HomeMy WebLinkAboutord1999-079R'YATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 9 g_ q03
CLEARANCES
Date
Date Received in Council Office
Agenda Date
Assigned to:
.gina[or: Mau W. Aamo[
7
(�
Ij pJ �j*
l �41E
G 1
OCT 9 ���
�) W HATCO M COUNTY
COUNCIL
I0 -26 -99
Council Introduction
Division Head. Sylvia Goodwin
�,ny
- �{1{`jJJ
S
II -9 -99
Planning & Development
Committee
Dept Head: Michael T. Knapp
60 -15
II -23 -99
p rr p / co-U til Ll(,
Prosecutor:
Dave Gran[
�At
PurchasingBudget:
t,
�y� � C� �
Executive: Pete Kremen
I
V ((nn -'
SUBJECT. Ordinance adopting Comprehensive Plan amendments, along with associated Shoreline Program amendments, relating to
pier development at Cherry Point (File # CMP99 - 00014).
ATTACHMENTS:
(1) Proposed Ordinance.
SEPA review required? ( x )Fes ( ) NO
SEPA review completed? ( x ) Yes ( ) NO
Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( ) Yes ( xt ) NO
Requested Date:
The Council must hold a hearing if they want to change the Planting
Commission's recommendation (WCC 20.10.110 and WCC 20.90.090).
SUMMARY STATEMENT. The request is to adopt amendments to the Whatcom
County Comprehensive Plan and associated changes to the Whatcom County
oreline Management Program that would provide for economic development
and address environmental impacts by limiting future port and industrialpier
development in the Cherry Point area.
The Growth Management Act requires that Comprehensive Plan amendments be
considered only once per year, with certain exceptions. All amendments must be
considered concurrently. In 1999, the County Council initiated 13 amendments
for review under Resolution No. 99 -012. The Planning Commission held
multiple hearings to consider these amendments. The Planning Commission
took a final vote on the package of the 13 amendments on October 14, 1999. The
Council is requested to adopt the Planning Commission's recommendations or,
alternatively, to hold a hearing and adopt modifications to the Commission's
recommendations. The Council can not adopt the amendments until 60 days
after they were sent to the State Department of Community, Trade & Economic
Development, which occurred on September 23, 1999 (RCW 36.70A. 1061WA C
365 -195 -620). Additionally; the amendments have to be adopted prior to or along
with the budget (WCC 20.10.040). Therefore, it appears that the request should
be voted on at the Council's November 23, 1999 meeting.
Distribution Request
Indicate those who should receive a copy after Council action.
List specific names to the right.
ADS Facilities Management
ADS Finance
ADS Human Resources
ADS Info Services
Assessor
Auditor
Cooperative Extension
District Court
Executive
Health _
Hearing Examiner
Michael Bobbink
.jail
COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN. •
1999-403 10/26/99: Introduced
11/9/99: Held /Committee
11/23/99: Adopted 7 -0, Ord. #99 -079
dlt
Related File Numbers: AB99 -074
.juvenile
Parks
Planning
Michael T. Knapp
Prosecutor
Public Works
Sheriff
Superior Court
Treasurer
Other
Ordinance or Resolution umber
(this item): s
I :Planning\Rezone \Comp.99\Agenda Bills \CMP99- 00014.doc
File Ref: CMP994M14 SPONSORED BY: Consent
10 -15 -99 PROPOSED BY: Planning & Development Services
INTRODUCTION DATE: 10/26/99
ORDINANCE NO. 99 -079
AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AND SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
TEXT REGARDING CHERRY POINT PIER DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, The Whatcom County Council passed Resolution 99 -012 on March 23, 1999
initiating 13 Comprehensive Plan amendments, and related amendments to the Official Whatcom
County Zoning Ordinance (Title 20), for review in 1999; and
WHEREAS, One of the proposed amendments is a request to amend the Comprehensive
Plan and Shoreline Management Program to limit future port and industrial pier development in
the Cherry Point area; and
WHEREAS, The Deputy SEPA Official for Whatcom County issued a determination of
non - significance on May 5, 1999; and
WHEREAS, Pursuant to RCW 36.70.390, RCW 36.70.590, and WAC 173 -16 -040, legal
notice was published in the Bellingham Herald on May 6, 13 and 20, 1999; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the subject amendment on
May 27, 1999 and considered all testimony;
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission held a work session on October 14, 1999 to consider
all the amendments concurrently, as required by WCC 20.10.100, WCC 20.90.070, and WCC
20.90.040; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission evaluated the merits of each amendment in
relationship to the County Wide Planning Policies and the goals, policies and objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan, as required by WCC. 20.10.100 and WCC 20.90.070; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission issued Findings of Fact & Reasons for Actions,
Conclusions and Recommendations on the amendments; and
WHEREAS, the County Council has considered the Planning Commission's Findings of
Fact & Reasons for Action, Conclusions, and Recommendations for all the amendments, as
required by WCC 20. 10.110 and WCC 20.90.080; and
WHEREAS, the County Council has considered all the amendments concurrently so that
the cumulative effect of the various proposals can be ascertained, as required by the Growth
Management Act (RCW 36.70A.130) and WCC 20.10.010; and
WHEREAS, the County Council finds that the Comprehensive Plan amendments
recommended by the Planning Commission conform to the Growth Management Act and that the
Whatcom County Shoreline Management Program amendments recommended by the Planning
Commission are consistent with and implement the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 and its
implementing guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the County Council finds the Comprehensive Plan and Shoreline Program
amendments in the best interest of the public health, safety, and welfare, based on the following
findings and conclusions:
FINDINGS
1. On March 23, 1999, the Whatcom County Council initiated an amendment to "Revise the
Comprehensive Plan to include the consideration of only one additional industrial multi -
use pier to provide for economic development while preserving the environmentally
sensitive shoreline and marine life at the Cherry Point Management Area" (Resolution
99 -012).
2. A determination of non - significance was issued on May 5, 1999 under the State
Environmental Policy Act.
3. Notice of the hearing was mailed to shoreline property owners and other interested parties
on May 4, 5, and 6, 1999. Notice of the hearing was published in the Bellingham Herald
on May 6, 13, and 20, 1999. The public hearing was held on May 27, 1999.
4. The Planning Enabling Act states that when changed conditions or further studies by the
planning agency indicate a need, the Comprehensive Plan maybe amended (see RCW
36.70.410). The listing of Puget Sound Chinook salmon as "threatened" under the
Endangered Species Act on March 24, 1999_ constitutes a changed condition.
5. The Cherry Point herring stock is unique in that it begins spawning approximately 4 to 6
weeks later than the other Puget Sound herring stocks. Though the Cherry Point herring
stock has been one of the largest in Puget Sound, the stock has been declining since 1977.
The eelgrass and marine vegetation along the Cherry Point shoreline provide critical
spawning substrate for the Cherry Point herring stock. Eelgrass and marine vegetation
are dependent upon adequate light to survive and as such are susceptible to shade related
impacts associated with over water structures.
6. Surf smelt and pacific sandlance utilize the native substrates along select reaches of the
upper intertidal beach along the Cherry Point shoreline for spawning.
7. Adult herring,* surf smelt and pacific sandlance are an important food source for a variety
of marine fish species including Chinook salmon.
8. Along the Cherry Point shoreline, organisms grow on the aquatic vegetation that are
primary food sources for Chinook salmon.
9. The intertidal and shallow subtidal habitat along the Cherry Point shoreline provides a
shallow water migratory corridor for a variety of juvenile marine fish species including
juvenile chinook salmon. The shallow water migratory corridor provides important
rearing habitat and predator avoidance habitat.
10. Because of its location, juvenile salmon including chinook from both the Nooksack River
and the Fraser River utilize the Cherry Point shoreline.
2
11. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), in a letter of May 18, 1999,
stated that "... The marine environment along the Cherry Point shoreline is biologically rich
and diverse. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife supports Whatcom County's
efforts to limit new pier construction at Cherry Point to only one additional pier structure
because this policy significantly reduces the risk that the natural resources at Cherry Point
will be impacted by future industrial development ..."
12. The State of Washington asserted its ownership of the beds and shores of navigable waters in
the State under Article XVII of the Washington Constitution. The State has not sold any
aquatic lands waterward of extreme low tide in the Cherry Point area. A lease would be
required from the Commissioner of Public Lands in order to construct a pier on State owned
aquatic lands.
13. The Commissioner of Public Lands issued a letter on October 5, 1995 to the County
Executive indicating that the State Department of Natural Resources would consider an
aquatic lands lease for only one additional pier in the Cherry Point area. The Commissioner
of Public Lands confirmed this position in a letter of May 14, 1999 in which she stated ".. .
The Department has long been on record that we will consider the construction of only one
new pier in the area ..."
14. A planning goal of the Growth Management Act is to "Encourage economic development
throughout the state that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans ..." (RCW
36.70A.020(5)). The subject amendment would facilitate construction of one more pier in
the Cherry Point area, thereby encouraging economic growth.
15. A planning goal of the Growth Management Act is to "... conserve fish and wildlife habitat
..." (RCW 36.70A.020(9)). The subject amendment would limit the number of piers
allowed in the Cherry Point Management Unit, thereby reducing impacts to fish habitat.
16. The Shoreline Management Act of 1971 seeks to foster all reasonable and appropriate uses,
including ports, while protecting the marine environment. The subject amendment fosters
reasonable shore - dependant uses by allowing one more pier in the Cherry Point area.
Additionally, it protects the marine habitat because no piers, which may impact this habitat,
would be allowed except those currently permitted by the County, provided they are able to
obtain all State and Federal approvals. If, however, neither is approved, one additional pier
could be allowed.*
17. Department of Ecology guidelines for development of Shoreline Programs state that "The
cooperative use of docking, parking, cargo handling and storage facilities should be strongly
encouraged in waterfront industrial areas" (WAC 173- 16- 060(10)(d)). The subject
amendment would limit the number of piers allowed in the Cherry Point Management Unit,
thereby increasing the potential for multi -use.*
18. In a letter of April 22, 1999, Washington State Assistant Attorney General Steven J. Thiele
stated: "On behalf of the Department of Ecology Shorelands and Environmental Assistance
Program, I have reviewed the ... proposed amendment to the Whatcom County Shoreline
Master Program. The proposed amendment, as currently drafted, is consistent with the
Shoreline Management Act, the SMA rules and the standards for master program
amendments found in RCW 90.58.090... "*
* Indicates findings that only apply to the Shoreline Program Amendment.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The subject amendment would be in the public interest because it would provide
reasonable economic growth and protection of the marine environment. Additionally, it
would provide greater consistency between State and County policy.
2. The Growth Management Act, Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan and County -Wide
Planning Policies all seek to promote both economic growth and environmental
protection. The subject amendment promotes economic development by facilitating
construction of one more pier in the Cherry Point area. Additionally, it protects the
marine habitat because multiple piers, which may impact this habitat, would not be
allowed unless both of the piers currently permitted by the County are able to obtain all
other State and Federal approvals. Therefore, it is concluded that the subject amendment
is consistent with these goals and policies.
3. The listing of Puget Sound Chinook salmon as "threatened" under the Endangered
Species Act constitutes a changed condition that warrants a Comprehensive Plan
amendment under RCW 36.70.410.
4. The subject amendment is consistent with the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 and
Department of Ecology guidelines because it fosters appropriate shore - dependent use of
the shoreline by facilitating one more pier in the area while minimizing potential impacts
to the marine environment that could occur with the construction of multiple piers, which
would not be allowed unless both of the piers currently permitted by the County are able
to obtain all other State and Federal approvals.*
5. The policy of the Commissioner of Public Lands to consider an aquatic lands lease for
only one more pier in the Cherry Point area constitutes a changed condition that warrants
a Shoreline Program amendment under RCW 36.70.410.*
Indicates conclusions that only apply to the Shoreline Program Amendment.
4
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that:
Section 1. The -text of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended as shown
on Exhibit 1.
Section 2. The text of the Whatcom County Shoreline Management Program (Title 23) is
hereby amended as shown on Exhibit 2.
Section 3. Adjudication of invalidity of any of the sections, clauses, or provisions of this
Ordinance shall not affect or impair the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any part thereof
other than the part so declared to be invalid.
ADOPTED this 23 day of November 1999.
� s
APPRO ED as to form:
ivil Deputy Prosecutor
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Marlene Dawson, Chairperson
W Approved () Denied
t fi , 4 `c, '
Pete I emen, Executi
Date:
Exhibit 1.
Add the following paragraph after the second paragraph on p. 2 -50 of the Whatcom County
Comprehensive Plan:
The Cherry Point shoreline also has egr at importance to the fisheries and ecology of Northern
Puget Sound because it provides essential spawning habitat for the largest herring stock in
Washington State. This herring stock has supported important commercial fisheries and provides
forage for salmonids and other important marine species.
Add Policy 2AA -10 to the Cherry Point Major Industrial Urban Growth Area /Port Industrial
section of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan as follows:
It is the policy of Whatcom County to limit the number of piers at Cherry Point by establishing a
development moratorium. Notwithstanding the above, this moratorium shall not affect, nor
otherwise apply to, any proposed pier that Whatcom County approved under its Shoreline
Management Prog rarn prior to adoption of the moratorium.
11
Exhibit 2
Amend the "atcom County Shoreline Management Program, Cherry Point Management Unit
policy 23.100.210.21, as follows:
23.100.210.21 Port Development
(a) eke- dDevelopment of a limited number of piers on piling and floating public and private
marine cargo transfer terminal facilities is encouraged as the preferred use in the Cherry
Point Management Unit. Port development that requires dredge and fill not associated with
the construction and operation of the preferred uses has not been permitted in the Cherry
Point Management Unit due to its potentially adverse effects on the natural environment,
including fish and shellfish habitat and geo- hydraulic processes. Further- However,
Washington State natural resource agencies and Whatcom County have identified certain
portions of the Cherry Point Management Unit as a herring spawning bed and have
prohibited dredge and fill activities therein due to their potentially adverse effects on the
natural environment, including fish and shellfish habitat and eg_o- hydraulic processes.
Moreover, the State of Washington Department of Natural Resources has indicated that it
will not consider issuance of more than one aquatic lands lease for port development in the
Cherry Point Management Unit in addition to the three piers already in peration as of
January 1, 1998.
(b) Consequently, it is the policy of Whatcom County that port facilities which require
dredge and fill not associated with the construction and operation of the preferred uses
should be prohibited until such time that it can be demonstrated that the impact of such
development will avoid adverse effects to the shoreline environment.
(c) Consequently, it is the policy of Whatcom County to limit the number of piers at Che
Point by establishing a development moratorium. The goal of the moratorium is to
ensure that only one pier in addition to those in operation as of January 1, 1998, is
constructed at the Cherry Point Management Unit. Notwithstanding the above, this
moratorium shall not affect, nor otherwise apply to, any proposed pier that Whatcom
County approved under its Shoreline Management Program prior to adoption of the
moratorium.
Amend the Whatcom County Shoreline Management Program, Cherry Point Management Unit
regulation 23.100.210.31, as follows:
23.100.210.31 Permitted Development
The following listed uses and activities are permitted within the Cherry Point Management Unit
subject to the development standards contained in Section 23.100.24- 3210.40.
(a) Port development and shore - dependent or shore - related industrial development together with
any or all of the following components and restrictions:
1. . There is hereby
established a moratorium precluding issuance of any shoreline permit allowing
development of new pile supported or floating piers, except that this moratorium
shall not have any gpplication to those that have obtained shoreline approval from
Whatcom County prior to adoption of this moratorium. If all of the unexercised
shoreline approvals in existence at the time of imposition of this moratorium expire
or are abandoned, a single excgption to the moratorium may be granted and shoreline
approval may be given for one additional pile supported or floating pier.
2. Expansion of existing piers.
3 -2. Landfill or excavation necessary to the access and construction of My pile supported
or floating piers permitted following expiration or abandonment of the unexercised
permits-
43. Dredging for maintenance or expansion of operations at existing piers.
54.. Dredging necessary for the construction of new pile supported or floating piers.
6S. Roads and railways.
76. Utilities.
8 -7. Shore defense works: revetments, bulkheads, floating breakwaters and seawalls only.
99. Over -water structures and buildings that are intrinsic to the operation of the primary
development, provided that they are elevated on pilings or on floating structures.
(b) Recreational development for public or quasi- public shoreline access.
(c) Archaeological excavation.
(d) Fish and wildlife habitat research and/or enhancement.
8
Amend the Whatcom County Shoreline Management Program, Cherry Point Management Unit
regulation 23.100.210.32, as follows:
.32 Conditionally Permitted Development
Port development and shore - dependent or shore - related industrial development which includes the
following components may be considered under the Shoreline Conditional Use Permit process
defined in WAC 173 -2744; EXCEPT to the extent restricted in Section 23.100.210.31, and EXCEPT
where prohibited along the accretion_ shoreform and natural wetland areas described in Section
23.100.210.27 (g) and Appendix E.
(a) Landfill or excavation associated with pier or floating structures which does not meet the
development standards for such activities.
(b) Dredging for purposes associated with pier or floating structures which does not meet the
development standards for such activities.
(c) Shore defense works, floating breakwaters and seawalls which do not meet the development
standards for these structures.
0