HomeMy WebLinkAboutord1997-023WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
NO. 96 -0 l 1,
CLEARANCES
Initial
Date
Date Received in Council Office:
Agenda date
Assigned to:
iginator: Michael Knapp
Division Head:
4/25/97
l�j (_; �
L [: >`. �i -� ±r
Et s -1 3 1997
L�Y" ATCOM OOUN i Y
cOu!cI�,
' 5/6/97
Planning /Council
Dept. Head: Michael Knapp
Prosecutor:
PurchasingBudget:
Executive:
SUBJECT: Adoption of the Final Draft Comprehensive Plan
ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Comprehensive Plan (available at Council Office)
Comprehensive Plan Findings
Draft Council Minutes
SUMMARY STATEMENT: Please complete sections of box as appropriate & explain the item below.
Related County contract #: n/a
Should Clerk schedule a hearing? NO H YES /X/ Requested date:
Amount budgeted for this item/project: $ n/a
Is it (or will it be) within budget? YES / f NO / / (Please explain below) n/a
Rudget line item number(s): n/a
In order to comply with the Growth Management Act, Whatcom County is committed to adopting a Comprehensive Plan
by May 1997. The draft Comprehensive Plan, dated November 1994, was reviewed and edited by the County Planning
Commission at a series of 43 work sessions from March 1995 through June 1996. On June 26, the Commissioners
forwarded to Council its recommended revised draft. Council conducted four public hearings in October and November
to review items and receive public testimony. Additional public hearings and work sessions were held January through
April 1997.
ORIGINATOR'S RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Director of Planning and Development Services recommends
Council adopt the May 6, 1997, Final Draft Comprehensive Plan.
COMMITTEE ACTION TAKEN:
COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
1996 - 51 L 5/6/97: Held in Council until 5/20/97
5/20/97: MRL section of Chapter 8 adopted 5 -1, Brenner
opposed, Starkenburg abstained. Remaining Plan adopted 6 -1
Brenner opposed. Ord. #97 -023
6/3/97: Exhibit A, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law,
amended & approved 6 -1, Brenner opposed
:nance or Resolution Number (this item only):
on, on -z
2
FileRef:23- 94:GMA SPONSORED BY: - Consent
PROPOSED BY: Council
INTRODUCTION DATE: 516197
ORDINANCE NO. 97 -023
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO LAND USE PLANNING ADOPTING AS THE OFFICIAL
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF WHATCOM COUNTY THE DOCUMENT ATTACHED IN
EXHIBIT B HERETO AND REPEALING THE 1970 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND INTERIM
URBAN GROWTH AREAS.
WHEREAS, the 1990 State Growth Management Act as amended requires the
County to adopt a comprehensive plan that contains Land .Use' Rural, Housing,
Transportation, Capital Facilities, and Utilities elements, and provides for optional elements
including Economics, Resource Lands, Recreation, Design, and Environment.
WHEREAS, in accordance with RCW 36.70A.140, the County Council adopted by
Resolution a Public Participation Process for Visioning in June 1993; and
WHEREAS, in order to comply with RCW 36.70A, the Washington State Growth
Management Act, and RCW 36.70, the Planning Enabling Act, Whatcom County drafted a
Comprehensive Plan following completion of the Visioning Process, dated November 17,
1994; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.70.390 notice of joint County Council and Planning
Commission hearings for the plan was published in the Bellingham Herald on February 4,
1995.
WHEREAS, the County Council and Planning Commission held joint public hearings
on February 15, February 22, March 1, and March 8, 1995 and considered all testimony;
and
WHEREAS, in a series of 43 work sessions from March 1995 through June 1996,
Planning Commission reviewed and edited each of the eleven chapters of the draft plan;
and
WHEREAS, on June 26, 1996, the Planning Commission, after due consideration,
amended the November 1994 draft Comprehensive Plan and recommended to the County
Council a plan to be adopted as the Official Comprehensive Plan for Whatcom County; and
WHEREAS, such plan includes background information, issue statements, and a set
of community goals and policies that are consistent with the adopted County -wide Planning
Policies and provide the basis for review of the Official Zoning Ordinance and Map, the six-
Page 1
year Capital Facilities Program, and other land use regulatory ordinances of Whatcom
County; and
WHEREAS, subarea plans are an important part of the planning process in Whatcom
County, and represent County and community views of how subareas of the County should
develop. Whatcom County acknowledges some inconsistencies between these previously
adopted subarea plans and the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan - 1997.
WHEREAS, policies in the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan direct that existing
subarea plans will remain in effect as interim development regulations until updated or
replaced with subarea plans consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Such policies also
direct that in the case of inconsistency or conflict between existing subarea plans and the
Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan will
prevail.
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.70.390, the Deputy SEPA Official issued a
Determination of Significance (DS) for the proposal on May 24, 1993, and revised DSs
were issued on March 14, 1994, and July 12, 1994; and
WHEREAS, a draft and final environmental impact statement comprised of an
Environmental Impact Existing Conditions Report dated September, 1994 and an Existing
Conditions Report, Impact and Mitigation Report dated February, 1995 and a Final
Environmental Impact Statement for the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan dated
September, 1996 and a Draft and Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
dated February and March, 1997 respectively, were completed pursuant to the State
Environmental Policy Act, and
WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Council held 5 public hearings during October and
November, 1996 to consider additional public comment, and
WHEREAS, the Council Planning and Development Committee held 6 additional
public hearings during January and February, 1997 and 23 work sessions between .
October, 1996 and February, 1997 to further consider this matter and forwarded the
Planning Commission recommendation with proposed amendments to the full Council on
March 18, 1997; and
WHEREAS, the Council held a final public hearing on March 18, 1997, and
conducted 4 final public work sessions during March and April, 1997 on the matter of
adopting such plan as recommended, and as a result of such hearings and meetings finds
that the proposed plan as revised by the County Council addresses the goals of the Growth
Management Act, the County -wide Planning Policies and Visions for Whatcom County by:
1) Encouraging responsible development in urban areas where adequate public facilities
exist or can be provided; 2) Discouraging the conversion of undeveloped land into
sprawling, low- density development; 3) Promoting efficient, multi -modal transportation
systems and the provision of such systems concurrent with development; 4) Encouraging
the provision of affordable housing and a variety of rural and urban housing densities and
housing types; 5) Promoting appropriate economic development and the provision of family
Page 2
1 wage jobs; 6) Protecting private property rights from unconstitutional takings and arbitrary
2 and discriminatory actions; 7) Processing permits in a fair and timely manner; 8)
3 Maintaining and enhancing natural resource based industries such as timber, agriculture,
4 mining and fisheries; 9) Encouraging the retention of valuable open space, fish and wildlife
5 habitat, and the maintenance and development of parks and recreation opportunities; 10)
6 Protecting the environment and enhancing the quality of life, including air and water
7 quality, and the availability of water; 11) Promoting citizen participation in the planning
8 process and encouraging cooperation between jurisdictions; 12) Identifying and
9 encouraging the preservation of historic or archaeological lands, sites and structures; and
10
11 WHEREAS, the Council finds further that the plan is in the best interest of the public
12 health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Whatcom County, and
13
14 WHEREAS, by reference, the Council adopts the additional Findings and Conclusions
15 . marked as Exhibit A.
16
17
18 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that:
19
20 Section 1. Adoption of Plan. The following document attached hereto, marked as Exhibit
21 B as follows and by this reference incorporated herein, is hereby adopted as the Official
22 Comprehensive Plan for Whatcom County, replacing the 1970 Comprehensive Plan, and
23 replacing the adopted Interim Urban Growth Areas.
24
25 Section 2. Adjudication of invalidity of any of the sections, clauses, or provisions of this
i Ordinance shall not affect or impair the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any part
/_7 thereof other than the part so declared to be invalid.
28
29 ADOPTED this 20 day of May 1997.
30
31
32
33 ATTEST:
34 ..,
35 uc.'�:
36
37 ?""-Dana Brown- Davis, Council Clerk
38
39
40 APPROVED as to forme & content:
42
43
44 Dan Gibson, Civil Deputy Prosecutor
45
46
47
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, rASHINGTON
L.Ward Nelson, Chairperson
Page 3
roved () enied
Pete Kremen, Executive
a3�9�Date: 5-
Exhibit A
(Findings)
Exhibit B
(Comp Plan)
Located in the original file
AB 1996- 51 L
Continuation
WIIATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 96 -051L
CLEARANCES
Initi
Date
Date Received in Council Office:
Agenda date
Assigned to:
Originator: Michael Knapp
4: j i�
MAY f
M A 1 2 � l99/
17
1 �, p q h
vYHATCOM COUNTY
COUNCIL
6/3/97
P &D /Council
ision Head: Sylvia Goodwin
Dept. Head: Michael Knapp
Prosecutor:
Purchasing/Budget:
Executive:
\�
a�
SUBJECT. Findings in support of Ordinance 97 -023 Adopting the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan.
ATTACHMENTS. Proposed Findings.
SUMMARYSTATEMENT.
Please complete sections of box as appropriate & explain the item below.
Related County contract #: n/a
Should Clerk schedule a hearing? NO /X/ YES / / Requested date:
Amount budgeted for this item/project: $ n/a
Is it (or will it be) within budget? YES /X / NO / / (Please explain below) n/a
Budget line item nurriber(s): n/a
The request is to approve the final wording of the findings supporting adoption of the Whatcom County Comprehensive
Plan.
ORIGINATOR'S RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Director Planning and Development Services recommends
Council approve the wording of the attached findings.
COMMITTEE ACTION TAKEN.•
COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN.
Related File Numbers: 16 -91: GMA Ordinance or Resolution Number (this item only):
FINDINGS
WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Approved June 3, 1997
INTRODUCTION
Population Projections
1. The population of Whatcom County is projected to grow from 148,300 in 1995 to 220,366 in
the year 2015, an increase of approximately 48 %, or 72,066 people. This population iswithin
the range of projected population growth supplied by the state Office of Financial Management
to Whatcom County in late 1995, and is supported by rates of growth experienced in the county
in recent years.
2. Growth results in competing demands for land for private residential, commercial and
industrial development; agriculture, forestry and mineral resource production; and public
facilities and services.
3. Unplanned growth can result in sprawl, strip development, and other inappropriate
development patterns, with resultant damage to environmentally sensitive areas., loss of forest,
agriculture, and open space, and demands for inefficient provision of services and utilities
where densities are insufficient to support the costs.
Market Factor
1. Due to its unique location adjacent to the Canadian border, the county is strongly influenced
by economic and demographic trends in the lower mainland of British Columbia. There is a
significant amount of Canadian owned undeveloped real estate in the county being held for long
term investment and therefore not immediately available to serve market needs. This backlog
of investor held land is added to by other owners outside of Whatcom County who are holding
land in anticipation of retirement and relocation to the county. Also, there are some areas of the
county where a high percentage of homes (65% to 90% in some cases) are seasonally
occupied by Canadian and other out of county owners, essentially creating resort communities
with a mix of full time and part time residents. These part time residents are not accounted for
in the county's population estimates and projections, which utilize such indicators as school
enrollment, employment and voter registration.
2. Each city in the County has its own unique set of influences on land supply that support the
use of various land supply market factors as recommended by each of the cities. None of
these is above the Department of Community Trade and Economic Development's guideline of
25 %.
PROCESS
Whatcom County has a history of comprehensive planning to manage growth and prevent
sprawl dating back to the 1970 adoption of a Comprehensive Plan, continuing through the
adoption of County -wide Goal Statements in 1979. In 1981, the County began adopting
subarea plans and detailed zoning that designated forestry and agricultural resource lands,
rural areas, and areas adjacent to urbanized areas where urban growth may occur only if urban
level services are provided.
Public Involvement (GMA Goal 11)
The Washington State Legislature adopted the Growth Management Act (GMA) in 1990 with
amendments in 1991, requiring communities including Whatcom County to adopt
comprehensive plans. GMA Goal 11, Citizen Participation and Coordination calls for
communities to: Encourage the involvement of citizens in the planning process and ensure
coordination between communities and jurisdictions to reconcile conflicts.
The Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan - 1997 (The Plan) was developed through a lengthy
public involvement process, that began with the formation of citizen and technical advisory
committees in 1991; was followed by the Visioning process; and concluded with public hearings
and work sessions with the County Planning Commission and the Whatcom County Council as
follows:
1. Committees
Beginning in 1991, citizen committees were formed to provide guidance in protecting critical
areas and resource lands. Other committees that contributed to developing The Plan include
Housing, Design, Industrial Land Supply, Utilities, Transportation, Shorelines, and Environment.
2. Oversight committee
The Oversight committee was formed to coordinate planning efforts with other jurisdictions in
the County, including cities, tribes and special districts. The efforts of this committee were
focused on County -wide Planning Policies and Urban Growth Areas.
3. Visioning
In June 1993, County Council Resolution #93 -044 established a Public Participation Process for
Visioning. The visioning process involved weekly meetings by a nine to thirteen member
committee, a Visioning "hot line" for nine months, a booth at the 1993 Northwest Washington
Fair, sixteen Town Hall meetings, 12,000 written surveys, a statistically -valid phone survey, an
additional fourteen Town Hall meetings and four newsletters. The results provided four land
use alternatives to serve. as a foundation for the draft plan that was introduced for review by the
Planning Commission. Visioning also provided Community Value Statements, which initially
guided the formulation of the land use designations and goals and policies in The Plan.
4. Planning Commission and County Council review.
The November 18, 1994 Draft Plan (Second Draft) was the basis for a series of joint County
Council /Planning Commission work sessions held in November and December 1994. The
work sessions were followed by four joint County Council /Planning Commission public hearings
from January through March 8, 1995 on The Draft Plan. Written comments were collected,
compiled and provided to the Planning Commission and Council. The Planning Commission
held 48 work sessions beginning in March 1995 and concluding on June 26, 1996 with the 1996
Planning Commission recommended Draft Plan (Third Draft). Five County Council hearings
were held in October and November, 1996. The Council Planning and Development Committee
held six additional hearings in January and February, 1997 and a total of 23 work sessions
between October, 1996 and February, 1997. A final County Council public hearing was held
on March 18, 1997 on a revised Draft Plan (dated March 18, 1997) that was made available for
public review on March 5, 1997. The written record for public input was held open until
2
March 27. After the hearing, the County Council Committee of the Whole held additional work
sessions (public meetings) during March, April, and May-1 997 prior to adoption of the Plan on
May 20, 1997.
5. Plan policies
The plan includes many general policies supporting community involvement, especially in the
Land Use Chapter. The plan also contains numerous policies encouraging citizen involvement
for specific planning activities, such as facility siting, environmental management programs, and
density reduction programs. Numerous policies have been written throughout the plan
emphasizing action toward reconciling conflicts through coordination between communities and
jurisdictions.
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
The Environmental Impact Statement for the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan consists
of four parts:
1. Existing Conditions Report - September 1994.
The Environmental Impact Statement - Existing Conditions Report for the Whatcom County
Comprehensive Plan: describes the current state of the various environmental elements
required to be examined under SEPA. This document briefly reviews the conditions of earth,
air, water, plants, animal, energy, environmental health, land use, transportation, and public
services in Whatcom County. Current county policies for each element are also summarized.
The purpose of the Existing Conditions Report is to provide reviewers of the Comprehensive
Plan informational background.
2. Impact and Mitigation Report - February, 1995
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement - Impact Analysis and Mitigation Report for the
Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan contains an analysis of the probable adverse
environmental impacts likely to occur with the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. In addition;
the Impact and Mitigation Report examines probable adverse environmental impacts associated
with three reasonable alternative land use plans.. The purpose of examining alternatives is to
provide reviewers of the. DEIS and the Comprehensive Plan a comparative analysis of the
proposed action.
In addition to the analysis of adverse environmental impacts, the Impact and Mitigation Report
contains a discussion of possible mitigating measures which could be employed to offset or
reduce the identified environmental impacts of the proposed action. In many cases, the Goals
and Policies outlined in the Comprehensive Plan will serve as mitigating measures. In some
cases, additional mitigating measures are suggested.
The Impact and Mitigation Report also examines the potential cumulative effects of each land
use alternative, where such effects are understood and reasonably foreseeable.
3. Summary -February, 1995
The third document of the DEIS is the Summary. This document summarizes the Impact and
Mitigation Report and provides a general overall view of the differences among the various
alternatives, the impacts associated with each alternative, and recommended. mitigating
3
measures.
4. Final EIS - September, 1996
On May 30, 1995 a public hearing was held on the DEIS. The public was encouraged to review
and submit written comments on the adequacy of the Existing Conditions Report, the Impact
and Mitigation Report, and the Summary. Comment letters, responses, public hearing
transcripts, and responses to public hearing testimony were published in the Final EIS.
5. Draft Supplemental EIS, Custer- February 1997
..In order to consider inclusion of the proposed Custer intermodal site in the Plan as an Urban
Growth Area, additional SEPA review was deemed necessary. Draft Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement was published in February, 1997 followed by a Final EIS in
March, 1997.
6. Ongoing additional SEPA review
The Whatcom county SEPA administrator has continually followed changes to the Plan in its
various draft forms as the Council has worked on it and has determined that the changes
brought forth by the Council are not likely to have a significant environmental impact.
Analysis of Cumulative Effects
1. Analysis of cumulative effects was presented in the EIS. Additionally, Hebert Research
Incorporated prepared for Planning Commission and County Council consideration, Whatcom
County Comprehensive Plan Alternatives Economic Impact Study, August, 1995.
2. Affected jurisdictions and the public have had an opportunity to comment on this analysis.
SEPA Documents Released
May 24, 1993 Determination of Significance (DS) for comprehensive plan and Request
for Comments on Scoping issued to coincide with startup of Visioning
Process.
December 8, 1993 Draft Existing Conditions Report.
September 1, 1993 DS for Designation of Interim Urban Growth Boundaries.
September 29, 1993 Revised DS for Designation of Interim Urban Growth Boundaries.
October 12, 1993 Second Revised DS for Designation of Interim Urban Growth Boundaries.
November 12, 1993 Draft EIS on Interim Urban Growth Areas in Whatcom County.
December 15, 1993 Draft Supplemental EIS on Interim Urban Growth Areas in Whatcom
County (City of Sumas).
January 11. 1994 Final EIS on Interim Urban Growth Areas in Whatcom County.
rd
January 18, 1994 Final supplemental EIS on Interim Urban growth Areas in Whatcom
County (City of Sumas).
March 14, 1994 Revised DS and Request for Comments on Scoping issued as a result of
alternative land use plans developed in Visioning Process.
May 16, 1994 Second Final Supplemental EIS on Interim Urban Growth Areas in
Whatcom County.
May 25, 1994 County Environmental Review Committee Meeting on Scoping for the
Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan
July 12, 1994 Revised DS and Request for Comments on Scoping issued to reflected
preferred alternative from Visioning Process
September,- 1994 EIS Existing Conditions Report
February, 1995 Draft EIS Impact Analysis and Mitigation Report
February, 1995 Draft EIS, Summary
August, 1995 Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Alternatives Economic Impact
Study, Hebert and Associates.
September 6, 1996 Final EIS, for the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan
January 31, 1997 Memo from Carl Batchelor to Bill Florea and Roland Middleton re:
changes to the Comprehensive Plan being considered by the County
Council.
February 7, 1997 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Whatcom County
Comprehensive Plan EIS, Inclusion of Custer in Urban Growth Areas of
Whatcom County with Designation as Industrial Land.
February 25, 1997 Memorandum from Carl Batchelor to Roland Middleton re: SEPA review
of Council proposed changes to The Plan.
February 26, 1997 Memorandum from Roland Middleton to "public agencies and persons
with interest" re: Addendum to the proposed Comprehensive Plan:
changes not likely to have a significant impact.
March 17, 1997 Memorandum from Roland Middleton to Carl Batchelor re: one letter
received in response to Addendum memo (above) and response that
Plan adoption will not require additional SEPA review. Future zoning
changes and development regulations to implement the Plan will require
additional review.
5
March 18, 1997 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Whatcom County
Comprehensive Plan EIS, Inclusion of Custer in Urban Growth Areas of
Whatcom County with Designation as Industrial Land.
May 1, 1997 Memorandum from Roland Middleton to Dan Gibson re: addtional
environmental review of comprehensive plan and maps with identification of
two river mining policies requiring additional SEPA review. .
COMPLIANCE WITH GMA
Initial requirements
Interim designation of resource lands
1. On March 11, 1992, the Whatcom County council adopted Ordinance #92 -013 and
Ordinance #92 -01.4 classifying and designating agricultural lands and.forest resource lands on
an interim basis..
2. On May 26, 1992, the Whatcom County council adopted Ordinance #92 -028 classifying and
designating mineral resource lands on an interim basis.
County -wide Planning Policies (CPPs)
On April 13, 1993, the Whatcom County council adopted Resolution #93 -024 County -wide
Planning Policies. On March 11, 1997 a package of amendments to the CPPs was adopted by
the Council (Resolution #97 -011) to correct grammatical errors, provide clarification of the
original policy intent, provide an improved organizational framework, and remove inflexible
references to circumstances which frequently change (population estimates and projections,
for example). In addition, the amendments bring the CPPs more closely into alignment with the
goals and requirements of the Growth Management Act, particularly as recently- interpreted by
the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board. Finally, there is some
strengthening of references to the County's vision for economic development and employment.
Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO)
On May 26, 1992 the Whatcom County Council adopted Ordinance #92 -032, Temporary Critical
Areas Ordinance. This was subsequently replaced in 1993 (Ordinance #93 -02) with a
Referendum version of the CAO which was appealed to the Hearings, Board, The Board ruled.
in June, 1994 that the Referendum version would.not comply.with.GMA. primarily. with respect
to SEPA review and public participation. In response, the Council adopted Ordinance #95 -019,
Emergency CAO in April, 1995. After two more iterations of CAO adoption and Hearings Board
rulings, the County Council adopted emergency ordinances on March 11 and May 6, 1997 to
-re -adopt the 1992 CAO until the Planning Commission can complete its work on a revised
permanent ordinance.
Interim Urban Growth Areas (IUGAs)
The County Council adopted Interim Urban Growth Areas on May 24, 1994 (Ordinance 94 -033)
for all seven cities and several unincorporated areas of the County. The Hearings Board ruled
on November 9, 1994 that the IUGAs were invalid because of a lack of proper analysis and
inadequate public process. On January 23, 1996 the County Council adopted Ordinance
r6i
#96 -004, Interim Urban Growth Areas. On September 12, 1996 the Hearings Board ruled that
selected portions of those IUGAs are invalid because they are not supported by sufficient
analysis and they conflict with GMA goals.
Required elements
The Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan includes all of the following required elements:
Land Use, Housing, Capital Facilities, Utilities, Rural (found in the Land Use Chapter), and
Transportation.
Optional elements
The plan also contains the following optional elements: Economics, Resource Lands,
Recreation, Design, and Environment. While these elements are optional, they contain goals
and policies which meet many requirements of the Growth Management Act.
Resource Lands (GMA Goal 8)
GMA Goal 8. Natural Resource Industries, directs counties to: Maintain and enhance natural
resource -based industries, including productive timber, agricultural, and fisheries industries.
Encourage the conservation of productive forest lands and productive agricultural land, and .• .
discourage incompatible uses.
This objective is met primarily through Chapter 8, Resource Lands, Chapter 9, Economics and
the Natural Systems Section of Chapter 11, Environment. The goals and policies of these and
other chapters seek to conserve resource lands and maintain and enhance natural resource
based industries through a number of mechanisms including land use designations, support of
resource -based industries, flexibility in land use plans, current use taxation, and habitat
protection. The conservation of productive forest and agricultural lands is further encouraged
through sustainable and best management practices.
Agriculture, Forest, and Mineral Resource Lands have been classified and designated on the
comprehensive plan land use map. The County has conserved Agriculture, Forestry, and
Mineral Resource Lands through the application of agriculture and forestry zoning districts;
enactment of the Right to Farm and Right to Practice Forestry Ordinances, Mineral Resource
Land Disclosure Ordinance, designation of an Agricultural Protection overlay zone; and the
creation of a Mineral Resource Lands Overlay zone.
I. RESOURCE LANDS -- AGRICULTURE
The purpose of the resource lands- agriculture section of the Plan is to conserve and protect
agricultural land of long-term commercial significance as those terms are used in the Growth
Management Act (WAC 365- 190 -030). The process involves designations of such land,
considering the factors set forth in WAC 365- 190 - 050(1 -3).
The Council finds,
in Whatcom County, four categories of agricultural land meet the GMA required considerations
and are important for the conservation of long -term commercially significant agriculture:
VA
Category I. Agricultural Activities.
Includes land with soils well suited for agricultural activities (including prime soils), which have
historically been devoted to agricultural activities and which are appropriate for conservation as
agricultural lands. The current Agricultural zone (88,000 acres) is designated as Category
land. These lands include most of the productive farms in the county. In affirming the present
boundaries, the Council considered U.S.D.A. Natural Resource Conservation Service "Prime
and "Unique" classifications, LESA soil capability classifications and historic farming patterns.
The Council finds that a ten percent loss is possible due to environmental constraints (such as
EPA limitations on certain practices in flood areas and manure lagoons) and economic factors
(e.g. declining activity on some county dairy lands) and necessary urban encroachment and
services in Lynden, Sumas, Everson and Nooksack. Thus 80,000 acres are assumed available
for long term protection.
Category II. Flood Hazard Lands.
Include floodways outside urban growth management areas. Whatcom County has extensive
floodways in connection with the County's river systems. The floodways are not suitable for
construction, but do provide land which has historically been used for a number of agricultural
activities and will continue to be useful. Best management practices on flood ways must be
cognizant of the proximity to rivers and the potential for contamination. Outside of the
agricultural zones and urban areas, flood -ways comprise about 500 to 1000 acres, as marked
in the Whatcom County Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan (1997 draft).
Category III. Agricultural Protection Overlay Zone.
The agricultural protection zone is an overlay zone which applies generally to rural zoned lands
(R5A and R10A). The areas principally affected correspond to the area of agricultural use east
of Interstate 5 and Blaine, outside Urban Growth Areas, west of 1 -5 between Cherry Point and
Ferndale, and north and east of Bellingham. The overall acreage involved in the resource
protection zone is approximately 107,000 acres. The resource protection zone requires non
agriculturally related development in the R5, R10 zone to be sited on 20 percent of the
available land on tracts 20 acres and larger, with potential administrative approval of
development of 30% of the parcel where justified by.site constraints. This would not reduce the
residential density but would require that all residential short plats and subdivisions utilize the
cluster development method on 20% (or 30 %) of the parcel. The remainder of the tract could
be used for a house. and would be available for agriculture, forestry, or recreation and open
space uses in the short term. In the longer term such larger parcels in the rural areas provide
opportunities for other community needs. The Council finds the lands conserved for agriculture
under Category III should include approximately 28,000 acres for long -term agricultural use.
Category IV. Voluntary Agricultural Protection: Open Space Taxation
The open space taxation program is being used extensively by eligible landowners in Whatcom
County. Slightly less than 140,000 acres is enrolled in the open space - agriculture component
of the program. The U.S. Agricultural Census for 1992 reflected approximately 118,000 acres
reported to be in agricultural usage in the County. A comparison of the two figures suggest
more land available for agriculture than is being used. The minimal income requirement for
parcels over 20 acres to be eligible for open -space taxation may explain in part the difference
between the two figures as such parcels may have minimal agricultural production but
nonetheless qualify for participation in the agricultural open -space taxation program..
The requirement to pay a penalty and back taxes upon removal of land from open -space
classification serves as a practical obstacle to conversion of large parcels to rural residential
subdivision, regardless of zoning.
The Council specifically finds:
1. Current large parcel commercial agriculture lands necessary to assure the health. of the
agricultural industry and economy is 100,000 acres. The agriculture and agricultural protection
overlay zones provide for the necessary agriculture lands.
2. About 20 -25 percent of the commercial agriculture in the County is anticipated to occur on
farms that are smaller than 20 acres. This small lot commercial balance is expected to continue
as special products and smaller scale animal husbandry continue to play an important role in
the Community. The Plan's emphasis on best management practices should aid and support
the growth and continued vitality of such farms.
3. The agricultural protection overlay zone will substantially reduce the potential for five acre
tracts to parcelize the large- parcel rural resource lands into less commercially viable tracts,
with ability to serve requirements through discretionary review. No further caps or limits are.;..
considered necessary.
4. Clustered residential development in rural areas will not overtax public facilities or utilities.
In the short term this helps to conserve lager parcels for agricultural, forestry, or recreation and
open space purposes. As needs change, particularly closer to developed areas, the larger
parcels also provide a community resource for other growth and expansion which would
otherwise be lost if unrestricted development of five and ten acre home sites were permitted.
5. Best management practices approved by the U.S.D.A. Natural Resource Conservation
Service guide appropriate practices and will assure compliance with County regulations.
6. County development regulations need to be modified to enable the identified changes, and
to specifically provide:
a. Agricultural uses and associated and accessory activities shall be the
predominant and primary use in the agricultural and resource protection zones.
b. No development approval shall be given in any agriculture or resource protection
zone without:
(i) A written finding that the development will not interfere with the overall
agricultural productivity of abutting and nearby farmland.
(ii) Within the. Resource Protection zone, the non - resource related
development does not include more than 20 percent of the overall site.
7. All development approvals within the agricultural and resource protection district shall
contain limitations against locating wells for potable water within 100 feet and structures
E
intended for residential .occupancy within 100 feet of abutting or neighboring land used, or
suitable for, long term agricultural use. These distances are adequate to protect the agricultural
uses from incompatiblity with the neighboring uses, particularly in conjunction with required
notices on deeds for these properties..
8. In order to be exempt from the cluster and 20 % requirements of the agriculture protection
zone, a property owner would be required to demonstrate that:
a. There is no history of agricultural use of the property, and
b. The property contains a predominance of soils (more than 50 %) that are not
suitable for agricultural use.
The Council further finds,
9. Farmgate income in Whatcom County is approximately $250 million per year and has
increased steadily over time even as there has been a gradual reduction of the agricultural land
base acreage. This does not include additional income generated by value -added products, or
the revenues of primary and secendory agriculture- supported businesses, professions, and
industries.
10. While there has been reduction of agricultural acreage over time, only a portion of that is
attributable to urbanization. Smaller - acreage rural subdivision has accounted for some
reduction in acreage of larger scale commercial agricultural value operation. A portion of that
reduction has also occurred on lands of marginal agricultural value, which were removed from
agricultural production for reasons related to their inherent limitations for that purpose.
11. Continued low prices for most agricultural products such as dairy products, beef, poultry,
and vegetables have contributed to marginalization of some farms, a reduction in the number of
farmers and a growth in the size of some of the remaining farms.
12. The concentration of dairying activity (more cows on fewer acres) has led to increased
scrutiny'forcompliance with environmental regulations which has resulted recently in the
levying of significant fines by DOE and EPA.
13. For many farms comprised of sandy loam soils on glacialoutwash. terraces- irrigation during
the summer months is critical to sustain commercially viable levels, of agricultural. production.
The inability of some farmers to obtain rights from Ahe -Department of Ecology to a long term
reliable source of water for irrigation serves to discourage a long -term commitment to farming
their land.
14. The use of ground water and surface water for irrigation is closely linked to discussions of
hydraulic continuity and the maintenance of minimum in- stream flows.
15. Many lowland farms exist at least in part because of the drainage of wetland areas and
they rely upon regular maintenance of drainage ways for continued productivity. This reality
creates the potential for conflict with critical areas protection. Natural subirrigation on many of
these lands does reduce or eliminate the need for irrigation during the growing season.
10
16. Smaller- acreage holdings are not necessarily incompatible with agriculture and may in
many instances serve to buffer and bolster large -scale agricultural activities by providing a
significant part of the economic base necessary to support the infrastructure upon which
agriculture is dependent.
17. The more stringent income requirements for smaller acreage to participate in the open -
space taxation program serves as an incentive to commercial agricultural activity for those in
that category who qualify and choose to participate in the program.
18. Small acreage holdings are likely to have increased economic viability for agricultural
purposes as the population influx into Western Washington creates larger urban markets in
closer proximity to those farms (see Klein and Reganold article, Agricultural Changes and
Farmland Protection in Western Washington). Off -farm job availability also enhances economic
survival for those wishing to farm part-time. The resurgence of local farmers markets in several
cities within the county are evidence of this trend. At the same time, increasing population
tends to create greater competition for available agricultural lands, pushing land prices upward.
19. Agriculture is dynamic which means that as the economy, technology, and culture change,
the types of agricultural produce will change, both in proportion and kind.
20. Land -use regulations should be written so as to enable successful transitions within the
agricultural economy. Activities which enhance economic survivability while safe - guarding long-
term agricultural use should be considered when defining allowed uses.
21. Given the dynamic character of the agricultural economy, a comprehensive plan supportive
of agriculture seeks to preserve for agricultural usage a balanced range of parcel sizes on a
variety of productive soil types.
22. The agricultural land conservation component of this plan helps to achieve preservation of
intermediate -sized parcels (16 acres and up) for agricultural usage and also helps to capture a
couple of broad categories of soil types. From a regulatory perspective, this fills a gap between
ten -acre rural zoning and the minimum 40 -acre zoning in the ag zone. It also helps to reduce
the potential for predominantly five -acre and ten -acre subdivisions in the rural zones.
23. The rural zones affected by the agricultural protection overlay zone are -found primarily in
the Mountain View Uplands west of Ferndale; the King. Mountain :Uplands..north and northeast
of Bellingham; the Boundary Uplands east of Blaine; the Custer Trough; an area trending
northeast from Nooksack toward Sumas generally east of the Sumas River; and along and
around the foothills, often between forestry and agriculture zones. The three upland area
referenced are mantled with glacio- marine drift, generally meaning the soils.are heavier soils
with slow drainage, and with generally a more hilly terrain, which presents a greater challenge
to farming than the nearly level topography-found in the floodplain of the Nooksack and the
adjacent outwash terraces. -Thus these upland areas, while often consisting of good productive
soils, are less likely to be used for larger -scale commercial agriculture. The soil survey for
Whatcom County provides good insight into the nature of soils and the natural limitations on
farming activity associated with significant portions of the rural zones. Another book, The
Geology and Geomorphology of Western Whatcom County, by Donald Easterbrook, also
11
provides good background information for understanding the varied topography and soils of
western Whatcom County.
24. Recently, strong national and international markets for raspberries have triggered a major
expansion of raspberry production and acreage in that production. That expansion has driven
prices upward for land suitable for raspberry production. To the extent such land has been
used for forage production for dairy operations, the increase in land prices operates to the
disadvantage of those dairies.
25. To date, mineral resource extraction on agricultural lands has involved a very small
percentage of the total amount of those lands. Given the amount of area designated outside of
the agriculture.zone, or already existing within the zone, containing sizable reserves, it is
unlikely that a significant amount of additional agricultural land will be used for mineral resource
extraction in the near - future. The currently designated mineral resource lands and designation
criteria do not pose a.threat to the viability of the agricultural economy of Whatcom County.
26. Parcelization of agricultural lands within the rural zones into two, five, and ten acre parcels
appears to have several effects on agriculture: it serves to introduce greater diversity of
agricultural activity,. it helps to buffer agriculture - related support industries from the economic .
ups and downs of the dominant components of the agricultural economy, it tends to raise land
prices in the rural zones from what they were when it was primarily large parcel agriculture, and
it introduces a greater potential for conflict in land uses.
Attachments:
1. Agricultural Land Use Maps #4A and #413
2. SCS Maps of Prime and Unique Soils, LESA Maps, County Agriculture Tax
Maps
3. Agricultural Land Use Table - Parcels less than 10 acres not zoned agriculture
RESOURCE LANDS -- MINERALS
The narrative contained in the comprehensive plan pertaining to mineral resource quantity,
quality, location, and usage provides very helpful factual information and the Council hereby
incorporates that factual data into these findings by reference. The Council also finds that
additional study is necessary to expand and refine the information available on the quantity,
quality, and location of mineral resource deposits and that it is a high priority to complete such a
study within five years of the adoption of the comprehensive plan. The designations of Mineral
Resource Lands that have been made are necessary to insure a steady, adequate supply of.
good quality construction aggregate at a reasonable price over a fifty year planning horizon.
Proposed Policy 8N -10 and proposed action item 12 of Chapter 8 of the Resource Lands
chapter both addressed river gravel mining and were removed from the plan based upon the
need for additional environmental review. The County is currently reviewing its proposed
Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan. This review includes environmental review of
all alternatives for flood control, including those stated in the policy and action item referred to
above. Completion of this environmental review should provide the County with additional
information upon which to judge the environmental impacts, if any, of those two proposed items.
12
The Council heard and considered extensive testimony regarding all proposed and requested
MRL designations in the County. The various requests for MRL designation were examined in
light of the designation criteria contained within the mineral resource portion of the resource
lands chapter of the comprehensive plan, and in each instance, approval or denial of
designation was made in terms of the relevant designation criteria.
The Council finds, after weighing all the evidence, that prohibiting all mineral resource land
designations within the five year zone of contribution for designated well -head protection areas,
and that prohibiting mining within 10 vertical feet of the seasonal high water table between the 5
and 10 years time to travel, provides an acceptable minimum level of protection for public water
sources as it relates to comprehensive plan land use designations. Additional conditions
providing for protection of water quality may be imposed if needed as a demonstrated by the
environmental review which is conducted before issuance of an administrative permit.
The designation of a 20 acre MRL zone in the area of a hard rock quarry on Lummi Island is
warranted because of: 1) the presence of high quality hard rock in the area of designation;
2) the fact that the area of designation beyond that which is already being mined is located
farther away from existing residences; 3) the fact that the zoning in the area is rural forestry;
and 4) the fact that mining has occurred and is occurring at the site as a non - conforming use:-
The limitation of the designation to 20 acres at this time is warranted because the rural forestry
zoning serves to protect the resource from incompatible development within the area of the
deposit and in the surrounding area, and because the Lummi Island subarea plan includes a
policy to limit the scope offtnininglactivity to the scope of existing uses.
III RESOURCE LANDS -- FORESTS
The Counci finds that an abundance of forest lands have been designated and preserved for
long -term commercial use. Also, in addition to forest lands under county jurisdiction, there are
several hundred thousand acres of forest land under federal jurisdiction within the county which
serve as additional forest resources for the region. Changes under consideration as to
permitted uses within forestry zones will be, if instituted, designed to minimize impact on the
forest resource and should have no practical detrimental effect upon it.
Critical Areas (GMA Goal 10)
GMA Goal 10. Environment is to: Protect the environment and'enhance the state's high quality
of life; including air and water quality, and the availability of water.
There are a number of policies interwoven throughout the plan that incorporate environmental
protection in the achievement of other goals. Chapter Eleven, Environment, supports
environmental protection through a number of policies focusing on the protection of natural
hazards, water resources, and natural systems. Chapter 2: Land Use, also, directly furthers the
protection of the environment through the Open Space sections. These policies serve to
enhance a high quality of life through environmental protection and the ancillary benefits to the
economy this provides. The enhancement of air quality is further supported in the plan. The
enhancement of water quality is pursued through Goals E, F, G and H of the Environment
Chapter and in the Land Use and Utilities Chapters as well..
13
Whatcom County has adopted ordinances to restrict development withinigeologically hazardous
areas, alluvial fan hazard areas, wetlands, streams, wildlife, floodplains, and critical aquifer
recharge areas and implement the Shorelines Management Act, the State Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA).
Urban Growth Areas (GMA Goal 1)
GMA Goal 1. Urban Growth Areas, is to: Encourage development in urban areas where
adequate public facilities exist or can be provided in an efficient manner.
The Comprehensive. Plan designates the final Urban Growth Area for Whatcom County
pursuant to RCW 36.70A.110, within which urban growth is encouraged and outside of which
additional urban expansion and sprawl are not permitted. The boundaries of the city urban
growth areas are based on the needs of the cities as presented in their Comprehensive Plans
and endorsed by the County. Plan goals and policies specifically provide forthe coordination
and regulation of public and private development as is necessary for the.public. health, safety,
and general welfare of Whatcom County residents. The Plan prevents extension of urban
services outside of urban growth areas and avoids urban sprawl and expansion into resource
lands.
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES
1. General Policies
Urban Growth Boundaries are set in accordance with the policies established in Chapter 36.70A
and applicable Regulations. Specific consideration is given to approved comprehensive plans
for the municipalities and the supporting justification. Modifications have been incorporated into
this plan based upon several criteria:
a. The need to assure logical service Boundaries,
b. The need to avoid isolated pockets or abnormally irregular boundaries of county
area.
c. Consideration of land needs analysis for residential, commercial and industrial
needs within urban areas, and
d. Identification of. special needs with respect- to;unique :.non- city:,industrial sites
(Cherry Point) and County areas which are rapidly becoming cities, and for which
the County will support annexation or incorporation as appropriate (Birch Bay).
2. Specific Policies within Urban Growth Boundaries outside City limits
Urban Growth Boundaries outside present City limit lines identify areas of County jurisdiction
during the_interim between the adoption of this plan.and the ultimate annexation of the property
by the City. During this interim period the following policies shall be in place to assure that the
purposes of this plan and growth management are in fact accomplished.
a. No annexation shall occur within a County UGA until the County has an .
interlocal agreement with the annexing jurisdiction on issues such as timing, logical
14
service areas, and economic balance between commercial industrial residential and
other lands within the UGA.
b. The County will require a power of attorney to annex to the applicable jurisdiction
(and or support incorporation in the case of Birch Bay) as a condition of any
development approval within the County controlled UGA, including any action
pursuant to Chapter 58.17 RCW, the approval of any Binding Site Plan or other
development permit, including any permit issued under the Uniform Building Code
which increases the square footage of property within the UGA. The County shall
use the powers granted to assist in achieving the balance sought under paragraph
1 above.
c. The County has identified long term planning areas within UGA's where a need
exists to promote phased development from the urban core outward, where final
plans for urban services are not yet in place, or where joint planning at the
development regulation level is appropriate to assure both conformance and
consistency for future plans and developments. Short and long term planning areas
are identified on the maps in the Appendix of the Plan. Short term planning areas
shall be administered as a development regulation and may be moved, within We-
UGA UGA when several objectives have been accomplished:
• "rhe County and the City have agreed on a joint plan or are working toward
agreement upon a city /county interlocal agreement for land use and
development standards.
• The land to be included within the revised Short Term Planning Area has
planned facilities available or facilities capable of being made available in
time to serve development within the new Short Term Planning Area at the
time development occurs.
• The City and County have agreed on annexation issues identified in policies
in the Plan.
• The Short Term Planning area adjacent to the area proposed for inclusion is
meeting the density objectives established for the UGA.
• "rhe City has annexed to the STPA, and extension of the boundary is
necessary to accommodate provision of urban services.
• The planning area extension is otherwise consistent with the policies of this
Comprehensive Plan.
• The City has corrected any deficiency which created the need for the Long
Term Planning Area.
• In any event, that adequate capacity in public facilities exists or is projected
within ten years to serve the new area.
• Short Term Planning Areas would be moved by zoning action consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan.
• These limitations are not intended to interfere with existing commitments or
obligations to provide water and /or sewer, or with vested applications to the
extent of vesting.
3. Land within a UGA but outside a short term planning area
Land within a UGA but outside a short term planning area shall retain its current zoning until a
15
new joint plan is identified and the short term planning area is revised, but with the following
additional limitations on development which shall be included in the County development
regulations:
• No sewer shall be extended outside a Short Term Planning Area. Water
lines shall not be extended to serve urban levels of development outside a
Short Term Planning Area. Exceptions may be made in cases where human
health. is threatened as determined by the County Health Department.
• All development in urban growth areas shall be done in a manner which will
not preclude development at urban levels of density when the area is
annexed into the city.
• No residential development shall occur at greater than one unit per five
acres.
• All residential development on parcels greater than 20 acres shall be
clustered on no more than 20 percent of the property.
4. Urban Growth Boundaries -- Cities
The purpose of this section is to provide the framework for review of Urban Growth Boundaries
for the Cities in Whatcom County. Subsequent to the County designating the IUGA's, which._,_
were invalidated for lack of adequate support and definition, the cities have all been engaged in
the statutory process. for identification of urban growth boundaries through the city
comprehensive planning process. The process involved identification of areas characterized by
urban growth, land needs beyond the present city limits, and a focus on the ability to provide
adequate public services.
These plans have been officially adopted by the cities as part of the cities' official GMA
comprehensive plans, reviewed by the state and subject to state and local review through the
appeal process. None of the official adopted city comprehensive plans or their associated
SEPA review were challenged by appeal. For this reason the Council finds that the City Plans
are presumed to be correct, and should not be changed unless the Council has good reason.
The land needs analyses submitted by Bellingham, Blaine, Everson, Ferndale, Lynden,
Nooksack and Sumas in their findings, comprehensive plans and submissions to the County
Council support the population distributions presented in Table 3 in Chapter 1 of the
Comprehensive Plan.
The Council should consider proposed modification to the UGAs based upon updated land
needs analysis, changes requested to further GMA goals, and consistency with state and
County policies.
Bellingham.
Bellingham is presently working on amendments to its adopted plan. The original plan was
adopted and not appealed. The County IUGA was invalidated for lack of analysis county wide.
That lack was addressed in the specific plans and in additional work provided to the Council by
the City and others.
The Council finds that the Bellingham Plan, as recommended for amendment is supported by
the land needs analysis. The City originally used the 50 percent market factor which the
16
Growth Management Hearings Board interprets as overstating the amount of land necessary.
By the same token, the City used an overly dense assumption for redevelopment in existing
areas and under estimated the impact of critical area buffers. The City's revised analysis
reflects the more realistic 25% market factor which the Council finds acceptable.
Bellingham is projecting an industrial need based on a reasonable review of existing studies.
The County has received new information (Supply and Demand of Industrial Land in Whatcom
County and at Cherry Point, prepared for Trillium Corporation and Pacific International .
Terminals by Gregory R. Easton, Property Counselors, Seattle, January, 1997) which indicates
that existing users will consume more land than previously anticipated, and that the overall
intensity of use and number of workers per acre used in prior studies may have understated
actual ratios found in the Bellingham industrial area. The Council finds the 1997 study to be the
best summary of existing and projected use and provides the basis of the County planning
assumptions. The County study certainly shows that the City of Bellingham needs at least as
much.as shown in City plans and suggests the City consider the new data in its next review.
The Council also finds that permanent facilities such as the Port and the supporting
infrastructure and industrial lands serving the harbor and airport must be planned for more than
a twenty year horizon. If new residential or commercial land is needed, growth boundaries can
be adjusted accordingly. Where ports and airports are concerned, the land needs must be
accommodated for a significantly longer time frame since the ability to relocate or find a new
facility to accommodate growth is difficult, if not impossible, and disruptive to other community
values. For this reason the Council finds that the industrial lands within the Bellingham Plan are
appropriate and justified by the analysis given. No good cause has been shown to reduce the
area within the boundary.
The City of Bellingham has re- examined the Geneva area and has concluded that the area is
characterized by urban growth, and with Water District 10 plans for sewer and water presently
under review, has a reasonable prospect of being provided with adequate sewer and water
service during the planning period. The County concurs with the City's conclusions and finds
that existing zoning and development patterns and the district's plan for service support
inclusion within the UGA.
The Summit View property presents a different set of facts. The property does have a vested
plat application for 1.5 units per acre and a court settlement for sewer. The owner has not
completed his environmental documentation. andwill be required .to. conform .to-applicable
standards for the construction of streets, drainage and other environmental considerations.
A regional arterial has been identified in transportation plans as potentially crossing the Summit
View property, but no plans are in place for the present construction or development of the
route. The Summit View property cannot be accessed without travelling through Bellingham and
has vested rights to urban services of water and sewer. From a public service perspective, the
property is best included within. the Bellingham UGA. Bellingham has not included the Summit
View property in their capital facilities plans and has requested that it not be included in the
UGA. The Council finds that the public interest is not served by creating non - conforming uses
or areas without good cause. Such good cause does not exist in this area. For these reasons,
the Council has included the Summit View property, and properties to the immediate west of
Summit View, within the Bellingham UGA, but outside of the Short Term Planning Area.
17
Proposed changes to this Short Term Planning Area should be coordinated with the City of
Bellingham land use and capital facility planning. Nothing in this action changes the owner's
rights under the vested application to the extent of the. vesting.
The Council concurs with Bellingham's recommendations with respect to both Geneva and the
Yew Street properties to the west of Summit View and finds no reason to change. At a hearing
the City recommended that the City be given greater runoff responsibility in the area. The
development regulations for UGA properties should reflect City standards and the City and
County should explore joint means of increasing the City stormwater management responsibility
for urban areas in advance of annexation.
The Planning Commission and the Bellingham City Council recommended a number of "Five
Year Review Areas ". The Council finds that many of the areas may be logical for consideration
by the City in future reviews but that no priority is-given and .future circumstances may warrant a
different view. The Council finds that the "Five Year Review Areas" should be deleted from the
County comprehensive plan but that the City be advised of our request that those areas
abutting the present urban boundary be considered by the City as development occurs in the
abutting City areas.
A significant issue in the Bellingham UGA is the extension of utilities and the timing of
annexation to assure logical service boundaries. The Council's policy is that land within a UGA
should be served by a City or Special Purpose District and that the Council will take steps to
assure that result. The Council also finds that annexation must be balanced so that the costs of
growth are paid by those who benefit from that growth. In the Bellingham UGA this means a
mix of residential, commercial and industrial properties annexed by the City must retain some
balance to assure the county does not retain a disproportionate share of low value or high cost
properties. It is also essential to assure that logical service boundaries be provided.
The Council finds that this objective can best be accomplished by a' requirement that all
development permits within the Bellingham UGA, whether pursuant to Chapter 58.17 RCW,
binding site plan, application for utility extension or application for a permit under the Uniform
Building Code, except those. permits for remodels which do not add to the square footage of
property developed in the county, shall be required to sign a power of attorney to the County for
annexation at the time-the property is contiguous'and can otherwise lmeet "statutory
requirements for annexation. In this way the County can address a.logical progression of
development at urban densities, and.separately.pursue a:reasonable agreement.with the•City. -
Further, the Council finds that annexation of any property to the City, in advance of the creation
of an annexation agreement may be prejudicial to the County's ability to work out such a
balanced annexation agreement with the City and for this reason the comprehensive plan shall
provide that no annexation occur within the Bellingham UGA until such agreement is in place.
Blaine.
The area within the urban boundary is characterized by urban growth, within approved public .
facility service areas.
Blaine is re- examining its land needs. analysis to bring it up to date, based on information
18
received to date. A few minor modifications are suggested:
1. West Urban Area, Cannery Hill, West Semiahmoo. Vested applications exist for about 1,600
units and assorted recreational facilities. The high value and high tourist/resort part time
resident population of the area minimizes impacts on schools and year around facilities. The
property does not serve resource uses and is suitable for urban growth. The west urban area is
characterized by significant tourist, and resort development and use, and the area serves a part
time population many times the. permanent population. Blaine has planned for and is prepared
to deal with the unique requirements and demands of such fully developed resort
recreational /residential areas.
The Council finds water service can be provided by either the Birch Bay Water and Sewer
District or Blaine. Given the agreement to resolve the service dispute, this area has been
identified as a Short Term Planning Area.
2. South' Urban Area, Loomis Trail /Drayton Harbor. The Loomis Trail and Drayton Harbor areas
are characterized by significant critical areas, vested development, and the presence of both
sewer, water and significant transportation links. The area is characterized by urban
development and is not likely to revert to or serve any rural or resource purpose. The Council.
finds that an Urban Growth Area designation is appropriate, with a short term planning area
adjacent to and north of California Creek to encourage infill at urban density to coincide with
facility extensions.
3. East Urban Growth Area. East Blaine's urban growth area (east of 1 -5) is the home of many
of Blaine's permanent residents and an area which will see a significantly higher proportion of
permanent residents than the west areas. The City has requested an extension of the boundary
proposed by the Planning Commission to incorporate a city well field which the City plans to
annex, and the associated aquifer protection district. The expanded Blaine UGA mirrors a
recent annexation along the Canadian border. Growth in the city is expected to phase west to
east, as utilities are extended. The County urban area is presently zoned R -10 which reflects
the aquifer sensitive nature of the property and the presence of the City well fields. The Council
finds that the urban area should be modified to include the entire City well field, given the City's
stated policy to annex. 'In addition, the County will impose a short term planning area within the
UGA and retain the underlying zoning until (1) the City and the County complete a joint plan for
the growth areas which reflects the aquifer recharge and other sensitive areas, (2) a phasing
plan which aids in reducing the potential for sprawl in the County�UGA'.or the:abutting City area,
and (3) an interlocal agreement dealing with annexation and other development related issues
affecting the area.
Everson.
The Everson Plan has been adopted by the City and not appealed. For this reason the criteria
for proposed modification is "good reason for change ". Everson has revised its land needs
assessment, reflecting a 25 percent rather than a 50 percent market factor. Using the new
analysis, and making allowance for some inefficiencies inherent in the development process,
the area within the plan is within 40 acres, or less than 10 percent of the total urban area. The
Council finds that a 10 percent deviation is within the normal range of error for such plans and
is acceptable the entire UGA is designated as a short term planning area. .
19
Ferndale.
The Ferndale Plan has been adopted and was not appealed. Thus the Council's basis of
review is good cause shown. The Planning Commission recommended deletion of certain
property along Mountain View Road and the inclusion of property west of Vista Drive. The
basis for the City action was the presence of existing development and future utility plans.
Geography dictates that Ferndale develop its southwest utility corridor before moving to the
residential areas around Vista Road. The Council finds the rationale for including Mountain
View supportable. The deletion along Vista Road leaves an abnormally irregular future
boundary. The Council finds that the Ferndale urban growth area should continue to include
the Vista Drive properties at the R -10 designation, with higher density development precluded
until adequate facilities can be provided and the area becomes a Short Term Planning Area.
Annexation and utility agreements will assure, however, that the area will ultimately be
incorporated into the City. Given the likelihood of urban level growth abutting the permitted
commercial and industrial development, the Council finds good cause to include the added
lands with the short term planning area and annexation agreement requirement to assure the
availability of adequate services.
The land needs analysis in the plan supports the overall growth and planning objectives of the
City. The City revisited its land needs assumptions in conjunction with the County
Comprehensive Plan review. The Council finds that the City used very conservative figures
with respect to critical area buffers and setbacks and has a reasonable projection of needs.
The County will recommend that the area west of the existing city limits be excluded from. the
short term planning area until a joint plan has been identified on utility extension and phasing,
and an annexation agreement is in place to assure that the undeveloped area is not affected
by sprawl in advance of available services.
Similarly, the area north of the City was also excluded from the Short Term Planning Area until
the same criteria have been met.
Lynden.
Lynden is the center of the county dairy processing and agricultural activity. Both industrial
processing and commercial needs reflect the resource orientation and economic base for the
area. Lynden's plan was approved by the state without legal challenge and thus the criteria for
review is '.'good reason for change ".
The Planning Commission recommendation and the City recommendation mirror each other.
The City has provided .an updated land needs analysis and based on information received to
date no good cause for change is found to exist. The urban growth areas do project into
agriculture resource lands. The Council finds the loss of lands for long term agriculture will not
affect the overall productivity of the county resource areas and provides areas for expansion of
agriculture industry and service facilities which are consumptive of large quantities of land and
essential to a healthy agriculture industry.
The Council finds that the Urban Growth Areas on the north side of the city west of Benson
Road should be outside the short term planning area until: (1) public services are planned for
and can be extended to serve the areas at urban densities, (2) a phasing plan is in place to
assure adequate in- filling and the prevention of sprawl, and (3) an annexation agreement is in
20
place with respect to timing and phasing of public utilities.
Nooksack.
The Nooksack Plan has been modified by the Planning Commission reflecting the deletion of
certain agricultural lands southeast of the City. The approved UGA is 221 acres which is above
the flood hazard area, a significant issue in Nooksack. The City Plan was approved without
appeal. The Planning Commission recommended deletion of property south of South Pass
Road. The Council finds that critical areas, shorelines and flood plains will limit some of the
area. The proposed use of the remaining property is one of the few non -flood areas which will
permit a connected road and limited industrial development. The Council supports retaining the
southern area.
The Council does recommend the use of a short term planning area as a sprawl prevention
device with revision of the short term area dependent upon a joint plan for utility service and
phasing, and an interlocal agreement on annexation issues. The short term planning area will
serve also to assure that City regulations and County regulations avoid undue sprawl in
advance of City utilities being available.
Sumas.
The Sumas Plan has been approved by the City and not appealed. For this reason change
should be made only for good cause shown. The Planning Commission found the boundary too
large based on population projections and recommended the deletion of a portion of the City
proposed area on Morgan and Hovel Roads. The Council supports the Planning Commission's
reduction. The Council also finds that the flood area on the northeast corner has not been
further supported and should be deleted at this time. The industrial land on Front Street is
surrounded on two sides by existing industry which would be adversely affected by adoption of
residential zones. A similar analysis fits the industrial lands abutting the main line Burlington
Northern track. The property is mostly wetland to the north and is situated along a major rail
corridor. Any residential development, even at rural levels would be disruptive of the abutting
rail and industry and the public interest is well served by the proposed plan.
A long term planning area is recommended for the Hovel Road residential area, approximately
180 acres. The purpose is to encourage growth at urban levels from the City out. The
boundary would remain in place until a joint plan identifies a phasing plan for the extension of
utilities and an annexation agreement is in place.
Birch -Bay:
Birch Bay is located south of Blaine and is presently unincorporated. The area is characterized
by significant residential /recreational developments at urban lot sizes and densities and is thus
characterized by urban growth. The area is planned to grow to a population of 6,500 over the
planning horizon of this plan. The area is presently served with urban facilities, including sewer,
water and power. While water supply is not fully available to the entire area, the district is in the
process of securing supplies, and development within the area will be limited until an adequate
supply is found. The Birch Bay UGA is served by roadways designated as part of the regional
transportation network. Birch Bay serves the County's economic development, recreation and
housing goals by continuing to provide an opportunity for a variety of housing types /price
ranges and recreational opportunities.
21
The Council finds that the Birch Bay area is of a suitable size, intensity and mix of uses to
warrant eventual incorporation into a city. The purpose of the comprehensive plan is to set the
stage for such change, within the life of this plan to the extent possible. Areas which are
contiguous to the commercial core area, currently subdivided or developed, and have access to
urban services are identified as short term planning areas to promote infill.
To that end, the County is administering the area as a trustee for the City to come. Thus urban
zoning standards to assure adequate density and to avoid sprawl are recommended. These
would include a minimum density of four units per acre in the UR 6 zone and development
regulations to assure an average density of developed property of 2.5 units per acre or greater
within the UR-4 zone. The County will also require "ability to serve" letters from all affected
public districts and agencies as a condition of granting any development approval which will
result in any increased demand on public facilities. The County will use SEPA to identify any
facility needs impacted by a proposed development and appropriate improvements or mitigation
fees.
All development shall be required to hook to available sewer and water, and all development
permits, whether pursuant to Chapter 58.17RCW, or binding site plan, or any request to hook
or commence service to an existing utility, or any permit granted pursuant to the Uniform
Building Code which adds or increases the size or number of structures, shall be required to
sign a power of attorney to annex or incorporate, whichever is determined appropriate by the
Boundary Review Board.
The County will support steps for incorporation, but will follow the decision of the Boundary
Review Board.
5. SQecial Situations
Cherry Point
Cherry Point has a number of significant natural features which provide it with major potential
as a port of regional significance: deep water in the near -shore area sufficient to accommodate
vessels with draft of at least 60 feet and up to 250,000 dwt (vessels of this size are called "cape
vessels" and few ports on the west coast can accommodate them); a prime location at the north
end of Puget Sound with ready access to the Pacific Ocean and the closest deep water marine
terminal site in the continental United States to Alaska and th Orient; proximity and rail linkage
to the trans - Canadian rail systems and Canadian markets located just across the international
border within 10 miles of the site; linkage to the U.S. rail system; proximity to 1 -5 and major
Canadian truck routes accessible via Grandview Road, which is an all- weather road suitable for
industrial traffic; end large undeveloped parcels in the upland areas adjacent to the shore
which can be developed as a staging area for on- loading and off - loading both manufactured
goods and bulk commodities; and a sparsely populated area surrounding the site. Additionally
there is a regulatory framework,.the Cherry Point Management Unit, contained within the
County's Shoreline Management Master Program and approved by the Department of Ecology,
to insure the proper review and management of environmental concerns in the shoreline area.
The zoning for the area is largely heavy impact industrial which prohibits residential
development .which could otherwise endanger the potential of this area for port related
activities. The area, due to location, soil types, and a variety of natural constraints, has minimal
22
significance for resource land usage, and the County's resource land needs are adequately
addressed elsewhere in the County. Industry requirements for noise shed and air shed,
together with critical areas regulations adopted by the County, provide for significant
undisturbed areas within the Cherry Point UGA, which provide excellent wildlife habitat and
protection.
The County has reviewed the existing uses, the boundaries and the proposed uses for the
Cherry Point area and finds the area designated to reflect the area's historic use and that
infilling within the existing land ownerships is the best approach. Cherry Point is already
characterized by urban growth, including two major oil refineries and an aluminum production
facility, with an industrial park and a bulk commodity shipping port under permitting and /or
construction. The area has two vested proposals for deep water moorage and an overall plan
for major industrial and port activities and supports the job base and economic base in the
County. The Council finds that the existing large scale industry is unsuited for a dense urban
setting and is more appropriately located where the impacts can be contained. Also, the uses
contemplated are of a size, scale and impact which cannot be accomplished within the cities,
nor would such uses be appropriate given the proximity of residential, commercial and other
urban city uses which could significantly conflict with the Cherry Point type uses.
The County needs to take steps to preserve the unique features of the site which include large
parcelization, access to a deep water port, access to major transportation infrastructure,
including rail, interstate and Trans - Canadian Highways and trade routes, all weather road
access, natural gas;and high voltage power from BPA. Many of the industries provide their
own fire suppression and emergency power generation. The unique nature of the site is
retained by designating the site a Major Industrial Area /Port Industrial in the Comprehensive
Plan within an unincorporated Urban Growth Boundary. Furthermore, policies and development
regulations provide limitations on development within the zone at Cherry Point which provide
protection and assurance for major users and limit other parcels to uses which are accessory to
or supportive of major users.
The Cherry Point UGA is served by Whatcom County PUD #1 (water), fire district, power
companies, and is at the confluence of multi -modal transport, including a marine port, railroad
lines, county all- weather arterials, and a state highway. Specifics as to sewer service are best
dealt with through the industrial discharge NPDES/ State Waste Discharge process due to the
unique nature and needs of each industry and the fact that issues such as use, reuse,
treatment and recycling are often part of an Industry's Processing Plan. The PUD has both the
legal, physical and financial ability to provide necessary services.
Road and law enforcement services will be provided by the County, but existing facilities,
combined with proposed and mandated developer extensions are capable of meeting
transportation needs. Law enforcement services can be met without hardship, and fire
suppression services will be met through ready -to -serve requirements which will assure that
unique fire and hazardous materials issues are considered prior to development.
The Council finds that the unique services available at Cherry Point will serve a County demand
well beyond the 20 Year Planning horizon of the Comprehensive Plan. The natural deep water
features are permanently fixed and cannot be relocated or expanded. The need for suitable
23
large parcels will continue and would be adversely affected if allowed to parcelize for other uses
within the twenty year period. The size of the Cherry Point UGA is based on existing properties
and uses, and the in- filling of areas within those uses, rather than a mere twenty year demand,
and is supported by the study Supply and Demand of Industrial Land in Whatcom County and
at Cherry Point, Prepared for Trillium Corporation and Pacific International Terminals by
Gregory R. Easton, Property Counselors, Seattle, January, 1997.
The Council finds that by requiring the master planning of the large parcels as a prerequisite to
any division and development that the basic character of the area can be preserved.
The Comprehensive Plan includes policies to assure that Cherry Point's unique features of
large parcelization, port access, and transportation availability are maintained and protected,
from incompatible development.
The Council finds that the unique features of the Cherry Point Industrial Area can best be
preserved by adopting - development regulations which:
Require the master planning of each large parcel in advance of any
development or subdivision of the parcels.
2. Require the designation and site plan for a major user (40 acres or more) on
a large tract before the development of accessory uses to assure that
accessory uses are compatible with and will not interfere with the major
industrial user.
3. Require the master planning of parcels prior to development and require that
site(s) for major users (generally 40 acres or larger) be identified on the
master plan prior to parcelization.
4. Allow support activities, warehousing, shipping, machine repair and service,
educational services, food service and conveniences, to locate on a large
parcel (40 acres or larger), only after the completion of a master plan, and
the identification and site plan approval for the major user.
Due to Cherry Point's status as virtually the only remaining heavy industrial zoning in the
county, its unique location as the last remaining deep water port in the region, and the
appropriateness of siting heavy industrial uses away from residential population centers,
designation of the Cherry Point Industrial Area as an unincorporated UGA meets the goals of
GMA. If not used for industrial development, these areas remain reserved for future
development and preserved as open space because all other types of development are
prohibited.
Custer
The Custer area is uniquely located in proximity to the confluence of the Burlington Northern -
Santa Fe Railroad main line, the Cherry Point rail spur, Interstate 5 and major port facilities to
serve as a major intermodal facility. Such facilities provide breaking down, assemblage,
storage, transshipment, and /or further processing of container goods and other freight.
Facilities also typically include rail and truck storage yards, freight forwarding businesses,
24
warehouses, truck or rail repair facilities, and related commercial establishments. Such
centers need to deal with issues of size, limitations on use due to local factors, adequacy of
buffers, minimizing or mitigating transportation conflicts and assuring adequate public or private
facilities, including water, fire, sewer and hazardous materials response.
The Council finds that the Custer area, located just west of 1 -5 meets the criteria identified for
such an intermodal yard and the Comprehensive Plan should enable such a designation.
Unlike Cherry Point, Custer is not readily defined by existing uses and zoning. The Council
finds that the scope of such designation would best be completed through a master planning
process under the County's zoning ordinance.
Custer was identified in prior plans.as an area potentially suitable for light industrial zoning
associated with rail, highway and port related activities. During the planning process
subsequent work has identified that as an inter - modal facility, Custer can serve a unique and
important function in Whatcom County.
The site is unique in that it is located at the crossroads of rail and highway facilities, the
gateway to Cherry Point and potential future cross county connections to Sumas and Canada.
It is also unique in that it is a contiguous block of underdeveloped property large enough for
both rail and truck, storage, loading, repacking, transfer, assembly, and other activities
commonly found in and associated with an inter -modal facility. Such a contiguous site does not
exist within the UGA of Blaine, Bellingham, or Ferndale and the activity contemplated could be
incompatible with day to day urban activities.
The site is important as a facility which can coordinate with and consolidate "large parcel"
transit activity, to serve all the cities and Cherry Point with consolidated rail and highway
transportation services.
The site is provisional as an urban area and therefore no development can occur other than
that allowed by the underlying R =10 zoning until a master plan is approved which:
A. Identifies the appropriate facilities and criteria necessary to preserve the usefulness
of the site for primary inter -modal activates, (e.g. rail switching, loading, repacking
and storage, truck and container loading, repacking, and storage), as well as
associated activities which must be accessory to the primary inter -modal activities
(e.g. manufacturing, repair, sales, administration, ;personal: and professional
services). Accessory uses must be identified and planned in conjunction with
primary uses. A 40 acre minimum planning block shall be established for primary
uses and associated accessory uses.
B. Identifies (1) right -of -way for rail and truck; (2) necessary utilities, public or private,
to meet with water, fire flow, and waste discharge (both sewage and solid waste)
needs and requirements and a (3) phasing plan which identifies for each planning
block or phase: Essential public and private facilities and utilities which must be in
place, prior to development; public and private facilities, utilities and mitigation
which will be developed with the phase; and public or private facilities, utilities and
mitigation which will be developed late, but for which the early phase is making a
25
capital contribution.
C. Identifies and maps potentially affected critical areas, including streams, wetlands,
and aquifer recharge areas, and assures that adequate buffers, protection and
contingency plans are in place to protect the critical areas (a) during construction,
(b) during operation, (c) in the event of upset (includes adequate fire and hazardous
materials., plans and response capability).
The master plan shall,be processed as a rezone for the provisional urban area, consistent with
the comprehensive plan. Once adopted, the master plan shall serve as parcel specific zoning
for each of the 40 acre planning blocks, as well as identify the essential covenants, conditions
and assurances to protect the essential character of the site for inter -modal transportation and
accessory uses consistent with this comprehensive plan.
Specific considerations include limitations against residential, retail and non related commercial
uses to assure that the site does not develop incompatible use or uses which could otherwise
be served within existing urban areas. For this reason development regulations shall also
provide that there be no subdivision, parcelization or development approval for the properties
involved until the master plan is approved and necessary facilities, including traffic, water
sewer and others are in place or planned and funded. The site planning process can make
provision for appropriate accessory and supporting uses which serve the needs of the users
and do not interfere with the master plan.
To assure prompt resolution of the issues of size and unique characteristics of such an
intermodal center within a reasonable time, the designation of Provisional Urban Growth
Area shall be reviewed within five years or sooner. IF no master plan for the overall site is
presented and processed within the next five years, the Council shall examine whether the
Comprehensive Plan designation is potentially viable or whether it should be allowed to expire.
The Custer site will be designated Provisional Urban Growth Area - Intermodal
Transportation Facility. The designation is in the nature of an urban reserve in that the
underlying zoning will remain R -10 as to uses with the additional limitations noted above on
subdivision. If a master plan is completed satisfactorily addressing the issues discussed above,
the Council will redesignate the final boundaries "Urban" as such a development will clearly be
urban in nature and require urban levels of service and utilities. The urban area would remain
County, however, as the Council finds that the high residential density which accompanies
annexation would be incompatible with the intensity of use and 24 hour operations typical of an
intermodal yard.
Rural Lands
SMALL TOWNS AND CROSSROADS COMMERCIAL
The Council finds rural area planning includes not only agriculture, timber and mineral resource
lands and the resource protection zone within the R5 and R10 zoned areas of the county, but
also requires the county to deal with many special situations which are not urban, including
small towns and crossroad commercial areas, resort residential areas and suburban enclaves.
FM
The Council finds the best policy is to deal with the development which does exist and the
immediate impact areas, while assuring that the impact is limited to the area of development.
Most notably, the Foothills, South Fork Valley, and Lynden - Nooksack Valley Subareas have
several unincorporated areas which can be characterized as crossroad communities and small
towns. Populations range from a few houses or just a store such as in Kendall, to self
contained communities of a few hundred people. These communities. grew up serving the
agricultural and timber industries providing necessary goods and services. Today the areas are
characterized by grocery, fuel, food service, churches, some lodging, community halls and
service facilities. Schools and fire stations often are located in or nearby. In addition to serving
the agricultural and timber community, some of these areas have taken on a new role, that of
serving the tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of tourists who visit Mount Baker and
the foothills for both winter and summer recreation.
In reviewing these areas, the first question is whether the areas should be designate_ d for urban
growth: 'By this, the Council means that the area should be designed to build out at four (4)
units per acre or greater, have a viable commercial base, and ultimately incorporate into a city.
To be cost effective, a city should have a population potential over the twenty year planning
period of 2500 -5000 permanent residents, and the physical and financial capability of
supporting a full urban core providing retail, social and governmental services.
In looking at the small towns of Glacier, Maple Falls, Acme, Deming, Newhalem, Diablo and
Custer, all provide one or more urban type services, but none of them provide the range of
services or are of a size which would make incorporation fiscally prudent. Each does provide
essential services, however and should continue to support the agricultural, timber and tourist
needs of the County. The Council finds that none of the areas are likely or appropriate for
incorporation, however, within the planning period of this plan.
Small towns and crossroad commercial areas do exist, however, and will continue to exist and
serve the rural areas. The County will continue to be the general purpose government, with
school districts, fire districts and water districts and associations providing most of the other
public services and facilities.
In designating the boundaries and defining uses for "small towns" the Council looked at the
present size, physical features and limitations and logical service areas with room for expansion
to serve a growing demand where appropriate. The - Council also intends to avoid inappropriate
sprawl--or density and excessive costs of inappropriate development.
The Planning Commission recommended a physical limit on development characterized by a
specified number of people. The Council finds this limitation artificial and difficult if not
impossible to administer. Once a community reached a population near the specified limit,
family size and the vagaries of births, deaths, and the random location of even necessary public
facilities could result in noncompliance with the Planning Commission's recommended
guideline.
In small towns and crossroads communities areas, utility and public facility planning is more
reactive than in city UGA's. Cities, with a specified population, have a specific basis for large
27
scale utility planning. The small towns and crossroad areas may see growth, or not, depending
upon many factors. The County envisions about 8,000 to 12,000 people county -wide, or three
to five percent of the total county population, moving into all of the rural areas over the next 20
years. Given a reasonable allocation of the county population to suburban enclaves, resort
communities and rural areas, large scale utility planning for future growth is impractical.
The Council finds a number of mixed use zones rather than parcel specific commercial zones .
better fits the comprehensive planning designations for small towns. Parcel specific decisions
should be made at the:development regulation stage. As the population of all of these areas is
presently in the few hundreds or less, the expected growth is limited by the absence of sewer
facilities and the relatively small community size. The addition of a few hundred additional
residents overall within the area of existing development in these communities is insignificant in
impact to the overall. County plan and would aid the County objectives to support tourist growth.
The council finds that it is essential to the economies of the rural small towns to permit cottage
industries, home occupations and resource based industrial development appropriate to the
size and scale of the rural areas. This local employment will enhance employment
opportunities for existing residents, decrease transportation impacts from rural residents
commuting to work in urban areas, and provide a local tax base to fund essential public
services. Development regulations will assure adequate public facilities and buffering from
other uses.
The requirement of an "ability to serve" letter from all affected purveyors of public service is
designed to aid in assuring new development corresponds with service availability. By requiring
"ability to serve" letters before allowing development to occur, communities in the rural areas
and potential builders or users are put on notice that they must work with local utility purveyors
and public service operators to assure public needs can be met for each specific project. This
is appropriate in rural areas which do not have large scale public utilities.
1. Eastern Towns Glacier, Maple Falls and Kendall are the closest towns and crossroad
commercial areas to Mount Baker. The communities are within the greater Vancouver, B.C.
recreation area and serve a local population of more than 1.5 million Canadian residents as well
as Whatcom County and out -of -area and out -of -state tourists to the Mount Baker recreation
area. Increasing tourist activities have increased`the demand for additional food, fuel and
tourist services in the northeastern small towns, including restaurants, motels. and rental
housing. The Council .expects this increased demand to: continue.:, Thus the northeastern
towns provide vital support for the tourist industry which is a significant part of the County
economy. The towns, existing and planned, also serve the needs of several existimg
recreational plats located at or near the entrance to the National Forest. Newhalem and Diablo
are company towns managed in conjunction with utility facilities and continue to exist and
operate with the present limited scale. Small towns in this area typically occupy an area of one
quarter to one half square mile and are constrained by physical limitations.
Water supply for both potable water and fire flow is available or can be obtained. Further, at
the limited scale envisioned for small towns, sewer can be accommodated through on -site
facilities or local districts. Roads would not be significantly impacted by the expansions
contemplated, as the services are to accommodate the already growing recreational visitor
28
traffic, capture the pass -by traffic and reduce the need to travel into the National Forest and
then travel back out to a larger community to find food, fuel and overnight accommodations.
A "Sun Mountain Lodge" or "Skamania Lodge" type and scale resort at or near the small towns
would also be consistent with the plan and would aid the economic stability of the area. Most of
the dollars brought into the area are from Canada and outside Whatcom County. The impact
on schools of such growth would be negligible due to the limited permanent population of
school age children and the added assessed value would serve to replace dollars lost due to
the reduction in the timber industry activity which is expected to be long term. The Glacier,
Maple Falls and Kendall boundaries have been sized accordingly. In the case of Kendall, the
Council finds that commercial services expansion on the highway is more appropriate than
attempting to create a new commercial core in the Columbia Valley plats.
2. The Central Communities Acme and Deming have historically served both agricultural and
timber:.industries in the eastern portion of the county and continue to do so. Both also support
the growing tourist industry as they are at the access of the southern foothills of the Cascades
in the--County and see tourist activity both winter and summer. By some accounts, tourist
activity can be double the base activity for local businesses. The boundaries of both Acme and
Deming have been sized based on the areas characterized by existing development and logical
extensions of the present service areas. As with the small towns farther east, adequate water
supplies and.fire service are available or obtainable and on -site sewer can support the limited
expansion contemplated. Ability to serve requirements will assure that facilities and utilities are
available to serve proposed new development. The Deming area appears particularly suited to
small scale rural industrial development.
3. Western Towns Custer is a small unincorporated population center, formed at a major
crossroads along a main railroad line early in the county's history. Custer has retained a small
town character and a certain visual charm because of its older, dense, commercial center, and
has legal status as a "Town" under state law. As with the small towns farther east, adequate
water supplies and fire service are available or obtainable and on -site sewer can support the
limited expansion contemplated. Ability to serve requirements will assure that facilities and
utilities are available to serve proposed new development.
4. Crossroads Commercial Crossroads commercial centers include Van Wyck, Pole Road,
Nugent's Corner, Goodwin Road, and others shown on the map. These areas provide
necessary services to the surrounding rural areas. The commercial centers have been
designated to reflect existing facilities and logical service areas. Fire and water service
capability are the principal constraints on development and County development regulations will
require a certificate of service availability from the local fire district as a condition of commercial
development in the crossroad commercial centers. Adequate water for fire flow is a component
of adequate service.
Crossroads commercial should be located where such commercial exists and at arterial road
intersections where no such facility exists within three miles.
The Planning Commission recommended specific parcels in the vicinity of small towns
"commercial ". The Council prefers the broader area -wide classification with more general
/s
comprehensive plan designations. The zoning map may consider more specific additions and
deletions based on parcel specific and geographic considerations.
Needed Development Regulation Considerations:.
1. A Mixed Use Tourist Commercial zone suitable to small town needs
2. A Rural Industrial zone
Exhibits: 1. Overall Vicinity Map
2. Individual City Maps
3. Individual Air Photos
4. Individual Parcelization Maps
5.. Special Considerations The biggest impact to the county of the small towns and crossroads.
commercial areas remaining unincorporated is the ..need to provide law enforcement activity for
the area. The Nooksack tribe has entered into. an agreement: with the County to -provide
additional sheriffs services in connection with an;existing casino, part of the growing tourist
trade. The demand already exists for additional sheriff response in the Maple -Falls, Kendall,
Glacier area and the County is prepared to provide the additional services. The economic
base, including both sales and property taxes generated by additional tourist service and resort
commercial activity will aid in offsetting the cost of new services.
The principal. public service need in each of the communities is adequate water including fire
flow, to enable local fire. districts to deal with concentrations of buildings and commercial
activities. Development regulations shall identify a mechanism to assure minimum fire flow
within the various districts, and the issuance of development permits shall be conditioned upon
the availability of adequate services. School districts will also be given the ability to assure
concurrent facilities in conjunction with development having impact on schools. The proper
requirements for each shall be identified by the County and the local fire district. No
development permit shall be issued pursuant to Chapter 58:17 RCW or [binding site -plan
without "ability to serve letters" from school, fire, and where appropriate, water districts or
associations.
RESORT AND RECREATIONAL SUBDIVISIONS
Outside the urban growth areas of the county are several -areas which were developed as resort
or, recreational communities. The principal-features W:thef sites ;in-tquestion.ar&existing or.
vested plats or lots,-,.often with substantial development; but without the density, population or
services which would warrant further development as a full fledged city.
The areas of principal concern in this,category . include Point Roberts, Mount Baker Recreational
Region, and the Lake Whatcom Region. Each of the areas displays the results of unique
circumstances. For this reason each will be discussed in turn.
1. Point Roberts
Point Roberts is physically isolated from the County and is served by both Canadian and
Whatcom County services. The Council finds the.area qualifies as a resort center, but should
30
be zoned based on existing development impacts and not designated an urban growth area at
this time.
The Council requests that the COG study Point Roberts, Columbia Valley and Sudden Valley to
identify the factors necessary to create an economically viable city in each area, the
implications of such development within the County overall, and make recommendations as to
whether, and, if feasible, how such action should be addressed.
2. Mount Baker Recreational Region
Between 1968 and 1978, approximately 5000 second home sites, trailer lots or units were
platted or constructed within the Mount Baker Foothills region of Whatcom County. Rising
popularity of outdoor recreation, expanded public facilities and the five -hour round trip travel
time from Vancouver to the Mount Baker ski area fostered a market demand for overnight
lodging: With few resort or cabin units available prior to 1968, recreation subdivisions, camper
clubs -and condominiums were developed to fill the demand. In addition, during this period the
British-Columbia government placed a moratorium on the private purchase of B.C. land for
recreational use. This policy, combined with substantially lower land prices in neighboring
Whatcom county and crowded recreation facilities in Canada, persuaded many Canadian
citizens to buy land here for both recreation and investment.
A number of recreational subdivisions are located within the Mount Baker region, including
Paradise Lakes and Peaceful Valley within Columbia Valley, the Glen at Maple Falls, Mount
Baker Rim, Snowline, and Glacier Springs.
Snowline and Mount Baker Rim border the Mount Baker National Forest, just east of Glacier.
The subdivision of Snowline has approximately 300 lots on 120 acres. It has about 150
dwelling units occupied mostly for recreational use. Mount Baker Rim has approximately 520
lots, with at least 120 developed with cabins or manufactured homes. Remaining lots are
either vacant or used as sites for recreational vehicles. Snowline and Mount Baker Rim are
served with public water by Whatcom County Water District #14. There is no sewer service and
lots utilize individual or community septic systems.
Glacier Springs is located along Canyon Creek, a few miles west of the town of Glacier. It is
comprised of a 95 acre recreational subdivision with 285 lots of record, but presently with very
few cabins. It does not have sewer service but is served water by the Glacier Springs Water
Association. Permanent use of this subdivision is limited by the presence of an alluvial -fan
arising from Canyon Creek.
Approximately one mile southwest of Maple Falls on Mount Baker Highway is the Glen at
Maple Falls, a resort community of 1,220 lots and used primarily for travel trailers mounted on
permanent foundations. The community is served by a private water association and relies on
individual or community septic systems.
Located in the northeast of the developed portion of the county, the Columbia Valley area, like
many other areas in Whatcom County, was originally developed to cater to a seasonal
population, primarily Canadians who are allowed to spend up to six months per year in the
31
United States. 1990 US Census data also indicates that 53% of the population is seasonal.
However, portions of the area, particularly Paradise Lakes, have become attractive for
permanent residents, with this trend expected to increase to 60% in the 20 year planning
period. The lots are affordable and still within commuting range to jobs in the western part of
Whatcom County.
Columbia Valley refers to two large subdivisions along both sides of Kendall Road. These
include Paradise Lakes and Peaceful Valley. The developments include a golf course, a large
pond and wetland complex along Kendall Creek, and some undeveloped land. There are
approximately 2,000 platted lots, with an estimated 1,375 current dwelling units consisting of
both recreational cabins, manufactured homes, and permanent residences. Accounting for
some build out of undeveloped land, summer time populations could reach 5,000 people within
the 20 year planning horizon.
The Council does not believe that the public interest would be served by designating the plats
as urban at this time with the impetus to grow into an incorporated city with all of the additional
facilities which would -attend a fully serviced, incorporated city. For this reason the area is not
designated as "urban."
The development boundary is limited to the existing platted and zoned area. Density is
approved at a level which reflects the present vested development. The incremental growth
allowed is reasonable and will not unduly burden public services beyond that necessary to
serve the presently approved plats. Concurrence is a policy of the County for all new plat
development, and the unplatted areas will be required to provide "ability to serve" letters from
schools, water and fire districts, to receive any county approval under Chapter 58.17 RCW. In
addition, any new building permits on existing lots must be able to demonstrate that the water
service is available to provide adequate water as a precondition to the issuance of a permit.
Commercial services for the Columbia Valley area are provided at Kendall which is one of the
designated commercial service centers for the area.
The Council requests the COG study Point Roberts, Columbia Valley and Sudden Valley to
identify the factors necessary to create an economically viable city in each area, the
implications of such development within the County overall, and make recommendations as to
whether, and, if feasible, how such action should be addressed.
3. Lake Whatcom Region
The Lake Whatcom Region includes Sudden Valley and Cain and Reed Lakes, two major
subdivisions originally created primarily for recreational use.
Sudden Valley
Sudden Valley is a community located in the Lake Whatcom Watershed which was created in
the early 1970s. It includes over 4,200 platted single- family lots, condominiums, a limited
commercial area, community facilities, a marina, and a golf course. It also contains
approximately 600 acres of undeveloped tracts zoned for residential and multi - family use, most
of which are dedicated to other land uses including the golf course, The Firs bible missionary
camp and Western Washington University's recreation facility. It has public water and sewer
provided by Water District 10. However, the existing sewer transmission line from Sudden
32
Valley to Bellingham is inadequate for full build -out. Sudden Valley is presently 33% developed
with approximately 2800 lots still vacant. US Census data for 1990 indicates that 22% of the
population in Sudden Valley is seasonal.
Sudden Valley lies within the Lake Whatcom Watershed where limiting development has been
identified as desirable. The Sudden Valley Community Association has a voluntary lot
consolidation program with a targeted density reduction of 1,400 lots. A previous study
indicated that there is a greater likelihood of success with the voluntary program than with any
change in lot consolidation regulations. To date, over 200 lots have been voluntarily
consolidated.
Neither the City of Bellingham nor their Council see the areas becoming fully urbanized and
part of the city. The .trend is toward permanent homes and the County Council sees no public
interest in either ignoring the development which has occurred.or in hindering steps taken to
assure both adequate water flow and fire flow. :The sewer and water. district .has had problems
in the past resulting in a moratorium on new development in the area..: The district: has a new
plan for the area, however, with environmental documents presently circulating. The Council
finds the alternatives under consideration reasonable, and chooses to adopt a land use plan
consistent with, and supportive of, the district's efforts to serve the existing facilities, particularly
at Sudden Valley. As noted above, the County Council finds a study of the Sudden Valley area
appropriate to explore the option of incorporation. Water quality protection and transportation
issues must be an item of specific focus in the Sudden Valley study.
The Council strengthened stormwater policies and requirements to balance the vested
development and the environmental consequences of future growth.
Cain and Reed Lakes
Although the Cain and Reed Lakes subdivisions are located just south of Lake. Whatcom, they
are actually within the Samish River drainage basin. In 1941; the area around Cain Lake was
subdivided into 131 lots. A series of Glenhaven Lakes subdivisions were subsequently
approved in the 1960s creating a total of 1,412 lots for the entire area. Many of these lots have
not been built upon. In 1990, there were 204 dwelling units but a permanent population of only
333. There are presently 310 houses built with water available for 410 total lots. System
improvements will increase this to 600 houses. Six hundred andforty :total -lots .have been
approved for septic systems. At the present time the Glenhaven plats are not able to develop
at full idensity due to terrain and natural physical limitations which will.provide::a:significant limit
on overall growth and build -out.
4. Eliza Island
Eliza Island is located off the southeast corner of Lummi Island in Bellingham Bay. It contains
3.1 miles,of mostly pristine shoreline and 158 acres of upland. Most of the island was platted in
1961 into 139 residential parcels and five community tracts, covering all of the island except for
a federal lighthouse reserve at the southern end. Approximately 55 -60 cabins have been built,
which are used mostly as weekend or summer get-always. Private camping also takes place
on some of the undeveloped lots. A recently built water de- salinization plant may now allow for
further development. Access to the island is by private or chartered boat or planes. The 1,510
foot -long airstrip is suitable for small propeller plane use only during daylight hours. A subarea
33
plan and implementing zoning, receiving broad consensus from the community, was adopted in
May 1994.
SUBURBAN ENCLAVES
The suburban enclaves are large residential areas which are near cities but which are not urban
or likely to develop into urban areas. These include Chuckanut, North Bellingham, Lake
Samish and Fort Bellingham, as well as other small non - conforming residential areas.
1. Chuckanut/North Bellingham
Chuckanut and North Bellingham both share a close proximity to urban areas and an historic
development pattern significantly below the four units per acre considered "characterized by
urban growth ". In both cases, the historic development patterns and parcelization are at about
one unit per acre. Schools, roads, water and fire service are all able to provide service to the
present community and would: not be unduly taxed if-,development withimthe defined areas were
to continue at the present and historic patterns.
Local. communities,. Bellingham for the Chuckanut area and Ferndale for North Bellingham, -
have reviewed the potential for urban scale development and incorporation into the urban
growth boundary. In both cases the cities concluded that incorporation in the urban growth
areas was not appropriate.
.Council finds that the likelihood of either area further urbanizing, with the extension of public
sewers, is unlikely due to the age and pattern of present development. The Council likewise
finds that the existing water service, schools and fire services are capable of meeting the needs
in the area at the.existing.level of intensity and segregation.
Chuckanut Drive and Bay, Governor's Point
More than 50 percent of the Chuckanut area is divided into lots of two acres or smaller, with
many smaller. parcels.. No purpose is served in rendering the existing development
non - conforming and the property within the enclave has no long term use as rural forest,
mineral or agricultural resource land. Steep slopes provide a significant limit to future
development, as do shoreline regulations.
The Chuckanut enclave area is presently designated RR2 which in factTellects the pattern of
existing parcelization.': The only exception is Governor's Point _whichis..presentlydesignated
RR3. - The Council finds that the-RR2 zone is appropriate for the enclave which has been drawn
tightly to reflect the presently developed area. No- purpose would be served in forcing the larger
parcels to develop at a pattern of parcelization significantly greater than the present pattern in
the enclave. Likewise, services for schools, roads, water and fire service are or can be made
available-without undue strain on existing services.. Any new developments will be required to
provide". letters of service" availability from water, school and fire districts before any. approvals
will be given pursuant to Chapter 58.17 RCW.
North Bellingham
The Council finds that the RR1 zone, accurately reflects both the pattern of existing
development and the needs of the North Bellingham enclave for potential future development.
34
No purpose would be served by forcing larger parcels within the area to develop at a size
significantly larger than adjoining parcels. The Council has carefully limited the boundaries of
the enclave to property already affected by the pattern of smaller property segregation.
2. Lake Samish
Lake Samish grew up as a recreational lake with many small lots used for summer cabins.
Over time the individual lots were sold. The lake is close to but not within the Bellingham Urban
Area. The area is developing a sizeable permanent. population. The lake properties are
sewered and while water is taken from the lake, long term plans call for a water system. The
RR2 _zone accurately reflects the existing parcelization along the lake and along the road
immediately adjacent to the lake. Beyond that the area is characterized by steeper areas and
some flat areas sloping to forest lands. The public interest is not served by continuing the
historic suburban trend away from the lake and onto the higher areas.
A water district provides sewer service to the homes around the lake and delivers ^the sewage
to the.City of Burlington in Skagit County. Because of water problems, there :is discussion of
converting the district to a water and sewer district. There are presently three small water
associations in the area with the majority of homes relying on withdrawals from the lake or
private wells.
3. Fort Bellingham
Fort Bellingham is an area that lies on the bluff at the north end of Bellingham. Bay, straddling
both sides of Marine Drive. Its western boundary is the Lummi Reservation and Nooksack
Delta area. Its northeast boundary is generally the Curtis Road /airport area and the Cliffside
neighborhood. It includes Smith Gardens, a major flower - growing operation; a generally
developed neighborhood on the bluff; a large underdeveloped area; an undeveloped lowland
area which is part of the Nooksack Delta, and the community of Marietta on Marine Drive. The
1990 Census indicates there were 506 dwelling units and 1,099 people in an area covering
approximately 839 acres.
The Council finds that the RR1 zone accurately reflects both the pattern of existing
development and the needs of the Fort Bellingham enclave for potential future development.
No purpose would be served by forcing larger parcels within the area to develop at a size
significantly larger than adjoining parcels. The Council has:carefully.limited -the boundaries of
the enclave to property already affected by.the smaller pattern of property segregation.
4. Additional Areas
Additional rural areas zoned RR -1, RR -2 and RR -3 have been considered as Suburban
Enclaves. These areas all share a common pattern of previously platted lots. Map
designations have been made_ to confine development within existing boundaries, zones or
areas of impact. Based on historic build out patterns, the growth in these and the above
described areas is expected to be minimal, at or less than 55 new dwelling units annually,
-county -wide. They comprise approximately one percent of the total land area in western
Whatcom County and significantly less -than 1% of the population growth. Allowing infill of the
enclaves would have a negligible impact on the natural resource related land uses, and may
divert some rural purchasers away from resources land areas in which development could be
more disruptive. The Council finds that retaining the existing designation but eliminating
35
clustering bonuses in the RR -1, RR -2 and RR -3 zones provides the most efficient long term use
of these historically patterned areas.
TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS
1. Gateway Industrial
The gateway industrials area is a transportation related corridor in which transportation related .
warehouse and other uses have located in an area between the railroad and the Interstate.
The property is not used or suitable for longterm large scale commercial natural resource use,
such as agriculture or forestry, and is not particularly suitable for residential development. The
area is characterized by existing development but lacks significant utility service to warrant
urban designation at this time.
The policy of this plan is to recognize the existing development and .to confine further
development to warehouse and, transportation /auto�travel related activities: The .County will
encourage local utility. purveyors and abutting cities to consider.: inclusion in-future Urban Growth
Areas.
Development regulations shall require a close look at the availability of public facilities,
particularly water for fire and other needs, and adequate sewage disposal. The Planning
commission shall -= develop a-limited overlay zone to implement these policies while the property
continues to be located outside a UGA.
2. Guide Meridian
The Guide Meridian Road is unique for several reasons. North of the Bellingham urban area,
the Guide travels about 13 miles, through Lynden, to the Canadian border. As the Blaine
border crossings become increasingly overcrowded, and waiting time is often measured in
hours during peak travel seasons, the Guide is becoming more and more attractive as a
crossing alternative. The town of Aldergrove located just north of the border crossing is part of
a significant urban area estending eastward to Abbotsford. Canada is planning a significant
upgrade of the route north of the border including 264th Street to connect to the
Trans = Canadian Highway north of Aldergrove. The Washington State Department of
Transportation is, projecting-international traffic loads which will warrant up to a five lane
configuration within the 20 year planning horizon.of this plan..,; For this.reason, the'- Guide,
Meridian is designated a "major transportation corridor".
The designation is designed to alert the community. to the proposed expansion and to guide°
planning appropriately. County plans should limit direct�access to.the.Guide and should require
building setbacks which will permit the needed widening without destroying new buildings.
- Acquisition of additional right -of -way would be through appropriate state processes once the
corridor studies are completed.
Other GMA goals
The Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan responds to the other goals of the Growth
Management Act by establishing the various County Goals, Policies, and Actions Items.
GOAL 2 REDUCE SPRAWL
3m
Reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling low density
development.
The Comprehensive Plan furthers this goal by directing growth towards cities and existing
urbanized areas. It also directs growth into unincorporated UGAs where appropriate due to the
presence of or planned provision of utilities and services. The plan further directs growth into
pre - established and well defined "Small Towns" and has placed limits on the expansion of these
areas. The plan encourages cities to increase density levels.
The areas proposed to be designated as Small Towns in the plan are small self- contained
areas that are presently characterized as pockets of urban or suburban type, development with.
limited area for expansion. The primary purpose of the Small Towns is to provide for
stabilization of the rural tax base and meet limited needs for rural employment and services
while recognizing existing development patterns-. Theseareaspresently have a small nucleus
of development and will be allowed to grow only to the extent.that services are presently
available or can be efficiently provided. The boundaries of designated Small Towns are well
defined -in order to prevent sprawl. Other sprawl prevention techniques include the Resource
Protection Overlay and the Short Term Planning Areas. Further prevention of sprawl is assured
through limitations placed on the location of lower density suburban enclaves, and the
requirements of "ability to serve" letters from local service providers to assure concurrent
facilities..
GOAL 3 TRANSPORTATION
Encourage efficient multi -modal transportation systems that are based on regional priorities and
coordinated with county and city comprehensive plans.
The Comprehensive Plan addresses this objective in the Transportation Chapter. Goal C of
this chapter emphasizes jurisdictional coordination within a regional framework. Efficient
multi =modal transportation systems are strongly encouraged in Goals M and N. Goal M
supports bicycle and pedestrian travel. Goal N supports public transit and the integration of
transit services with other forms of transport. Goals P and R promote the efficient movement of
goods. Goal Q encourages intermodal connections for the efficient transfer of freight, bicycle
storage facilities at park and ride lots, and the integration of a regional public transit system with
other-modes of transport including auto, pedestrian, -rail, ferries, and airlines.
GOAL 4 HOUSING
Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments -of the population of
this state, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage
preservation of existing housing stock.
The Housing Chapter substantially addresses this goal through the promotion of a more
efficient permit process, and by building incentives into the permit process which favor
affordable housing. A variety of housing types and residential densities is also encouraged.
Housing goals and policies support the preservation of existing housing stocks.
GOAL 5 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Encourage economic development throughout the state that is consistent with adopted
37
comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all citizens of this state, especially for
unemployed and for disadvantaged persons, and encourage growth in areas experiencing
insufficient economic growth, all within the capacities of the state's natural resources, public
services and public facilities.
The Comprehensive Plan most directly addresses this objective through the range of goals and
policies contained in the Economic Chapter, through designation of industrial and commercial
lands on the Land Use Map, and relevant industrial and commercial policies. The goals and
policies of the Chapter encourage economic development consistent with comprehensive
planning, and recognize the importance of environmental management to a sound economy.
Policies support educational and re- training efforts and encourage sustainable management of
resource industries. Goals and policies also promote economic opportunities for unemployed
or underemployed persons, and encourage growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic
growth.
The designation of Small Towns and Crossroads'Commercial:areas.in rura[parts of Whatcom
County fulfills GMA economic development goals by providing limited opportunities for rural
employment while strengthening the tax base supporting impoverished rural school districts.
These designations only apply to areas where it can be shown that services are adequate to
support limited development.
GOAL 6 PROPERTY RIGHTS
Private property shall not betaken for public use without just compensation having been made.
The property rights of landowners shall be protected from arbitrary and discriminatory actions.
The Comprehensive Plan furthers this objective. The goals and policies of Section 2H promote
less governmental regulation and seek voluntary incentive based actions over regulatory based
changes to land use laws when the land use options of a land owner may be reduced. The
goals and policies of Sections 11 B, 11 C, and 11 D of the Environment Chapter all attempt to
ease the burden of excessive regulations, provide for economic opportunities, planned growth,
while protecting private. rights and minimizing the potential loss of life and property damage.
The council has carefully considered property rights also in light of the County Charter
requirement contained in Section 1.11 of the Charter and in light of the requirements of the
Growth Management Act and finds that both its comprehensive plan policies•and its initial
implementing regulations preserve reasonable uses:of their property by:•property:owners and do
not unduly burden them.
GOAL 7 PERMITS
Applications for both state and local governmental permits should be processed in a timely and
fair manner to ensure predictability.
The plan directly supports this objective through a number of goals and policies in many
chapters. In the comments submitted by the Department of Ecology, the suggestion was made
that the county should. limit access to exempt wells by those seeking to develop their property.
Whatcom County requires proof of an adequate supply of potable water prior to issuance of a
building permit. The Council finds that it is not appropriate and does not intend to impose
greater restrictions on access to available water than what have already been imposed by the
k1li
state legislature and the responsible state agencies.
GOAL 9 OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION
Encourage the retention of open space and development of recreational opportunities,
conserve fish and wildlife habitat, increase access to natural resource lands and water, and
develop parks. -
The plan furthers the .elements of this goal through a number of policies. The retention of open
space is encouraged through support for the County's open space taxatiori program, incentives,
cluster development, conservation organizations, public investment and existing plans. The
conservation of fish and wildlife habitat is promoted in the Environment and Land Use Chapters.
The Capital Facilities and Recreation Chapters support levels of service for County Parks, trails,
and recreational facilities.
GOAL,42 PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES
Ensure- ::that those public facilities and services necessary to support development,shall be
adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and
use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards.
The Comprehensive Plan addresses this objective more directly through the range of goals and
policies within the Capital Facilities Chapter. This Chapter incorporates a six -year financing
plan for capital improvements and establishes levels of service for capital facilities necessary to
support projected population growth.
GOAL 13 HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Identify and encourage the preservation of lands, sites, and structures that have historical or
archaeological significance.
The protection of historic resources and structures is encouraged through policies contained
within the Design Chapter. Action Items in the Design Chapter also provide for the identification
and protection of historical and archaeological sites.
INTERNAL CONSISTENCY
The policies within and among the elements of-the Plan are complementary, not contradictory.
Both separately and together, they further the goals of GMA.: Therefore, The Plan is internally
consistent. The Council specifically finds that to the extent that .the adopted Subarea Plans
(Lummi Island, Cherry Point - Ferndale, Lake Whatcom, Urban Fringe, Lynden - Nooksack Valley,
Chuckanut -Lake Samish, Birch Bay - Blaine, Foothills, Point Roberts, South Fork Valley, and
Eliza Island) are consistent with the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, they remain valid
in the detail they provide for specific areas. Where there is a conflict between a Subarea Plan
and the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan
shall prevail.
CONCURRENCY
The Plan meets the concurrency requirements of GMA. Levels of service for County facilities
are established in the Plan which includes six -year and 20 -year project lists with costs and
funding sources identified. Where longer term utility and facility planning is more difficult, in
39
rural areas, "ability to serve" requirements are in place to assure that development in rural
areas does not over tax needed facilities. Plan goals provide direction to establish a
concurrency management system based on adopted levels of service.
INTER - JURISDICTIONAL COORDINATION
The Plan is consistent with adopted County -Wide Planning Policies. The County -Wide
Planning Policies and policies contained within the Land Use Chapter call for interlocal
agreements to-manage growth in urban growth areas and address annexations and revenue
balancing. The County has begun negotiating interlocal agreements with individual cities to
serve as a basis for inter jurisdictional coordination over the next twenty -year planning horizon.
CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER PLANS
City plans and submittals have been reviewed and the Plan is substantially consistent with
adopted plans of municipalities and other jurisdictions. I In addition, the Bellingham,City Council
has forwarded to the Whatcom County Council specific° recommendation4orthe:Urban Fringe
Subarea Plan which covers a significant portion of Belli ngham'sUrban.Growth Area.
COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY -WIDE PLANNING POLICIES
As required by GMA, Whatcom County participated in discussions with local cities within the.;
county to establish urban growth area boundaries and adopted such boundaries for each city.
consistent with the County -Wide Planning Policies. The Plan is consistent with the adopted
County -Wide Planning Policies.
COMPLIANCE WITH STATE SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
The required notice of intent to adopt was filed on January 13, 1995, with the Washington State
Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development within the required time frame.
State Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development received notice of
Whatcom County's intent to adopt a comprehensive plan under the Growth Management Act,
dated September 1996.
IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES
Interim development regulations essential to preserving planning the options in the
- comprehensive plan are being adopted contemporaneously with the plan. Adoption of final
zoning ordinances and :other development regulation.measures necessary .to implement the
Comprehensive Plan are being referred to the Planning Commission:for=public review and will
be adopted following adoption of thin plan.
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS
Housing Background Document (Draft), October 17, 1994:; information on demographics;
employment; and -existing housing market and unit trends, conditions and needs,
-Capital Facilities Requirements, 1995 -2000 (and to 2014), September 6, 1994 (minor
revisions February 27, 1996). An inventory of County facilities and a forecast of the need for
additional capital facility capacity to serve current and future development.
Capital Facilities Plan, Capital Improvements, Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan:
40
Proposed September 13, 1996 with December 27, 1996 revisions. A capital improvements plan
with an inventory of current facilities, level of service capacity analysis and capital
improvements projects and financing plan.
Whatcom County Financial Resource Projections for Growth Management, revised
January 8, 1996. A projection of financial resources for capital facilities.
Whatcom County Financial Capacity Analysis for Capital. Facilities, Bob Woods, January
8, 1996. A financial capacity analysis for capital facilities.
Utilities Background Document: Whatcom County Comprehensive Growth Management
Plan, June 1994. A utilities background document including information for electricity, natural
gas, petroleum, telecommunications, fiber optics, cable television, radio communications, and
sewer and water utilities.
Whatcom County Urban Transportation Plan, Whatcom _County, Washington,.. adopted
November 1991.
Whatcom Community Public Transportation Plan (1993 - 1998), prepared for Whatcom
Transportation Authority, May 1993.
A Bicycle Plan for Whatcom County. An Element of the Rural Transportation Plan .- .Draft,
November 1994. '
A Whatcom County Transportation Plan: Existing Conditions Report, prepared for
Whatcom County, February 1, 1994.
Transportation Plan: Draft, July 1994.
T -Model Run, Chapter 6: Transportation, Transportation Background Document, January
1996.
Preserving a Way of Life: A Natural Heritage Plan for Whatcom County, adopted by
County Council, Resolution #91 -044, July 1991.
Whatcom County Park and Recreation. Open Space_ Plan, Whatcom!-County,. Washington
(A Long Range Plan for Parks, Open Space, Trail Systems and Shoreline Access), August
1991.
Whatcom County natural Resources Report: Mineral Resources Background Document,
revised November 1.994. Including information on mineral deposits and classification
methodology for mineral resources.
Projections of Income, Employment, and Land Requirements in Whatcom County
19942020, the Center for Economic and Business Research, Western Washington University,
in cooperation with the Washington State Employment Security Division, February 1994.
41
Whatcom County Industrial Lands Inventory, prepared by Whatcom County Planning staff,
August 1995.
A Study of Industrial Land Supply and Forecast for the Demand and Absorption of
Industrial Land to the Year 2020, Fourth Corner Economic Development Group, September
1995.
Projections of °Income, Employment, and Land Requirements in Whatcom County
19942020, by David Merrifield, Daniel Hagen, and Scott Bailey.
Whatcom County Proposed Urban Growth Areas, For County Council Planning and
Development Committee, January 30, 1997
.Whatcom County Rural Incentive zones, Whatcom County Planning and Development
Services Department, December, 1996, with revisions March, 1997.
Whatcom County Environmental Resources Report Series: Alluvial Fan Hazard Areas.
Whatcom County Planning Department, August 1992.
Whatcom-County Environmental Resources Report Series: Category I Wetlands.
Whatcom County Planning Department, April 1992.
Whatcom County Environmental Resources Report Series: Wetlands in the Nooksack
River Floodplain. Whatcom County Planning Department, December 1992.
Whatcom County Environmental Resources Report Series: Depression/ Areas in the
Nooksack River.Floodplain. Whatcom County Planning Department, December 1992.
Whatcom County Environmental Resources Report Series: Hydrologic and Fishery
Resources of Whatcom County. Whatcom County Planning Department, December 1994.
Whatcom County Environmental Resources Report Series: Wildlife in Whatcom County.
Whatcom County Planning Department, December 1994.
Whatcom County Environmental Resources Report Series: ,MapjFolio l :. Whatcom .County
Fish and Wildlife. Whatcom County Planning Department, 1993.
Overview of Whatcom County Water Resource Assessment - Draft. Whatcom County
Planning Department, May 1991.
Whatcom County Environmental Resources Report Series: Map Folio II: Whatcom
County Geologic Hazards. Whatcom County Planning Department, 1996
Soil Survey of Whatcom County Area, Washington, United States Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1992.
42
Environmental Geology of Western Whatcom County, Don Easterbrook, 1973.
Agricultural Changes and Farmland Protection in Western Washington, by Linda R. Klein
and John P. Reganold, pp. 6 -12, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, January/February,
1997.
k: \common \users \planning \findings.fin
43