Meeting Summary Planning Unit WRIA 56 Hangman (Latah) Creek Local Watershed Plan February 17, 2004 Chair: Walt Edelen, Spokane County Conservation District (SCCD) Present: Gary Ostheller, Fairfield Triangle Grange Doug Allen, Ecology Bryony Stasney, Golder Associates Jilla Harmon, SCCD Minutes Walt asked for any additional corrections or comments to the January 20, 2004 meeting minutes that were distributed at the previous meeting on February 9, 2004. There were no additional changes and the minutes were approved with the changes suggested at the February 9th meeting. Open Discussion/Public Comment Walt distributed updated copies of the Request for Proposals for the Multipurpose Storage Proposal to study Hangman Creek. The deadline for the submission of sealed proposals was listed as March 19, 2004. Further discussion led to the change of the submittal date to March 12, 2004 (4:30 p.m.). The “Basis For Acceptance” section on page 3 was discussed and changed to – “The proposal that is most advantageous to the Planning Unit will be selected, considering price and other factors. Preference will be given to proposals that adequately cover the scope of work and feature additional information given funding and time constraints.” Not available yet. It should be completed this week and Walt will e-mail it to the Planning Unit when it is finished. Watershed Issues/Recommendations Habitat/Land Use ii) Riparian area and flood plain encroachment continues to occur throughout the basin (rural and urban). (1) Recommendation(s): (a) Reassess setbacks for new construction. Reanette Boese read the shoreline definition from the Shoreline Regulations found in the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan. Reanette will ask Bill Moser, at the County Office, to see what the limitations or baseline is for the Hangman Creek. b) Greenbelts or conservancy corridors should be utilized to reduce damage. The Planning Unit discussed going beyond just “utilized”. CHANGE “utilized” to “established”. c) Prohibit residential and commercial development within “flood plain and associated meander belt.” NOTE: It was suggested that we include the meander belt map that is found in the Hangman Creek Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan document as part of the final recommendation report. d) No comments or changes e) No comments or changes There was some discussion regarding the enforcement of these regulations. Bill Rickard suggested that the planning unit review the current levels of enforcement. CHANGE--Need to expand beyond developers to include other targets. The Planning Unit was asked to think about what those other targets would be and it will be discussed at a later meeting. h) Develop and implement a flood warning system and response plan There was some discussion regarding the “Storm Ready” signs that are posted in Rockford and Waverly. Walt and Rick will find out what the signs indicate. i) Develop County tax incentive plan Bill suggested ADDING a couple of funding mechanisms to this recommendation: a) A petition to dedicate a certain amount of the County Conservation Futures to Riparian Funding b) Establish a local improvement district for Riparian and flood management. This could be a watershed wide establishment for tasking themselves for the purpose of obtaining funds for Riparian easements, flood insurance or possible financing of implementation for storage options c) Develop a cost share program j) No comments or changes k) A long-term riparian enhancement program should be established. ADD l) No comments or changes iii) Fisheries Habitat (1) Recommendation(s): (a) A comprehensive fisheries habitat/species inventory shall be conducted on the mainstem and tributaries CHANGE “should” to “shall” (b) Fish barriers shall be identified and mapped within the mainstem and tributaries. An action plan to eliminate the barriers shall be developed. CHANGE “should” to “shall” Walt reported on the California Creek Fish Barrier Projects. The Conservation District has been working with the DOE, landowners, and WDFW to correct/replace two fish barriers (culverts at Jons Rd and Chapman Rd). ADD (c) Conduct PFC’s (Proper Function Conditions) on the remaining tributaries ADD (d) DNA study for fish habitat (e) What is the potential of the stream’s hydrograph to support the flows required for returning migratory salmonids. ADD (f) Identify what target species would be and what flow they need for certain times of the year. The Planning Unit decided that all acceptable proposals submitted should be available on March 15, 2004 for planning unit review. Walt will have the ranking procedure s available also. Planning Unit members were requested to review and score proposals by Thursday, March 18. The committee will meet on Friday, March 19, 2004 at 1:30pm and select a consultant. Walt asked how the Planning Unit wanted to handle the local priority process ranking for the new 319 Grant Proposals. The SCCD has prepared a proposal to conduct geomorphic stabilization of a reach of Hangman Creek just downstream of California Creek. Walt will send out a brief summary of this grant proposal to the Planning Unit for review. It will be discussed at the next meeting on March 9, 2004. Next Meeting The meeting was adjourned at 12:17 pm.
Bruce Carmack, Rockford
Reanette Boese, Spokane County
Rick Noll, SCCD
Bill Rickard, City of Spokane
Dee Bailey, Coeur d’Alene Tribe
The meeting was called to order at 10:10am and began with introductions. Storage Proposal Status
Quarterly Report
f) Current regulations should be used to the fullest extent possible.
g) Develop public awareness and education program for residents in flood plains and developers.for to encourage buffer establishment.
a) A study for the establishment and economics for Riparian and
upland forestry.
CHANGE (iv) to (e) under Fisheries
Open Discussion/Public Comment
The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, March 9, 2004 at 10:00am – 12:00pm. Another meeting was set for March 23, 2004 from 10:00am – 12:00pm. Both meetings will be held at the SCCD offices.