approved prior to the effective date of this ordinance are also exempt from this ordinance. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6/18/93 28 SECTION 10.0 ADMINISTRATION 10.1 ADMINISTRATION The Planning Director is hereby directed to administer the provisions of this ordinance and may appoint other employees as may be necessary to assist in its administration. The Planning Director under direction of the County Commissioners of Grant County shall adopt and revise, as required, such forms and instructions as are necessary or appropriate to serve the public and carry out the provisions of this ordinance. SECTION 11.0 SEVERABILITY 11.1 SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, part or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance or the application or the provision to other persons or circumstances. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 5118183 29 SECTION 1.2.0 EFFECTIVE DATE 12.1 EFFECTIVE DATE This ordinance shall come into full force and effect on4�,,��! ,1993. APPROVED: C , 4,Z Con ti ting t e Board of Co ty Commissioners ATTEST: -"AJ (& /I A/rl, Clerk oft d APPROVED AS TO FORM: Prosecuting Attorney Passed by the Board of County Commissioners: , 1993. Filed with the County Auditor: , 1993. Published: , 1993. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6118193 30 DATA MAP SOURCE CRITICAL RESOURCE AREAS Aquifer Recharge Areas: Frequently Flooded Area: Geologically Hazardous Areas: Wetlands: Wildlife Habitat Areas: WAC 173-124-040; WAC 173-124-060 WAC 173-128A-040; WAC 173-128A-050 United States Federal Emergency Management Agency - Flood Insurance Rate Maps Matrix generated from the United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service Grant County Soil Survey maps and tables United States Department of the Interior - National Wetlands Inventory Maps Wetlands Habitat Fish Population/ Values and Related Data Other areas of Wildlife Concern United States Department of the Interior, National Wetlands Inventory Maps Washington State Department of Wildlife, Priority Habitat and Species(PHS data) Maps Washington State Department of Wildlife/Department of Natural Resources, Washington State Department of Fisheries, Washington Rivers Inventory System(WARIS) Maps - Washington State Department of Wildlife, Priority Habitat and Species(PHS data) Maps United States Department of the Interior, Spokane District Resource Management Plan GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE - 6/18/93 31 RESOURCE LANDS Agriculture Resource Land: Mineral Resource Lands: United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Land Evaluation for Irrigated Cropland Areas of Grant County, Land Evaluation for Dryland Cropland Areas of Grant County, Land Evaluation for Rangeland Areas of Grant County, Soil Survey of Grant County. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil. Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Grant County Cultural Resource Washington Department of Community Development, Office of Areas: Archaeology and Historical Preservation, National Register of Historic Places, State Register of Historic Places, and the Archives of the DCD-OAHP. GRANT COUNTY RESOURCE AND CRITICAL AREA DRAFT ORDINANCE • 6/1 B/83 32 BILLIE M. SUMRALL, DIRECTOR May 25, 1993 AREA CODE 509-754-2011, EXT. 366 COUNTY COURTHOUSE P. O. BOX 37 EPHRATA, WASHINGTON 98823 TO: U.S. Army - Corps of Engineers U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Wenatchee U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Ephrata U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Grand Coulee East -Columbia Basin Irrigation District Quincy -Columbia Basin Irrigation District South -Columbia Basin Irrigation District USDA - Soil Conservation Service, Ephrata USDA - Soil Conservation Service, Moses Lake USDA - Soil Conservation Service, Quincy Colville Confederated Tribes Washington State Department of Community Development Washington State Department of Community Development, Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia Washington State Department of Ecology, Spokane Washington State Department of Fisheries, Olympia Washington State Department of Health, Spokane Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Ellensburg Washington State Department of Transportation, Wenatchee Washington State Department of Wildlife, Ephrata Grant County P.U.D., Ephrata Grant County Assessor Grant County Board of County Commissioners Grant County Cooperative Extension Office Grant County Fire Marshal Grant County Fire District #3 Grant County Fire District #4 Grant County Fire District #5 & #15 Grant County Fire District #6 Grant County Fire District #7 Grant County Fire District #8 Grant County Fire District #10 Grant County Fire District #11 Grant County -Fire District #12 Grant County Fire District #13 Grant County Fire District #14 Grant County Health District Grant County Prosecuting Attorney's Office Grant County Noxious Weed Control Board Grant County Port District #1, Quincy Grant County Port District #2, Royal City Grant County Port District #3, Mattawa Grant County Port District #4, Coulee City Grant County Port District #5, Hartline Grant County Port District #6, Wilson Creek Grant County Port District #7, Grant County Port District #8, Grant County Port District #9, Grant County Port District #10, Black Sands Irrigation District Moses Lake Irrigation District Town of Coulee City Town of Coulee Dam Town of Electric City City of Ephrata Town of George City of Grand Coulee Town of Hartline Town of Krupp / Marlin Town of Mattawa City of Moses Lake City of Quincy Town of Royal City City of Soap Lake Town of Warden Town of Wilson Creek FROM: Kenn Hamm Grant County Grant County P.O. Box 37 Ephrata, WA Grand Coulee Warden Ephrata Moses Lake Planning Department Courthouse 98823 RE: DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE Grant County has issued a Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) under the State Environmental policy Act (SEPA) rules (Chapter 197-11 WAC) for the following project: Grant County Resource Land and Critical Areas Development ordinance After Review of a completed environmental checklist, feedback from agencies by SEPA review and other information on file with the County, Grant County has determined that this proposal will not have a probable significant adverse environmental impact. You are asked to submit any comments you may have by , 1993, to the Grant County Planning Department at the above address. thank you for your cooperation in this regard. GRANT COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST , RCW 197.11-960 Environmental checklist. ` Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about government regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for non project proposals: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (PART D) For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Grant County Resource Lands and Critical Areas Development Ordinance 2. Name of Applicant: Grant County SEPA Rules Part Eleven -197-11-960 4. Date checklistRregared: September 4, 1992 5. Agency requesting checklist: Grant County 6. Proposed timid or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Public Hearing by Planning Commission scheduled 10/7/92; County Commissioner approval to follow; estimate adoption approximately 11/15/1992. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes explain. This proposed ordinance is an interim ordinance, so there may be some amendments made when incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan, approximately 7/94. 8. List any environmental information you know that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. The nature of this proposal is such that environmental information is exactly what is portrayed in this proposal. 9. Do you know whether agplications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes explain. Again, the Planning Conunission and Board of Conunissioners of Grant county have yet to adopt this ordinance. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. See 9. 2 SEPA Rules Part Eleven -197-11-964 11. Give brief, complete description of Your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the Project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this pace. This ordinance is intended to comply with the growth Management Act RCW 36.70A, to conserve resource areas and to protect critical areas from land uses determined to be incompatible or potentially detrimental through mitigation of any environmental concerns. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of Your proposed Project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans Le .guired by the agency, you are not required to duplicate mans or detailed Plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. This proposal will be in effect for all non -municipal lands within the corporate limits of the County of Grant. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one): flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountains, other Grant County contains all above descriptions to some extent. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Greater than 70% (cliffs) c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. There are 189 soil types listed for Grant County, of all types of loams, sands, clays, silts and the like. There are also areas of both prime and unique farmland. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so describe. Some soils in the county would be considered unstable, especially in the coulees. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Not applicable. SEPA Rules Part Eleven -197-I1-960 f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings?) Not applicable. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Not Applicable. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. None. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Not Applicable 3. WATER a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. There are many dozens of water bodies in Grant County, including but not limited to: Columbia River, Soap Lake, Lake Lenore and Blue Lake. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adiacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Indirectly, yes, but mostly as a protection measure, rather than as construction. 4 SEPA Rules Part Eleven -197-11-960 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions`? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a L00 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. There are several areas within a 100 -year floodplain and are addressed in the ordinance. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Not Applicable. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Not Applicable. 5 SEPA Rules Part Eleven- 197-11-960 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Not Applicable. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water 'impacts, if any: The ordinance addresses the need for site analyses and refers to previously adopted state and federal regulations that address the concern of wastewater management. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: x deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other x evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other x shrubs x grass x pasture x crop or grain x wet soil plants: Cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other x water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other x other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? None. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. The USDI - $LM Spokane District Resource Management plan has identified species in the County. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Not Applicable. 6 SEPA Rules Part Eleven -197-11-960 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: ..all ............................................... Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: ..deer, beaver, others .......................................... Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: ..salmon, trout, bass, others ....................... b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Bald Eagle, Ferruginous Hawk and White Pelican c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Yes, the Pacific Flyway is on site. d. Proposed treasures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: The ordinance addresses wildlife critical areas and requires mitigation to be sought when these areas are found on a site. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Not Applicable. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None. 7 U SEPA Rules Part Eleven -197-11-960 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal`? If so, describe. No. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: The preservation and protection of resource lands and critical areas as addressed in the ordinance would be considered as these types of measures. b. Noise 1) What type of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Not Applicable. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. None. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. S. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Agriculture, rural, suburban, residential, light industrial, heavy industrial, recreation, open space, public lands, range lands, and commercial. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Yes - both irrigated and dryland agriculture and much still is. c. Describe any structures on the site. See 8 a. - structures related to those land uses are on site. 8 r SEPA Rules Part Eleven-] 97-11-960 d. Will any structure be demolished? If so, what. No. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? see 8 a. for the zones f, What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? see 8 a. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Rural, suburban, and conservancy. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Not as of yet, by SEPA standards. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Currently there are approximately 58,200 residences in the entire county, approximately 29,000 of which are non -municipal county residents. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace. None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not Applicable. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: All phases of the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations must be concurrent, and the City and County Plans must also. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. None. 9 SEPA Rules Part Eleven -197-11-964 b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not Applicable. 10, AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structures(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Not Applicable. b. what views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Not Applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Not Applicable. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. what type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Not Applicable. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not Applicable. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Not Applicable. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not Applicable. H 0 SEPA Rules Part Eleven -197-11-960 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Many, including boating, hunting, fishing, ORV use, birdwatching, hiking and swimming b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Not Applicable. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATIONS a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. Yes, the DCD - OAHP and Grant County are currently working together to provide resource information for the County. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. There are many Historic Register buildings, cultural markers, indian sites, and other cultural resources on site. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Mitigation, focusing on preservation of the resource are required as part the ordinance. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. There are thousands of mules of county roads, several state highways, Interstate 90 and U.S. Highway 2 serving the site. 11 SEPA Rules Part Eleven -197-11-960 b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. No. Not Applicable. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have`? How many would the project eliminate? Not Applicable. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. None. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Not Applicable. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Not Applicable. 12 SEPA Rules Part Eleven- 197-11-960 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. All above utilities are available in various areas of Grant County. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Not Applicable. c. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on thein to make its decision. Signature-................................................................................................... DateSubmitted............................................................................................... 13 I • SEPA Rules Part Eleven- 197-11-960 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1) How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? No. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Not Applicable. 2) How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: It should enhance the welfare of all life in the County. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Identification and mitigation of probable impacts to critical and resource areas in the County. 14 .. r t SEPA Rules Part Eleven -197-11.960 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Not at all. Proposed measures to protect such resources to avoid or reduce impacts are: Through identification and mitigation of impacts. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, flood plains, or prime farmlands? The focus of the ordinance is to preserve and protect these areas, as directed by law. (RCW 36.70A.) Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: Through identification and mitigation of impacts. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans'? Shoreline area impacts will be mitigated, thereby rendering compatible those incompatible uses, if those uses are to exist. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and line use impacts are: Identification and mitigation of impacts. 15 r SEPA Rules Part Eleven -197-11-960 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Not at all. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: Not Applicable. 7. identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Not Applicable. This ordinance does not conflict with any State or Federal Laws as those laws take obvious precedence. 16 M, .1.9.9 3 Ma,y_l 1993 Week AY 23 d MONDAY 24 10:(l0am. Linda Edwards 10:30an1 Greg Grammer -Juvenile Department 2:30p1n Mark Furhman TUESDAY 25 3:30pm Sam Lor nz 9:00am Prosecuting Attorney }�, f 10:00am Public Works Department 10:00am Perc Mediation -solid waste contract 1:30pm Jay Johns 2:30pm Public Meeting; Burkey Zone Change FRIDAY, DAY Y 27 ,AY 5/24/1993 May June S M T W T F S M T W 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1.9 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 15 16 5/24/1993 June S M T W T F S 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 5/24/1993 COMMISSIONERS' PROCEEDINGS Week of May 24,1993 The Grant County Commissioners session was called to order at 9:00 a.m. by Chairman Helen Fancher. All of the Commissioners were in attendance with the Clerk of the Board. The Commissioners approved the minutes of the preceding session as written. The Commissioners approved the Request for Transfer in the Law and Justice Department #163, Law and Justice Fund #121 in the amount of $3640.00. The Commissioners approved the salary increase of Pamela Park of the Clerks Office to $5.75 per hour effective May 1,1993. Chairman Fancher was authorized to sign the Notice of Separation or Work Interruption of Jerry Dormaier, and Rhonda Walker of the Grant County Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities Department. A motion was made by Commissioner Snead, seconded by Commissioner Fancher that Resolution Number 93 -45 -CC relating to the establishment of a petty cash/revolving fund for the Jail Concession Fund #112, to be called Prisoner's Trust Revolving Fund in the amount of $250.00 be passed. The motion carried. The Commissioners approved the request by the Grant County Fire Marshal that no sales permits be authorized within the unincorporated areas of Grant County for Fireworks Stands for the 1993 year. The Commissioners received notification from the City of Soap Lake that they approved the Interlocal Agreement for Housing Need Assessment and Community Development Block Grant Responsibilities. The Commissioners approved the Treasurers request that the County sponsor the Association of County Treasurers Western BBQ and allow it to be under the County's insurance umbrella. A motion was made by Commissioner Snead, seconded by Commissioner Fancher that Resolution Number 93 -46 -CC setting a public hearing for June 14,1993 at 1:30 p.m. relating to the facts requiring an appropriation and expenditure of funds for the County Fair Fund #116, Department #158 in the amount of $5,378 be passed. The motion carried. A motion was made by Commissioner Snead, seconded by Commissioner Fancher that Resolution Number 93 -47 -CC setting a public hearing for June 14,1993 at 1:30 p.m. relating to the facts requiring an appropriation and expenditure of fund in the Current Expense Fund #001, Operating Transfers -Out, Department #142 in the amount of $5,378 be passed. The motion carried. A motion was made by Commissioner Snead, seconded by Commissioner Fancher that Resolution Number 93 -48 -CC relating to the transfer of funds within the 1993 budget of the Law and Justice Fund #121, Department #163 in the amount of $1,586 be passed. The motion carried. The Commissioners appointed Gary Chandler to a position on the Grant County Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities Board. Chairman Fancher was authorized to sign the disapproval of Liquor License Application of Ogden Entertainment Services. As there was no further business the session was continued until May 25,1993. May 25,1993 The session was continued at 9:00 a.m. with all of the Commissioners in attendance with the Clerk of the Board. A motion was made by Commissioner Winzler, seconded by Commissioner Snead that Resolution Number 93-49-CC,and Ordinance Number 93 -49 --CC in the matter of adopting the Grant County Resource Lands and Critical Areas Ordinance, for compliance with RCW 36.70A.060 of the Growth Management Act be passed. The motion carried. Chairman Fancher was authorized to sign the Determination of Non -significance of the Grant County Resource Lands and Critical Areas Development Ordinance. The Commissioners met with the Public Works Director regarding 10:00 a.m. Marine View Heights RID, Les Parr -Road Requirements (Short Plat), Bid Award Recommendation-Auctioneering Services, Request to Purchase Pick -up -Royal City, Request for Reimbursable Work-Hartline, CRP Resolution -Dover Street, Project Agreement -Bridge #104, Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 1994 to 1999. A motion was made by Commissioner Winzler, seconded by Commissioner Snead that Resolution Number 93 -50 -CC in the matter of initiating County Road Project designated as CRP No. 93-23, Dover Street be passed. The motion carried. A motion was made by Commissioner Snead, seconded by Commissioner Winzler that Resolution Number 93 -51 -CC in the matter of Grant County Road Improvement District No. 93-3 for Marine View and Marine View Heights located in portions of Sections 17 and 18, T17N., Range 28E.W.M. be passed. The motion carried. The Commissioners approved the request by the City of Royal City to purchase a 1989 Ford pick-up from the County for the price of $3,037.50. The Commissioners approved the bid award for auctioneering services to Northwest Auction Company. A Public Meeting was held and a motion was made by Commissioner Snead, seconded by Commissioner Winzler that the William R. Burkey zone change request by located in a portion of Farm Unit 215, Block 41, Containing 92 acres in a portion of Section 1, Township 19 N., Range 28 E.W.M. set for Public Hearing, June 14,1993 at 10:00 a.m. The motion carried. As of this date the Board by a majority vote does approve for payment those vouchers included int he list filed in the Auditors Office 5/24/93 in the total amount of $115,072.75. The Commissioner signed the Public Works May Payroll journal in the amount of $66,729.79. The Commissioners appointed Martell Palmer to a position on the Grant County Planning Commission. The Commissioners approved the amount of $3,600 from Law and Justice Funds for materials to renovate the bunks in the Jail. The Commissioners approved the Capital Outlay Request by the Juvenile Probation Department for a Computer Lab. The Commissioners approved the request by the Sheriff Department for the purchase of a copy machine in the amount of $15,945.43 from Law and Justice funds. As there was no further business the session was adjourned until June 1,1993. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON .. Clerk of 14913oard— Zd,Chairman Imo— / TO: County Commissioners FROM: Dedra J. Osborn, Clerk RE: Pamela Park GRANT COUNTY OFFICE ° F CLERK AND EX -OFFICIO CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT May 20, 1993 Pamela Park has been working in this office since March, 1992. She started working with us through an outside agency training her for job placement in another field other than what she had previously worked. She went on our payroll through this office in April of this year. Her starting hourly wage was $5.50 per hour. Because of the time Pamela has been in this office and the great job she is doing in her "new" field, I would like to increase her salary to $5.75 per hour effective this month if possible. Thank you for your consideration on this matter. Sincerely, DEDRA J. S ORN, Clerk cc: Payroll Department Board of County Commissioners REC;EI XV, FE. D Grant County, Washington Approve Disa MAY 2 0 9993 Dist. � 1 V-1,pprove Burvit7 OF Cti :,'.Ui:>S�uNERS ��- Dist, GRANT COUNT4 WASHINGTON Dist. #2 Dist. #� Dist. #3Dist. #moi LAW AND JUSTICE CENTER • P.O. BOX 37 « EPHRATA, WASHINGTON 98823 . (509) 754-2011 WILLIAM A. WIESTER, SHERIFF GRANT COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE MAX HEALY P.O. BOX 37 PHONE: (509) 7S4-2011 Undersheriff Ephrata, WA 98823 (800) 572-0119 LARI DAHL Administrative Assistant FAX: (509) 754.2058 MAY 2..Ci , ^ G93 i`: RECEIVED I!_7 0 5— LA, W ;1;ri Ji -1.' �.E MAY 2 5 1993 GIANT C'O:.iNTY :::OI`'',1IS:--, T0NF.I ;=, P,• GtiAN LCOUtdii.WASNINf70N EPURATA . WAS H _ ` GT; 5.N'98(82 :'(_ MM 1.`, I ONER OUR MAIN COPY MACHII`lE Ic IN NEED OF CONSTANT REPAIR TO KEEP T IN WORK I NG ORDER. THE '4A I IN ENANC>~ COINTR ACT I") UP FOR RE NEWA L AT COST OF $608.43'. Ire' AS MUCH AS YOU HA*,..`E APPROVED :'HE P'.;RCHASE OF A N --W CO Y ' 'E OF LAW AND •.IUST"CE , *VTE: F,EQl-'ES,T THAT YOU MAKE AN EXCEPTIOI4 REGARDING THE FREEZING OF THIS ACCOUNT AND ALLOW THE r'URCHASE OF A NEW MACHINE. "HE COST OF THE COPIER IS: STATE BID CONTRACT MACHINE: $ 14,737.00 'T'AX: 11,208.43 SHIPPING: - 0 - TOTAL: 15,945.43 MAINTENANCE CONTRACT - 8200.00 PER MONTH AFTER FIRST 913 DAY GUARANTEE. PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT INCLU^ED IN THE MAINTENANCE CONTRACT OF THIS, MACHINE IS ALL SUPPLIES (EXCEPT PAPER) WHICH WILL ASSIST WITH HOLDING DOWN SUPPLY COSTS IN OUR REGULAR BUDGET WITH THE PURCHASE OF THIS, MACHINE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ON THIS REQUEST. SINCERELY, WILLIAM T, WIESTER / ✓ GRANT COUNTY SHERIFF ?��J .� ''in✓� M l — I�N C AIRMAN CHER BY: MAX HEALY i'COM'1T��SN vJt'LLER UNDERSHERIFF MH:LRD COMMI39LLONER SNEAD �1JT cocl�. Sharon E. Kiehn Grant County: Mental Health Executive °'ra°`°r Developmental 'Disab1lities '(5091765.-9239 SCAN 282-2283 • 1038 W. IVY STREET -P.O. BOX 1057. • MOSES LAKE, WA 98637 May 18, -1993 Grant .County -Commissioners Grant County Courthouse P.O. Box 37. Ephrata, WA 98.823 Dear Commissioners,. The Grant'County.Mental Health -and Developmental Disabilities Board would like to recommend to the Board.of:County Commissioners., the appointment of Representative Gary Chandler•to the Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities Board.: Representative Chandler resides in Moses Lake and has'. expressed an interest in serving ori the.Board. .The' Board believes.Representative Chandler would be an.asset to.the, Board in regards to addressing the needs'of persons•with 'disabilities.. •Please.notify Sharon Kiehn or myself regarding your decision.. on this appointment - Thank you. Sincerely, RE�EI EIVED r ��• MAY 2 0 9993 Shirley Heer , . Chairperson ty•... a, ur �SSIONERs Grant County. Mental Health & GSL COUNT;WASHINGTON 'Developmental Disabilities Board BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NUMBER 93- 48 -CC A RESOLUTION relating to the transfer of funds within the 1993 budget of the Law and Justice Fund #121, Department #163. WHEREAS, it has been brought to the attention of the Board of Grant County Commissioners that it is necessary to transfer funds in the current budget of the above named County Department in the amounts and accounts enumerated below; and WHEREAS, there is no expenditure of funds not previously budgeted but a transfer pursuant to R.C.W. 36.40.100 and County and State auditing procedures; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF GRANT COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON, that the following transfers within the current budget are hereby made: 1993 BUDGET OF LAW AND JUSTICE FUND #101, DEPARTMENT #163 FROM AMOUNT TO Account Number 508 $1,586 Account No. 109-594.15.64.00 TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATION FOR THE PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE FOR COMPUTER NETWORKING SOFTWARE UPGRADE. This resolution is in the best interest of good government and shall take effect immediately upon its passage. Done this 24TH DAY OF MAY,1993 ATT\EST* Clerk a Board Board of County Commissioners Grant County, Washington BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NUMBER 9' � -CC A RESOLUTION relating to the transfer of funds within the 1998 budget of the WHEREAS, it has been brought to the attention of the Board of Grant County Commissioners that it is necessary to transfer funds in the current budget of the above- named County Department in the amounts and accounts enumerated below; and WHEREAS, there is no expenditure of funds not previously budgeted but a transfer pursuant to R.C.W. 36.40.100 and County and State auditing procedures; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF GRANT COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON, that the following transfers within the current budget are hereby made: 199 BUDGET OF �! � JZ%SreA� FROM AMOUNT TO Account No. 506' Account No. l4 q-59�l 15: G�-a This resolution is in the best interest of good government and shall take effect immediately upon its passage. i Done this ATTEST: Clerk of the Board Board of County Commissioners Grant County, Washington 1 JOHN XMIDDEll Pronow s A WPOY sumaN J. "ISTA011 CMS Da" VARIAN NAANCK Aditnstrame Ail ,11- I Dowi . AMD A. IIANUT ALAR {. HERNAN0E2 mmw. IDu JAM$ 0. UNDAu CNAMIS ROEN& Ep wsw wsshngwn OFFICE OF GRANT COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY P.O. BOX 37 • EPHRATA. WASHINGTON 98823 • (509) 754-2011 April 16, 1993 IMAY 4 1993 Board of County Commissioners 3 F'AN7 CGJ1t Y WAST; N401Y ;Grant County Courthouse POBox 37 Ephrata, WA 98823 Re: Equipment Purchase - Software Upgrade Dear Commissioners: Early in 1991 Criminal Justice Funds were used to purchase Novell Netware v. 2.2 to provide networking ability for the prosecuting attorney's office in the criminal section. The network has given this office the ability to share files and printer resources between work stations. Late in 1992 Novell released an upgrade in the 10 user category to Novell Netware v . 3.11. It provides greater security features controlling who may log into the network and access to files and directories plus increased resource tracking and management. One vital feature would prevent accidental erasure of a boilerplate form by an operator. We believe this upgrade is essential to continued operation of this office in the most efficient manner possible. The cost of the upgrade would be $1295.00 for the software, plus an additional $150.00 for installation and hardware required to increase to 8 megabytes, totalling $180.00. Your approval is requested for the purchase E de through The Computer Place in Moses Lake.ours, /. g�ELL �ry� Prosecuting Attorney APPROVED: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Chairman ember r r BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Grant County, Washington IN THE MATTER OF GRANT COUNTY ROAD IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-3 RESOLUTION CREATING A ROAD for Marine View and Marine View Heights IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT located in portions of Sections 17 and 18, T17N, R28EWM Resolution No. 93 -51 -CC A Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Grant County, Washington providing for the improvement of roads and streets within Marine View Plat, as recorded in Book 10, Page 5 of Plats, and Marine View Heights Plat as recorded in Book 10, Pages 66 through 68 of Plats, records of the Grant County Auditor, all in accordance with Resolution No. 93 -26 -CC passed and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Grant County on April 20,1993; declaring the sufficiency of the petition of said improvement; creating Grant County Road Improvement District No. 93-3; stating the portion of the cost of said improvement which shall be paid by cash or assessment upon the property of said District and the mode of payment; and directing the County Road Engineer to proceed with the improvement and to prepare and file an assessment roll. WHEREAS Resolution No. 93 -26 -CC, passed and adopted on April 20, 1993, declaring the intention of the Board to order the improvement of roads and streets within Marine View Plat, as recorded in Book 10, Page 5 of Plats, and Marine View Heights Plat as recorded in Book 10, Page 66 through 68 of Plats, records of Grant County, and fixing a time for the hearing therein, and WHEREAS said Resolution of Intention was duly published and the due notice of hearing was given as required by law, and WHEREAS the County Auditor has certified that the petition for this improvement, including all withdrawals therefrom and additions thereon made prior to 5:00 p.m, of the day prior to said hearing, has been signed by the owners of 70.48% of the lineal frontage upon the improvement to be made, and of 69.99% of the area within the limits of the proposed assessment district, and WHEREAS the said hearing was held as provided in said notice and after hearing and considering written and verbal suggestions and recommendations of various property owners within the district, the Board has ascertained that the petition is sufficient, and has ascertained that the plan of improvements within the limits of the district is feasible and has determined to order the construction of said improvement, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED By the Board of County Commissioners of Grant County, Washington as follows: Section 1. The Board of County Commissioners orders the improvement of the following roads and streets within Marine View Plat, as recorded in Book 10, Page 5 of Plats, and Marine View Heights Plat as recorded in Book 10, Pages 66 through 68 of Plats, records of the Grant County Auditor: Highland Dr from SR 262 to Belmont 34 ft, finished width 0.41 mi Highland Dr from Belmont to El Camino 24 it. finished width 0.05 mi El Camino Ln from Highland to cul-de-sac 24 ft. finished width 0.08 mi El Camino St from Aurora to Nob Hill 26 ft. finished width 0.23 mi Belmont St from Highland To Nob Hill 26 ft. finished width 0.36 mi Lacona St from Highland to Nob Hill 26 ft. finished width 0.36 mi Plaza St from Highland to Nob Hill 26 ft. finished width 0.36 mi Belmont St from Highland to Frontenac 24 ft. finished width 0.10 mi Lacona St from Highland to Frontenac 24 ft. finished width 0.10 mi Bellevue St from Highland to Aurora 26 ft. finished width 0.13 mi (tent County All) No, 93 3 Canal St from Aurora to Nab Hill 24 ft. finished width 0.24 mi Aurora St from El Camino to N. of Bellevue 26 ft. finished width 0.25 mi Aurora St from El Camino to Canal 24 ft. finished width 0.03 mi Nob Hill St from S. of Canal to El Camino 24 ft. finished width 0.11 mi Nob Hill St from EI Camino to N. of Plaza 26 ft. finished width 0.20 mi Frontenac St from Belmont to Summit 24 ft. finished width 0.11 mi Cascadia Av from Highland to Frontenac 24 ft. finished width 0.11 mi Bayview Av from Highland to Frontenac 24 ft. finished width 0.11 mi Aloha Av from Highland to Frontenac 24 ft. finished width 0.11 mi Terrace Av from Highland to cul-de-sac 24 ft. finished width 0.07 mi Summit Av from Highland to Frontenac 24 ft. finished width 0.11 mi Frontenac St from Cascadia to Aloha 24 ft. finished width 0.12 mi Total 3.75 mi by acquiring rights of way, by constructing or reconstructing, grading, shaping, installing drainage structures, furnishing and placing crushed surfacing, constructing approaches, paving with bituminous surface treatment, installing traffic control devices, and by doing all work necessary in connection therewith. Section 2. It is hereby found and declared that the petition filed herein for the aforesaid improvement including all additions thereto or withdrawals therefrom made prior to 5:00 p.m. of the day before the said hearing is sufficient and it is found that the plan of construction as hereinbefore outlined is feasible and the benefits to be derived therefrom by the property within the proposed district as hereinbefore outlined exceed the cost and expense of the contemplated improvements. Section 3. There is hereby established a road improvement district in the County to be known and designated as Grant County Road Improvement District No. 93-3, which said district shall include all the property between the termini of said improvements as described below: The territorial extent of the proposed improvement includes all rights of way and all lots, blocks and divisions of Marine View Plat as recorded in Book 10, Page 5 of Plats, and Marine View Heights Plat, as recorded in Book 10, Pages 66 through 68 of Plats, records of the Grant County Auditor, and the following described tracts of land: Parcel "A" Beginning at the intersection of the west right of way line of Highland Drive and the south right of way line of SR 262, as shown in Book 10, Page 5 of Plats, records of Grant County Auditor; thence South 00° 20'00" West along the west right of way line of Highland Drive a distance of 1,153.11 feet to the northeast corner of Lot 6, Block 8, Division No. 1 of Marine View Heights Plat, as shown in Book 10, Pages 66 through 68 of Plats, records of Grant County Auditor; thence North 89° 40'00" West along the north line of said Marine View Heights Plat a distance of 125.00 feet; thence North 00° 20' 00" East a distance of 1,195.02 feet to the south right of way line of SR 262; thence South 71° 08' 00" East along the south right of way of SR 262 a distance of 131.84 feet and returning to the point of beginning. Parcel "B" Beginning at the northeast corner of Lot 11, Block 1, Division No. 2 of Marine View Heights Plat, as recorded in Book 10, Pages 66 through 68 of Plats, records of the Grant County Auditor; thence N 00°30' E along the west right of way line of Aurora Street a distance of 296.00 feet; thence N 89°40 W a distance of 147.17 feet; thence S 00°30' W a distance of 296.00 feet to the north line of said Marine View Heights Plat; thence S 89°40' E a distance of 147.17 feet and returning to the point of beginning. Section 4. It is deemed that the nature of the improvement contemplated for said district is such that the special benefits conferred on the property of the district are fairly reflected by the use of an area assessment method, and that for the purposes of said district the assessments shall be made against the property of the district in accordance with the special benefits it will derive from the improvement by use of the area assessment method. It is determined that all assessments against the properties lying within Marine View Plat, as recorded in Book 10, Page 5 of Plats, and Marine View Heights Plat as recorded in Book 10, Pages 66 through 68 of Plats, rm t Caney RID N. 93.3 records of the Grant County Auditor, and Parcels 'A' and 'B' will be paid by the owners of the properties located in said Sections 17 and 18, T17N, R28EWM. Section 5. The County Engineer is hereby directed to establish a reimbursable project to provide moneys from the County Road Fund for the payment of all costs and expenses of the construction of said improvement and, upon the determination of said costs and expenses, to prepare and file with the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners an assessment roll for the costs of said improvement to be assessed against the property included in the assessment district herein created. He is also directed to prepare plans and specifications under which the proposed improvement will be constructed and either issue a Call for Bids upon the same, or utilize Grant County road crews to perform all or part of the necessary work. Section 6. The Total Project Cost shall be the sum of the following items of cost: (1) Construction amount comprising the sum of the contract amount as determined by the lowest responsible bid on which the contract is awarded, and/or the actual costs incurred by day labor forces ..... $177,313.00 (2) Preliminary Engineering & Administration being 10 percent of the contract amount .................... $11,231.00 (3) Construction Engineering being 5 percent of the The total project cost shall be apportioned as follows: One hundred percent (100%) of the total project cost shall be borne by assessment against the properties benefitted and included in the district hereinbefore created. Except as otherwise provided herein, Grant County shall not be liable in manner for any portion of the costs and expenses of said improvement district. Section 7. That there be and is hereby created in the office of the Grant County Treasurer two funds of the County to be known and designated as "Grant County Road Improvement District No. 93-3 Construction Fund," and "Grant County Road Improvement District No. 93-3 Bond Fund." The Grant County Road Fund shall be reimbursed for all costs and expenses incurred by reason of the District except those costs or portions of costs which Grant County agrees to bear as hereinbefore stated. Such reimbursement shall be made by the issuance of warrants against the Grant County Road Improvement District No. 93-3 Construction Fund. All moneys collected by the County Treasurer upon any assessments levied for the construction of said improvement shall be placed in the said Construction Fund during the thirty (30) day period allowed for payment of such assessment without penalty or interest and shall be placed in the said Bond fund thereafter. Bonds of said improvement district, payable not later than ten years from date of issuance, shall be sold in the amount sufficient to reduce all outstanding warrants against aforesaid construction fund for that portion of the cost and expenses of the installation of said improvement to be assessed against the property within the district after determining the amount of such assessments paid within the thirty (30) day period allowed for payment of assessments without penalty of interest. The interest charged on the unpaid assessments shall be the same rate as the rate of interest the Road Improvement District bonds shall bear. C-1 C—ty HIO No. 9].] Construction Amount ........................... $8,866.00 (4) Contingencies being 10 percent of the construction amount $17,731.00 (5) Interim Financing Cost .......................... $8,866.00 (6) Publishing Costs ................................ $800.00 (7) Bond Attorney Fee ............................. $2,660.00 (8) Closing Costs .................................. $400.00 (9) Bond Costs .................................. $2,760.00 (10) Treasurer's Fee ............................... $1,240.00 Total Project Cost ............................ $231,867.00 The total project cost shall be apportioned as follows: One hundred percent (100%) of the total project cost shall be borne by assessment against the properties benefitted and included in the district hereinbefore created. Except as otherwise provided herein, Grant County shall not be liable in manner for any portion of the costs and expenses of said improvement district. Section 7. That there be and is hereby created in the office of the Grant County Treasurer two funds of the County to be known and designated as "Grant County Road Improvement District No. 93-3 Construction Fund," and "Grant County Road Improvement District No. 93-3 Bond Fund." The Grant County Road Fund shall be reimbursed for all costs and expenses incurred by reason of the District except those costs or portions of costs which Grant County agrees to bear as hereinbefore stated. Such reimbursement shall be made by the issuance of warrants against the Grant County Road Improvement District No. 93-3 Construction Fund. All moneys collected by the County Treasurer upon any assessments levied for the construction of said improvement shall be placed in the said Construction Fund during the thirty (30) day period allowed for payment of such assessment without penalty or interest and shall be placed in the said Bond fund thereafter. Bonds of said improvement district, payable not later than ten years from date of issuance, shall be sold in the amount sufficient to reduce all outstanding warrants against aforesaid construction fund for that portion of the cost and expenses of the installation of said improvement to be assessed against the property within the district after determining the amount of such assessments paid within the thirty (30) day period allowed for payment of assessments without penalty of interest. The interest charged on the unpaid assessments shall be the same rate as the rate of interest the Road Improvement District bonds shall bear. C-1 C—ty HIO No. 9].] PASSED AND ADOPTED By the Board of County Commissioners of Grant County, Washington, this 25"' day of May, 1993. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON Helen Fa cher, Chairperson ATTEST: Sid Winzle ssioner Clerk of the Board v � T' nead, Commissioner G—t County RID No. 93-3 C RESOLUTION NO. 93-50—CC BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS of GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON In the matter of initiating County Road Project designated as CRP NO. 93.23. IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED THAT DOVER STREET, State Road Log No. 45010 from MP 0.13 to MP 0.64 and State Road Log No. 45009 from MP 0.00 to MP 0.23 be improved as follows: Construct a four4ane urban arterial street including curb and gutter, sidewalk, bicycle path, left tum lanes, and park 'n' ride lot with lighting. This project is hereby declared to be a public necessity and the County Road Engineer is hereby ordered and authorized to report and proceed thereon as by law provided. (RCW 36 75.050, 36.80.030, 36.80.070) (Optional References) IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that an appropriation from the officially adopted road fund budget and based on the County Engineers estimate is hereby made in the amounts and for the purposes shown: PURPOSE Engineering Right of Way Acquisition TOTAL (Not subject to 36.77.060) Construction TOTAL (Check appropriate box) AMOUNT OF APPROPRIATION $30,000 $0.00 $30,000 $750,000 $780,000 ❑ This project is included in the officially adopted Annual Road Program as Item No. LJ The project is hereby made a part of the officially adopted Annual Road Program in accordance with RCW 36.81.130. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that (Check appropriate box) The construction is to be accomplished by contract in accordance with RCW 36.66.020. ❑ The construction is to be accomplished by county forces in accordance with RCW 36.77.060 and WAC 136-18. ADOPTED this >�-day of '19(_/ ATTEST: J . Bwid BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GRANT COUNTY. WASHINGTON CommbdCowr 1-17 1 f MOSES AIRPORT PROJECT SITE 4qKF \1 CHANUTE ST. ST. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NUMBER 93 -47 -CC A RESOLUTION relating to the facts requiring an appropriation and expenditure of funds for the following department/fund: CURRENT EXPENSE FUND #001, OPERATING TRANSFERS-OUT,DEPARTMENT X6142 , together with a budget therefor; declaring an emergency; and setting a public hearing date; all pursuant to RCW 36.40.140. WHEREAS, it has been brought to the attention of the Board of County Commissioners of Grant County that an appropriation and expenditure of funds should be authorized for the above- mentioned department/fund, together with a budget therefor, in the estimated amount .of $ 5,378.00 ; and WHEREAS, expenditure of such funds was not included in the current budget of Grant County, however, emergent conditions now require that such funds be expended; and WHEREAS, it appears that an emergency exists and that the expenditure of such funds could not have been reasonably foreseen at the time of making said county budget; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COM- MISSIONERS OF GRANT COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON, that the afore- mentioned facts constitute an emergency and that an appropriation and expenditure of funds should be authorized for the following department/ fund: CURRENT EXPENSE FUND x'6001, OPERATING TRANSFERS -OUT, DEPT, 0142 together with a budget therefor. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that notice of a public hearing upon such expenditure shall be given, said hearing to be held on June 14,1993 in the Grant County Commissioners' Office, Grant County Courthouse, Ephrata, Washington, at the hour of 1.30 p.m. .\ DONE THIS. 24 DAY OF May , 14_i: ATTEST: t-b*rk of the Boord R-2 wmmnsroner Commin{onor Constituting the Board of County Commissioners of Grant County, Washington J� > x, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 93 -45 -CC A RESOLUTION relating to the establishment of a petty cash/ revolving; fund (account) for the following county department: Jail Concession Fund #112 , to be called: Prisoner's Trust Revolving F»nd WHEREAS, it has been called to the attention of the Board of County Commissioners that a petty cash/revolving fund (account) should be established as set forth hereinbelow; and WHEREAS, the establishment of said fund is in accordance with state and county laws and does not require a public budget hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COM- MISSIONERS, as follows: 1. That a petty cash/revolving fund (account) to be known as Prisoner's Revolving , is hereby established in the amount o 250 or the allowing county depart- ment : Jail Concession Fund #112 Captainshall be custodian 2. That the Correction. Facilities Sergeant and / of said fund, shall record all transactions according to proper accounting procedures, and shall use it only for the purpose of: Used to pay small amounts($10 00 or less) to prisoner's belug release from custody 3. That if from said account (and) (or) N/A a checking account is used, all checks drawn shall be signed by: N/A 4. That all expenditures from said fund are to be supported with appropriate receipts and reimbursement of said fund shall be by claim voucher and warrant. DONE THIS 24th DAY OF Maw 'Q 01 ATTEST: _44 t r o x f c' r of ,ho Board R-8 Commissioner Constituting the Board of County Commissioners of Grant County, Washington BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NUMBER 93 -46 -CC A RESOLUTION relating to the facts requiring an appropriation and expenditure of funds for the following department/fund: COUNTY FAIR FUND #116, DEPARTMENT #158 , together with a budget therefor; declaring an emergency; and setting a public hearing date; all pursuant to RCW 36.40.140. WHEREAS, it has been brought to the attention of the Board of County Commissioners of Grant County that an appropriation and expenditure of funds should be authorized for the above- mentioned department/fund, together with a budget therefor, in the estimated amount .of $ 5,378.00 ; and WHEREAS, expenditure of such funds was not included in the current budget of Grant County, however, emergent conditions now require that such funds be expended; and WHEREAS, it appears that an emergency exists and that the expenditure of such funds could not have been reasonably foreseen at the time of making said county budget; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COM- MISSIONERS OF GRANT COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON, that the afore- mentioned facts constitute an emergency and that an appropriation and expenditure of funds should be authorized for the following department/fund: COUNTY FAIR FUND #116, DEPARTMENT #158 , together with a budget therefor. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that notice of a public hearing upon such expenditure shall be given, said hearing to be held on June 14,1993 in the Grant County Commissioners' Office, Grant County Courthouse, Ephrata, Washington, at the hour of 1:30 D.M. DONE THIS 74th DAY OF May , 19, °' ATTEST: 0--e M,1j 4 Clerk of the Board R-2 Commissioner Constituting the Board of County Commissioners of Grant County, Washington f GRANT COUNTY BUILDING/ FIRE Mj4RSHAL Grant Board of County Commissioners P.O. Box 37 Ephrata, Wa. 98823 May 24, 1993 RECEIVED Ref: 1993, fire -works sales and use. Dear Commissioners, MAY 2 4 1993 �,� ,�, yr up; �kiVSS10NERS GRANT Co"T"VVASNINGTON In the past there have been two or three fire -work retail sales permits that have come through this office for your approval. The office of the Grant County Fire Marshal is responsible to inspect the location of these proposed sales and report to the Board of County Commissioners as to the safety problems found or the acceptance of the stands as proposed. The fire districts whose territorial boundaries these sale stands have been placed in the past have always expressed their dislike of fire -works in general yet no formal protest has been made. The stands have not presented any problems for this office nor the fire districts such as fires in the booths. Once or twice there has been fires occur in the areas around the stands, in grasses dried out by the summers heat. This seasons extra rain falls have generated growth in the natural vegetation through out Grant County which present a greater -- fuel load for grass or wild land fires then many previous seasons. Because there is such a large fuel load in the vegetation this year I make the following request. "For the 1993 season which fire works are allowed to be sold and used by State Law, I request no sales permits be authorized with in the unincorporated areas of Grant County. The use of fire -works should also not be allowed if the conditions that exist prior and during the season for which the law provides, if we experience extremely dry periods prior to July 1st. Washington State law allows these decisions to be made by the local authorities. I believe the sales with in the unincorporated areas are unnecessary because several cities allow sales. The cities are less likely to have fires around the stands, that may occur because of fire -works use. By acting now against the probable permits we allow the sponsors time to evaluate locations with in the cities or towns, if allowed, We take a stand against the fire causes that may occur, or at minimum reduce the known threat that fire -works are. Yesl, fire works have always been a part of the .American celebration of our independence. They have been in the past and most likely will be allowed in the future. I do not want to take any part of this heritage away. The truth is that a few who are careless take the spirit of the celebration with fires caused P.O. BOX 37 * EPHRATA, WA 98823 wxtYh unsafe handling of the fire -works. For children inured and those who must respond to fires that should never occur if safe practices were used, they loose by default. The Board of County Commissioners may allow or deny a fire- works permit as provided by RCW 70.77. The need for an early decision is to allow change of the applicants permit from the state, not less than :Tune 1st. The closure of the unincorporated areas of the county from fire works use should be made with a declaration of a burning ban with specific wording for the use of fireworks. The timing of this action should be not less than one week prior to July 4th, in order to make public notification through the media. Thank you Sam H. Lorenz Fire Marshal vn RETURN TO: WASHINGTON STATE LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD License Division - 1025 E. Union, P.;. Ecx 43075 Olynpia, W,, 98504-3075 TO: GRANT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RE: NEW APPLICATION License: 077969 - 5E County: 13 Tradename: OGDEN ENTERTAINMENT SERVICES Loc Addr: 754 ROAD W NW QUINCY WA 98848 Mail Addr: 2 PENNSYLVANIA PLAZA NEW YORK NY 10121 Phone No.: 212-868-6000 Classes Applied For: A Restaurant or dining place - Beer on premises C wine on premises DATE: 5121/93 APPLICANTS: OGDEN ENTERTAINMENT SERVICES, INC. ABLON, RALPH RICHARD 10-07-49 105-36-6713 ALLEN, PETER 11-30-36 130-28-4519 DI GIA, ROBERT M 08-24-24 103-12-5250 GOLDEN SERVICE CORP. (100% STOCKHOLDER) Notice is given that application has been made to the Washington State Liquor Control Board for a licen e to conduct business. If return of this notice is not received in this office within 20 DAYS0 0 days notice given for Class I� from the date above, it x111 be assumed that you have no objection to the issuance of the license. If additional time is required please advise. YES NO 1. Do you approve of applicant ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �E' ❑ 2. Do you approve of location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ❑ �' 3. If you disapprove and the Board contemplates issuing a license, do you want- a shearing before final action is taken ? ❑ OPTIONAL CHECK LIST: !EXPLANATION LAN ENFORCEMENT HEALTH I SANITATION FIRE, BUILDING, ZONING OTHER YES NO ❑ If you have indicated disapproval of the applicant, location or both, please submit a statenent cf all facts upon which such objections are based. DATE SIGNATURE OF MAYOR,CITY MANAGER(C6UNTY-COMMISSIONERS 'R DESIGNEE C1400451LIBRIMS GRANT COUNTY OFFICE OF ,BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. r` POST OFFICE BOX -37", EPHRATA;'WASHINGTON "0892'0! 65081 7$4.2011' ti 74 r rl,•� - e.`.- f t5. •1'.r ' ... ... .I •`ill �f. • May 24,1993 . Washington State Liquor'Control -Board License Division P.O.Box 43075 Olympia,WA 98504-3075 +- xi:REO den Entertainment Services Application • .. "� • .. a '�I"�',ar`' k `r . ,- Dear Sirs: We are in receipt of the application made by Ogden,ter,iiinment S�rv�+cesf+�r, ay7 <• and wine garden at the Chumps de Bn'onne W�nefiyl! hithlaterr cis ` ytr met with Mr. Hoen representing Ogden AAeees and have reviewed t : . P 9 , 9 Entertainment::,, printed material. I was impressed with Mr. Hoen's prtii�d the' < 'fain ..•=c they are probably a credible organization. However, three weeks before the announcement of the. Lalapalo©za•concert which is to: bring 25,000 people into our County, the Bryants assured us that 12,000 to 18,000, et: any one concert would be an absolute maximum. Therefore, we feel that the County, -: MCA(the promoter) and the Washington State Patrol need an opportunity to prove that',;; we either can or cannot cope with all these extra people, without the added complication of alcohol being sold on the premises. If it is successful, "within reason, then we would-..*,', consider giving our approval to this type of activity: We would appreciate the support of the Liquor Control Beard in this matter: " Please.-. '" ' . understand that this promoter is new to us, and has' made many assurances that they . ;': , can and will help us to handle crowds of this magnitude, ,but they haven't yet had the opportunity to prove it to us. TIM SNEAD HELEN FANCHER SID WINZLER DISTRICT 1 DISTRICT 3 DISTRICT 2 2644 RD. F NE 1020 RD. S NW - 4414 LAKESHORE DR. " MOSES LAKE. WA 98837 OUINCY. WA 98848 MOSES LAKE, WA 96897 - RHONE 765.9548 Pf10NE 787.4731 PRONE 765.8001 5 REQUEST FOR TRANSFER DUE TO NECESSARY EXPENDITURES UNFORESEEN AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL OF THE 19933 BUDGET, IT IS REQUEL TED BY THE LAW AND JUSTICE DEPT. # 163 , LAW AND JUSTICE FUND # 121 THAT THE FOLLOWING TRANSFERS WITHIN THE SAME BUDGET BE MADE. FROM: BARS CODE AMOUNT OPERATING RENTALS AND LEASES 117-527.60.45.00 $3,640.00 TOTAL-FROM3.6t�Q.00 _ TO: OFFICE & OPERATING SUPPLIES 117-527.60.41.00 $ 864.00 SMALL TOOLS/MINOR EQUIP. 117-527.60.35.00 1,450.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 117.527.60.41.00 52.00 CAPITAL OUTLAY-MACH.&EQUIP. 117-594.27.64.00 1,274.00 TOTAL -TO $_3_lbAIl_on ; DETAILED EXPLANATION TO RE -ALLOCATE APPROPRIATIONS NOT NEEDED IN RENT TO OTHER AREAS OF COST ASSOCIATED WITH THE MOSES LAKE OFFICE. DEPARTMENT HEAD HAVING APPROVED THE ABOVE TRANSFERS, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AUTHORIZES THE COUNTY AUDITOR TO EXCUTE SAID TRANSFER TO BE EFFECTIVE THIS DATE. DATED THIS 24rh DAY OF Ma17 ,19 9� . ORIGINAL -COMMISSIONERS COPY 1 -AUDITOR COPY 2 -REQUESTING DEPARTMENT COMMISSIONERS BRANT COUNTY ` JUVENILE PRobATION dEPARTMENT SUPERIOR COURT Of ThE STATE OF WAShiNgTON To: Grant County Commissioners Helen Fanch, Chair Sid Winzler Tim Snead From: Grant County Juvenile Court ROBERT J. CORNWELL AdpArwsTRATOR of Juvoift COURT SERVICES HowwAbIE EVAN E. SPERLINE. JudgE ft4m WE KENNETH L. JORGENSEN, Judrg Hamm" JAMES R. BROWN COURT COMMISSIONER Date: 5/4/93 Re: 1993 Criminal Justice Fund Budget Request Item #9 - Rental of Moses Lake office for use by probation staff and treatment groups. On 3/8/93 the Commissioners approved the allocation of $5,000.00 for the rental of office space in Moses Lake. Effective 5/1/93, we began rental of the office at the rate of $545.00 / month. For the remainder of the year the total cost for this rental will be $4,360.00. We are requesting the remaining balance of $3,640.00 to be allocated to e� provide for telephones, cleaning supplies and reasonable furnishings for the office to p accomodate its operations. V r Respectfully submitted, ;' a Greg A. Eframmer, Asst. Admin. V:: Commissioner ]ComL*ssionei Commissioner Date: POST 01110E BOX 5 • EPtIRATA. WASMINC,TON 98823 - (509) 754-2011. EXT. 350 5/18/93 FURNISHINGS ESTIMATE MOSES LAKE OFFICE # ITEM COLOR VENDOR PRICE SUB -TOTAL 2 HON 30 x 60 Metal Desk"' Tropic Sand Haley's $244.89 $489.78 2.HON Right Hand Return•" Tropic Sand Haley's $169.00 $338.00 3 HON 7901 Chair '• Black Haley's $125.00 $375.00 2 40 x 60 Chair Mat w/Lip" Haley's $40.29 $80.58 2 41 Qt. Wastebasket' Gray Haley's $6.52 $13.04 2 28 Qt. Wastebasket' Gray Haley's $3.15 i $6.30 1 72" Storage Cabinet' • Light Gray Haley's $179.00 $179.00 1 Video Storage Cabinet' Med. Oak National $358.00 G $358.00 20 Stacking Chairs" WA State $35.00 I $700.00 1 Telephone" Joe Braun $13.95 $13.95 1 Telephone Installation"" PNB $48.00 { $48.00 1 Office Supplies' Miscellaneous $784.40 j $784.40 i $0.00 TOTAL I $3,386.05 + TAX { $253.95 4GRAND TOTAL I $3,640.00 I CAPITAL OUTLAY 594.27.64.00 $1,274.71 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1527.60.41.00 $51.60 " OFFICE EQUIPMENT 527.60.35.00 $1,449.67 ' SUPPLIES 527.60.31.00 1 $864.02 REQUEST FOR TRANSFER yDUE TO NECESSARY EXPENDITURES UNFORESEEN AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET, IT IS REQUESTED BY THE ZAV/ 'IV5)79V DEPT . # ,/G 3 , Gi�l�/ ✓'7/T/G FUND # THAT THE s FOLLOWING TRANSFERS WITHIN THE SAME BUDGET BE MADE. FROM: TO: BARS CODE //17-5-,77Co, ip"', -l'wwlow'OV4 5MIIAI�� 7Z�!�5'-�oln'for I&-�-51511 lA14/5�v �6";%&a17- `�WlIg- TOTAL -FROM i/,7-5111,1�0 3i ca 17/7 S Z, d4 35.4a iii 5ZI7, 6j-. TOTAL -TO AMOUNT 3, d;a 57 z��� DETAILED EXPLANATION 0 Z:37~ A/lpw"O'a� � NtO!5�" &1 - DEPARTMENT HEAD HAVING APPROVED THE ABOVE TRANSFERS, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AUTHORIZES THE COUNTY AUDITOR TO EXCUTE SAID TRANSFER TO BE EFFECTIVE THIS DATE. DATED THIS DAY OF ,19 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ORIGINAL -COMMISSIONERS COPY 1 -AUDITOR CHAIRMAN COPY 2 -REQUESTING DEPARTMENT GRANT COUNTY NOTICE OF SEPAP,ATI(TN OR `rJOR:C I.F=UT TION DATE �' / 7, NAA-;�i� _ /l J f 1 �✓ l�. D °ARTNiE."NI` mLnta1. hatth POSITION CrLLS 5e l ( }FULL TIME ( } PART TIME DATE EMPLOYED % ' I J / LAST DAY WORKED" : I, TEEZMINATION DATE REASON FOR TERMINATION: (�) ESIGNATION{ }RETIll lI r ( )DISABILITY )DISCHARGE ( )LAYOFF ( ) TEMPORARY SUSPENSION ( ) LEAVE OF .'ABSENCE EXPLANhTION , ry-o.mLL,,� IF RESIGIZATIO-J, DOES THE EMPLOYEE fiAVE OTHER EMPLOYMENT (-,.-,)YES ( ) No IF YES, NAME OF NEW LXPLOYER (OPTIONAL) SIGNED / ti(i TITTLE (FIB= OFFICIAL,/DEPART141ENT FEAD) (ACCOUNTING/DEPARTM.z2NTT ONLY) apLOY= SOCIAL SECURITY NO. 63a- 76 333 3 ? PAYROLL No. DEPAR �'MENT NO. RFFTIlt0SENT PLAN Pews NUMSER OF UNUSED VACATION DAYS ,:OURS NUMBED. OF "ELIGIBLE" UNUSED SICK DAYS/HOURS ENDING MON'_"HIMY SALARY G gj 2 0 `33 SIGNATUREZ4Z�L'� (CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS) GRA!,Tr COUNTY 1 !JO1'ICE OF SEPAP.ATI(YN OR WORX I�UE RRU'_'TION DATE :��., 1�.r dQ W a, f I<�/l' _ Dov , j� Qr�tSd�L. Q- POSITION (�J`� ! / �C.C�✓( ( x } FlT,d, TIME ( }^ PART TL -4E DATE EMPLOYED ( I Q "" -1 a� LAST DAY WORKED `�1 " d � � ( 3 TERMINATION DATE '[ " �9 3 r REASON FOR T-7RMINATION: ( A RESIGNATION ( ) RETLR�T ( ) DISABILITY ( ) DISCHARGE ( ) LAYOFF ( ) Ta4PORARY SUSPE1ISION ( ) LEAVE OF ABSENCE ( ) OTHM- EXPLAANATION, M t)V r/l A l Jct c r ' 1%j I6ob. - ?F RESIGI1ATIO:V, DOES THE EMPLOYEE HAVE OTHER EMPLOY.MENT ( ) YES ( ) :c IF YES, N: -IE OF NEW EMPLOYER (OPTIONAL) TIT'S �!'( (.ELECTED OFFICIAL/ DEPARTMENT FAD) (ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENT ONLY) a,PLO= SOCIAL, SECURITY NO. �3� -'`7q - g735j PAYROLL N0. 1861 DEPARTMENT NO.(�� "! RETIREMENT PLAN NUAiBER OF UNUSED VP_CATION DAY :OURS NUNiBEP. OF "ELIGIBLE" UNUSED SICK DAYS/HOURS ENDING MONTHLY SALARY 4), 553. � r SIGNA ( , BOARD OF COUNTY COMISSIONERS) I� WILLIAM A. WIESTER, SHERIFF GRANT COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE. MAX HEALY P.O. SOX 37 PHONE: (509) 754.201 1 Undersheriff Ephrata, WA 98828 (800) 572-0119 LARI DAHL Administrative Assistant FAX: (509) 754.2058 MAY 24, 1993 Pf dECEI V ED FILE NO F3015—JAIL 1993 MAY 2 4 9993 �u Ur CGLWISSIONERS GRANT COUNT`,; WASHINGTON GRANT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GRANT COUNTY COURTHOUSE EPHRATA, WASHINGTON 98823 COMMISSIONERS: REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN A PRISONER TRUST REVOLVING FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF $250.00. THE FUND WOULD BE L1:nED TO PAY SMALL AMOUNTS ($10.00 OR LESS) TO PRISONERS BEING RELEASED FROM CUSTODY WITHOUT THE NECESSITY OF WRITING CHECKS. THE ACCOUNT WOULD BE REIMBURSED ON A MONTHLY BASIS FROM THE PRISONER WELFARE ACCOUNT, AND MONITORED BY THE CORRECTION FACILITIES SERGEANT AND CAPTAIN. THIS IS WITH THE APPROVAL OF BOB MOSHER AND THE STATE AUDITOR. SINCERELY, WILLIAM A. WIESTER GRANT COUNTY SHERIFF BY: JOHN JUROVICH CHIEF DEPUTY COMM_L5--x-ION CHAIRMAN FANCHER LtS YO SERI SNEAD COMMISSIONER WlUf-LER ' PSNINGTO r CITY OF TREPMONE j509j 246-1211 FAx (509) 246-1213 �^- �`�{ T h R E,SQQ►' May 20, 1993 SOAP LAKE P.O. BOX 1270 SOAP LAKE, WASHINGTON 98851 RECEIVED MAY 2 1 1993 bi ;F tU Ut CC:,.111Sa10NERS GRANT COUNT i, WASHINGTON Grant County Commissioners P.O. Box 37 Ephrata, WA 98823 RE: Resolution No. 447 The City Council approved the Interlocal Agreement for Housing Need Assessment and Community Development Block Grant Responsibilities. I am enclosing a copy of the Resolution and signed agreement. Councilmember Richard E. Boylan was appointed as the contact person for the City of Soap Lake. Mr. Boylan's address is: P.Q. Box 26, Soap Lake, WA 98851. His home phone is 246-1460, and his work phone is 754-5190. If you need more information on this matter, you can reach me at Soap Lake City Hall. Sincerely, CITY OF SOAP LAKE SHIRLEY L. ROBERSON CITY CLERK r 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SOAP LAKE, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CLERK TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF SOAP LAKE, WASHINGTON, as follows: That the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and instructed to enter into the Contract attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Soap Lake, Washington, this _( ' day of 199?. THE CITY OF SOAP LAKE, WASHINGTON ATTEST: ity Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Cm&-&ei Q - r' INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR HOUSING NEED ASSESSMENT AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT RESPONSIBILITIES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 1993 by and between Grant County, City of Ephrata, Town of George, City of Moses Lake, City of Quincy, City of Royal City, City of Soap Lake, City of Warden, Town of Mattawa, City of Grand Coulee, City of Coulee City, City of Electric City, City of Coulee Dam, Town of Krupp, Town of Wilson Creek, hereinafter referred to as the "Jurisdictions", as well as the Grant County E.D.C. and the Housing Authority of Grant County. WHEREAS, the Jurisdictions share a common planning need to develop a Housing Needs Assessment and Plan for Affordable Housing; and WHEREAS, the Jurisdictions wish to seek cooperative solutions to the problems of housing; and WHEREAS, the Jurisdictions will. establish local housing committees and appoint a representative to serve -on a County -wide Housing Task Force; and WHEREAS, Grant County and the participating municipalities are eligible small city CDBG jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the Jurisdictions would benefit from applying for and administering a CDBG Planning -Only Grant to undertake a Housing Needs Assessment and prepare a Plan for.Affordable Housing; and WHEREAS, the Interlocal Cooperation Act contained in RCW 39.34 authorizes local government to contract for the conduct of activities which each party has the authority to perform; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms, conditions, covenants, and performance contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follows: I. LEAD JURISDICTION DESIGNATION Grant County will be the lead jurisdiction during the application and planning project period. The Chair of the Grant County Commissioners is authorized to sign for the CDBG Planning -Only Grant application. II. RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED A. The Housing Authority of Grant County will be the legal and responsible party in completing the grant progress and close-out reports, and financial claims and disbursement of funds from the CDBG Grant. Total funds available for Interlocal Agreement Page 1 r ' 'r disbursement to the Jurisdictions are as authorized in the 1993 CDBG Planning -Only Grant application. B. The Jurisdictions have designated the Grant County Economic Development Council to provide assistance in conducting the planning activities. III. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES The roles and responsibilities of the Jurisdictions are as follows: ' A detailed Work Plan, Expected Products, and Time Frames will be authorized in the 1993 CDBG Planning -Only Grant application. IV. PRODUCT AND TARGET AREA DEFINED The products to be created as a result of this Interlocal Agreement and application of CDBG Planning -Only funds will be a Needs Assessment Report, Citizen Participation Plan and an Affordable Housing Plan for .the Grant County area. V. TIME FRAMES The beginning date of this Agreement will be the date the last Jurisdiction's Resolution is passed. The proposed planning activities will be developed by the Housing Task .Force and undertaken simultaneously with the execution of grant*- documents with the Washington State Department of Community Development, hereinafter referred to as"DCD". The end date for. completing the planning project to be ready for governing body review and approval will be identified in the.project work program. CDBG contract close-out is to occur at a date specified by.DCD. VI. PLANNING PROJECT ACCOUNT The Housing Authority of Grant County will be, the jurisdiction responsible for maintaining the grant account in accordance with CDBG Planning -Only Grant accounting requirements. A separate fund will be set up according to the rules expressed in the BARS manual and the Washington State Auditors Office. VII. DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY Disposition of acquired property shall be in accordance with CDBG Planning -Only Grant requirements. VIII.CONTRACT CONDITIONS As a condition of this intergovernmental agreement, the jurisdictions will comply with federal and state regulations when carrying out the CDBG Planning -Only Grant contract. IX. REVISION OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT In the event that full anticipated Planning -Only Grant does not occur, then and conditions of this Agreement will be funding from the CDBG the scope of services revised. Interlocal Agreement Page 2 X. HOLD HARMLESS All services to be accomplished under this Agreement will be performed by the responsible jurisdiction at its own risk. The Jurisdictions expressly agree to hold each other harmless from any liabilities or damages resulting from the negligence of the responsible party. XI. INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS Any duly authorized representatives of the Jurisdictions shall have the right to inspect the records related to CDBG Planning -Only Grant or this Intergovernmental Agreement upon ten (10) days prior notice. XII. NON -WAIVER OF RIGHTS The parties agree that the forgiveness of the non- performance of any provision of the Agreement does not constitute a waiver of the provision of this Agreement. XIII.MODIFICATIONS Any modifications of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be signed by all parties. XIV. TERMINATION Failure to substantially comply with any of the provisions stated herein shall constitute a material breach of contract and cause for termination. Upon a material breach by another party, a party may terminate this Agreement at any time after giving thirty (30) days notice thereof. This Agreement may also be terminated during the duration of the Agreement in whole or in part by mutual agreement of the parties. Any termination by mutual agreement shall be in writing and shall set forth the conditions of termination including the effective date and in case of termination in part, that portion to be terminated. XV. SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES Disputes regarding interpretation of coverage of this Agreement may be resolved by arbitration of any. means deemed appropriate by the parties. XVI. JURISDICTIONS A. This Agreement has been and shall be construed as having been made and delivered within the State of Washington, and it is agreed by all parties hereto that this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington, both as to interpretations and performance. B. Any action of law, suit in equity, or judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Agreement or any provisions thereof, shall be instituted and maintained only in any of the courts of competent jurisdiction in Grant County. Interlocal Agreement Page 3 XVII.SEVERABILITY A. It is understood and agreed by the parties hereto that if any part, term or provision of this Agreement is held by the courts to be illegal, the validity of the remaining provisions shall not be affected, and the rights and obligations of the parties shall be construed and enforced as if the Agreement did not contain the particular provision held to be invalid. B. If it should appear that any part, term or provision thereof is in conflict with any statutory provision of the State of Washington, said part, term or provision which may conflict therewith shall be deemed modified to _conform to such statutory provision. XVIII.ENTIRE AGREEMENT The parties agree that this Agreement is the complete expression of the terms hereto and any oral representations. or understandings not incorporated herein are excluded. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed this day of , 1993...,. Grant County Town of George City of Quincy City of Soaptake-7--- Town of Mattawa City of Coulee City City of Coulee Dam Town of Wilson Creek Housing Authority of Grant County City of Ephrata City of Moses Lake City of Royal City City of Warden City of Grand Coulee City of Electric City Town of Krupp Grant County E.D.C. I MAY 17, 1993 TO: GRANT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: DARRYL PHEASANT GRANT COUNTY TREASURER RE: JUNE TREASURER'S CONFERENCE Grant County is hosting the annual Washington State Association of County Treasurers (WSACT) conference in Moses Lake at the Hallmark Inn on June 15-18, 1993. Wednesday evening, June 16th, we are having a Western BBQ at the Fairgrounds starting at 7:30 pm. Depending on the weather, the picnic will bee held either behind the Grange Hall in the picnic area outside or inside the first building across the road from the Grange Hall. The association extends an invitation to the Grant County Commissioners to join us Wednesday evening at 7:30 pm. The cost would be $12.00 per person. Texas Johns is catering and legislators Mick Hansen, Gary Chandler, George Sellars and Dale Foreman have informed me that they intend to be present. I hope that all of you can fit this into your schedule. I have one problem that needs your assistance though. For our picnic, the Fair office is requiring that we have insurance coverage which our association does not have. Would you consider having the County sponsor the Associations Western BBQ and be under the County's insurance umbrella? Thanks for your consideration. Board of, Cat+^t,-! Commissioners Grant Count;, ,v"soincyton Approve Disapprove Dist. #1. Dist. #1 — Dist. #2 Dist. #2 ,,,_. Dist. 42�� Dist. #3._._._.. RECEIVED MAY 17 1993 BOARD OF COMM..,__.,,. GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE I Description of proposal Grant County Resource Lands and Critical Areas Development Ordinance, Proponent Grant County Location of Proposal All non -municipal parcels within the Corporate Limits of the County of Grant. Lead Agency is Grant County The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. And environmental impact statement (E.I.S.) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030 (2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. There is no continent period for this D.N.S. XXX This Determination of Non -Significance is issued under 197-11340 (2). The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by y'� DONE THIS ��_DAY OF/ . 1993 CHAIRMAN Board of County Commissioners P.O. Box 37 Ephrata, Wa. 98823 Phone (509) 754-2011 GRANT COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 35 C Street N.W. Post Office Box 37 MICHAEL A. MURRAY, P.E. Ephrata, Washington 98823 Director of Public Works 509/754-2011 and County Engineer DAVID N. HEILMAN Assistant Director of Public Works and County Engineer ,r COMMISSIONERS AGENDA May 25, 1993 Serial No. 10:00 - RID (Creation Resolution) Les Parr - Road Requirements (Short Plat) Bid Award Recommendation - Auctioneering Services Request to Purchase Pick-up - Royal City Request for Reimbursable Work - Hartline CRP Resolution - Dover Street Project Agreement - Bridge #104 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 1994 to 1999 4 Georg Buchheim Mayor Anita Sather Finance Director May 6, 1993 Mike Murry Grant County Public Works P.O. Box 37 Ephrata, Wa 98823 Dear Mike, Noel Ballinger NOYAL CITY Police Chief P.O. Box 177, Royal City, WA 99357 James Montgomery Office: 509-346-2263 • Police 346-2212 Public Works Fax: 509-346-2040 IN \n RECEIVE( MAY 10 1993 GRAW Cu. E uc,uV vrutikS The City of Royal City request the purchase of x/302, 1989 Ford pick-up. VIFTEFI5YOKPA88776, for the price of $3,037.50. if—you have any questions please call. Georg Buchheim Mayor GRANT COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 35 C Street N.W. Post Office Box 37 MICHAEL A. MURRAY, P.E. Ephrata, Washington 98823 Director of Public Works 509/754-2011 and County Engineer DAVID N. HEILMAN May 21 1993 Assistant Director of Public Works and County Engineer Serial No. 93-320 1� A1C/ �e Board of County Commissioners � o Grant County Courthouse P. Q. Box 37 Ephrata, Washington 98837 Subject: Bid Award - Auctioneering Services Honorable Board County Commissioners: The Surplus Auction Committee met on May 21, 1993 for the purpose of making recommendation .for award of bids. The Auction Committee recommends that Grant County award the bid to Northwest Auction Company as the low bidder. V truly yours, Duane . Pugh. Coordinator Auction Sales Committee DSP:ams DATE 05/.24/93 Grant County, Washington PAGE TIME 13:05:08 PAYMENT APPROVAL. LISTING PAYL.0, PAYMENTS TO BE: PROCESSED 00/00/00 THRU 05/24/93 PAY a VOUCHER VENDOR ACCOUNT INVOICE INV DATE PAYMENT- DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CH VOUCHERS AUDITED AND CERTIFIED BY THE AUDITING OFFICER AS REQUIRED BY RCW 42.64.08(3, AND THOSE EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT CLAIMS CERTIFIED AS REQUIRED %Y RCW 42.24.09'0, HAVE BEEN RECORDED ON A LISTING WHICH HAS BEEN MADE AVAILABLE TO THE BOARD AS OF THIS DATE 05/24/93 THE BOARD BY A MAJORITY VOTE: DOES AP'P'ROVE FOR PAYMENT THOSE VOUCHERS INCLUDED IN THE: ABOVE LIST BY FUND DEPARTMENT AND PROGRAM EXCEPT AS NOTED BELOW. VOUCHER TOTAL. IS $115,072.75 -------------- _ _____.___-_ --_....-__......._.___--- COMMISSION R COMMISSIONER l r CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS VOUCHERS NOT APPROVED LiRY FUND/PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. PERIOD ENDING 05, 31/193 Y 25, 1993 7:01:55 CHECK BATE 05,E 2 /';G? SLD510 PAGE 2 P A Y R O L L .J 0 U R N A L ! Ak,IES AND CLAIMS FUND **"** Z- A C C O U N T E A R N I N G S D E D U C T I O N S ** NET ** CHECK ,* NAME *** c******* ----------------------------- *** TYPE—*-****** ------------- HOURS *** ---------------- RATE *** AMOUNT --------- TYPE ***?1:*** AMOUNT ?K ?KW PAY * K 4, NUMBER �k TOTAL 0.00 2560.17 ------------------------ 0.00 ---------- 2560.17 ------ 562 28 GRANT NATIONAL BANK 10 FLOAT HOL., 0.00 100,00 TOTAL 0.00 100.00, 0.00 10LJi.00 563 GRAND TOTAL 0.00 66729.7? 0.00 66729.79 PUBLIC -WORK S—DIREC - - - - - - - - - - - ---------- -- COUNTY ROAD ENGINEER DO HEREBY SAY: THAT THE SERVICES MENTIONED IN THE ABOVE PAYROLL HAVE ACTUALCY'BEEN RENDERED AS—THEREIN—CHARGED; THAT THE SAME ARE TRUE AND CORRECT AND THAT THE SAME OR ANY PART THEREOF HAS NOT BEEN PAID. ORDERED PAID BY DATE /��- - - -- l' ------------ CHAIRMAN fL/ COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER GRANT COUNTY OFFICE OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS POST OFFICE BOX 37 EPHRATA. WASHINGTON,90aaa. 13001 754.2011 May 25,1993 Mr. Martell Palmer - 14600 Road 1 NE ; Moses Lake,WA 98637 Dear Mr. Palmer: The Grant County Commissioners are pleased to appotnt,you to a position on,the Grant County Planning Commission. we feel that this is avlpwj i ,ft— Commission and that.. you . will be a good addition to the group. We tharllk'% fi r yptlr willir gnus. 'ta %w ai �... and look forward to working with you in the future. 0014wmx rall, the County Running Department Director will be contacting you concerting• meeting times' and. other ; information. Thank you again. Sincerely, _. Chairman s. SW/ pg TIM SNEAD HELEN FANCHER SID WINZLER • DISTRICT 1 DISTRICT 3 DISTRICT 2 2644 RD. F NE 1020 RD. S NW 4414 WCESHORE DR. MOSES LAKE. WA 96837 OUINCY. WA 98848 MOSES LAKE. WA 68837 PHONE 7659548 PHONE 7674731 PHONE 765.8001 .. - GRANT COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE WILLIAM A. WIESTER, SHERIFF P.O. BOX 37 PHONE: (509) 754-2011 EPHRATA, WASHINGTON 98823 MAY 19, 1993 FILE NO F3015 -JAIL -1993 GRANT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GRANT COUNTY COURTHOUSE EPHRATA, WASHINGTON 98823 COMMISSIONERS: RECEIVED MAY 2 5 1993 GG I h'11bSIONERS GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON PLEASE CONSIDER THIS MY OFFICIAL REQUEST FOR $3,600.00 FROM LAW AND JUSTICE FUNDS FOR MATERIALS TO RENOVATE THE BUNKS IN THE JAIL. THIS WILL ELIMINATE THE STEEL RODS THE PRISONERS ARE USING TO BURROW THROUGH THE WALLS OF THE JAIL. YOUR CONSIDERATION ON THIS IS GREATLY APPRECIATED. � SINCERELY, WILLIAM A. WIESTER GRANT COUNTY SHERIFF BY: AX HEALY UNDERSHERIF tag APPROVED: G- y COMMISSIONER FANCHER COMMI55IONE,9 SNEAD COMMISSIONER WIE CIRANT COUNT/ JUVENILE pRobATION dEPARTMENT SUPERIOR COURT Of ThE STATE Of WAShiNCjTON To: Grant County Commissioners Helen Fancher, Chair Sid Winzler Tim Snead From: Grant County Juvenile Court Greg Grammer ROBERT J. CORNWELL AdMINISTRATOR Of JUVENILE COURT SERVICES HoNouble EVAN E. SPERLINE, Judc4E limomble KENNETH L. JORGENSEN, 1udC4E Hcmomble JAMES R. BROWN COURT COMMISSIONER 5/25/93 Re: Capital Outlay Request Computer Lab (CCC - Computer Curriculum Corporation) I am requesting approval of funds totalling $20,$13.91 for the purchase of three computers and CCC software to establish a learning lab within our school. These funds will be partially matched by Ephrata School District funds from Chapter 1 Neglected and Delinquent youth funds, State Institution funds, and Supplies and Services funds provided to us through the Ephrata School District and the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI). Attached ease find bid is from CCC and North Central. ESD as to total costs, and an ite d list as toe ditures by agency. ,R,e/s�p,-'c-tf.ully sub 'tted, e Grep- A Grammer k��/ Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Date: /'S POST COUICE Box 5 • EPhRATA. WAShiNCyTON 98823 • (509) 754-2011, ExT. 350 Computer Curriculum Corporation 05/05/93 P R 0 J ECT COST EST I MAT E EXHIBIT A FIRST YEAR COST Client Number: 10001259 Ship To: 10001260 EPHRATA SCHOOL DISTRICT EPHRATA SCHOOL DISTRICT 499 C STREET NW 499 C STREET NW DENNIS GUTHRIE DENNIS GUTHRIE EPHRATA, WA 98823 EPHRATA, WA 98823 Quote # 5000422 Reference # 1 LAB - 32 STATIONS FULL CURRICULUM WITH ESL CCC Product Vendor P/N Description Qty Price Extension -> CCC Hardware Charges 95-93360-001 95-96972-001 -> License Fees 95-93369-002 AUDIO HEADSET MKTG DISCOUNT -SOFTWARE SOLO 1TIME S/W C/W IBM -> Annual Maintenance Charges 95-91170-424 SOLO HOTLINE -> Publication Materials 95-96916-001 -> Training 95-98209-000 SOLO PUBLICATIONS PKG TRAINING -CLASSROOM -BAS 4 35.00 1 140.00 SubTotaL 4 3000.00 SubTotaL 4 125.00 SubTotaL 140.00 -140.00 0.00 12000.00 12000.00 500.00 500.00 4 260.00 1040.00 SubTotaL 1040.00 1 1200.00 1200.00 SubTotaL 1200.00 GRAND TOTAL 14740.00 TRAINING OF $1200 FOR 4 SOLOS IS APPROVED PER RUBY BURNELL SOFTWARE IS ON CO ROM DISK Add sales tax where applicable. ......................... I..... This quote shall remain valid for a 90 day period. To: Greg Grammer Option 2-7-enith 486SX/25 with 170 MB Hard Drive Description Quantity Unit Price Total Price Zenith Z-400+ desktop computer. 4 $2,430.00 $9,720.00. 486SX/25 25 Mhz. (1). 170 megabyte IDE hard drive. (2).4 melts of RAM @ 70 nanoseconds. Expandable to 64 melts on system board. (3). 3.5" high density floppy drive. (4). Video: Local -Bus SVGA 14" color high resolution monitor. True color video for photo realistic clarity. (5). Novell compatible & tested. (6). Adaptec SCSI controller card. (7). CD-ROM installed (internal) (8). SoundBlaster Pro audio card installed & tested. (9). One year warranty and next day service from Groupe Bulle (Zenith's on-site service division). (10).30 day money back guarantee. Extra features: 1. Socket for an Intel OverDrive processor. 2. ZIF (Zero Insertion Force) socket for ease of upgrading. Tax: $767.88 Setup and install machine, audio $1,607.12 cards and software and miscellaneous items. Hardware Total: $12,095.00 CCC Total: $15,904.46 Grand Total: $27,999.46 r 1. SCHOOL.XLS EPHRATA SCHOOL DIST. AMOUNT Machine -1 $2,430.00 Instructional Publications $1,040.00 Training $1,200.00 Maintenance $500.00 Sub -Total $5,170.00 Tax $408.43 Set Up $1,607.12 TOTAL FUNDS $7,185.55 GRANT COUNTY AMOUNT Machines -3 Software Sub -Total Tax $7,290.00 $12,000.00 $19,290.00 $1,523.91 TOTAL FUNDS $20,813.91 TOTAL EXPENSE $27,999.46 Page 1