Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutres2004-003H HATCODI COUNTY COUNCH, AGENDA BILL NO. 2004 -029 CLEARANCES Initial Dare Date Received in Council Oface Astride Date Assi nedto: Originator: Kraig Olason 1 P n ` % - -� ✓7 -- JAN 05 2004 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL 1113104 Natural Resource /Council Division Head: Silvia Goodwin Dept. Head: Hal Hart Prosecutor: Karen Fakes ming/BUdgc Pu•oha Eceeurive: Pete K•emers SUBJECT: Resolution ame ding the Whate m County's Agricultural Purchase of Development Rights Program Guidelines. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution and Program Guidelines amendments, Exhibits 1& 2. SEPA review required? ( ) Yes ( x ) NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes ( x) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( ) Yes ( x) NO Requested Date: SUMMARY STATEMENT: The proposal contains two amendments, which were) cemnmended by the PDR Oversight Committee. Exhibit I - Site Selection Criteria Section. The proposed changes clarify the language to reflect the intent of Site Selection Criteria section. Exhibit 2 - Appraisal Section- The changes reflect suggestions made by the County's state certified appraiser, Jim Onniston. These changes correct and clarify the language. Distribution Request indicate those who shouhl receive a copy after Council anion. list pecic names to the rule ADS Facilities Mmmgmmmt ADS Finance ADSHoman Resources ADS In er Assessor Auditor Cooperative Exrenslon District Coun Executive -Pete Kremen Health Hearing Examiner ✓ail COUNCIL A CTION TAKEN: 2004 - 29 A 1/13/2004: Approved 7-0, Res. #2004 -003 l Related File Numbers: Juvenile Parks Planning Hal Hart Prosecutor Karen Frakes Public Works Sher Superior Court Treasurer Other Ordinance or Resolutio Number /[ M? (this item): KES .-' yl 4 • �J�J 3 1:12 Planning Division \l PDR Progrun90OCuments12003 Prog Guide AnlendmcnlS�AB PDR Resolution Prog Guideline Amend 12- 03.doc SPONSORED BY: Consent PROPOSED BY: Planning INTRODUCTION DATE: 1/3/04 RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -003 AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY'S PURCHASE OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRAM GUIDELINES DOCUMENT TO CLARIFY THE SITE SELECTION CRITERIA SECTION AND TO CORRECT AND CLARIFY THE APPRAISAL SECTION WHEREAS, Whatcom County government recognizes agriculture as a major contributor to the local economy and a high quality of life for Whatcom County citizens; and WHEREAS, The Growth Management Act and the County Comprehensive Plan support the retention of agricultural lands of long term commercial significance and encourage the use of innovative techniques to do so; and WHEREAS, Ordinance #92 -002 enacted a property tax levy known as the Conservation Futures Tax as authorized by RCW 84.34.230 to provide a funding source to assist in acquiring open space, wetlands, farm and agricultural land, and timber land; and WHEREAS, Ordinance #2002 -054, adopted September 10, 2002, authorized the creation of a Purchase of Development Rights program for agricultural land within Whatcom County, and WHEREAS, Ordinance #2002 -054 established a Purchase of Development Rights Oversight Committee to provide review and assistance to the FOR Administrator, and WHEREAS, Resolution # 2002 -040, passed by Council September 10, 2002, adopted the PDR Guidelines Document which includes specific direction for program administration and conservation easement acquisitions, and WHEREAS, The PDR Oversight Committee as part of their annual review process recognizes the need for clarification of the criteria in the Site Selection Criteria section, and at the suggestion of the County's Appraiser, the need to correct and clarify the Appraisal section. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Whatcom County Council that: 1. The Purchase of Development Rights Guidelines Document be amended by replacing the Site Selection Criteria section with Exhibit 1 and the Appraisal section with Exhibit 2. ADOPTED this 13 day of January , 2004 I1 Planning DivisionU PDR PrograrnMocuments\Resolution Guideline Changes 12- 03.doc ATTEST: Dana Brown- Davis, Clerk of the Council APPROVED as to form 'd- Grant, Civil Deputy Prosecutor WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WH OM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Da McShane, Council Chair ( Ap ved ()Denied �G e Kremen, Executive >c i 192 Planning Division \1 PDR Program0ocuments \Resolution Guideline Changes 12- 03.doc EXHIBIT 1 IV. SITE SELECTION CRITERIA All valid applications will be reviewed to determine if the acquisition of development rights will promote the PDR program's goals and priorities. Selection criteria have been developed to guide, but not control, the review and assessment of eligible properties during each selection round. The selection criteria awards allows up to 120 points. In all selection rounds, valid and accepted offers on eligible properties of greater points shall be considered for purchase with available funds before properties receiving lower scores. The criteria, which will be used to evaluate the applisaRts applications area as follows: A. Enlarges or Buffers Preserved Farmland - 30 Points Does farmland provide or enlarge a buffer between farmland and other uses? Priority will be given to farmland providing the largest or contiguous buffers, which help protect the integrity of the farm and farmland area from conflicting non - agricultural use. Maximum Points ("a" Fates highest,. " :.__!) 6 pis 1. Farmland buffers other agricultural land from direct development pressure. 4 pis 2. Property size greater than or equal to 20 nominal acres. 8 pts 3. Land adjacent to existing farmland conserved by a public property interest or farmland proposed for conservation. 13 VAI th n 1.500 feet of AARRPP ed (g.m and or land proposed fa 6. and n see fnr ,. GR1 2Pis a Adjacent 8 pts b. Within ' /.mile 4 -7 pts 6 pts 4. Total e of pa nominal acres'i. e - .O a. 40 -50 1 pt b. >50 -60 2 ots C. >60 -80 3 ots d. >80 -100 4 pts e. >100 -120 5 pts f. >120 6 pts lit Planning Division \1 PDR Progrann0ocuments \2003 Prog Guide Amendments \Exh 1 Site Selection Criteria 12- 03.doc 6 pts 5. Number of existing development rights offered under current zoning by the applicant for acquisition. ` ^F - 8 dF - 6pts; 6 7 dr - ` ptsi 4 5 dF - 4 pts; 2 a. 1 -2 1 of b. 3 2 pts C. 4 3 ots d. 5 4 ots e. 6 5 ots f. > =7 6 ots B. Long -Term Resource Value - 15 Points To obtain points for long -term resource value, the application should provide information on the farmland's long -term resource value. Evidence of long -term resource value may include, but is not limited to, characteristics such as: Existing infrastructure (i.e. irrigation, drain tile, maintained ditches, electricity, etc.). 1 -3 pts 2. Percent of prime soil. 1 pt 3. Percent of parcel farmable. 1 -2 pts 4. Active farming. 1 pt 5. Farm conservation plan. 1 at 6. High (berries, tree fruit, nuts), medium (dairy), low (beef) productivity. 1 -3 pts 7. Water rights. 1 pt 8. Other. 1 -3 pts C. Threat of Conversion - 30 28 Points Is the farmland threatened by immediate conversion or potential development? Max 'mum Re nt. ("a" Fates h ghost lowest) 8 pts L PRt e_ ,.io .Feet lots. 1 o lots - 1 pt 3 n lets - o pts .5 lets - n pts Potential sale /Platted lots. a. 1 lot 1 pt b. 2 lots 2 ots C. 3 lots 3 pts d. 4 lots 4 ots e. 5 lots 5 ots f. 6 lots 6 pts g. 7 lots 7 pts h. 8 lots or more 8 ots 2 7 5 pts 2. Surrounded by more :..t,..,_:.' uses (e.g. Laurel). rel) Proximity to more intensive uses (e.q. Laurel). (Presumably if a parcel is >75% surrounded by more intensive uses, it is an island and has less benefit to the program). a. >50 % -75% 1 pt b. >25 % -50% 3 pts C. <25% 5 pts i pts 3. Proximity to UGA, incorporated city limits, or rural. Aq zone Rural zone Citv /UGA Rural Adiacent 8 4 rWithin' /.mile 2 2 Citv /UGA Aa Adiacent 8 8 Within Y. mile 6 4 7 pts 4. Proximity to high traffic roads. (See attached list) a. Fronts a high traffic road 7 pts b. Within 1,500 feet Y. mile of a high traffic road 4 -6 pts C. Within 2,°^>? —tee' >1/4 to % mile of a high traffic road 2 1 =3 pts D. Bargain Sale /Opportunities to Leverage Funds - 15 Points A discounted price or other fund sources allow the County acquisition of development rights at less than full market value: 1. 50% or less of full value. 2. 50% to 65% of full value. 3. 65% to 80% of full value. E. Special Considerations - 102 pts The faFMIand provides strateg G value tewaFds the PFOWGUeR of other farmland R the CGURty andr... G9Rta FIS other s to spas f Gh..Fa Gt.:. t 96 Rot addressed above, sh a The farmland contains site specific characteristics not included above. 1. Heritage /historical significance. 2 pts 3 The parcel sustains or has the potential to sustain crops with unique soil requirements. 2 pts 3. Farming activity is regionally significant (dairy, raspberries, seed potatoes). 2 pts 4. Multiple conservation values (e.g. viewshed, creeks). 2 pts 5. Multiple conservation values (e.g. public viewshed creeks). 2 pts 6. Other. F. Bonus Points - 20 pts Within the designated target area, PDR participation by one or more applicants will result in the preservation of a significant amount of the farmland preserved in the target area. 1. 90% or more farmland preserved. 2. 75 to < 90% of farmland preserved. 3. 60 to <75% of farmland preserved. 4. 50 to < 60% of farmland preserved. List of HighTraffic Roads` State Highway or Maior Collector -Rural (as defined by Whatcom County Engineering). State Highway: Guide Meridian Road East Badger Road East Pole Road Grandview Road Blaine Road Maior Collector - Rural: East Axton Road West Axton Road Birch -Bay Lynden Road Hannegan Road East Smith Road West Smith Road West Badger Road Portal Way Enterprise Road North Enterprise Road West Pole Road Haynie Road Sunrise Road Northwest Drive Vista Drive Hovander Road Mountain View Road Rainbow Road Kickerville Road (part ) Lake Terrell Road Everson Goshen Road Hampton Road Van Buren Road H Street Road Sweet Road This is not a complete list. However, it includes most roads that would apply to the PDR Program. EXHIBIT 2 D. Appraisal Appraisals for eligible properties shall be conducted to determine the value of development rights of parcels in the order of its acquisition priority until acquisition funds are expended in the selection round. 1. The appraisals are to be made by an independent appraiser qualified to appraise agricultural land for development rights purchases. An appraiser is deemed qualified if he or she possesses a State of Washington certification as a real estate State Certified General Real appraiser, MAI designation by the Appraisal Institute (or equivalent), and at least five years agricultural lands appraisal experience. Appraisers shall supply a narrative or UAAR form report, which contains information as required by the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) and as specified in any contract with the County. 2. An appraisal report is an objective report of market facts. The appraisal report must estimate both the unrestricted fee market value of the land only, less excluding the value of buildings, and the agricultural value of the land only, of which the difference is the development rights value. 3. Both values shall be based primarily on an analysis of comparable sales. If comparable sales data is not available for agricultural lands, the appraiser may use local farmland rental values or capitalized production values to determine the agricultural values of the land. 4. The value A description of the buildings or other improvements shall appear in the appraisal report; however, this the buildings will not be valued and therefore will not be considered in determining the development rights value. 5. The appraiser shall report whether the subject property has any land use restrictions, public or private and /or physical attributes, which limit the developmental capability of the land. 6. The appraiser shall be advised that conservation easements are perpetual. The perpetual nature of the easement shall take precedent over any agricultural zoning status. 7. The appraisal shall be in writing and may be discussed with the owners prior to the submission of written offers. 8. If the property owner believes the property has not been adequately appraised, the owner may, within the time allowed in the selection round schedule, request that a review appraisal be made at the owner's expense. This appraisal must be completed in accordance with the guidelines set forth herein. If the review owner's appraisal is not completed within the allotted time, the application will be delayed to the following selection round. If a review appraisal is completed, the appraisals are worked thFGugh ^° ° ^° offer, will be reviewed by the County's Appraiser. The County's Appraiser in consultation with the Program Administrator and the PDR Oversight Committee will accept, modify or reject the review appraisal The determination of the County's Appraiser is final. 9. The maximum value of development rights purchased by the County shall be no more than the easement value contained in an appraisal report. The easement value is the difference between the farmland's market value and its agricultural value. ?2 Planning Division \1 PDR PrograrnTocuments @003 Prog Guide Amendments \Exh 2 Appraisal section 12- 03.doc