Commission - Regular Meeting

0:03 – 1:06•DHDan Huls

Good morning, all. I will call the Wednesday, September 16th Board of County Commissioners meeting to order. Chris, will you do roll call, please? CHRIS RODGERS, ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER HOLZ, COMMISSIONER BURROWS, COMMISSIONER CHILPOT, COMMISSIONER BURROWS, COMMISSIONER CHILPOT, COMMISSIONER BURROWS, COMMISSIONER CHILPOT, COMMISSIONER CHILPOT, COMMISSIONER CHILPOT, COMMISSIONER CHILPOT, COMMISSIONER CHILPOT, COMMISSIONER CHILPOT, COMMISSIONER CHILPOT, COMMISSIONER CHILPOT, COMMISSIONER CHILPOT, COMMISSIONER CHILPOT, COMMISSIONER CHILPOT, COMMISSIONER CHILPOT, COMMISSIONER CHILPOT, COMMISSIONER

Do we want to go over it page by page? Mr. Chairman?

2:22•DHDan Huls

Yes, please. We'll go through this so that everybody's clear.

Is that on the introduction page? I always thought, what I thought I had heard before was three was the number that required, is that always been that, at least the unwritten policy was two or more? Thank you. What are you talking about, Joe?

I mean, that's what I've been told, I thought, is when we were having Nate, is as soon as they hit three, that's when we required the road name, and in here it says two or more?

Okay. It was when they added a third. Because I've seen that before where we had that 30-foot split. Then they add another parcel or a family transfer. And when they add that third one, that's when we said, no, now you have to name it. So I've told people three or more. That's what I've been telling people because I've seen that.

in this case, family transfer, they had to rename the road, and that's when they were raising hell about how hard it was gonna be to rename, but I guess I didn't know that. I thought it was our policy of three or more, but it is two or more, and you need to name a road. Okay.

5:26•DHDan Huls

Okay, thanks for the clarification on that.

Just continuing on in the policy, the last sentence, it will be the discretion of GIS whether an approach requires a name or not. So you're going to tell somebody you have to or you don't have to based on what? I mean, it just seems like that is kind of ripe for... It seems like maybe if you had a criteria in there, do you have criteria you'd use for making that determination of whether you're going to make two or more? Is it 30 feet or less?

So behind or the, because those parcels could be. Split through a subdivision or family transfer process.

But a one-acre parcel could be family transfer.

When you say common approach, you mean... right off of three-mile splits versus having any sort of length to it. And that's any sort of length.

That's the certain area you're talking about.

So what about that scenario then in the future? you would say this scenario, no naming, but as soon as they do that, they have to name that or what? This is where this potentially happens right here is we allow them to have a three mile address right here for 10 years. then they, family, and these are just one acre lots, but they say family transfer this, build a little house back here, and you have this sort of weird scenario. Are you going to make them name this road or just for this parcel and they keep their three mile addresses or what happens in this scenario?

Okay. Especially the one that does the family transfer, they did it to themselves. But the other neighbor is even a bigger problem.

This neighbor is really frustrated right here because they're like, I didn't do this. I'm not going to divide mine. But now you're telling me I have to change everything.

I'm just saying, if you take this scenario here, and let's just say each one of these are 50-acre parcels here and here, does that change the situation?

Let's say those, instead of doing one acres, you call them 50 acres, but their houses are right next to the road. They have big hay fields back here that each one's farming. And now all of a sudden it's like, oh, well, I have two kids back here or whatever. Name the road. You're going to make that person name the road as well that has that kind of common approach off there?

I guess that's what I'm asking is what is the future development potential? Is the size of this parcel part of that equation, whether this is one acre or five acres or 10 acres? It has been in the past, yes.

OK. All I'm saying is during my time here, it hasn't happened a lot, but I'll bet it's happened three times at least where I've seen not that exact situation, but something somewhat similar where all of a sudden we come back on them and say, now you need to name the road. And they are really not very happy, especially like Greg said. And it's been this person right here who said, I've lived on this road. I've got an address established. My social security's coming to this address. It's gonna take me six months to get changed through social security, all these things. This is not my, these peop

And is this, are we going back and applying this retroactively? Or is this only if there's a change? So if this situation exists today, we're not going to go out and say you need to name this. It's only if they apply for an alteration permit on a septic or go through some sort of change that would trigger naming that road?

move it would not apply retroactively retroactively it would moving forward so we're not going to go on accesses to make them change something would have to trigger the change to make a name correct okay

Just to clarify a little bit more, what would trigger naming? Septic permitting, alteration, family transfer, or is there anything else that would trigger an approach to be named if there were two houses on a common drive?

So if I have a common driveway, I know where this exists. Main house, so it's a driveway off of a road, let's just say three mile. House sits here and they put a little mother-in-law shop or an apartment or whatever business that's got a separate address, they would then have to name that driveway?

What if it's the same person? Same person. I mean, the family, the lease or rent,

is gonna be a major contributor to this because you have three acres, you put five homes on it, get septic for them all. You put them all there, the same person comes and gets the address, right? And they're all separate structures. I struggle with the whole and we've had this conversation a number of times, but the single structure duplex versus the separate structures on a parcel.

So you're saying if somebody were to have a 10-, 12,000-square-foot house and lease the downstairs of it, And that what would happen in that case somebody had a huge house So back to the relevant discussion here And

I can't remember. You showed me something that said that, you know, I know in other jurisdictions in Montana they have A and B. But we don't allow that for some reason. It's proscribed by who?

You do know what sense that makes, right?

Why would there be the distinguishment between whether they're residential or commercial for lettering?

So the distinguishment is whether they're separate buildings or one combined unit. with different apartments. So a fourplex could have 113 A Street with A, B, C, and D, but if it was separate buildings, then they'd each need a number.

So you could have Unit one, unit two, unit three in residential, in commercial, you can go A, B, C. So like you have a duplex on 4th Street and the address is 203 4th Street for the duplex. And then it would be 204, what, unit two?

But in the duplex case with two garages, you're saying that would mean 203 and 205 South 4th. Yes.

22:02•DHDan Huls

solely because there's garages on each end?

I'm trying to understand the distinction. It makes no sense. You have a garage separating...

Or it could be a common floor or ceiling, right?

That makes sense because the way you explained it was you look at a block. You have 201, a house, 203, a house, 205, and 207. a duplex side by side. I mean, that makes sense when you're looking at it, but the logic of, Well, if there's three or more stacked up or four, then you would use units. But in the case of a duplex stacked up, you would say, well, we're going to go 201, 203, 205, 207, 209. Like that doesn't really make sense. But a linear look at it.

But you were saying that, for some reason, the next gen wants residential designated with unit 1, 2, 3, 4. And if that's a commercial building, then A, B, C, D. Yeah.

And so if you have commercial at the bottom and residential on top, then you would have.

I used to do it. I don't care if it's a commercial building or a commercial business or a residence. I get directed to an address as a responder. It makes no difference to me whether it's a Napa store or

You can just get into a whole bunch of what-ifs, and I don't want to beat it, but that exists as well, not only in the city, but also out in the county where you have a shop, say an upholstery shop. I've got a shop, a business address, my sign out on the street that says upholstery shop. Upstairs is an apartment, and we rent that, or you live there and work down underneath of it. I mean, that happens as well.

And then you start getting to potentially adds confusion if that's what you think is that letters represent commercial and numbers residential, and then that gets flipped around. So if that's next gen, that's fine. I'm just saying.

I'm not arguing that. I mean, long term, you're right. There's some order to it. But I really liked Jeff's scenario where you have you know, an upholstery shop and pick another business next door and this thing, and then they have apartments underneath. Who gets the numbers? Who gets the letters or the numbers? And when you respond to 201 4th Street and it's a U, wait a minute, no, it's a A, or it's a number one. I don't, you know, I just, I can see that also not being that orderly.

It helps with responders if that Go Shed Road's named, because... you say it's on X lane and you go flying down there, you're looking for the pot shop business that it's at, you don't know that it's tucked in back behind the house sitting back here and you go flying up and down the road looking for it because it's on fire or somebody had a heart attack.

I would think so. I mean, especially in your case where you're talking about a primary residence with a secondary business tucked in back in a little shed back behind there. And when they say go to 3473 mile and 347 is actually right behind 345, you're going to go flying past 345 to the next address and you're going to see 351 and you're like, Where the hell is the address? So you turn around and you look for the driveway between those two and you drive back past it. And so you've driven past a couple times looking for 347, not knowing it's down this little driveway back behind the main reside

You'd find it because you'd see the sign, go Shed Road, and it'd be on Cadastral or whatever it is. I don't know about the other departments, but we're actually using that software that will map you to where you're going. And sometimes it is screwy on those situations where it kind of picks a point somewhere in space and says it's about here. Whereas if it's a named road that's in the database, you know, it tells you go down, turn here off three mile, and it's back in there.

So at the top of Section 6, all roads that serve or potentially serve two or more, when it says separate structures, that means uniquely addressed structures? Or when it says separate, does that mean physically separated? Or what is that saying?

I would read a separate structure as a standalone structure different than...

So when it says separate structures, what does that mean? To occupy, like separate mean separated by physical distance or separate like two different addresses?

By a distance. So a duplex at the end of a driveway with two numbers on it does not need its name, its road name?

A common breezeway. Connected by a breezeway roof.

36:52•DHDan Huls

I just was looking for your idea of 10 feet, 20 feet, 100 feet.

39:48•DHDan Huls

It's got two septic systems on one building.

Here's an example of where it would be. Let's say you've got an old folks home. They've got 10 units for the folks. They've got a wastewater system that handles their residential waste, water, then they've got a commercial kitchen on one end and they need like a grease trap and a separate septic system. It's all one building, just one side's like their commercial kitchen that's a different activity and they get permitted for grease trap and septic system to handle the kitchen. It's not really a separate, it's all the same business, it's all the old folks home, but it's one side's the residenti

That makes sense. Because that wouldn't make any sense to make them have an address for the commercial kitchen.

42:53•DHDan Huls

But if each septic system must have an address, an address could have multiple septic systems.

Which this meets that. That just means that the wastewater permit has to have a physical dread. Right.

43:40•DHDan Huls

I think you just take out that separate and unique, and you've got it. It has to have an address.

Yeah. Because you could have the permit, the wastewater system permit, in the case we were talking about, could have the same address. It just doesn't have a unique physical address. You could have two permits at two of them.

I think it's fine. The situations we're talking about are one in a thousand where you may have that situation, like I said, where it's just absolutely not necessary to have a separate, unique physical address for a wastewater system. One building, all one operation, but they have two septic systems because, like I said, commercial kitchen, grease trap, residential living units, but it's all...

46:26•DHDan Huls

Yeah, if you're servicing two separate structures. But if they're combined two septic systems servicing one structure.

I think it's so minor that adding it may just cause confusion, but I don't really care. Penny?

I think a lot of what the focus here is and the intent is to get help, emergency help, emergency responders, to an address as quickly and efficiently as possible. The septic system is only a trigger for us to identify when something new is happening there. But at the end of the day, we just want to make sure that the ambulance shows up as timely as possible, or the fire department wants to get dressed and find the ad. And law enforcement, of course, to get there as quickly as possible. So I don't think that the septic side of it is really in this discussion is more than a trigger for us identi

I think you said it right the first time.

This is public meeting. Appropriate language, please.

But they'll also want to come back on somebody when emergency services takes a bunch of extra time because dad was having a heart attack in the back little ADU and you drove past three times trying to find it. And so that's, to me, ultimately what it will, yes, it's an inconvenience to adequately name your property, but it saves your family member, the next people that buy the property, whatever it is. That might be something to keep track of, too, is if we have non-conforming roads, it should probably be a requirement at some point that if the property transfers or transitions or sells, that

And the title companies would be another good,

title companies. I think if you inform the realtors like, hey, we've had some issues with public safety services to some addresses, something for your clients to consider, for you to consider telling your clients that if they buy a parcel and there's two buildings on there and it doesn't have the road name, they might want to think about renaming it because they've got nothing invested in that address at that point. It's a perfect time to name the road and

doing anything with it when they move into the house and they find out that we've heard that too in the board of health and then they leave and then the neighbor who made the complaint sends them an anonymous text saying hey how much to rent your back shop back apartment back there and they say 750 a month then they come back to the board of health saying we got you and it's like oh i didn't mean to send that what i meant to say what you know That's actually happened before.

55:41•DHDan Huls

Okay, any questions on any of those bullet points in Appendix A?

I move to approve resolution 4819 for the road naming and mandatory sequencing policy.

59:33 – 1:00:35•DHDan Huls

Okay, it's been moved and seconded to adopt Resolution 4819, a resolution of the Board of County Commissioners adopting a Valley County policy for road naming and addressing. Is there any public comment on that motion? Further discussion? Question, Jeff? Aye. And Greg? Aye. And I vote aye as well. Motion carries. Okay. That would bring us to 11.30. It's noon. We need to adjourn that public hearing. Oh, that's right. Okay. With that, the public hearing on the road naming and mandatory sequencing is adjourned, and we will reopen with a public hearing on the approach permit policy.

1:00:57•DHDan Huls

There's two stuck together. You're going to help us a little bit more.

1:02:17•DHDan Huls

Thank you. Just wanted to clarify. As proposed. As proposed. Just wanted to clarify that.

1:02:56•DHDan Huls

So environmental health, if somebody comes in, the first thing they'll ask is, do you have your approach permit?

But if there's road naming things and addressing, we defer to the GIS department because we've had people question the sequencing or order of this process and make it, it is a little confusing. So this just makes sense, having a standard policy that people follow and can expect. So, Mr. Chairman, I would move to adopt and approve resolution 4820, a resolution Revali County's established mandatory sequencing involving approach permits related to Revali County roadways prior to the issuance of an official address and or wastewater permit. That is about the longest one I ever read. All right.

Second. Do you want to include road players in this or not?

1:04:37 – 1:05:14•DHDan Huls

Okay, we have a motion that's been seconded to adopt resolution number 4820, a resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Ravalli County establishing mandatory sequencing involving approach permits related to Ravalli County roadways prior to issuance of an official address or wastewater system permit. Is there any public comment on that motion? Is there any further discussion? Call for the question. Greg? Aye. And Chip? Aye. And I vote aye as well. Motion carries.

1:05:39 – 1:05:59•DHDan Huls

Well done. And with that, is there any public comment on items not otherwise on our agenda? Move to adjourn. Second. We are adjourned. Thank you, guys. Good work.