HomeMy WebLinkAboutord2004-031it HATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. AB2004 -163
CLEARANCES
/nit'
ate
Dare Received in Council Office
Agenda Date
A.v'lgnedro:
Wall W. Ammt
fi
-�' O �QO�
COUNTY
OUNCIL
t
4 -6 -04
Introduction
d SYh'06uudw,„
Hal Hart
Karen brakes
AAremen
R „dga:OM
ete.:en n
SUBJECT: Ordinance adopting amendments to the Whatcom County Land Division
Regulations (Title 21).
i
ATTACHMENTS:
(U Proposed ordinance
(2) Planning Commission Findings ofFact & Reasons Jor Action, Conclusions, and Recommendations
(3) Technical Advisory Committee letter of 314104 relating to protection offish and water quality
Note: Background materials are available for review at the Count Counalo nee
I SEPA review required? ( x ) Yes ( ) NO
SERA review completed? ( x ) Yes ( J NO
Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( ) Yes ( xr)
Requested Date:
r A hearing must be held if the Council changes the Planning Commission
recommendation.
NO
SUMMARYST TTEMENT: The Whamom County Council requested the
Technical Advisory Committee and Planning Commission to review the Whatcom
Commit Land Division Regulations ( Title 21) and make recommendations relating
0:
• Gift exemptions:
• 5-acre roadfronfage exemptions;
IF Wireless communication exemptions;
• Short plat road frontage improvements & impaci fees;
• Threatened & endangered species;
• Shortp plat and
• Short pint process for creating lots afJive anew or larger.
Recommendations relating to these issues are being forwarded for Council
review. However, it must be noted that the TAC has not finished its work on
it anspo cation impact fees yet. Additionally, the TAC recommended that
!, criteria to protect threatened & endangered species .should be located in the
critical areas ordinance and shoreline program rather than in Title 21.
Distribution Request
h,June un names to the right ve a copy aJler co,mal anion.
Lis( spec fo nnmes m the righr.
ADS baGlities Management
ADS Finance
ADS Human Resources
�I
ADS Into services
Assessor
nudnor
Keith Willnauerr
Cooperative
tcurl>:rensmn
Dleula Court
executi
xealm
Hearing aaminer
Jail
COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
2004 -163 41612004: Introduced
4/20/2004: Amended and adopted 4 -3, Brenner, Cray forQ
Nelson opposed, Ord. #2004-031
�—
Rela
Related File Numbers: AB2003 -175 and AB2003 -175A
Juvenile
Parks
Planning
Prosecutor
-Hal Hart
_
Public Works
Sheriff
-
Superior Court
—~
Treasurer
oh
Ordinance or Resident Number
(this item): M. 2 •O
I Pe, mw_ 6i alomnae 21o003 -04 Amendimpt, Soff- v.CCbondUZOVZOWAUao r (Tine gI an,(nemems) -ABAnc
4 2044
SPONSORED BY: Consent
PROPOSED BY: Planning
INTRODUCTION DATE: 4/6/04
ORDINANCE # 2004 -031
AMENDMENTS TO THE WHATCOM COUNTY LAND DIVISION
REGULATIONS (TITLE 21)
WHEREAS, The County Council requested the Technical Advisory Committee and
Planning Commission to review certain provisions the Whatcom County Land Division
Regulations (Title 21); and
WHEREAS, The Technical Advisory Committee issued recommendations on March 11,
2004;and
WHEREAS, Legal notice was published in the Bellingham Herald; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposal; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has evaluated the proposed amendments and
made modifications; and
WHEREAS, The County Council has considered the recommendations of the Technical
Advisory Committee and Planning Commission.
The Council makes the following findings of fact and conclusions:
FINDINGS OF FACT
The Whatcom County Council adopted Ordinance 2003 -033 on May 20, 2003. This
ordinance temporarily deleted the gift exemption and 5 -acre road frontage exemption
provisions from the Whatcom County Land Division Regulations (Title 21) for a 180 -day
period. This ordinance also requested the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to
review Title 21 and make recommendations relating to
Gift exemptions and 5 -acre road frontage exemptions;
Wireless communication exemptions;
Short plat road frontage improvements & impact fees;
Threatened & endangered species;
Multiple wells; and
Short plat process for creating lots of five acres or larger.
K i
2. The Whatcom County Council adopted Ordinance 2003 -058 on November 18, 2003,
temporarily deleted the gift exemption and 5 -acre road frontage exemption provisions
from Title 21 for another 180 -day period.
3. The Technical Advisory Committee commenced consideration of the amendments to
Title 21 on September 18, 2003 and issued final recommendations to amend Title 21 on
March 11, 2004.
4. Notice was published in the Bellingham Herald on March 11, 2004.
5. The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Official for Whatcom County issued a
Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) on March 12, 2004.
6. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the subject amendments on March
25,2004.
7. The Growth Management Act (GMA) establishes planning goals that are to guide local
governments when adopting development regulations, such as land division ordinances
(RCW 36.70A.020).
8. The GMA requires that development regulations must be consistent with and implement
the County's Comprehensive Plan (RCW 36.70A.040).
Gift Exemptions & 5 -Acre Road Frontage Exemptions
9. Water — Gift exemptions (WCC 21.03.020(6)) and 5 -acre road frontage exemptions
(WCC 21.03.020(4)) are not reviewed to determine if they have a drinking water supply.
Therefore, there is no assurance that a parcel created through an exemption will have a
suitable domestic water supply.
10. Sewage Disposal - Gift exemptions and 5 -acre road frontage exemptions are not
reviewed to determine if they can accommodate an on -site sewage system. Therefore,
there is no assurance that a parcel created through an exemption will be suitable for
building.
11. Critical Areas /Shorelines - Gift exemptions and 5 -acre road frontage exemptions are not
reviewed for compliance with the critical areas ordinance or shoreline program. A parcel
created through an exemption may be substantially impacted by wetlands, steep slopes or
other critical areas. It may be difficult to build upon, substantially more expensive to
build upon because of mitigation requirements or may compromise protection of critical
areas.
P . 2
12. Clustering - Parcels created through gift exemptions and the 5 -acre road frontage
exemptions must be a minimum of five acres. These exemption provisions do not allow
for clustering in the same manner that a short plat allows clustering. For example, if a 10-
acre parcel is bisected by a stream that contained threatened fish species, creating two
parcels through an exemption process may lead to altering the riparian vegetation
adjacent to the stream to accommodate construction. In contrast, a short plat could
accommodate clustering of building lots away from the stream. The stream and its buffer
could be preserved in the reserve tract.
13. Access Easements — Access easements may go through wetlands and may be difficult or
expensive to construct, or may need to be altered, because of government regulations
relating to the protection of critical areas. Access easements are not reviewed to
determine if they are located on steep slopes that would hinder emergency vehicle access.
14. Legal Descriptions - If not written by a professional consistent with the requirements of
RCW 18.43 (Engineers and Land Surveyors), there is a greater likelihood that legal
descriptions for lot boundaries will be incorrect. Additionally, there have been cases
when the access easement is not properly described and does not match the location
shown on the map. Incorrect legal descriptions affect future lot owners and neighboring
property owners, as they may create a dispute about the boundary between two properties.
Legal descriptions that are not written by a professional frequently cost more to survey in
the future, adding financial burdens to the public (Note: This rationale statement only
applies to gift exemptions).
15. Survey —These exemptions do not require a survey.
If an access easement is adjacent to a neighboring property line, there is no survey
to confirm that the access road is actually being constructed within the easement
and does not encroach onto the neighboring property.
Additionally, without a survey, you don't know if the parcel is actually 5- acres.
Some sections of land are less than the 640 -acre standard size. Therefore, a
subdivisional description of land (i.e. the west % of the SE '/< of the SE Y< of the
SE Y< of the section), would not yield a 5 -acre tract if the section is less than 640
acres. Without a survey, the County may not be able to know if the lot being
created is actually 5 acres. Therefore, the exemption process may allow
unintentional violation of the R5A zoning.
16. R -O -W Dedications — Gift exemptions are not required to dedicate right -of -way for
future road widening by the County. Short plats and long plats are required to make such
dedications under appropriate circumstances.
17. County Review — Absent County review for compliance with critical areas, development
standards, and other County regulations, a parcel may be created that is essentially
unbuildable under standard county codes. This may lead to compromising County code to
allow a reasonable use of the property and avoid a takings claim.
Ps
18. Other Counties —An October 2003 survey of the 38 other counties in Washington State
revealed that only five of these counties (13 %) had gift exemption provisions.
Additionally, only six counties (16 %) had provisions for other 5 -acre exemptions. The
five counties that allow gift exemptions are: Mason, Ferry, Stevens, Spokane, and
Garfield. The six counties that allow 5 -acre exemptions are: Clallam, Kitsap, Pacific,
Wahkiakum, Garfield and Asotin.
19. State law provides County governments with the discretion to either require plat approval
or provide exemption status for divisions of land into tracts of five acres or larger (RCW
58.17.040(2)). For the reasons stated above, the gift exemption and 5 -acre road frontage
exemption clauses should be deleted from Title 21 as recommended by the Whatcom
County Technical Advisory Committee.
Wireless Communication Exemption
20. Senate Bill 6578 was passed by the state legislature and signed into law by the Governor
in 2002, exempting leases for personal wireless facilities from state land division rules.
This new state law is now codified as RCW 58.17.040(8).
21. Whatcom County already has siting criteria in the Official Whatcom County Zoning
Ordinance governing the location of personal wireless facilities (WCC 20.13).
22. Once a decision has been issued by the County through the administrative approval
process or conditional use permit process to approve a wireless facility, requiring
additional County review through the short plat process is unnecessary.
23. Therefore, an exemption for wireless communication facilities should be added to the
Whatcom County Code as allowed by state law.
Threatened & Endangered Species
24. The critical areas ordinance will soon be updated considering best available science.
25. The shoreline management program will soon be updated.
26. Rules relating to protection of fish habitat should be placed into the critical areas
ordinance and shoreline program, as these codes that are applicable to all types of
development, land use, clearing, and filling, rather than in Title 21, which only applies to
land divisions.
27. The shoreline program should be specifically referenced in Title 21 to alert property
owners and developers of the requirement to comply with these regulations. The critical
areas ordinance is already cited in Title 21.
P . 4
Multiple Wells
28. State law requires that appropriate provisions must be made for potable water supplies
before a subdivision can be approved (RCW 58.17.110(2)). Additionally, the Whatcom
County Code requires that appropriate provisions must be made for potable water
supplies before a binding site plan can be approved (WCC 21.07.030(1)).
29. State water law, at RCW 90.44.050, provides that:
... no withdrawal of public ground waters of the state shall be begun, nor shall
any well or other works for such withdrawal be constructed, unless an application
to appropriate such waters has been made to the department and a permit has been
granted by it as herein provided: EXCEPT, HOWEVER, That any withdrawal of
public ground waters for ... single or group domestic uses in an amount not
exceeding five thousand gallons a day ... is and shall be exempt from the
provisions of this section ...
30. The Washington State Supreme Court, in the case of State of Washington Department of
Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn et at (March 28, 2002), interpreted this law as follows:
... The developer of a subdivision is, necessarily, planning for adequate water for
group uses rather than a single use, and accordingly is entitled to only one 5,000
gpd {gallon per day} exemption for the project... the exemption does not ...
allow a withdrawal for each lot in the residential subdivision under separate,
individual 5,000 gpd exemptions... the exemption in RCW 90.44.050 does not
apply where a developer proposes to use multiple wells collectively withdrawing
over 5,000 gpd to serve a subdivision...
3 L Title 21 should be amended to require applicants to demonstrate that they have adequate
water rights to serve subdivisions and binding site plans, except when the water
withdrawal is exempt from obtaining a water right permit (i.e. total water use is 5,000
gallons /day or less for a subdivision or binding site plan). This is one component in
ensuring appropriate provisions are made for a potable water supply as required by state
and local law.
Short Plat Process
32. GMA planning goal # 7 indicates that "Applications for both state and local government
permits should be processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure predictability" (RCW
36.70A.020(7)).
33. Government regulations, other than those rules in Title 21, have been imposed or are
more complex than they were 10 to 15 years ago. While these regulations have a
legitimate public purpose, the application of these regulations increases the time it takes
to process short plats under the provisions of Title 21.
P5
34. Amending Title 21 to specify timeframes and clarify requirements in the short plat
process should provide a limited degree of increased efficiency in the short plat process.
35. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Policy 2D -3 is to "Streamline development
regulations to eliminate unnecessary time delays."
36. The new agricultural short plat provisions in Title 21 would reduce the time, cost and
complexity of processing a short plat under WCC 20.40.252(1).
CONCLUSIONS
L The subject amendments are consistent with RCW 58.17 (Plats — Subdivisions —
Dedications).
2. The subject amendments are consistent with the Growth Management Act planning goals
of RCW 36.70A.020.
3. The subject amendments are consistent with the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan
goals and policies.
4. The subject amendments will serve the public interest.
R6
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whateom County Council that:
Section I. The Whateom County Land Division Regulations (Title 21) are hereby amended as
shown on Exhibit A.
Section 2. Adjudication of invalidity of any of the sections, clauses, or provisions of this
ordinance shall not affect or impair the validity of the ordinance as a whole or any part thereof
other than the part so declared to be invalid.
ADOPTED this 20th day of April , 2004
pa0uunnuq
G O UN'''%
.
�( .PT" �'/'� WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
ATTEST:? �:y��'`� �4j WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Aloe
Dana
APPROVED as to form:
Civil Depu rosecutor
P. 7
Dan McShane, Chairperson
Approved ( Denied
Pete Kremen, Executive
Date: �0�3
Exhibit A
AMENDMENTS TO THE
WHATCOM COUNTY LAND DIVISION
REGULATIONS (TITLE 21)
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
APPROVED VERSION
APRIL 20, 2004
Note: Rationale statements are for explanatory purposes only and will not
appear in Title 21.
Amend chapter 21.03, Exemptions and Boundary Line Adjustments, as
shown below:
21.03.020 Exemptions.
The following land divisions are exempt from the provisions of this title except as noted
or conditioned. All land divisions must be consistent with applicable zoning regulations.
(I) Cemeteries and burial plots while used for that purpose.
(2) Divisions of land made by testamentary provisions or the laws of descent.
(3) Divisions of land into lots, none of which are smaller than 20 acres or 1/32 of a
section of land and not containing a dedication. Any further division below 20 acres or
1/32 of a section of land shall go through the appropriate long subdivision, short
subdivision, or binding site plan procedure, except for exemptions under subsection (1) of
this section.
(4) A division for the purpose of leasing land for facilities providing personal wireless
services while used for that purpose 'Personal wireless services" means any federally
licensed personal wireless service 'Facilities" means unstaffed facilities that are used for
the transmission or reception, or both, of wireless communication services including but
not necessarily limited to antenna arrays transmission cables equipment shelters and
support structures.
Rationale,for proposed amendment: Senate Bill 6578 was passed by the state legislature
and signed into law by the Governor in 2002, exempting leases for personal wireless
facilities from state land division rules. This new state law, now codified as RCW
58.17.040(8), is appropriate to incorporate into the Whatcom County Land Division
Regulations because Whatcom County already has siting criteria in the Official Whatcom
County Zoning Ordinance guiding the location of persona[ wireless facilities (WCC
20.13). Once a decision has been issued by the County through the administrative
approval process or conditional use permit process to approve a wireless facility,
requiring additional County review through the short plat process is unnecessary.
(4) pk isions of land into He asefe than fear -3vided that -1111 Rf the following
eenditions
(a) All lots are less t1.:an t;.,, (on) acres r1192efu section of land, but not
11 ....1.
.... ....an five (5) acres vi 1a 28 of section of 1rx¢
(b) The division does not contain a proposed ded'eation.
(E) All lots in such divisions shall lue, e aeeess onto maintained publie read
_ a............................. ................ u..0 ...u..uu.m w. „vo dmTormme.
tiblie M in or,
apply to the pimbandle or flag stem peetien of the
(e) Nef3f .- ..n.e aeee.,s Toad shall --.,ter lots
(f) A legal d.v . ..l3:::: and w'uv.m.ona l o..t.l..F l e proposed w .
v
Ebl lot. sold 1........d
Within five yeafs of the date af e�Eeuvptiim
stibiliN
Rationale for proposed amendment: The Technical Advisory Committee recommends
deleting the gift exemption and 5-acre road frontage exemption because they are
inconsistent with fundamental principles ofgood planning. These exemptions do not
allow proper planning and engineering analysis to determine the feasibility of a proposed
land division and do not consider long range needs (such as transportation corridors,
future utility corridors, and trails). While it is unfortunate that short plats are not
processed more quickly, approximately 61 ib of all delays are waitingfor the applicant to
provide information or studies. The exemption process has been employed by a number of
applicants to avoid the short plat requirements. Specific reasons for deleting these
exemptions include:
1. Water - Exemptions are not reviewed to determine if they have a drinking water
supply. Therefore, there is no assurance that a parcel created through an
exemption will have a suitable domestic water supply.
2. Sewage Disposal - Exemptions are not reviewed to determine if they can
accommodate an on site sewage system. Therefore, there is no assurance that a
parcel created through an exemption will be suitable far building.
3. Critical Areas/Shorelines- Exemptions are not reviewed for compliance with the
critical areas ordinance or shoreline program. A parcel created through an
exemption may be substantially impacted by wetlands, steep slopes or other
critical areas. It may be difficult to build upon, substantially more expensive to
build upon because of mitigation requirements or may compromise protection of
critical areas.
4. Clustering - Parcels created through exemptions must be a minimum offive
acres. The exemption provisions do not allowfor clustering in the same manner
that a short plat allows clustering. For example, if a 10 -acre parcel is bisected by
a stream that contained threatened fish species, creating two parcels through the
exemption process may lead to altering the riparian vegetation adjacent to the
stream to accommodate construction. In contrast, a short plat could
accommodate clustering of building lots away from the stream. The stream and
its buffer could be preserved in the reserve tract.
Access Easements — Access easements may go through wetlands and may be
difficult or expensive to construct, or may need to be altered, because of
government regulations relating to the protection of critical areas Access
easements are not reviewed to determine if they are located on steep slopes that
would hinder emergency vehicle access.
Legal Descriptions -If not written by a professional consistent with the
requirements of RCW 18.43 (Engineers and Land Surveyors), there is a greater
likelihood that legal descriptions for lot boundaries will be incorrect.
Additionally, there have been cases when the access easement is notproperly
described and does not match the location shown on the map. Incorrect legal
descriptions affect future lot owners and neighboring property owners, as they
may create a dispute about the boundary between two properties Legal
descriptions that are not written by a professional frequently cost more to survey
in the future, addingfinancial burdens to the public (Note. This rationale
statement only applies to gift exemptions).
Survey —These exemptions do not require a survey.
• If an access easement is adjacent to a neighboringproperty line, there is no
survey to confirm that the access road is actually being constructed within the
easement and does not encroach onto the neighboring property.
• Additionally, without a survey, you don't actually know ifyou have a 5 -acre
parcel. Some sections of land are less than the 640 -acre standard size.
Therefore, a subdivisional description of land (i.e. the west % of the SE Y of
the SE' /. of the SE % ofsection 10), would not yield a 5 -acre tract if the
section is less than 640 acres. Without a survey, the County may not be able
to know if the lot being created is actually 5 acres. Therefore, the exemption
process may allow unintentional violation of the R5A zoning.
R -O -W Dedications — Exemptions are not required to dedicate right -of -way
forfuture road widening by the County. Short plats and long plats are
required to make such dedications under appropriate circumstances.
County Review— Absent County review for compliance with critical areas,
development standards, and other County regulations, a parcel may be
created that is essentially unbuildable under standard county codes. This may
lead to compromising County code to allow a reasonable use of the property
and avoid a takings claim.
10. Other Counties An October 2003 survey of the 38 other counties in
Washington State revealed that only five of these counties (13016) had gift
exemption provisions. Additionally, only six counties (16010) had provisions
for other 5-acre exemptions. Thefive counties that allow gift exemptions are:
Mason, Ferry, Stevens, Spokane, and Garfield. The six counties that allow 5-
acre exemptions area Clallam, Kitsap, Pacific, Wahkiakum, Garfield and
Asotin.
(5) Divisions made for the purpose of lease for agricultural uses; provided, that each such
leased parcel is a minimum of five acres or 1/128 of a section of land. The remaining
portion of the parcel shall also be a minimum of five acres or 1/128 of a section of land.
This exemption authorizes leasing the parcel but shall not authorize the sale of the parcel.
(6) A gift of land be
(a) Ne more than fom:
(b) All lots
(4) lots
by the
are created;
di, isien
and
lots
ureated
_ .ffiNe([
i/i 28
and the
remaining
..f l..
are a
«d ..l
...:r.rmcvrrmzrvc�..t
(e) The lots
)ass
be
or
fitom
of
o ¢ oao
legal lot
,
Hew must
the egisetive date
(d) Any lurtheF divisien
created
ef this eizdimanee;
the
a
let
and
of eeetwd
that existed
as of
of
that was
given
as a gift
shall go through
the
be filed
(e) Legal ingress
Hiatt sha"
with the
is
CountyAnditoF;
and
to lots
by
and
the
egress aeoess
including
of reeefd
the
provided
lots,
the created
gifl exemption,
CataA5 Engineering.
Ali
remaining
to
and
venfied byWhateo
access
peints
public
reads
shall eaeaply
with
.. does
the
t th
pr c :...::. ..
exemption is gooHeo.
not c
cam.::,.-....,.,,,
of
.,...,.,
a
...,.,.,s
o. --..,e .,.,,e the
Rationale for proposed amendment: The rationale for deleting gift exemptions is the
same as the rationale for deleting the 5 -acre road frontage exemption (see rationale
under the deleted WCC 21.03.020(4) above).
(66-7) Divisions of land for environmental mitigation, conservation or restoration;
provided, that all of the following conditions are met:
(a) All lots are a minimum of five acres or 1/128 of a section of land.
(b) Except as provided in subsection (7)(c) of this section, all lots shall be used
exclusively for:
(i) Environmental mitigation required under local, state or federal law; or
(ii) Environmental conservation or restoration when a nonprofit nature
conservancy corporation or association as defined by RCW 84.34.250 or
public agency will own the lots.
(c) If residential, commercial, or industrial buildings already exist, then one lot
containing these buildings shall be created. This one lot shall not be subject to the
requirements of subsection (7)(d) of this section.
(d) A permanent covenant acceptable to the director of planning and development
services shall be recorded against each lot, except as provided in subsection (7)(c)
of this section. This covenant shall state the following:
(i) The lot shall be used exclusively for environmental mitigation,
conservation or restoration.
(it) The lot shall not be further divided
(iii) New structures not necessary for environmental mitigation,
conservation or restoration including residential, commercial and
industrial development shall be prohibited.
(iv) After recording, if the original purposes underlying the covenant can
no longer be fulfilled and changed conditions warrant, the covenant may
be revised with the consent of the county council, consistent with then
applicable policies and regulations.
(e) A legal description °.cy of the parcels created for
environmental mitigation, conservation or restoration, prepared by a surveyor,
shall be submitted to the planning and development services department for final
approval and recordation.
(f) Legal ingress and egress access of record is provided to the lots created by the
exemption and verified by Whatcom County engineering. All access points to
public roads shall comply with county development standards to provide for a
safe physical access. (Ord. 2003 -033* Exh. A, 2003; Ord. 2001 -027 § 1; Ord.
2000 -056 § 1).
21.03.040 Certificate of exemption.
A certificate of exemption shall be obtained from the planning and development services
department for exemptions under WCC 21.03.020(2), (3), (4, and (6), and (7). A
certificate of exemption shall consist of a suitably inscribed stamp on the instrument
conveying land title and shall be certified prior to the recording of the instrument with the
county auditor. An exempt land division does not occur and is not considered approved
until said instrument has been duly stamped exempt and is filed for record concurrently
with all applicable disclosures of WCC 21.03.045. (Ord. 2002 -017 § 1; Ord. 2000 -056 §
1).
Rationale for proposed amendment: Reflects the fact that the TAC is recommending
deletion of two exemptions and the addition of a new exemption for personal wireless
towers. The TAC did not see any reason that a lease site for personal wireless facilities
should require a certificate of exemption, especially in light of the fact that the location of
such facilities must be approved by the County under the provisions of the zoning
ordinance (WCC 20.13).
21.03.045 Required disclosures.
The following disclosures, if applicable, shall be recorded in the county auditor's
office and shall be filed concurrently with the certificate of exemption:
❑ Right to farm, right to practice forestry, mineral resource disclosures.
• Boundary discrepancies.
• Protective covenants, conditions and restrictions.
• Latecomers' agreements.
❑ Significant pipeline in vicinity disclosure ( i et) when the
subject property is within 660' of a pipeline shown on Mao 12
Chapter 5 of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan (Ord. 2002-
017 § 1).
Rationale for proposed amendment: The term "significant pipeline" is
ambiguous. However, chapter 5 of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan
states:
... The Utilities Committee concluded notification was the most
appropriate method to meet the County's goals, as opposed to imposing
setbacks or other restrictions which would limit landowners use of land on
the remote possibility an event would occur. Map 12 indicates a
notification area of 1320 feet (660 feet from each side from the pipeline)
,for natural gas and hazardous liquid transmission pipelines, which may be
of value to the public (p. 5 -10).
The Planning & Development staffperson who worked with the Utility Planning
Advisory Committee indicated that the intent was to require disclosure for
developments within 660' ofpipelines shown on map 12, chapter 5 of the Comp
Plan. Adding a specific reference to this map will reduce ambiguity and increase
certaintyfor applicants so they know what is required of them.
Amend chapter 21.04, Short Subdivisions, as shown below.
Chapter 21.04
SHORT SUBDIVISIONS
21.04.010 Purpose.
The purpose of a short plat is to provide an abbreviated platting procedure The purpose
of this chapter is to establish or reference the procedure and requirements for the
application, review and approval of short subdivisions. The procedure is intended to
provide orderly and expeditious processing of such applications. (Ord. 2000 -056 § I).
21.04.020 Requirement to Obtain Short Subdivision Approval.
All divisions of land into four or fewer parcels shall require short subdivision approval
from Whatcom County unless:
(1) The division is specifically classified as an exemption or boundary line adjustment
under Chapter 21.03 WCC; or
(2) The division has received long subdivision approval as required under WCC
21.03.020(4)(g) or 21.04.040; or
(3) The division has received binding site plan approval under Chapters 21.07 and 21.08
WCC. (Ord. 2000 -056 § 1).
21.04.030 Short Subdivision Procedure.
Approval of a short subdivision is normally a two -step process that involves notice of
preliminary approval and final approval. Notice of preliminary approval includes initial
review of the application to determine if the short plat is acceptable in concept,
identification of relevant issues, formulation of appropriate conditions that must be
satisfied prior to final approval, and issuance of written findings. Notice of preliminary
approval does not authorize selling lots or offering lots for sale. Final approval includes
resolution of all issues, satisfaction of the conditions outlined in the notice of preliminary
approval, preparation of a survey, construction of required improvements (or posting
securities for these improvements), and filing an original drawing with the county
auditor. Lots may be sold or offered for sale only after the original drawing is filed for
record with the county auditor. The notice of preliminary approval and final approval
processes may be combined into a single process if all the information required by WCC
21.04.150 and 21.04.160 is submitted simultaneously.
(1) Notice of Preliminary Approval.
(a) Any applicant requesting approval of a proposed short subdivision as defined in this
title shall submit to the planning and development services department copies of the
items required in WCC 21.04.150, together with a complete application form and the
prescribed fee.
(b) r.,... ° °� ° °a _,. 0. Within 10 working days of receiving properly prepared
and complete application, the county shall schedule and immediate! notify the
applicant appropriate county staff, and the appropriate city, if the proposed land
division is located within that city's urban growth area, of the time and place of the
technical review committee meeting at which the application will be considered. The
county shall also distribute application materials to appropriate county and city staff
within 10 working days of receiving a complete application The technical review
committee shall meet in public session, hold an informal hearing, consider the
proposed short subdivision and make a recommendation to the director. The director
may waive the requirement for the technical review committee meeting if all issues
can adequately be addressed without such a meeting.
(c) Whenever a short subdivision is located adjacent to the right -of -way of a state
highway or will depend on access from a state highway, the administrative official
shall give written notice of the application to the Washington State Department of
Transportation within 10 working days of receiving a properly prepared and complete
application. This written notice shall include a legal description of the short
subdivision and a location map.
(d) The administrative official shall Nnotify and provide copies of project plans to any
and all private or public utility organizations whose facilities are within or adjacent
from the area presented in the application within 10 working days of receiving
properly prepared and complete application Such utility organizations shall have 4-5
14 calendar days to respond. If there is no response within 1-5 14 calendar days, the
administrator and technical review committee may conclude their review of the
application without such comments.
(e) An applicant may place a short subdivision application, which has not yet received a
notice of preliminary approval, on hold for a cumulative maximum of two years.
After the two years, the county shall continue processing the application and either
approve or deny the application. This two -year period shall not include time the
applicant is performing studies required by the county when the study is provided
within the time frame agreed to by the county and the applicant.
(f) The director shall, within 30 calendar days of the date of submittal of a complete
application, issue a notice of preliminary approval, issue a notice of requirements to
continue processing, or deny the application.
(g) Preliminary approval of a short subdivision shall be accompanied by written findings
by the county that:
(i) Appropriate provisions have been made for the public health, safety, and
general welfare and for such drainage ways, stormwater management,
streets or roads, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, and sidewalks and
other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students
who only walk to and from school, and the public use and interest will be
served by the platting of such short subdivision and dedication; and
(ii) The short subdivision is in conformity with applicable land division,
zoning, critical areas, shoreline management, and other land use
regulations.
(2) Final Approval.
(a) The applicant shall submit the original drawing signed by the owner(s) within five
years of receiving the notice of preliminary approval. The director may grant a one -
year extension upon the request of the applicant, if the applicant agrees to comply
with current Whatcom County Development Standards in effect at the time of the
extension request. If the applicant fails to submit the original drawing within these
time frames, the county shall proceed to deny final approval of the short subdivision.
(b) The applicant shall submit a current title report, issued no more than 60 calendar days
prior to the director signing the original drawing of the short plat. The owner of
record and the surveyor of record shall sign the original drawing of the short plat
prior to filing it for record with the county auditor. The original drawing shall include
a statement that the short subdivision has been made with the free consent of and in
accordance with the desire of the land owner(s).
(c) When all requirements of the notice of preliminary approval, applicable laws,
applicable regulations, and applicable development standards are satisfied and an
original drawing for recording has been submitted, the director shall sign the original
drawing of the short plat within 20 workine 38 days. If right -of -way is dedicated, the
county engineer shall also sign the original drawing, accepting the dedication. The
surveyor of record shall then immediately file said original drawing with the county
auditor, at which point it shall be deemed "approved." (Ord. 2002 -017 § 1; Ord.
2000 -056 § 1).
21.04.040 Restriction of Further Division
Land in short subdivisions may not be further divided in any manner within a period of
five years except through the long subdivision process which requires the filing of a final
plat or through binding site plan process which requires the filing of a general and
specific binding site plan. However, if the short subdivision contains fewer than four
parcels, nothing in this section shall prevent the owner who filed the short plat from filing
an alteration within the five -year period to create up to a total of four lots within the
original short subdivision boundaries. (Ord. 2000 -056 § 1).
21.04.050 Development Requirements
(1) All short subdivisions shall comply with the applicable standards, requirements and
procedures of the Whatcom County Development Standards and local, state, and
federal laws and regulations. The county, to the extent practicable, will require new
land divisions located within city urban growth areas to conform to city development
standards, in accordance with adopted interlocal agreements.
(2) Improvements are required to be installed and completed by the subdivider prior to
final short plat approval, unless security is provided under WCC 21.04.140. (Ord.
2000 -056 § 1).
21.04.060 Roads
Roads shall be designed with appropriate consideration for existing and projected roads,
anticipated traffic patterns, topographic and drainage conditions, public convenience and
safety, and the proposed uses of the land served.
(1) Dedications for the realignment and widening of the rights -of -way, in accordance
with the County standards, shall take place whenever a short subdivision abuts a
County road. Frontage roads or parallel access roads may be required to eliminate
direct access to arterial and collector roads.
(2) Frontage improvements to the public roadway(s) adjacent to the subject property shall
be completed to the current functional classification prior to recording the short plat,
unless security is provided under WCC 21.04.140.
(3)Roads and access easements that serve a short plat shall be constructed in compliance
with the Whatcom County Development Standards
21.04.070 Public Dedications
The dedication of public road rights -of -way and /or easements within the short
subdivision may be required to the extent that such dedication is suitable to and
reasonable for the needs anticipated by full development of the short subdivision. (Ord.
2000 -056 § 1).
10
21.04.080 Easements
(1) Easements shall be provided where applicable for development related facilities.
(2) All easements shown on short plats shall include:
(a) The beneficiary of the easement;
(b) The purpose of the easement; and
(e) A clear depiction of the easement (including dimensions) on the face of the
short plat.
(3) The owner may specify the burdening of the easement. Examples of burdening may
include the average daily trips for ingress and egress easements, the equivalent single -
family units for water, sewer, and on -site sewage disposal systems and the maximum
peak flow rate expressed in accepted units for drainage easements. The owners of the
subservient estates are not entitled to rely upon the county to enforce the limitations
of the easements so granted, and no cause of action shall lie against the county for
errors or omissions occurring in connection with the administration of, or issuance of,
permits for development of properties that burden the easements referred to herein.
(Ord. 2000 -056 § 1).
21.04.090 Water supply.
A public water supply, including se�4ees to eaeh lot, shall be provided fiuFeN efy short
(1) For residential shart
te each let, ma) be provided if needed be supp!) adequate � ater capacity as required b�
.... .......... .and ......................, ....rte i�ent.
(1) Water from a public water system(s) shall be provided to serve each lot in a short
plat, except as specified in (2) below.
(2) For a residential short subdivisions, private water supplies may be utilized under
the following circumstances:
(a) All lots served by the private water supplies are five acres or larger, unless
smaller because of clustering. If the lots are smaller because of clustering, the
gross density of the short subdivision shall not exceed one dwelling per five acres;
and
(b) The withdrawal is not from a defined portion of an aquifer of known regional
ground water contamination that exceeds state standards and that has been
identified by the director of the health department nd human e „es and
confirmed by the board of health; and
(c) The water source is ground water and not surface water; and
(d) If the short subdivision is within the designated water service area of a public
water purveyor that is shown on the Coordinated Water System Plan map or
within one -half mile of an existing water purveyor's water lines:
(i) The water cannot be provided to the applicant within 120 calendar days
of submitting a written request and applicable fees to the purveyor unless
specified otherwise by the hearing examiner or county council; or
(ii) The purveyor states in writing that it is unable or unwilling to provide
the service; or
(iii) The purveyor and applicant are unable to achieve an agreement on the
schedule and terms of provision of service within 120 calendar days.
If a public water supply is required, all the requirements of Chapter 246 -290
WAC, Group A Public Water Systems, or Chapter 246 -291 WAC, Group B
Public Water Systems, must be met prior to final plat approval. (Ord. 2000 -056 §
1).
Rationale far proposed amendment:
(1) The water supply rules for short plats were reviewed with the County 's Attorney
,for consistency with the Washington Supreme Court decision in the case of
Department of Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn et al (146 Wn.2d 1; 43 P.3d 4),
issued on March 28, 2002. It was determined that the short plat regulations are
not in conflict with state water law.
(2) However, the wording relating to `public water systems" is being modified for
consistency with the subdivision and binding site plan sections of Title 21.
(3) The name of the Whatcom County Health & Human Services Department has
been changed to the Whatcom County Health Department.
21.04.100 Sewage Disposal
(1) Within urban growth areas, public sewer shall be required in short subdivisions unless
the on -site sewage disposal requirements of WCC 24.05.220, Developments,
subdivisions, and minimum land area requirements, can be met.
12
(2) Outside of urban growth area and small town Comprehensive Plan designations, short
subdivisions shall not be approved that require extension or expansion of public
sewer except when:
(a) Public sewer is necessary to protect the public health, safety or environment;
and
(b) Public sewer is financially supportable at rural densities and does not permit
urban development.
(3) On -site sewage disposal systems shall meet the requirements of WCC 24.05.220,
Developments, subdivisions, and minimum land area requirements.
(4) All portions of a community on -site sewage system that are held in common
ownership shall be constructed and approved prior to final short plat approval. (Ord.
2000 -056 § 1).
21.04.110 Fire Protection
Short subdivisions shall incorporate adequate capability for fire protection in accordance
with sound engineering practices and locally adopted codes and development standards
and shall be approved by the county fire marshal. (Ord. 2000 -056 § 1).
21.04.120 Short Subdivision Vacation and Alteration
Applications to vacate or alter short plats that have been filed with the County Auditor
shall be processed as follows
(1) Affidavit of Minor Correction of Survev
A Professional land survevor may file an "affidavit of minor correction of survey"
pursuant to WAC 332 - 130 -050 to correct minor survey, spelling mathematical or
drafting errors or omitted signatures. The surveyor shall file the "affidavit of minor
correction of survey' with the County Auditor and Provide one copy to the Division
of Engineering and one copy to Planning and Development Services
Rationale for proposed amendment: WAC 332 -130- 050(3) contains criteria that must
be met when correcting survey information on a previouslyfiled short plat.
Additionally, the DNR has developed a form entitled "affidavit of minor correction of
survey" that can be utilized when such minor corrections are needed. The provision
above would outline the County's process for such minor corrections, which could be
accomplished in a quick and easy manner.
13
(2) Boundary Line Adjustments
Boundary line adjustments are processed under WCC 21 03 060 and are not subject to
the Provisions of WCC 21.04.120, except for such adjustments that alter the
boundaries of a reserve tract in the short plat
Rationale for proposed amendment:
(1) State subdivision laws do not apply to boundary line adjustments (RC W
58.17.040(6)). The County has historically approved boundary line
adjustments by stamping new deeds as exempt from the subdivision
process and has not required a new Mylar map.
(2) The exception to this rule has been boundary line adjustments to the
"reserve tract' in a cluster subdivision. The County has required a new
Mylar map far adjusting the boundaries ofa reserve tract. The reason for
this is the reserve tract language in the zoning code. For example, the
Rural zone states:
The purpose of the reserve tract ... shall be communicated in
writing on the face of the plat or short plat; also, the number of
developable building sites remaining (if any) with the original
parcel of record, based on the assigned density, shall also be
prominently displayed on the plat or short plat. Whatcom County
shall make every effort to assist all agents in communicating
clearly such information to all purchasers and prospective
purchasers of building lots or "reserve tracts "(WCC
20.36.320(4)).
The best way to clearly communicate this information, and changes to
boundary lines, is on theface ofa shortplat (i.e. on a map, rather than on
a written deed that changes the boundaries of a map). Therefore, Planning
& Development Services has required a new map when the boundaries of
a reserve tract are being modified.
(3) Minor Alterations
The director shall approve, deny or issue a notice of requirements to continue
processing a minor alteration within 21 calendar days of submittal of a complete
application.
a) In order to Pualifv as a minor alteration the proposal mush
• Modify the text, mans or other information shown on the short plat that
was filed for record with the County Auditor:
• Maintain the density, uses and basic design of the approved short plat
14
• Not adversely impact public health public safety, shorelines or critical
areas: and
• Not eliminate a public dedication or reduce the width or length of a public
dedication.
b) The application shall include a written description of the alteration_ the
reasons for the alteration and a map drawn to scale showing the alteration
c) The county shall distribute application materials to appropriate county and
city staff within 5 working days of receiving a complete application
d) The technical review committee shall meet in public session to consider the
proposed minor alteration and make a recommendation to the director. The
director may waive the requirement for the technical review committee
meeting if all issues can adequately be addressed without such a meeting.
e) The director shall approve the alteration if the alteration:
• Does not conflict with the public interest: and
• Complies with zoning land division regulations and development
regulations applicable to the alteration that are in effect at the time the
application for the alteration was submitted and
• Complies with development standards applicable to the alteration that are
in effect at the time the application for the alteration was submitted
1) An "affidavit of minor short plat alteration" containing the signatures of all
parties having an ownership interest in the short plat or the nortion of the short
plat being altered shall be filed for record with the County Auditor. If the
minor alteration involves survey data the surveyor who signed the original
short plat shall file the alteration with the County Auditor. The applicant shall
provide one copy of the recorded affidavit to the Division of Engineering and
one copy to Planning and Development Services
g) Minor alterations do not require anew original drawing
Rationale for proposed amendment: Minor changes to a short plat should be
processed in a quick manner without need to change the Mylar map that has been
filed with the County Auditor. However, these changes need to be reviewed by the
County to ensure compliance with applicable codes and standards.
(4) Major Alterations
The director shall approve deny or issue a notice of requirements to continue
processing a maior alteration that does not eliminate or reduce the width or length
of a public dedication within 30 calendar days of submittal of a complete
application.
15
a) Major alterations are modifications . to text, maps or other information shown
on the short plat that
• May adversely impact public health public safety, shorelines or critical
areas
• Change the density, modify the uses, or alter the basic design of the short
plat,
• Create an additional lot(s) to a maximum of tour within the short l�at
pursuant to WCC 21.04.040:
• Add eligibility for an accessory dwelling unit(s) within the short plat
• Modify reserve tract boundaries:
• Modifv reserve tract or cluster notes: or
• Modify or extinguish an easement shown on the face of the short plat
b) The application shall include a written description of the alteration the
reasons for the alteration and a map showing the alteration The map shall be
prepared in accordance with the requirements of WCC 21.04.150(2), unless
waived by the director.
e) The county shall distribute application materials to appropriate county and
city staff within 10 working days of receiving a complete application
d) The technical review committee shall meet in Public session to consider the
proposed major alteration and make a recommendation to the director. The
director may waive the requirement for the technical review committee
meeting if all issues can adequately be addressed without such a meeting
e) The director shall approve the alteration if the alteration
• Does not conflict with the public interest: and
• Complies with zoning land division regulations and development
regulations applicable to the alteration that are in effect at the time the
application for the alteration was submitted: and
• Complies with development standards applicable to the alteration that arc
in effect at the time the application for the alteration was submitted.
f) Maier alterations require anew original drawing The original drawing
be prepared in accordance with the requirements of WCC 21.04.160, unless
waived by the director and filed for record with the County Auditor.
Rationale for proposed amendment: Major amendments would be reviewed by the
County for compliance with applicable codes and standards. They would require a
new Mylar map that must be filed with the County Auditor.
Irl
(5) Vacations — Not Involving Public Dedications
The director shall approve deny or issue a notice of requirements to continue
processing a vacation of a short plat that does not eliminate or reduce the width or
length of a public dedication within 30 calendar days of submittal of a complete
application.
a) The anplication shall include a written description of the vacation the reasons
for the vacation, and a man showing the vacation
b) The director shall approve the vacation if he finds that it does not conflict with
the public interest.
c) An order of vacation containing the signatures of all parties having an
ownership interest in the short plat or the portion of the short plat being
vacated shall be filed for record with the County Auditor. The order shall state
that the vacation is with the free consent and in accordance with the desires of
the owners.
d) Title to the vacated property shall vest with the rightful owner(s) as shown in
the county records
Rationale for proposed amendment: The current version of Title 21 states that
vacations not involving a dedication are approved by the director, but does not
provide a process or criteria for approving these vacations. The proposed rules
would provide such a process.
(6) Vacations — Involving Public Dedications
The vacation and alteration of a short subdivision shall be processed in
accordance with RCW 58.17.212 and 58.17.215 respectively when the alteration
or vacation eliminates or reduces the width or length of involves a public
dedication. All other vapatigns __a.at._ .hiAIu_..___ _.,�_ . _ ___ _
OUPFFitions 40 lot I,flw
adjustmeRt process). (04 2000 056 § 1).
Rationale far proposed amendment: State law requires that vacations ofshort
plats that contain a dedication must be approved by the legislative body of the
County in accordance with the procedures outlined in RCW 58.17.212.
21.04.130 Land Survey of Outer Boundary of Site
A The subdivider shall submit a short plat prepared and certified by a professional land
surveyor in accordance with WCC 21.09.010 shall 14c c;:b mitted °'t',..�a- .r,.,,- the —desp and
eea s me,o,° ' -. (Ord. 2000 -056 § 1).
17
Rationale for proposed amendment: The title of the section was changed because
short plats require a survey of interior lot lines in addition to a survey of the outer
boundary. The text was changed because not all short plats require design and
construction drawings (i.e. engineered drawings for roads on steep slopes).
Additionally, the short plat drawing, showing the survey of the site, is often
submitted after the design and construction drawings when a short plat is
proceeding through the system of County review. The proposed amendment would
add,flexibility in the code for the applicant and better reflect the actual process
for reviewing short plats.
21.04.140 Security
As an alternate to complete installation of required improvements, the subdivider may
elect to post securities, with the approval of the appropriate county authority, as set forth
in the Whatcom County Development Standards guaranteeing completion of the work.
No occupancy permit, final inspection, or use of the lots) created by a short subdivision
shall be issued or allowed until all necessary infrastructure improvements as specified by
this title have been met. (Ord. 2000 -056 § 1).
21.04.150 Requirements for a Fully Completed Application for Short Subdivisions
Requirements for a fully completed application must be provided in order to vest an
application.
(1) Written and Other Data and Fees.
❑ Name, address and phone number of owner(s), applicant, and contact person.
❑ Intended uses.
❑ List of variances and waivers requested.
❑ General written proposal of water supply and sewage disposal method.
❑ Preliminary drainage proposal.
❑ Preliminary traffic analysis.
❑ Assessor's parcel number (of the parent parcel).
❑ Fees as specified in the Unified Fee Schedule.
(2) Map Data.
❑ Name of owner(s).
❑ Name of proposed land division.
❑ General layout of proposed land division.
❑ Common language description of the general location of the land division.
❑ Approximate locations of existing roads, utilities, and infrastructure.
❑ Vicinity map.
❑ Six copies of proposed short plat map with a common engineering scale with north
arrow and sheet numbers (on each sheet containing a map).
18
❑ Section, township, range and municipal and county lines in the vicinity.
❑ General boundaries of the site with general dimensions shown.
❑ General direction and degree of slope.
❑ Legal description of the land.
❑ Means of proposed water service and sewage disposal.
❑ Means of proposed access (including proposed improvements to on -site and off -site
roadways).
❑ Other proposed on -site and off -site utilities and facilities.
❑ Location of existing roads, rights -of -way, buildings, parking, and drainage on -site or
contiguous to the site.
❑ Where appropriate, location of natural features, including bodies of water, natural
drainage areas, critical areas, and buffers.
❑ Location of existing facilities, sanitation and water facilities, easements (where
appropriate).
❑ Existing and proposed street names.
❑ Names or numbers of any adjacent divisions.
❑ Sequential numbers or letters to all lots within the short subdivision.
(Ord. 2000 -056 § 1).
21.04.160 Final Review and Submittal
Final review and submittal items are not required to vest an application.
(1) Review Submittal.
❑ Six copies of the original drawing of acceptable sizes (18" x 24 ").
❑ Name of short subdivision.
❑ Legal description of the land.
❑ Common engineering scale, north arrow, and sheet numbers.
❑ Date of original and significant revisions.
❑ The length of each lot line, together with bearings and other data necessary for the
location of any lot line in the field.
❑ The location, width, centerline, and name of all roads within and adjoining the land
division.
❑ Final survey of boundary of the land division with complete bearings and lineal
dimensions.
❑ The location of all monuments or other evidence used as ties to establish the land
division's boundaries.
❑ The location of all permanent control monuments found and established at the
controlling corners of the parcel being divided and within the land division.
❑ The length and bearing of all straight lines, the radii, arcs and semi- tangents of all
curves.
❑ The location and width of all easements, shown with broken lines, and a description
of the purpose of the easement (including beneficiary).
❑ Existing and proposed road names.
19
❑ The location of all permanent wells and associated protective zones, municipal
boundaries, section lines, township lines, and meander lines.
❑ A reference to any covenants or restrictions (two copies for county review).
❑ Signature block for persons with ownership interest (declaration) and dedication
block, if appropriate.
❑ Land surveyor's certificate.
❑ County engineer certificate (if a rights -of -way dedication is made).
❑ Director of planning and development services' certificate.
❑ County auditor's certificate.
❑ Title report.
❑ Letter from the health and human services department approving water supply and
sewage disposal method.
❑ Lot closures.
❑ A separate map scaled at 1" =400" for the assignment of addresses.
(2) Final Submittal
❑ Original drawing (in reproducible format) with executed signature block of persons
with ownership interest.
❑ Title report update or copy of title report issued no more than 60 calendar days prior
to the director signing the original drawing.
❑ Addresses as assigned by the county.
The above sections can be combined into one submittal if the applicant so chooses.
(Ord. 2000-056 § 1).
21.04.170 Disclosures and Notes
The following disclosures and notes, if applicable, shall be recorded in the county
auditor's office and a statement identifying the subject and the auditor's file number for
each such instrument shall be on the final short plat map under surveyor's notes prior to
final approval by the county:
❑ Right to farm, right to practice forestry, mineral resource disclosures.
❑ Critical area notes.
❑ Boundary discrepancies.
❑ Protective covenants, conditions and restrictions.
❑ Drainage maintenance agreement block.
❑ Road maintenance agreement block (private roads only).
❑ Latecomers' agreements.
❑ Significant pipeline in vicinity disclosure (widiiii -6 0-'°et) when the subject property
is within 660' of a pipeline shown on May 12 Chanter 5 of the Whatcom County
Comprehensive Plan. (Ord. 2002-017 § 1; Ord. 2000-056 § 1).
Rationale for proposed amendment: The term "significant pipeline "is ambiguous.
However, chapter 5 of the "atcom County Comprehensive Plan states:
20
... The Utilities Committee concluded notification was the most
appropriate method to meet the County's goads, as opposed to imposing
setbacks or other restrictions which would limit landowners use of land on
the remote possibility an event would occur. Map 12 indicates a
notification area of 1320feet (660 feet from each side from the pipeline)
Jar natural gas and hazardous liquid transmission pipelines, which may be
of value to the public (p. 5 -10).
The Planning & Development staff person who worked with the Utility Planning
Advisory Committee indicated that the intent was to require disclosure for
developments within 660' ofpipelines shown on map 12, chapter 5 of Comp Plan.
Adding a specific reference to this map will reduce ambiguity and increase certainty
for applicants so they know what is required of them.
21.04.180 Agricultural Short Plat.
The provisions of WCC 20 40 252(l) provide for the seae gation of a farmstead parcel
with an existing residence(s) off of a remainder parcel used for faminj4 in the Agriculture
Zone. The remainder parcel is restricted to agricultural use only Because no further
Agricultural short plats that qualify under WCC 20 40 252(1) shall be subject to the
following:
(a) Agricultural Short Plats shall be processed pursuant to all the requirements of this
chapter except that the short plat will not be reviewed for compliance with
(1) WCC 21.04 060 (Roads)
(ii) WCC 21 04 090 (Water Supply) when the remainder parcel will not
require potable water:
(iii) WCC 2104100(Sewage Disposal)'
(iv) WCC 21.04.130 (Land Survey)
(v) WCC 21 01 150 (Boundary Discrepancies)
(vi) WCC 16.16 (Critical Areas) and
(vii) WCC 18 (Shoreline Master Program)
21
(b) Any subsequent development must comply with all applicable codes
(c) Survey Requirements— Partial
(1) A survev, prepared by a Professional Land Survey in accordance with
W CC 21 09 010 and 020 which provides the location of at least two
corners of the farmstead parcel shall be submitted A survey is not
required for the remainder parcel that can not have further residential
development
Rationale for proposed amendment
The division of an existing house from a large parcel (the remainder parcel has to be at
least 10 acres) is allowed within the Agriculture zone to unburden the land base of the
cost ofa residential unit. No residential development is allowed on the remaining
agricultural parcel. No additional traffiq environmental impacts or activities are
inherent in the segregation of the house from the farm. Unlike atypical subdivision,
which is being done to create another buildable lot, where the suitability of the site is
under review for a residential or commercial use, Agricultural divisions as allowed
under 20.40.250 -252 restrict this possibility.
At present, when a small lot is divided off a large lot, the entire property has to be
surveyed. This can bean extremely costly process that generally isn't necessary to
clearly identify the speck location of the farmstead parcel (residential lot). No further
divisions of either lot would be allowed unless a rezone of the property was granted. In
that case a much more detailed survey would be required to facilitate a more intense
development.
Other reviews are also unnecessary due to the fact the residential structure is already
where it is — there really is no siting issues, this is an after the development division.
If additional structures are constructed on either parcel, several reviews would be
triggered and any alterations or additions that would have affect on the environment or
be contrary to County Codes could be addressed at that time. If no additions or
alterations are proposed, then for all practical purposes, the only change is that the one
parcel is now two, making it possible for two owners to purchase the property for specific
purposes — one for a residence and the other forfarming. Otherwise everything is the
same as it was before the division.
22
Amend chanter 21.05, Preliminary Lone Subdivisions as shown below•
Amend section WCC 21.05.030(l)(h) of the Whatcom County Land Division Regulations
as follows:
(h) Approval of a preliminary long subdivision shall be accompanied by written
findings of fact and conclusions that:
(i) Appropriate provisions have been made for the public health, safety,
and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, stormwatef
management, streets or roads, pedestrian and bicycle paths, alleys, other
public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks
and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and all other
relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure
safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school,
and the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such
subdivision and dedication; and
(ii) The proposal is in conformity with the Whatcom County
Comprehensive Plan, applicable land division, zoning, critical areas,
shoreline management, other land use regulations, and Chapter 58.17
RCW.
21.05.080 Water supply.
A single public well air single publie water supf)15L, including sers,jees to each lot, shall b
provided fef every subdivision, except as lclliv�s-
(1)
required by the health afld human seisiiees department.
(I )Water from a public water systemf s) shall be provided to serve each lot in a
subdivision, except as specified in (2) below.
(2) For a residential subdivisions with six or fewer residences, private water supplies may
be utilized under the following circumstances:
(a) All lots served by the private water supplies are five acres or larger, unless
smaller because of clustering. If the lots are smaller because of clustering, the
gross density of the subdivision shall not exceed one dwelling per five acres and
the number of clustered lots shall not exceed four; and
23
(b) The withdrawal is not from a defined portion of an aquifer of known regional
ground water contamination that exceeds state standards and that has been
identified by the director of the health department a ..°.,a human -service � and
confirmed by the board of health; and
(c) The water source is ground water and not surface water; and
(d) If the subdivision is within the designated water service area of a public water
purveyor that is shown on the Coordinated Water System Plan map or within one-
half mile of an existing water purveyor's water lines:
(i) The water cannot be provided to the applicant within 120 calendar days
of submitting a written request and applicable fees to the purveyor unless
specified otherwise by the hearing examiner or county council; or
(ii) The purveyor states in writing that it is unable or unwilling to provide
the service: or
(iii) The purveyor and applicant are unable to achieve an agreement on the
schedule and terms of provision of service within 120 calendar days.
(3) The applicant shall demonstrate that adequate water right(s) exist to serve the
subdivision except when water withdrawal is exempt from obtaining a water right
permit under RCW 90.44 050
(4) If a group B public water system is created to serve the subdivision the number of
wells shall be limited to the minimum needed to serve the water needs of the
subdivision as determined by the health department
(5) If a public water supply is required, all the requirements of Chapter 246 -290
WAC, Group A Public Water Systems, or Chapter 246 -291 WAC, Group B
Public Water Systems, must be met prior to final plat approval. (Ord. 2000 -056 §
1).
Rationale for proposed amendment:
(I) The proposal would bring greater consistency between the County's subdivision
rules and state water law. State law provides an exemption from the requirement
to obtain a water right permitfor "single or group domestic uses in an amount
not exceeding five thousand gallons a day` (RCW 90.44.050).
(2) The Washington State Supreme Court has interpreted this statute in the case of
Department ofEcology v. Campbell & Gwinn et al (146 Wn1d I; 43 P.3d 4),
issued on March 28, 2002. In this decision, the Supreme Court indicated.
24
... The developer of a subdivision is, necessarily, planning for adequate
water for group uses, rather than a single use, and accordingly is entitled
to only one 5,000 gpd exemption for the project... the exemption does not
apply here to allow a withdrawal for each lot in the residential subdivision
under separate, individual 5, 000 gpd exemptions... the exemption in
RCW 90.44.050 does not apply where a developer proposes to use
multiple wells collectively withdrawing over 5, 000 gpd to serve a
subdivision...
(3) The Whatcom County Health Department indicated, in an e -mail message of
August 19, 2002, that:
.... We use Washington State Department ofHealth (DOH) Design
Criteria for determining how much water to allocate to each residential
connection. For these small systems, DOH requires 800 gallons per day.
This accounts for the peak usage days during the year. Ifyou multiply 6
residences times 800 gallons of water you get 4800 gallons. The
maximum amount of water a landowner can use without a water right is
5000 gallons.
(4) However, the Health Department also indicated that, in rare cases, more than six
dwellings may be served by an exempt well. For example, the Lummi Island Land
Trust was approved for nine dwellings on an exempt well, based upon analysis of
an "analogous system, " metering, a conservation program, restrictions on the
number of bedrooms in each dwelling, covenants regarding water use, etc.
(Cedrus Cooperative, BSP2001- 00004).
(5) Residential subdivisions with 7 or more lots shouldn't have private wells, even if
they were able to obtain a water right permit. The County Health Department has
indicated that the state has a goal of increasing the number ofpeople on public
water supplies. Such public supplies have on -going testing requirements to assure
that water quality standards are maintained over the life of the water system.
Private wells do not usually have such on -going monitoring requirements.
Additionally, the Health Department has stated an interest in reducing the
number of holes in the ground that could be conduits far contaminants entering
the aquifer. Multiple private wells, if allowed in medium size and larger
subdivisions, could lead to a proliferation ofsuch conduits.
(6) The Whatcom County Health Department recommended using the term `public
water system(s)" because state and local health codes use the term `public water
systems " rather than "public wells " or `public supplies. " The Health
Department has indicated that a public water system can use multiple wells as
long as those wells do not withdraw more than 5,000 gallons ofwater in a day.
(7) The name of the Whatcom County Health & Human Services Department has
been changed to the Whatcom County Health Department.
25
Amend chapter 21.06, Final Long Subdivisions, as shown below.
21.06.070 Disclosures and notes.
The following disclosures and notes, if applicable, shall be recorded in the county
auditor's office and a statement identifying the subject and the auditor's file
number for each such instrument shall be on the final plat map under surveyor's
notes prior to final approval by the county:
Right to farm, right to practice forestry, mineral resource disclosures.
UCritical area notes.
U Boundary discrepancies.
UProtective covenants, conditions and restrictions.
!'Drainage maintenance agreement block.
-Road maintenance agreement block (private roads only).
L] Latecomers' agreements.
U Significant pipeline in vicinity disclosure (: 4hii+°60-feet) when the subject property
is within 660' of a pipeline shown on Mao 12 Chanter 5 of the Whatcom County
Comprehensive Plan. (Ord. 2002 -017 § 1; Ord. 2000 -056 § 1).
Rationale for proposed amendment The term "significant pipeline" is
ambiguous. However, chapter 5 of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan
states:
... The Utilities Committee concluded notification was the most
appropriate method to meet the County's goals, as opposed to imposing
setbacks or other restrictions which would limit landowners use of land on
the remote possibility an event would occur. Map 12 indicates a
notification area of1320feet (660feetfrom each sidefrom the pipeline)
for natural gas and hazardous liquid transmission pipelines, which may be
of value to the public (p. 5 -10).
The Planning & Development staff person who worked with the Utility
Planning Advisory Committee indicated that the intent was to require
disclosure far developments within 660' of pipelines shown on map 12,
chapter 5 of the Comp Plan. Adding a specific reference to this map will
reduce ambiguity and increase certainty far applicants so they know what
is required of them.
26
Amend chapter 21.07, Preliminary Bindine Site Plans as shown below.-
Amend section 21.07.030(1)(h) of the Whatcom County Land Division Regulations as
follows:
(h) Approval of a preliminary binding site plan shall be accompanied by written
findings that:
(i) Appropriate provisions have been made for the public health, safety,
and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, stormwater
management, streets or roads, pedestrian and bicycle paths, alleys, other
public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks
and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and all other
relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure
safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school,
and the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such
binding site plan and dedication; and
(it) The proposal is in conformity with applicable land division, zoning,
critical areas. horeline management and other land use regulations.
21.07.080 Water supply- Health requirement
Forma bile home parks and RV paFlEs vordrip I e J3-blie I sells or pub lie water supplies,
idequat
(1) Water from a public water system(s) shall be provided to serve each lot or lease
space in a binding site plan
(2) The applicant shall demonstrate that adequate water ri ht(s) exist to serve the
binding site plan except when water withdrawal is exempt from obtaining a water
right nemnit under RCW 90.44.050.
(3) if a group B public water system is created to serve the binding site plan the
number of wells shall be limited to the minimum needed to serve the water needs
of the binding site plan as determined by the health department
(4) All requirements of Chapter 246 -290 WAC, Group A Public Water Systems, or
Chapter 246 -291 WAC, Group B Public Water Systems, must be met prior to
specific binding site plan approval. (Ord. 2000-056 § 1).
27
Rationale for proposed amendment:
(1) the proposal would bring greater consistency between the County's subdivision rules
and state water law. State law provides an exemption from the requirement to obtain
a water right permit far "single or group domestic uses in an amount not exceeding
five thousand gallons a day ... orfor an industrial purpose in an amount not
exceeding five thousand gallons a day° (RCW 90.44.050).
(2) The provisions would allow commercial or industrial development to utilize multiple
public water sources when all of these sources have a water right. Por example, an
industrial use may have an existing on -site well that qualifies as a public water
supply but may not be able to obtain additional water rights to expand operations.
Such a business should not be hindered from utilizing other available public water
supplies, such as from a water association, water district, or municipal supply to
facilitate expansion.
(3) The name of the Whatcom County Health & Human Services Department has been
changed to the Whatcam County Health Department.
28
Amend chapter 21.08, General and Specific Binding Site Plans, as shown
below.
21.08.070 Disclosures and notes.
The following disclosures and notes, if applicable, shall be recorded in the county
auditor's office and a statement identifying the subject and the auditor's file
number for each such instrument shall be on the general binding site plan and each
specific binding site plan original drawing under surveyor's notes prior to final
approval by the county:
-Right to farm, right to practice forestry, mineral resource disclosures.
- Critical area notes.
'I Boundary discrepancies.
Ij Protective covenants, conditions and restrictions.
IJ Drainage maintenance agreement block.
f !Road maintenance agreement block (private roads only).
:Latecomers' agreements.
Significant pipeline in vicinity disclosure (within 6600 feet) when the subject property
is within 660' of a pipeline shown on Map 12 Chapter 5 of the Whatcom County
Comprehensive Plan. (Ord. 2002 -017 § I; Ord. 2000 -056 § 1).
Rationale for proposed amendment: The term "significant pipeline" is
ambiguous. However, chapter 5 of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan
states:
... The Utilities Committee concluded notification was the most
appropriate method to meet the County's goals, as opposed to imposing
setbacks or other restrictions which would limit landowners use of land on
the remote possibility an event would occur. Map 12 indicates a
notification area of1320feet (660 feet from each side from the pipeline)
,for natural gas and hazardous liquid transmission pipelines, which may be
of value to the public (p. 5 -10).
The Planning & Development staff person who worked with the Utility
Planning Advisory Committee indicated that the intent was to require
disclosure for developments within 660' of pipelines shown on map 12,
chapter 5 of the Comp Plan. Adding a specific reference to this map will
reduce ambiguity and increase certainty for applicants so they know what
is required of them
29
SOOM CO
3rP Gtia
a
�4•NINGZG2
WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FINDINGS OF FACT & REASONS FOR ACTION,
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Amendments to the Whatcom County Land Division Regulations (Title 21)
WHEREAS, The County Council requested the Technical Advisory Committee and
Planning Commission to review certain provisions the Whatcom County Land Division
Regulations (Title 21); and
WHEREAS, The Technical Advisory Committee issued recommendations on March 11,
2004; and
WHEREAS, Legal notice was published in the Bellingham Herald; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposal; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has evaluated the proposed amendments and
made modifications;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
THE PLANNING COMMISSION ENTERS THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT &
REASONS FOR ACTION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR ACTION
The Whatcom County Council adopted Ordinance 2003 -033 on May 20, 2003. This
ordinance temporarily deleted the gift exemption and 5 -acre road frontage exemption
provisions from the Whatcom County Land Division Regulations (Title 21) for a 180 -day
period. This ordinance also requested the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to
review Title 21 and make recommendations relating to: _
• Gift exemptions and 5 -acre road frontage exemptions;
• Wireless communication exemptions;
• Short plat road frontage improvements & impact fees;
• Threatened & endangered species;
• Multiple wells; and
• Short plat process for creating lots of five acres or larger.
2 Plaming DiAsioM'i1k 2i/2W3 -04 AmeMmentVSUff-- P.C: CowiciVZ0N2W4- 00WI(Title 21 A Mmenas)— AR.doc p
2. The Whatcom County Council adopted Ordinance 2003 -058 on November 18, 2003,
temporarily deleted the gift exemption and 5 -acre road frontage exemption provisions
from Title 21 for another 180 -day period,
3. The Technical Advisory Committee commenced consideration of the amendments to
Title 21 on September 18, 2003 and issued final recommendations to amend Title 21 on
March 11, 2004.
4. Notice was published in the Bellingham Herald on March 11, 2004,
5. The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Official for Whatcom County issued a
Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) on March 12, 2004.
6. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the subject amendments on March
25, 2004.
7. The Growth Management Act (GMA) establishes planning goals that are to guide local
governments when adopting development regulations, such as land division ordinances
(RCW 36.70A.020).
8. The GMA requires that development regulations must be consistent with and implement
the County's Comprehensive Plan (RCW 36.90A.040).
Gift Exemptions & 5-Acre Road Frontage Exemptions
9. Water — Gift exemptions (WCC 21.03.020(6)) and 5 -acre road frontage exemptions
(WCC 21.03.020(4)) are not reviewed to determine if they have a drinking water supply.
Therefore, there is no assurance that a parcel created through an exemption will have a
suitable domestic water supply.
10. Sewage Disposal - Gift exemptions and 5 -acre road frontage exemptions are not
reviewed to determine if they can accommodate an on -site sewage system. Therefore,
there is no assurance that a parcel created through an exemption will be suitable for
building.
11. Critical Areas /Shorelines - Gift exemptions and 5 -acre road frontage exemptions are not
reviewed for compliance with the critical areas ordinance or shoreline program. A parcel
created through an exemption may be substantially impacted by wetlands, steep slopes or
other critical areas. It may be difficult to build upon, substantially more expensive to
build upon because of mitigation requirements or may compromise protection of critical
areas.
2 Phmmg Oiv ion i&2 I1 03A1NmdmenWSUd- P.C.L0wiV N2W4-0 1 (fitk 21 Ame Wn6)— AR .doc P,2
12. Clustering - Parcels created through gift exemptions and the 5 -acre road frontage
exemptions must be a minimum of five acres. These exemption provisions do not allow
for clustering in the same manner that ashort plat allows clustering. For example, if a 10-
acre parcel is bisected by a stream that contained threatened fish species, creating two
parcels through an exemption process may lead to altering the riparian vegetation
adjacent to the stream to accommodate construction. In contrast, a short plat could
accommodate clustering of building lots away from the stream. The stream and its buffer
could be preserved in the reserve tract.
13. Access Easements — Access easements may go through wetlands and may be difficult or
expensive to construct, or may need to be altered, because of government regulations
relating to the protection of critical areas. Access easements are not reviewed to
determine if they are located on steep slopes that would binder emergency vehicle access.
14. Legal Descriptions - If not written by a professional consistent with the requirements of
RCW 18.43 (Engineers and Land Surveyors), there is a greater likelihood that legal
descriptions for lot boundaries will be incorrect. Additionally, there have been cases
when the access easement is not properly described and does not match the location
shown on the map. Incorrect legal descriptions affect future lot owners and neighboring
property owners, as they may create a dispute about the boundary between two properties.
Legal descriptions that are not written by a professional frequently cost more to survey in
the future, adding financial burdens to the public (Note! This rationale statement only
applies to gift exemptions).
15. Survey —These exemptions do not require a survey.
• If an access easement is adjacent to a neighboring property line, there is no survey to
confirm that the access road is actually being constructed within the easement and
does not encroach onto the neighboring property.
Additionally, without a survey, you don't know if the parcel is actually 5- acres. Some
sections of land are less than the 640 -acre standard size. Therefore, a subdivisional
description of land (i.e. the west %2 of the SE '/4 of the SE %4 of the SE %4 of the
section), would not yield a 5 -acre tract if the section is less than 640 acres. Without a
survey, the County may not be able to know if the lot being created is actually 5 acres.
Therefore, the exemption process may allow unintentional violation of the R5A
zoning.
16. R -O -W Dedications — Gift exemptions are not required to dedicate right- of-way for
future road widening by the County. Short plats and long plats are required to make such
dedications under appropriate circumstances.
17. County Review — Absent County review for compliance with critical areas, development
standards, and other County regulations, a parcel may be created that is essentially
unbuildable under standard county codes. This may lead to compromising County code to
allow a reasonable use of the property and avoid a takings claim.
2 Planning DivisioMide 2MM3 -C4N Mn=WSMIT- PC.-COwici=NE004 -G [(Title 21 Amendments) —A doc P.3
18. Other Counties — An October 2003 survey of the 38 other counties in Washington State
revealed that only five of these counties (13 %) had gift exemption provisions.
Additionally, only six counties (16 %) had provisions for other 5 -acre exemptions. The
five counties that allow gift exemptions are: Mason, Ferry, Stevens, Spokane, and
Garfield. The six counties that allow 5 -acre exemptions are: Clallam, Kitsap, Pacific,
Wahkiakum, Garfield and Asotin.
19. State law provides County governments with the discretion to either require plat approval
or provide exemption status for divisions of land into tracts of five acres or larger (RC W
58.17.040(2)). For the reasons stated above, the gift exemption and 5 -acre road frontage
exemption clauses should be deleted from Title 21 as recommended by the Whatcom
County Technical Advisory Committee.
Wireless Communication Exemption
20. Senate Bill 6578 was passed by the state legislature and signed into law by the Governor
in 2002, exempting leases for personal wireless facilities from state land division rules.
This new state law is now codified as RCW 58.17.040(8).
21. Whatcom County already has siting criteria in the Official Whatcom County Zoning
Ordinance governing the location of personal wireless facilities (WCC 20.13).
22. Once a decision has been issued by the County through the administrative approval
process or conditional use permit process to approve a wireless facility, requiring
additional County review through the short plat process is unnecessary.
23. Therefore, an exemption for wireless communication facilities should be added to the
Whatcom County Code as allowed by state law.
Short Plat Road Frontage Improvements
24. Frontage improvements for short plats (WCC 21.04.060(2)) are only required for
properties that directly front a public road. Such a property owner may have to pay at least
tens of thousands of dollars for frontage improvements. However, an owner with property
that does not front a public road does not pay for such improvements when short platting,
even though the short plat may create similar traffic impacts. Therefore, eliminating the
requirements for frontage improvements and instituting an impact fee ordinance would
ensure that short plats are treated more equitably.
25. Frontage improvements can be an expensive component of developing a short plat (this
cost can be increased even more when the owner must move utility poles, gas lines, etc.
or when a comer lot fronting on two roads is being short platted). However, these
frontage improvements must sometimes be altered or destroyed when the County
subsequently widens the road (i.e. if the County must shave a hill for sight distance
considerations, modify drainage to accommodate the new road, or if different road
construction standards have been implemented since the time the frontage improvements
for the short plat were installed).
i Pluming Divuian?itle 3llLWl-0I AmendmenWSnl (P.C.COUnciVZONlW1-0000I (Title 21 AmenNrcnR) —AR doc P.4
26. The Division of Engineering indicated that isolated frontage improvements can cause
traffic hazards when small segments of road are improved because drivers who are not
familiar with the area may not be aware that the wider road lasts only for a short distance.
Therefore, when the road narrows again, it can cause an unexpected situation for the
driver.
27. Therefore, the road frontage improvement requirements for short plats should be deleted.
Threatened & Endangered Species
28. The critical . areas ordinance will soon be updated considering best available science.
29. The shoreline management program will soon be updated.
30. Rules relating to protection of fish habitat should be placed into the critical areas
ordinance and shoreline program, as these codes that are applicable to all types of
development, land use, clearing, and filling, rather than in Title 21, which only applies to
land divisions.
31. The shoreline program should be specifically referenced in Title 21 to alert property
owners and developers of the requirement to comply with these regulations. The critical
areas ordinance is already cited in Title 21.
Multiple Wells
32. State law requires that appropriate provisions must be made for potable water supplies
before a subdivision can be approved (RCW 58.17.110(2)). Additionally, the Whatcom
County Code requires that appropriate provisions must be made for potable water
supplies before a binding site plan can be approved (WCC 21.07.030(1)).
33. State water law, at RCW 90.44.050, provides that:
... no withdrawal of public ground waters of the state shall be begun, nor shall
any well or other works for such withdrawal be constructed, unless an application
to appropriate such waters has been made to the department and a permit has been
granted by it as herein provided: EXCEPT, HOWEVER, That any withdrawal of
public ground waters for ... single or group domestic uses in an amount not
exceeding five thousand gallons a day ... is and shall be exempt from the
provisions of this section ... `
2 Planmg NminNli1k 21 2M] MendnenWSYH- P.CCMdVWN20C4 ] Ri11e 21 MCMmenl) -gR P.5
34. The Washington State Supreme Court, in the case of State of Washington Department of
Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn et al (March 28, 2002), interpreted this law as follows:
... The developer of a subdivision is, necessarily, planning for adequate water for
group uses rather than a single use, and accordingly is entitled to only one 5,000
gpd (gallon per day) exemption for the project... the exemption does not ...
allow a withdrawal for each lot in the residential subdivision under separate,
individual 5,000 gpd exemptions... the exemption in RCW 90.44.050 does not
apply where a developer proposes to use multiple wells collectively withdrawing
over 5,000 gpd to serve a subdivision...
35. Title 21 should be amended to require applicants to demonstrate that they have adequate
water rights to serve subdivisions and binding site plans, except when the water
withdrawal is exempt from obtaining a water right permit (i.e. total water use is 5,000
gallons/day or less for a subdivision or binding site plan). This is one component in
emoting appropriate provisions are made for a potable water supply as required by state
and local law.
Short Plat Process
36. GMA planning goal # 7 indicates that "Applications for both state and local government
permits should be processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure predictability' (RCW
36.70A.020(7)).
37. Government regulations, other than those rules in Title 21, have been imposed or are
more complex than they were 10 to 15 years ago. While these regulations have a
legitimate public purpose, the application of these regulations increases the time it takes
to process short plats under the provisions of Title 21.
38. Amending Title 21 to specify timeframes and clarify requirements in the short plat
process should provide a limited degree of increased efficiency in the short plat process.
39. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Policy 213-3 is to "Streamline development
regulations to eliminate unnecessary time delays."
40. The new agricultural short plat provisions in Title 21 would reduce the time, cost and
complexity of processing a short plat under WCC 20.40.252(1).
CONCLUSIONS
The subject amendments are consistent with RCW 58.17 (Plats — Subdivisions —
Dedications).
2. The subject amendments are consistent with the Growth Management Act planning goals
of RCW 36.70A.020.
2P mmg Division ? i1k21 /W3V AmeMnenh Uff- P.C.Cow il/LON3W4-0 1911101Ame n%) —A AC P.6
3. The subject amendments are consistent with the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan
goals and policies.
The subject amendments will serve the public interest.
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the above findings and conclusions, the Planning Commission recommends
approval of the amendments to the Whatcom County Land Division Regulations (Title 21) as
shown on Exhibit A.
PLANNING COMMISSION
Q
Date Date
Commissioners present at the March 25. 2004 meeting when the vote was taken on the subject
amendment: John Belisle, David Hunter, Kenneth Mann, Geoff Menzies, Dave Pros, Ron Roosma,
and Robert Wiesen.
Vote: Ayes: 5, Nays: 2, Abstain: 0, Absent: 2. Motion carried to adopt the above
amendments.
2 Plwti eivisioM'i1 MW3-0 gneMoeot4S ffPC. owcMN2004 -W lCfi1 21 AmeM U) - AR P.]
PfGOM CO
4
3r �<
h9�Mnot°P
Memo
Date: March 4, 2004
To: The Honorable Whatcom County Council
From: The Whatcom County Technical Advisory Committee �-
�a�a
Subject: Ordinance 2003 -033 (Land Division Regulations – Protection of Fish &
Water Quality)
In May of 2003, the County Council directed the Technical Advisory Committee
(TAC) to review the Whatcom County Land Division Regulations (Title 21) and
make recommendations relating to several matters. One of the issues the TAC
was directed to consider is "Threatened and endangered species criteria in
subdivision approval criteria per action item # 56 in the Environment Chapter of
the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan." Parenthetically, it should be noted
that Action Item # 56 will be renumbered to Action Item # 59 when the Council
approves the Environment Chapter amendments.
Action item # 56 in the Environment Chapter of the Whatcom County
Comprehensive Plan is to:
Amend the Whatcom County Land Division Regulations approval criteria
to require subdivisions and short plats to be designed in a manner to
protect fish habitat and water quality when a fish bearing stream or river
passes through the site.
The TAC finds that regulations and standards to protect fish habitat and water
quality should reside in sections of the County Code that apply to all types of
development & land use rather than limited to a section of County law that only
applies to land divisions. Specifically, we understand that the Critical Areas
Ordinance will be updated in 2004 and the Shoreline Management Program will
be revised in 2005. We believe that rules to protect fish habitat and water quality
should reside in these regulations, which are applicable to building permits,
conditional use permits, clearing permits, fill & grade permits, and land division
applications.
To adopt revisions to the Whatcom County Land Division Regulations at this time
may cause conflicts with critical areas & shoreline regulations once they are
revised.
The Whatcom County Development Standards Technical Advisory Committee
(TAC) has many recommendations related to this Action Item (see Exhibit A).
The TAC believes that the issue is larger than the Land Division regulations and
that protection of fish habitat and water quality offers a substantial opportunity to
integrate Whatcom County Land Use regulations such as shoreline and critical
area rules. The need for this consistency is evident and recognized in other
related Action Items such as Nos. 57, 58, and 59 (which will become Action
Items 60, 61 & 65 when the amendments to the Environment chapter of the
Comp Plan are adopted).
The TAC believes it's appropriate to defer consideration of further changes to the
Title 21 Land Division Regulations until after the Critical Areas Ordinance and
Shoreline Management Program are updated. The TAC may re -visit the issue
after these updates occur. Finally, it would be advantageous to specifically cite
the Shoreline Management Program in the Land Division Regulations to alert the
public and developers of the need to comply with these regulations.
In summary, the existing version of the Whatcom County Land Division
Regulations (Title 21) indicates that short plats, long plats and binding site plans
must be in conformity with applicable critical areas and other land use regulations
(WCC 21.04.030(1), WCC 21.05.030(1)(h) and WCC 21.07.030(1)(h)). These
references, when viewed in conjunction with the scheduled updates of the Critical
Areas Ordinance and Shoreline Management program to include best available
science, will protect fish habitat and water quality.
EXHIBIT A
Below are the recommendations of the TAC.
1. The regulations needed to protect fish habitat and water quality are
germane to nearly all land use activities, not just Land Division.
Therefore, to ensure consistency, the criteria belong in sections of the
Whatcom County Code that apply to all types of development, land use,
clearing and grading, such as the Critical Areas Ordinance and Shoreline
Management Program.
2. This type of regulation needs to be performance- based, which means
being linked to specific habitat functions, water quality parameters, and /or
water quantity needs (such as in stream flows). Performance -based
regulations may be different than the approach of the majority of the codes
in place to protect the environment. Scientifically based performance
criteria may be more expensive and time consuming to develop and
implement initially, but have the benefit of affording project applicants
more flexibility and predictability in the long term.
3. This type of regulation may require both site- specific and comprehensive
(watershed) levels of analysis. While tools are available at this time to
conduct watershed level analysis, these analyses may or may not exist for
drainages within Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 1. This reduces
the ability to implement performance -based regulations in the near term.
The various watershed management planning efforts, such as WRIA 1
watershed management project, should provide tools to assist in this level
of regulation.
4. The regulations to protect fish habitat and water quality should apply more
broadly than only to properties that have fish bearing streams on them.
The criteria should apply to all properties and surface waters unless
specific conditions warrant an exemption. This will also facilitate
comprehensive analysis. -
a. Generally speaking, all properties contribute to downstream or
down - gradient waters. Protection of fish habitat and water quality
should not be limited only to properties with fish bearing streams
crossing them. This will provide a more equitable treatment of
landowners.
b. Habitat is dynamic and can move within a stream system. Fish
utilization is similar and can change over time as the result of
natural and man - induced change. If a stream is not currently fish
bearing, it very likely contributes to a fish bearing water.
c. Specific conditions that would warrant an exemption should include,
among other things, land use activities done in such a manner that
protect downstream fish habitat and water quality.
d. In instances where substantial human alteration of the water
conveyance precludes fish use (e.g., the stream is culverted
through developed commercial properties), off -site mitigation may
be used in lieu of compliance with the criteria. However, water
quality outflow from the activity would still need to comply with other
applicable regulations such as stormwater standards.
5. One of the largest concerns of the TAC is how regulations to attain
protection of fish habitat and water quality will be interpreted,
implemented, and enforced. Vague regulations require too much
discretion on the part of the implementing personnel and will be difficult to
consistently and equitably implement and /or enforce. "One- size - fits -all"
regulations will likely meet substantial resistance because they may be
perceived as being too strict in many instances, the technical linkages to
the performance criteria may not be clear, and they could be perceived as
the easy - way -out from an administrative perspective. An alternative would
be a formula -based approach where site - specific and watershed factors
are used to determine what type of measures should be used. However,
at this time there is inadequate information regarding some performance
criteria to develop such an approach quantitatively while sufficient
guidance is available for others. The work products under development
for the watershed management planning efforts and under the W RIA 1
salmonid recovery planning should provide a framework for the formula -
based approach.
The TAC recommends that Whatcom County pursue two -types of
regulations to achieve compliance with protection of fish habitat and water
quality.
a. Prescriptive Regulations — This is a strict "one- size - fits -all,
regulation (such as a standard buffer that may be larger than
necessary). This type of regulation offers an opportunity to
minimize timelines and streamline the permit process.
b. Performance Based Regulations —This is a formula based
approach such as a point system based on watershed and site
specific features including soils, slopes, tree cover, etc. and the
ability of the project design to either protect or demonstrate
progress toward achieving properly functioning conditions for fish
r
habitat. This type of regulation may offer the opportunity to
maximize utilization of land.
6. The TAC recommends two basic objectives to be utilized to guide
development of regulations:
a. Land use will not contribute to degradation of the physical
processes that shape the channel structure conducive to properly
functioning physical fish habitat in the receiving waters.
b. Land use will not contribute to a violation of applicable stream flows
and /or water quality standards in receiving waters.
It is apparent to the TAC that Whatcom County will need more staff to
effectively develop and implement these regulations and that this effort
must be coordinated with ongoing Shoreline and Critical Area Ordinance
revisions and watershed and salmon recovery planning. The TAC also
recommends that policy and technical level staff from the County, other
agencies, and other governments work collaboratively on the development
and implementation of the regulations.
CC: Jeff Chalfant
John Thompson
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE 1
WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting March 25 2004
Call To Order: The meeting was called to order by Whatcom County Planning Commission
Chairperson, Dave Pros, in the Planning Department Library at 6:35 p.m.
Roll Call: Bob Wiesen, Dave Pros, Ken Mann, Geoff Menzies, Ron Roosma, David Hunter, and John
Belisle.
Staff Present: Hal Hart, Sylvia Goodwin, Matt Aamot, Jay Irwin, Elaine Wick, Wayne Fitch, Lee Carter -
Engineering, Lee Phipps - Health Department, and Becky Garvey.
Director's Dialog
Hart: One of the most important things you will be dealing with over the next year is the Urban Growth
Area for the City of Bellingham. Next Wednesday you are all invited to the Planning Short Course. This
is a joint presentation with the City of Bellingham.
Tomorrow the Environmental Impact Statement for the City of Bellingham UGA will be released. There
are three alternatives -Grow up, grow out, or grow up and out. What are the impacts of each alternative?
The Natural Resource Integration Projects will take up a lot of your time in the next two years. We will
be looking at critical areas, shorelines, stormwater, WRIA, and salmon recovery. Shorelines have been
around since the 1970's, Critical Areas since the 1990's, and WRIA and salmon recovery are new.
Regarding the One Stop Shop we are trying to get more permits on -line. We hope to have mechanical
permits on -line by next January. There are 19 cities, around Lake Washington, where you can go to
one place to get your building permit. It's a more integrated approach to the permit process. If other
places can work this out we should be able to also.
You know the Olympics are coming here and the state legislature is speeding up the Guide Meridian
project. They want to complete it in six years. They will have to figure out a by -pass. Not everyone can
be going down the Guide Meridian. They will be looking at a place north of Axton, or Smith, or Slater
with a direct cut through to 1 -5. This is a huge land use issue as well as a transportation issue. The idea
is to take all of the trucks off of the Guide Meridian. If they put the by -pass down Axton it makes the
proposed Pioneer Plaza happen. It would rebuild the entire area there. Wherever you put it there will be
implications such as traffic, noise, lights, smog, etc.
Wiesen: This connector to the Guide Meridian is really disturbing. Didn't we at one time have Slater
Road in the planning stage and then it got dropped?
Hart: It was dropped off of the six year transportation plan. The issues were over who would pay and
going through peoples property.
Wiesen: We are losing are chance. The least impact, right now, would be Slater
Hart: It's still in the Comprehensive Plan.
Wiesen: If we don't plan ahead it's going to cost us a lot more when we get to it.
Approval of minutes
Wiesen moved to approve the March 11, 2004 minutes as written. Roosma seconded. Motion carried
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2
WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting March 25 2004
Open Session for Public Comment
Jack Penes, Sunset Dr., Bellingham: A couple of weeks ago I promised you a copy of the HUD report,
so here it is. I spoke to you about the vacancy rate and if you look at the HUD report you will see the
vacancy rate in Whatcom County and Bellingham is at a very low level. HUD says you need 5.5% to
7.5% vacancy to reach an equilibrium in the market place so prices don't rise so rapidly. We haven't
been doing a good job because we have a low vacancy rate. This is important because the whole
concept of growth management is that cities are supposed capture more of the growth. You have to
make the cities a place people want to move to. Since we adopted the Urban Fringe Subarea Plan in
1997 you will see that in Bellingham there has been about two multi - family homes built for each single
family home. In the county it's all single family homes. The people who can afford to move out into the
county are doing so. They aren't living where we want them lo. Bellingham is still the center for
shopping, working, government, etc. The cities don't loose much if they don't attract growth. They still
get the tax dollars. The county gets the burden of providing public services and the loss of quality of life.
There has to be enough land available in Bellingham to allow builders to provide enough choices for
people.
Planning Commission Training Session relating to the existing Whatcom County Land Division
Regulations -Title 21.
Elaine Wick, Jay Irwin, Wayne Fitch, and Lee Carter gave a power point presentation explaining the
process of creating short plats, how long the process takes, and the requirements that must be met.
Roosma: On the short plat applications what percentage is submitted by engineers?
Wick: I would say about 99% of the applications are submitted by the surveyor or the owner.
Carter: Typically on short plats the only time you are going to have a licensed engineer is when you
have steep slopes or a public road.
Menzies: What recourse do people have when they buy a lot, that was done through the gift exemption
process, that isn't suitable for building?
Wick: It's a buyer beware situation. In some cases they can mitigate or do a boundary line adjustment if
there is not a site suitable for a house.
Phipps: Quite often these lots can't be approved for septic and water. If they go through the short plat
process it forces them to create lots that can support this.
Hunter: What is the date of completeness for vesting purposes?
Wick: There is specific criteria listed in Title 21. The date for vesting is when all the required information
is submitted.
Hunter: Is there a sunset provision for vesting?
Wick: There is on the plat. There is a time limit of five years. After that point it's no longer vested.
Hunter: Is that also true for long plats?
Wick: Yes.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE 3
WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting March 25 2004
Wiesen: When did that sunset clause go into effect?
Wick: December 15, 2000.
Wiesen: It states there is a right to practice forestry. Is this saying they can do so on the property?
Wick: It's saying there may be forestry taking place near them. There is also the right to farm and mine.
We put that on the mylar because we want people to know this up front.
Public hearing
File #ZON2004- 00001 -to consider amending the Whatcom County Land Division Regulations
(Title 21).
Matt Aamot presented the staff report.
The Whatcom County Council adopted ordinances in 2003 temporarily deleting the gift exemption and
the five acre road frontage exemptions from the Title 21 Land Division regulations. These are in effect
until May 2004. The Council also requested the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and the Planning
Commission to review and make recommendations relating to several other matters, which are outlined
in the staff report.
The TAC met over a six month period and is recommending deletion of the gift exemption and five acre
road frontage provisions. One issue they looked at was water. In these exemption provisions people
are not required to show they have an adequate drinking water supply, therefore there is no assurance
the parcel will have a supply. Another reason was there is no critical areas review. We did a survey of
other counties in the state which showed of the 38 other counties five others had gift exemptions and
six others had some other type of five acre gift exemption provisions.
The Council also had us look at wireless communication facilities. There was a senate bill passed in
2000 that accepted leases for personal wireless facilities from the state land division rules. In Whatcom
County we have siting criteria for these type of facilities so requiring further review through the short
plat process is not necessary. We are recommending adding an exemption into the code to allow land
divisions for these facilities.
Short Plat Road Frontage Improvements and Impact fees: The existing code requires frontage
improvements, to county standards, if the property directly abuts a public road. This could cost tens of
thousands of dollars. However if the parcel directly behind it does not abut on the public road then
nothing is required to be paid. The TAC recommends the frontage improvements language be deleted
from the code and instead an impact fee ordinance be instituted. This will be more equitable. The TAC
has just started working on the impact fee ordinance. An additional reason is that sometimes people in
the rural areas will improve their road frontage and later the county will come in and reconstruct the
road which can, under certain circumstances, destroy the original investment.
Threatened and endangered species: In the next year the Critical Areas Ordinance is supposed to be
updated in accordance with best available science. Next year the Shoreline Program will be updated.
The TAC believes threatened and endangered species should be addressed in these ordinances.
Multiple Wells: State law requires a person to get a water rights permit if they drill a well, unless that
well draws less than 5000 gallons per day. The state has indicated that about six houses can be served
by 5000 gallons per day, peak usage. The question is does this apply on a subdivision basis or to a
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE 4
WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting March 25 2004
particular well? The Supreme Court addressed this in 2002 and wrote the developer of a subdivision is
entitled to only one 5000 gallons per day exception for the entire parcel.
The Short Plat process: There was concern expressed to the Council last year that the short plat
process is too complex and too expensive. The Council asked the TAC to examine how the process
could be improved. The TAC recommends some changes but staff and TAC feel they will not
significantly reduce the time it takes to obtain a short plat. Other government regulations are more
complex now, which increases the time to complete a short plat. The TAC discussed the fact that a lot
of the building has taken place on the easy to develop land and as these lands become more occupied
there are more issues of critical areas on the remaining lands. The one exception is the ag short plat
provisions. This would apply if a farmer in the ag zone has a house with a field next to it he wants to
sell. No house could be constructed on the field. In this case no survey would be required and there
would not be the normal reviews because there would be no further residential development.
Planning and Development did have two differences with the TAC. One is on page eight of the staff
report. The TAC recommended a provision that prohibits the county from notifying any other county,
state or federal agency unless specifically mandated by law. Planning believes we should retain that
ability but not hold up the process waiting for a response. The other issue in on page nine, which
involves pipeline disclosure. Right now the code says if you are right next to a major pipeline that it
needs to be disclosed in the platting process. The TAC recommends deletion of this statement. This
disclosure provision is a result of the Utility Planning and Advisory Committee work that was adopted by
the County Council. Planning feels this wording should be retained. It would be reworded referencing a
map.
1000 Friends of Washington brought up that section 21.04.130 should be titled Land Survey. We agree
with this.
Wiesen: Are they a local group? Isn't this a local process?
Aamot: Anyone can comment.
Wiesen: I have a problem with them submitting this on the day of the hearing and outside people
commenting on our process.
Pros: On the item of having impact fees instead of fixing the road in front, will that reflect the same
amount of money that it would have cost or will the taxpayers have to pickup the difference?
Aamot: I don't know, the impact fees haven't been set yet.
Pros: Who is determining how the impact fees will be implemented?
Aamot: The County Council.
Pros: Will that go through us?
Aamot: No.
Roosma: If gift exemptions are deleted do you know what the extra cost will be?
Kyle Haggith, TAC member: Generally a short plat will cost $10,000 easy.
Irwin: The cost isn't really a matter of how much, it's when and who pays for it. The fees will either be
due up front for a short plat or later when the property is developed.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE 5
WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting March 25 2004
The hearing was opened to the public.
Ron Moline, 4185 Y Rd., Bellingham: We want to go through the process but can't because of the
moratorium. It's a piece of property I want to split with my daughter. If the gift exemption is eliminated
there is no recourse for people who want to legitimately gift their property.
Aamot: Recourse would be to short plat the property.
Mary Dickinson, BIA, 3323 Northwest Ave., Bellingham: I want to address the fact this hearing was not
very well advertised.
Pros: Would you like to see information made available a month before the hearing?
Dickinson: I would love it.
Michelle Schrader, 2413 Mt. Baker Hwy., Bellingham: There may be people using gift exemptions
legitimately but it would be very hard to have an ordinance that will determine true intent. Some people
are using it as a short cut around the platting process then there is a lot created . with all kinds of issues
that the Planning Department has to deal with later.
Wiesen: How big is your property:
Schrader: Two 20 acres pieces, a 26 acre, and % acre.
Wiesen: How is it zoned?
Schrader: R5.
The hearing was closed to the public.
A short break was taken.
Hunter move to accept staff recommendations. Menzies seconded.
Roosma: I would like to leave in the gift exemptions.
Hunter did not accept this as a friendly amendment. Roosma so moved as an amendment to the
motion. Wiesen seconded.
Hunter: I think the concern over the loss of the gift exemption is unfounded. As a practical matter
people who want to gift their property will be able to and it won't cost them that much more and there
won't be unnecessary expectations about what can be done with the property. For those people not
concerned with gifting property to their property, but want to avoid the rules, that will be avoided. I think
the loss of gift exemptions is exaggerated. I understand wanting to give land to your family. I'm not un-
sympathetic to that.
Roosma: The regulations in this county are so out of whack there needs to be a way for people to do
something easily.
Hunter: Those regulations will occur at a later point. The only people who will avoid the regulations are
those who want to stick it to the people they want to sell the property to.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE 6
WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting March 25, 2004
Roosma: If we stop doing gift exemptions we won't have the staff to do all the short plats.
Goodwin: The fees from the short plats can be converted to staff.
Pros: A person can put an accessory dwelling on the property.
Roosma: What if we made it 10 years before the property could be sold? That might take the
developers out of the loop.
Hunter: I think developers would be willing to wait 10 plus years.
Vote on Roosma's amendment to remove gift exemptions from the original motion: Motion
failed.
Pros: Is there a difference between contaminated water and salt water intrusion?
Aamot: If the Health Department finds contamination from soil fumigants, arsenic, nitrates, etc, they can
designate that area for no wells. As far as salt water intrusion the Health Department felt it may be a
valid issue but it should be addressed by a technical committee. The Health Department indicated there
is no state standard for testing sodium chloride in private wells.
Pros: So we are going to allow wells with salt water intrusion?
Phipps: It is not considered a health hazard.
Roosma: Can a person get on line and find out the status of existing wells?
Phipps: Water can be brought in and be tested. The areas where there is known contamination are
mapped.
Wiesen: Do mortgage companies require testing of a water source?
Phipps: Some do. They aren't very comprehensive.
Wiesen: Is it our job to protect everyone from everything?
Pros: The attorneys have made it be that way.
Hart : You will be dealing with the water issue later when we review the Critical Areas Ordinance.
Pros: I would like to propose a friendly amendment regarding the agricultural short plat, that the county
require notice that lots can only be used for farming.
Aamot: The section of the zoning code that allows this type of short plat requires a note on the plat
saying there will be no further divisions or residential structures allowed on the parcel until or unless
changes in zoning occur.
Roosma: It's already stated in the proposed language.
Phipps: It is stated ag short plats shall be processed pursuant to all the requirements of this chapter
except the short plat will not be reviewed for compliance with: and a lot of times we require a lot that is
being divided to show adequate soils, for the reserve area on the lot with the house, so you aren't
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE 7
WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting March 25 2004
splitting off all the good property. If the drainfield is located on one of the other lots you are cutting off
the access. You have to have easements for it. There needs to be review of this.
Aamot: For short plats you do have to show the location of the drainfield.
Mann: In this letter from 1000 Friends of Washington they recommended some changes to 21.04.100.
Did staff review these?
Goodwin: We looked at them and didn't see any changes that were necessary.
Roll Call Vote on motion to approve the staff report with staff's recommended change to section
21.04.130, which should be titled Land Survey. Ayes — Belisle, Hunter, Mann, Menzies, Pros;
Nays — Roosma, Wiesen; Abstain — 0; Absent— Burdge, Steensma. Motion carried.
Wiesen: Is there anyway to have exemptions?
Goodwin: You can still gift 20 acre parcels.
Other Business
Pros: One of the problems I have seen over the years is the timing issue of how we do things. For
example getting information at the last minute. I would like staff to develop a way for us to have a 30
day period between the time the report is issued and the hearing. Then we could have a hearing in one
session and the work session at the next meeting. This will give the public more time for comment.
Menzies: I'm happy with the time frame for getting the staff reports. Getting comments from the public
on the day of the hearing is an issue.
Hunter: We ought to be able to look at the information we are getting and say we need to end the public
hearing and continue at a later date which gives us time to review the testimony we have received.
Pros: We need to take into consideration staffs needs. They already have things planned.
Hunter: Staff knows which issues need to be carried over.
Goodwin: The problem with that is we have already advertised for the next meeting so you can't always
put something off for two weeks. You could schedule a special meeting if you want to hold something
over.
Wiesen: I was told the Lummi Island Plan isn't current on the web page. They got to the hearing and
had the old plan.
Goodwin: It takes a while to get things on the web site. I believe they had the same plan you had
except from some addendums the committee made.
Wiesen: I think we should be discussing what Jack Petree mentioned. We want to down zone the
county. Bellingham is not providing enough lots for the demand. A few other areas are but those are the
areas we don't want developed. Bellingham is where the jobs are. That's where we want people to be.
One of our charges is affordable housing. We need cooperation from the City of Bellingham.
Hart: Next Wednesday night, at the short course, you can discuss this issue
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE 8
WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting March 25 2004
Goodwin: The EIS for the City of Bellingham Urban Fringe will be on the City website with a link to the
County website tomorrow. We will have printed copies on Monday. CD's are also available.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
Minutes prepared by B. Garvey.
WHATCOM CO NTY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST:
r Hal H. Raft, A.I.C.P., Secretary
,6o6 Came se rJ
Vice. - Chats r