HomeMy WebLinkAboutord1996-004HWATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
NO.
CLEARANCES
Originator: Vickie Hardin Woods
Initial
V#W
Date
01 -09 -96
Date Received in Council Office:
Agenda date
Assigned to:
Division Head: Vickie Hardin Woods
✓W
01 -09 -96
Dept Head: Nate Brown
01 -09 -96
Prosecutor: Karen Frakes
Purchasin ud et:
Executive: Pete Kremmen
SUBJECT. • .File Ref. #23- 93IUGA:GMA (ord #3): An Ordinance adopting Interim Urban Growth Areas in accordance with
the .Growth Management Act as amended and in response to the Growth Management Hearings Board
ATTACHMENTS. Proposed Ordinance with Accompanying Exhibits A through Exhibit C
Draft Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan {available in Council Office}
Previous Agenda Bill #94 -033 with Attachments {available in Council Office}
Agency. Report
SUMMARY STATEMENT.
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 bud getcd for this item/project: S n/a
is it or will it be within budget? YES 1 / NO / 1 lease explain below n/a
Budget line item number(s): n/a
.Ln response to the Growth Management Hearings Board's determination that the County's Interim Urban Growth Areas
(UGAs) need more analysis and greater public process and set January 19 as the deadline for compliance, -the County and
its Cities have elected to submit the draft Comprehensive Plan's proposed Final UGAs as Interim UGAs. These boundaries
received adequate analysis and extensive public review as part of the comprehensive planning process. The Cities have
prepared findings to support their proposed boundaries. These are attached as exhibits. The Planning Commission meets
on January 11 and.will prepare a report for Council's meeting on January 23. The attached ordinance adopts the proposed
Final UGAs, with one minor amendment, as Interim UGAs.
ORIGINATOR'S RECOMMENDED ACTION.• The Director of Planning and Development Services recommends Council
adopt the proposed ordinance.
COMMITTEE ACTION TAKEN.
COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN.
1998 -,a
1/23/96: Substitute Ordinance was brought forward from
committee. Substitute became an Emergency Ordinance. It
was then amended and adopted, 7 -0.
Related File Numbers:
Ordinance or Resolution Number (this item only):
brd. acs —ocr�
nrGA.ora 01 /08/96 revised 01/23/96 SPONSORED BY: Consent
PROPOSED BY: Consent
INTRODUCTION DATE: 1/ 9 / 9 6
1 ORDINANCE NO. 96-004
2 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING INTERIM URBAN GROWTH AREAS IN
3 ACCORDANCE WITH THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT AS AMENDED
4 WHEREAS, Chapter 16.04 of the Whatcom County Code (WCC) established the
5 Planning Goals and Policies for the 1970 Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan; and
6 WHEREAS, said goals include (1) concentrating urban development to prevent
7 sprawl and assure adequate public facilities; (2) recognizing that development in rural areas
8 should be low density and should complement the rural character; (3) conserving agricultural
9 and forestry lands; (4) limiting the demand for urban services; and (5) developing land use
10 regulations intended to implement the adopted goals; and
11 WHEREAS, from 1981, through 1994, the County adopted subarea plans that
12 included more specific policies to limit urban sprawl and to specify that development in
13 rural areas should be low density that complements the existing rural character; and
_4 WHEREAS, RCW` 36.70A 110 (5) of the Growth Management Act requires Counties
15 to adopt Interim Urban Growth Areas (IUGAs); and
16 WHEREAS, the Cities proposed IUGAs and the County considered these areas
17 along with various alternatives for growth areas not associated with Cities; and
18 WHEREAS, the County prepared an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the
19 IUGAs including four alternatives and issued a final EIS on January 11, 1994, and
20 subsequently prepared a second Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, May
21 16, 1994; and
22 WHEREAS, Ordinance 94 -033, establishing interim urban growth areas, was adopted
23 by the Whatcom County Council on May 24, 1994; and
24 WHEREAS, subsequent to adoption of IUGAs, County Planning staff completed
25 the draft Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, dated November 1994; and
26 WHEREAS, Community Value Statements, included in the draft Whatcom County
27 Comprehensive Plan, are based on an extensive public participation process, as required in
28 RCW 36.70A.140, and are the foundation upon which the policies in the plan are
Page 1
1 formulated; and
2 WHEREAS, the draft Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan includes the land
3 capacity analysis for city urban growth areas as required in the Growth Management Act;
4 and
5 WHEREAS, the draft Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan includes a section on
6 County unincorporated urban growth areas that establishes policy basis and discussion of the
7 unincorporated growth area categories; and
8 WHEREAS, the County prepared a draft EIS, dated February 15, 1995, on the draft
9 Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan; and
10 WHEREAS, the County held a series of joint County Council /Planning Commission
11 introductory work sessions in November and December 1994 and four public hearings from
12 January through March 8, 1995 on the draft Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan; and
13 WHEREAS, the public record was held open for written comments on the draft plan
14 until March 17, 1995; and
15 WHEREAS, all comments were collected and compiled by topic area, including
16 proposed urban growth areas; and
17 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held 35 work sessions since March 1995
18 reviewing the draft Comprehensive Plan, chapter by chapter; and
19 WHEREAS, on November 9, 1994, the Growth Management Hearings Board
20 ordered the County to establish IUGAs at municipal boundaries that were not to be
21 extended without proper analysis of current data and without appropriate public
22 participation; and
23 WHEREAS, the Growth Management Hearings Board, further ordered the County
24 to adopt development regulations that prohibit new urban growth in areas outside properly
25 established IUGAs; and
26 WHEREAS, the Growth Management Hearings Board ruled on February 23, 1995,
27 that the County had taken no steps to rectify the noncompliance and that the original
28 noncompliance continued; and
29 WHEREAS, the Growth Management Hearings Board issued a second compliance
30 order on December 28, 1995, remanding the matter to Whatcom County with direction to
31 achieve compliance by January 19, 1996; and
32 WHEREAS, the Growth Management Hearings Board set a further hearing on
Page 2
1 January 30, 1996, to address whether the County IUGA ordinance should be found invalid,
2 pursuant to the standards found in RCW 36.70A.300(2); and
3 WHEREAS, the representatives of the County Council and the County Executive met
4 with officials of the Washington State Department of Community, Trade, and Economic
5 Development and agreed to work toward compliance with the order of the Growth
6 Management Hearings Board; and
7 WHEREAS, the County Council, at a public meeting on January 4, 1996, expressed
8 its intent to comply with the Growth Management Hearing's Board order to achieve
9 compliance in the matter of IUGAs by adopting new IUGAs; and
10 WHEREAS, the draft Comprehensive Plan proposes final UGAs; and
11 WHEREAS, RCW 36.70.795 establishes a procedure for Counties to adopt interim
12 official controls; and
13 WHEREAS, in order to meet the date designated by the Growth Hearings Board,
14 the Council deemed it necessary to proceed with adopting an interim official control to
15 establish new IUGAs based on proposed final UGAs in the draft Whatcom County
16 Comprehensive Plan; and
17 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission issued a report on January 11, 1996, to the
:8 County Council on the proposal to adopt the draft Comprehensive Plan proposed final
19 UGAs as new interim UGAs; and
20 WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.70.590, legal notice was published in the
21 Bellingham Herald on January 13, 1996; and
22 WHEREAS, the Council held a public hearing on January 23, 1996; and
23 WHEREAS, consistent with County -wide Planning Policies, the draft Comprehensive
24 Plan recommends growth boundaries to accommodate a population of 189,100 people in
25 2010, plus a market factor of 150 %, resulting in a need for growth boundaries to
26 accommodate 215,000 people; and
27 WHEREAS, the Office of Financial Management has revised growth projections for
28 Whatcom,County. The OEM's Medium Series (most likely) Projection for the year 2010 is
29 192,506, reducing the market factor to less than 123 %; and
30 WHEREAS, the Office of Financial Management's Medium Series (most likely)
31 Projection for the year 2015 is 208,242 and Cities have planned urban growth boundaries
32 to the years 2014 and 2015, further reducing the market factor; and
Page 3
1. WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.110 (2) was amended to allow Cites and Counties
2 discretion to set a reasonable land market supply factor; and
3 WHEREAS, a further analysis has been prepared for County Unincorporated Urban
4 Growth Areas as contained in findings; and
5 WHEREAS, each of Whatcom County's Cities prepared findings to justify their
6 IUGAs as contained in Findings, that are adopted as Exhibit B; and
7 WHEREAS, the Council finds the amendments to be in the best interests of the
8 public health, safety, and welfare; and
9 WHEREAS, the Council adopts the following Findings and Conclusions:
10 Findings
11 1. Whatcom County has an extensive growth management based comprehensive
12 planning history including the adoption of 1979 County Planning Goals and the
13 completion of ten subarea plans.
14 2. The proposed Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, currently in draft form,
15 (hereinafter referred to as the "Plan, "), completed November 17, 1994, includes an
16 analysis of urban growth areas that is based on the proposed boundaries by the cities
7 of Whatcom County. The proposed Plan recommends preliminary, final Urban
18 Growth Areas that considers the in -fill capacity of each city, twenty year growth
19 needs, the in -fill capacity of proposed urban growth areas, and the resulting densities.
20 The analysis is based on the year 2010 as a target year, but includes discussion of city
21 projected needs and boundaries for a range of years from 2010 to 2015.
22 3. The Plan is based on a population projection of 189,100 in the year 2010, as adopted
23 in the County -wide Planning Policies (CWPPs).
24 4. Subsequent to adoption of the CWPPs and the completion of the Plan, the Office of
25 Financial Management issued revised population figures for the county. The new
26 numbers projected a mid -range population of 192,506 for the year 2010 and a mid -
27 range population of 208,242 in 2015.
28 City UGAs
29 5. The City of Bellingham's findings support proposed interim UGA slightly smaller
30 than the area proposed in the draft Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan.
31 6. The City of Blaine's findings support a proposed interim urban growth area
32 consistent with the one proposed in the draft Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan,
33 and includes a conditional area identified as a water resource protection area. Policy
Page 4
1 2R -1 in the Plan requires adoption of a Critical Aquifer Recharge Protection Plan
2 as a prerequisite for inclusion of the conditional area as part of Blaine's urban
3 growth area.
4 7. The City of Ferndale's findings support a proposed interim urban growth area slightly
5 different from the one proposed in the draft Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan.
6 The findings support Ferndale's UGA as a whole, with the exception of the area east
7 of Ferndale, but do not specifically address the differences from the proposed Final
8 UGAs in the Plan. Additional findings with regard to the area east of Ferndale are
9 as follows:
10 A) The area east of Ferndale consists of a unique small community known
11 historically -as North Bellingham, which is mixed in types of housing.
12 and very independent in nature, having its own school, grange, grocery
13 stores, churches, gas stations, and fire station.
14 B) Throughout extensive public process, testimony for the Final UGAs
15 overwhelmingly supported exclusion of the North Bellingham area
16 from Ferndale's UGA.
17 C) The North Bellingham area is the only buffer between Bellingham and
18 Ferndale.
19 D) Northwest Road, which cuts through the North Bellingham area, is a
10 good alternate north -south connector for those wishing to avoid Guide
21 Meridian. It takes some burden off Guide Meridian. Increased
22 densities would serve to congest this major arterial.
23 E) Ferndale's IUGA is more regular by eliminating the North Bellingham
24 area.
25 F) The residents of the North Bellingham area have overwhelmingly
26 supported maintaining their unique identity, separate from Belllingham
27 or Ferndale.
28 G) Retaining North Bellingham's unique character is consistent with
29 finding #34 of the substitute ordinance.
30 8. The Cities of Everson, Lynden and Nooksack's findings support an interim urban
31 growth area the same as the one proposed in the Plan.
32 9. The City of Sumas is surrounded by floodplain. Goal 2W states that Sumas should
33 set an Urban Growth Area which accommodates future growth needs and recognizes
34 the unique constraints imposed by flooding of the Sumas and Nooksack Rivers. The
35 County proposed UGA includes a conditional area suggested by Sumas as being
Page 5
1 inappropriately classified as floodplain. Policy 2W -2 requires completion and
2 adoption of a flood study for the area due east of Sumas prior to inclusion in the
3 final urban growth boundary.
4 County Unincorporated UGAs
5 10. The Plan categorizes County Unincorporated UGAs as follows:
6 A) Areas which are already platted and will be allowed to continue to
7 build out, but will not be encouraged to expand;
8 B) Areas which are already platted and /or presently have zoning and
9 adequate provision for utilities which could allow future expansion;
10 C) Existing or proposed major industrial areas which, because of specific
11 location needs, are not contiguous to cities; and
12 D) Hamlets or small unincorporated urban areas with partial services
13 which will be designated and encouraged to grow subject to need and
14 when a full range of services are provided.
15 11. RCW 36:
16 priority:
17 A)
18
19 B)
20
_21
`2
23 C)
24
7OA.110(3) suggest that urban growth should be located in the following
Areas already characterized by urban growth that have adequate public
facilities.
Areas already characterized by urban growth that will be served
adequately by a combination of both existing public facilities and
services and any additional needed public facilities that are provided
by either public or private sources.
Other urban growth areas.
25 12. The Planning Division's Staff Report, dated February 8, 1995, provided analysis of
26 the capability of water service provision to the County's Unincorporated UGAs and
27 indicated that all urban growth areas should include some strategy for the delivery
28 of water services.
29
30 13. The proposed County Unincorporated UGAs were developed as a result of an
31 extensive public process specifically articulated in the Visioning Value Statements
32 and reflected throughout the Land Use Chapter of the Plan and were evaluated
33 against the Growth Management Act requirements.
34 County Unincorporated Residential UGAs
35 14. Population distribution for the County Unincorporated Residential Urban Growth
36 Areas (UGAs) for the next twenty years project the need to accommodate 3,282
37 more people within four major residential areas, with the potential for several small
38 Hamlets.
39 15. County UGAs are based on subarea planning efforts developed between the years
40 1981 and 1994. These plans identified urban reserve areas located in areas which are
Page 6
1 either adjacent to existing, specified municipalities, or are satellite areas that are of
2 sufficient size to adequately accommodate the projected demands for residential and
3 commercial growth. They are located in areas where a range of urban services
4 presently exist or can be economically and efficiently provided in the near future.
5 Zoning densities in these areas are limited to one unit per five acres until such time
6 as both water and sewer can be provided. In no case have any additional growth
7 areas been proposed beyond those identified in this earlier planning effort.
8 16. By the year 2010, potential population distribution among the unincorporated
9 residential UGAs indicates the Birch Bay UGA (Map A 8a -I) will absorb 1,149
10 people; the Sudden Valley UGA (Map A -8d -I) will absorb 1,213 people; the Paradise
11 Lakes /Peaceful Valley UGA (Map A -8b -I) will absorb 361 people; and the Point
12 Roberts UGA (Map A -8c -I) will absorb 459 people. The remaining 100 people will
13 be accommodated within the creation of small Hamlets.
14 17. County unincorporated residential UGAs contain a total of 9,279 acres.
15 18. The Birch Bay UGA (Map A -8a -I) is based on zoning established by Birch
16 Bay /Blaine Subarea Plan, adopted in September 1987. This zoning pattern is
17 intended to accommodate historical development patterns and estimated future
18 demands. There are 4,166 acres of land designated for residential use; 39 acres for
19 industrial use; and 480 acres for commercial use. In 1990, the area contained a
20 population of 2,307 with 2,471 dwelling units. Using a market factor of 150 %, the
1 area must accommodate an additional 1,846 dwelling units. Densities are expected
22 to increase. by 43 %. * The Birch Bay area has traditionally been an area of
23 recreational use with over 50% of the parcels in Canadian ownership. The
24 speculative nature of development in the area and the close link to the Canadian
25 economy have made predicting residential demands very difficult. The area is served
26 with water and sewer by the Birch Bay Water and Sewer District.
27 19. The Sudden Valley UGA (Map A -8d -I) is based on zoning established by the Lake
28 Whatcom Subarea Plan adopted in August 1982. The zoning pattern is intended to
29 accommodate historical development patterns and estimated future demands. There
30 are 1,694 acres of land designated for residential use and 20 acres designated for
31 commercial use. In 1990, the area contained a population of 2,592 and 1,388
32 dwelling units. Using a market factor of 150 %, the area must accommodate an
33 additional 974 dwelling units. Densities are expected to increase 41 %. Platting
34 patterns in the area were established in the 1970s. Well over 90% of the land area
35 within the UGA is already platted. The area is served with water and sewer by
36 Water District 10. The Sudden Valley UGA is consistent with findings #34; the
37 existing pattern of zoning represents prior zoning commitments to residents, and was
38 an important consideration in setting urban growth boundaries.
39 20. The Paradise Lakes /Peaceful Valley UGA (Map A 8b -I) is based on zoning
Page 7
1 established by the Foothills Subarea Plan adopted in November 1988. The zoning
2 pattern is intended to accommodate historical development patterns and estimated
3 future demands. There are 1,055 acres of land designated for residential use. In
4 1990, the area contained 726 people, and 970 dwelling units. Using a market factor
5 of 150 %, the area must accommodate an additional 723 dwelling units. Densities are
6 expected to increase by 43 %. 75% of the UGA area consists of platted lots. It has
7 potential to be served by water and sewer.
8 21. The Point Roberts UGA (Map A -8c -I) is based on zoning established by the Point
9 Roberts Subarea Plan adopted in 1990. The zoning pattern is intended to
10 accommodate historical development patterns and estimated future demands. There
11 are 1,899 acres of land within the area designated for urban levels of development,
12 of which, 1,572 acres are residential, 316 acres are commercial, and 11 acres are
13 industrial. In 1990, the area contained 923 people and 1,798 dwelling units. Using
14 a market factor of 150 %, the area must accommodate an additional 1,341 dwelling
15 units. The density is expected to increase by 43 %. Point Roberts is a particularly
16 unique area of the United States. While it is part of Whatcom County, it is not
17 contiguous to the US border, but exists as a peninsula. Travel into Point Roberts
18 requires crossing through Customs at the Canadian border; thus, the Canadian
19 economy has very heavily influence Point Roberts growth and development patterns.
20 The area is a popular Canadian resort and over 80% of the land is owned by
21 Canadian citizens. Much of the area has already been platted. It is served by water
22 and sewer.
23 22. The remaining Unincorporated Residential UGAs, the Acme and Glacier areas
24 (Maps A -8d -III and A- 8b -IV), are envisioned as potential Hamlet areas that are not
25 intended to absorb major population allocations.
26 23. The proposed County Unincorporated Residential UGAs reflect existing
27 development patterns which are a result of the unique location of Whatcom County
28 adjacent to the Canadian border. Large resort areas exist for Canadian citizens,
29 making it difficult to predict market demands and population projections.
30 County Unincorporated Commercial UGAs
31 Maps A- 8a -IV, A -8a -V, A- 8a -VI, A -8a -VII, A -Bb -I, A -Bb -II, A -Bb -III, A -8c -II, A -8d -IV
32 24. There are 486 acres of land designated as County Unincorporated Commercial UGA.
33 Of this number, 404 acres are designated General Commercial, intended to provide
34 a range of retail goods and services to the surrounding community; 40 acres are
35 designated Tourist Commercial, intended to serve the traveling public; and 42 acres
36 are designated Neighborhood Commercial, intended to provide goods and services
37 to persons residing within a neighborhood trade or service area.
38 25. Commercial zoning was established in various subarea plans based on existing
Page 8
1 development patterns and future demands for rural services.
2 26. Commercial areas along Guide Meridian (Maps A =8a -V, A- 8a -VI, A -8 -VII) have
3 been under study in the Whatcom County Council of Government and the
4 Washington State Department of Transportation Guide Meridian Corridor Study. The
5 draft study considers access management plans for Guide Meridian and addresses the
6 issues of traffic safety, circulation and access, infrastructure, and business
7 competition. There has been an extensive public involvement process for owners of
8 property along the Guide Meridian Corridor. The study suggests that no downzoning
9 occur, a "cottage industry corridor" be encouraged using existing zoning and transfer
10 of development rights, and the preservation of the floodplain and agricultural areas
11 north of Lynden. Existing zoning is consistent with this proposal.
12 County Unincorporated Industrial UGAs
13 27. The Whatcom County Industrial Lands Inventory was completed August 30, 1995.
14 The inventory indicates there are a total of 10,385 acres of land zoned for industrial
15 development in unincorporated Whatcom County. Of that area, there are 4,371 acres
16 unconstrained by wetlands and available for development. Only 99 acres are served
17 with water, sewer, and all weather roads.
18 28. County Unincorporated Industrial UGAs include 8,109 acres of industrially zoned
19 land. Of this, 6,578 acres are zoned for Heavy Industrial use; 1,156 acres are zoned
20 for Light Impact Industrial use; 26 acres for General Manufacturing; and 225 acres
21 of Gateway Industrial.
22 29. Industrial zoning was established in various subarea plans based on existing
23 development patterns and the need to provide a reasonable supply of land for
24 ancillary uses to the manufacturing and commercial sectors, as well as the need to
25 provide large areas away from urban development for heavy industrial uses.
26 30. The underlying rationale of Gateway Industrial (Map A 8a -III) is to supply a
27 reasonable amount of land for displaying industrial capabilities and to allow for
28 phased expansion in areas so that each phase presents a healthy economic image.
29 Locational criteria requires proximity to major international transportation routes,
30 potential availability of sewer, water and storm drainage facility and labor pool
31 supply within 45 minute commute.
32 31. The Light Impact Industrial zone at Custer (Map A -8a -III) was established with a
33 zoning amendment adopted in March 1995. Findings for the rezone included
34 reference to. earlier Birch Bay /Blaine Subarea Plan language that indicated a need
35 for industrial land adjacent to rail access and changed circumstances since the
36 subarea plan's adoption which indicated a need for additional land in this location,
37 including the re- establishment of Amtrak Service, recognition of the need for
38 industrial jobs, and the availability of gas and electrical power. This is a unique
Page 9
1 transportation area. The zoning amendment underwent SEPA review and extensive
2 public participation. The results of the Visioning Process established that Whatcom
3 County citizens support industrial development along the I -5 corridor.
4 32. The proposed County Unincorporated Industrial Areas include sufficient land area
5 to cover a reasonable market supply factor for the short-term, but do not propose
6 any additional areas to address long -term needs. In the long -term, it will be
7 necessary to consider the creation of additional industrial zoning to enhance the tax
8 base for rural school districts and to provide sufficient variety of parcel sizes and
9 serviced industrial land.
10 33. The majority of developable acres within County unincorporated UGAs are located
11 in the Cherry Point area which will be considered as a major industrial development
12 in Final UGAs.
13 34. The existing pattern of zoning, representing prior zoning commitments to residents
14 was an important consideration in setting urban growth boundaries.
15 35. The Plan, including the proposed UGAs, developed in conjunction with and in
16 response to a lengthy public involvement process that included the creation of citizen
17 committees, a fair booth at the August 1993 Northwest Washington Fair, sixteen
18 Town Hall meetings, 12,000 written surveys, a statistically -valid phone survey,
19 development of Community Value Statements and Land Use Alternatives, and an
L0 additional fourteen Town Hall meetings.
21 36. RCW 36.70A.060 requires Counties to assure the conservation of agricultural, forest,
22 and mineral resource lands through the adoption of designations and development
23 regulations.
24 37. Outside of proposed urban growth areas, the County has 86,619 acres of agricultural
25 land designation, restricting densities to one dwelling unit per 40 acres; 187,552 acres
26 of forestry designation with development regulations prohibiting residential
27 development; 33,703 acres of forestry designation, restricting development to one
28 dwelling unit per twenty acres; and 1,252 acres of mineral resource land designation,
29 restricting development to one unit per twenty acres, and there exists over 940,000
30 acres of public owned land in Whatcom County, in addition to the land previously
31 cited.
32 38. Inside proposed urban growth areas, there are 1,759 acres of land presently zoned
33 for agriculture, no areas designated as forestry resource lands, and 120 acres of land
34 designated as mineral resource.
35 39. Whatcom County Code, Chapter 16, adopted in 1979, contains Planning Goals for
36 Whatcom County which require concentration of urban growth, elimination of sprawl,
Page 10
1 protection of resource lands and rural character. Chapter 16 also requires adoption
2 of land use regulations to implement these policies. Title 20, Whatcom County
3 Zoning Code, was revised specifically to implement the Planning Goals.
4 40. RCW 36.70A 070 (5) requires Counties to include a rural element which permits
5 land uses that are compatible with the rural character of such lands and provides for
6 a variety of rural densities.
7 41. Outside of proposed urban growth areas, the County presently has 26,861 acres zoned
8 Rural Ten Acre (R10A), restricting densities to one unit per ten acres; 77,357 acres
9 zoned Rural Five Acres (RSA), restricting densities to one unit per, five acres; 5,213
10 acres zoned Rural Two Acre (R2A), restricting densities to one unit per two acres;
11 1,867 acres zoned Rural Residential One (RR1), restricting densities to one unit per
12 acre; 4,124 acres zoned Rural Residential Two (RR2), restricting densities to one
13 unit per acre unless either public water or sewer is available, in which case two units
14 per acre is allowed; 542 acres zoned Rural Residential Three (RR3), restricting
15 densities to one unit per acre unless public water or sewer is available, in which case
16 three units per acre are allowed; and 2,612 acres zoned Rural Residential Island
17 (RRI), restricting densities to one unit per five acres when located in an aquifer
18 recharge area and one dwelling unit per three acres when not in an aquifer recharge
19 area.
20 42. The citizens of Whatcom County have made it clear that they do not support
!1 downzoning. Many arguments have been made by local citizens against downzoning
22 including: (1) property owners' expectations based upon existing zoning, and
23 legitimate claims of entitlement to that zoning, (2) the need to ensure stability,
24 fairness, and predictability in land use planning, (3) the Growth Management Act's
25 goal to avoid arbitrary and discriminatory actions or takings of property without just
26 compensation, RCW 36.70A.020(6), and (4) the County's duty to avoid violating the
27 Taking, Equal Protection, and Due Process clauses of the U.S. Constitution, Fifth
28 and Fourteenth Amendment, corresponding provisions of the Washington State
29 Constitution, and the County's recent Charter Amendment No. 2, and the adverse
30 effects upon County taxpayers which could result from claims being asserted against
31 the County under these provisions.
32 43. Planning Commission and Council work schedules to complete the comprehensive
33 plan, most likely, will prohibit any further rezones from receiving final Council
34 approval before adoption of final UGA boundaries.
35 Conclusions
36 1. The analysis of proposed final UGAs included in the draft Whatcom County
37 Comprehensive Plan (Plan), in conjunction with the further analysis prepared for
38 adoption of this ordinance, is based on population projections and market factors
Page 11
1 consistent with the requirements of the Growth Management Act and is sufficient to
? meet the land capacity analysis required by the act.
3 2. The land capacity analysis findings submitted by the cities, and further findings by the
4 County support the size and location of the Interim Urban Growth Areas for cities.
5 The Interim Urban Growth Area adopted by this ordinance for the City of
6 Bellingham is smaller than included in the proposed Whatcom County
7 Comprehensive Plan. The Interim Urban Growth Area adopted by this ordinance for
8 the City of Ferndale is the same as that cited in the proposed Whatcom County
9 Comprehensive Plan and as modified in Finding #7 herein, although Ferndale
10 proposed a slightly different boundary.
11 3. The land capacity analysis and the policy basis of the Plan support the size and
12 location of the County unincorporated Urban Growth Areas (UGAs).
13 4. There has been sufficient public process to meet the requirements of the Growth
14 Management Act in considering the proposed final urban growth areas of the Plan.
15 This process has included the Comprehensive Plan Visioning Process, four public
16 hearings, and multiple work sessions.
17 5. The existing Whatcom County Development regulations limit uses sufficiently to
18 prevent new urban development from occurring outside logically established IUGAs
19 until the Plan is completed.
20 6. These densities and uses outside urban growth areas are rural for purposes of this
21 ordinance, and it is the intent of this ordinance to allow development and use of
22 property in these zones in accordance with existing zoning. To avoid litigation on
23 these issues, and in response to the overwhelming desire of the citizenry, downzoning
24 is not being proposed. Existing zoning is consistent with a coherent rural vision for
25 Whatcom County which provides for a variety of uses and densities, including a
26 variety of residential options, see, e.g. RCW 36.70A.020(4).
27 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that:
28 Section 1. The Interim Urban Growth Area for the City of Bellingham as presented in
29 the attached map (Exhibit A -1) be accepted.
30 Section 2. The Interim Urban Growth Area for the City of Blaine as presented in the
31 attached map (Exhibit A -2) be accepted.
32 Section 3. The Interim Urban Growth Area for the City of Blaine will include the
33 conditional areas as identified in the attached map (Exhibit A -2).
Page 12
1 Section 4. The Interim Urban Growth Area for the City of Everson as presented in the
2 attached map (Exhibit A -3) be accepted.
3 Section 5. The Interim Urban Growth Area for the City of Ferndale as presented in the
4 attached map (Exhibit A-4) be accepted.
5 Section 6. The Interim Urban Growth Area for the City of Lynden as presented in the
6 attached map (Exhibit A -5) be accepted.
7 Section 7. The Interim Urban Growth Area for the City of Nooksack as presented in the
8 attached map (Exhibit A -6) be accepted.
9 Section 8. The Interim Urban Growth Area for the City of Sumas as presented in the
10 attached map (Exhibit A -7) be accepted.
11 Section 9. The Interim Urban Growth Area for the City of Sumas will include the
12 conditional area as identified in the attached map (Exhibit A-7).
13 Section 10. The Interim Urban Growth Areas for Unincorporated Whatcom County as
14 presented in the attached map (Exhibit A -8, [a -d]) be accepted.
15 Section 11. The County will oppose any annexation outside the boundaries of an IUGA
16 until the IUGA has been amended or replaced by a final UGA.
17 Section 12. The IUGAs are intended to be in effect until such time as final urban growth
18 areas are recommended by the Planning Commission and approved by the County Council,
19 not to exceed eight months from time of adoption of this ordinance as provided in the work
20 plan attached as Exhibit C.
21 Section 13. Adoption of this ordinance replaces Ordinance # 94 -033.
22 Section 14. Adjudication of invalidity of any of the sections, clauses, or provisions of this
23 Ordinance shall not affect or impair the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any part
24 thereof other than the part so declared to be invalid.
25 ADOPTED this 23 day of January , 1996.
26 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
27 AXEEST: WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
28 -
29 Dana Brown Davis, Council Clerk Ward Nelson, ChUrperson
Page 13
1 AP ROVED as to form & content: Approved () Denied
2
3 Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor Pete Kremen, Executive
4 Date:
Page 14
I
Z
k
J
ilp
to2W /i+�%
7)
Cc
4J
JIM
O
Q
'a
C-
a)
C
O
CL
'Pa 1911141
U
c'
In
Q C �` U)
o
U 7 �2
U) 'J
- - - -- -------------------------
N (D
Qj
� o C5
a
ui
'PH II
�:'
*PH ue6a
Ir
r..
r
Y L
- - - - - -- i
-- pd ews -- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- -
rc
d
u1 4-)
Il d agaag N
L
01 m
l\ Yv AM IS w
ol
13
� N '
1 0 11
-------- - - - - --
' b
� 7
•H
i
cc
i
-- ----- --- C--------------- - - - - -;
Q
i
Y
J
1
I/
f"'
1
��I
1
7)
Cc
4J
JIM
O
Q
'a
C-
a)
C
O
CL
'Pa 1911141
U
c'
In
Q C �` U)
o
U 7 �2
U) 'J
- - - -- -------------------------
N (D
Qj
� o C5
a
ui
'PH II
�:'
*PH ue6a
Ir
r..
r
Y L
- - - - - -- i
-- pd ews -- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- -
rc
d
u1 4-)
Il d agaag N
L
01 m
l\ Yv AM IS w
ol
13
� N '
1 0 11
-------- - - - - --
' b
� 7
•H
i
cc
i
-- ----- --- C--------------- - - - - -;
Q
i
Y
J
1
----------
------ - - - - --
b
i cc
i
Q
L
8 '
Pb to as
-- --
-a
o
cc
- -
a) -
O
rl
ca
L
-ri I
N
L'
a I
1
I
-
a
1
w1
m
; ,
1
1
cc�
1
I
a
,
T
1
,
'o
ueiptiaW aptnq
�
c�
w
I
I
'
Ou
m
D
0= I
2
�
� m
I
I
-
I
I
w
,
Z
'
I
Q
w
I
'PEI uew >iaer
I
O
-
-- --------------
a
I- - - - - --
--------- - - - - --------- - - - - -- - -- - - --
O
'
Z
'
I '
Z
I
Q
1
z
z ` U3
O
s
❑
Pa Punrxd
U `%
I `
I
3
'
Iv—
co
It
al
/
FOREST Bo u.D.Ay
N
t
i
;1
-
P'IMpdpmppp-
Kenna 11
1 I
I I I
1 H I I
ZH
I � I
I � ! I
---- i-------------------------- �'---- -� - - -- -- - - - - -- --------------+----------------------------
C() D '
1 I
1)
I I
1 I I
I I I
ter;
I
N I �
I � �
I � I
I � I
I ; I
N 1
W
.�TI 7
s
I , �
ill
I , I
I I
I ; I
. I Z
I
I 1 I
I f•, I
-------+---------------------------- - - - --- --------------------------------
I
I I
, 1 1
I '
I
I I ,
I 1
I I
I I I
� 1 I
I I
•I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I 1
I � 1
I I I
1
I
1
I
- -- -- t-------------------- - - - - --
I
I / I
1 ,
1 ,
� I
I i ,
I ; I
I I
I / I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I ,
I
I I
I I
1 I
, _ 1
T 1 r r
I T ,
dl.
9-
n
O
r.
n
O
Z
C
Z
z
n
m
v
z
I
m
O
O
a
.i
v
0
00
--------------------- 7 :j
`
Nooksack Rd.
Ir
CL
oat coleS Rd. 0
'-----' - U Goodwin RU'
Trap Line Rd.
Buren
icl-
cu 0
CD
Lebrant Ad. '
�
c
(
�
/
o
r
L
-
Mecklem
Rd.
cl
CL
cl
`
Nooksack Rd.
Ir
CL
oat coleS Rd. 0
'-----' - U Goodwin RU'
Trap Line Rd.
Buren
icl-
cu 0
CD
Lebrant Ad. '
�
c
(
�
/
o
r
L
-
,
0
1
O
i
I
1
,
t'1
I
I
o
°'
1
C7
I
p
�Lawr o nce _ Rd.
Z
- --
----- - -
- - -- ---- - - - - -- = ---- - - - - -- — - - --
-- - - - - --
lJl�
--- - - - -_- - - - -- -
I
I
�
1
I
'
1
o
I
I
----------------- - - -- ----------------
--- - - - - -- - - -- --------- - - - - --
- - - - - -' ------------------
-...�
m
`
m
I
1
I
1
1
1
'
I
I
{
,
'
1
ow
I
�
1
�
------- - - - - =-
I
I
I
,
1
,
,
,
I
I
,
I
1
'
O
I
ZY
I
1
I
�i
-
I
,
I
-
� I
I
,
I
;
,
V4
1
�
I
�
m
_ H
I
D
1
--
I
G-)
,
.
I
W It
Co
S
n,
- - -' - --
- -- ---- - - - - --
1
I
I
1
l
1
I
c
,
----------_-__---___-----+—'--------r
| |
|
. |
-7___ ` .
�
`.'
TT/����� _-~
/ -� �� |� �� �_
' --
| �
---------------------
7
____________
-
~°
��. � �
~
.
�—q
W
-Fl |
BOUN
�
uo
uo
c*
��
—_____
�
'`^
|
' |
��. � �
~
.
�—q
W
-Fl |
BOUN
�
uo
uo
c*
��
rF
:13
0
CS
CD
cli
i.
ri 1 L-117
,a Yoe° '� 't .
aA
ash--- ---- ------ --
ti
- rr!9R/�I`r�
���
CA
104,
; W�p
VZOO 71000 1 f
IRK
'I
000
n
O
n
O
c
z
c
z
z
n
O
m
-u
O
m
�
N
V
k
,
rt
Airstrip
a
i
u
Z
Z
m
Z
.
O
O
�
V
G
r
0
-----------
..•
D
o
D
m�m
D
_
0
D
m
•:
9
��
ZC
a
m
a
Y
y
o
m
of
a
v
r
a
rt
0
•
r- �,
------------------------------------
YA,
Tit---------------------------------
0
0
9
0
0
c
z
Bp
m
c
m
z
------------------
0
R-7
wo-
- -
Qj I
1
- - - - - - - - - - -
---------------------------------------------------
-------------------------
Co
lot
----------
---------- - ----- ------ ---------- 4 ---------- - -
----------- - ----- ----- ---- i--
----------- ---------- ------------ ----------
-- ---- -------
----------- L ---- - -- ------- ------------ ----------------- V -----------
---------- --
---------- -----------
----------- ----- -- - ------ - - -------- -------- t
I
00
ir
----------- ---------
i
------------ -
---------- ------- I L--- ----- -------- --------- 4 -------- ------
------ ---- -------
t ---------- ----- ---- ---------- L
t* 1 U a
---- ------ --------- --------------------- 4 ---------- 4 --------- --------
--------------- ------- - - - - ------------------------------ ---------------------- r - -------------- 1 - ---------- ----------- ----------------
----------
-------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- t ---------- t ------ --T ---------- t
- - L
Sammy
---------- t
I-----------
----------
______ _____________f��______r________
---------------------------------------------------------
r
CT
� ,
C
Z
'
,� o0
Z
z
o
o
ti
'
'
CD
v
�__
__ -- - --------------------------------
\ga
n
�
'
c
w
-3
'
c
rn
'
o
I
.I
�J
r
I
I
1
I
1
1
I
1
I
I
Carlin
1
1
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
- -- - -- - ---------------------- - -----------------
d �a�te n
F �
I
i
I
m I
SR 9
I
I
N '
Nelson Rd. D
_ 1
D '
I -
I
I I
I
1 �
I
I 1.
I
r------ - - - - -- - I
I-------- - - ---
1 1
1 � 1
1 la
1
1 1
1 ;
1 1 �/ I
I I I
I � ,
I I I
I
1 I 1
m � I
1 m I
1 I I
1
______ _____ _____ ____ _____ _____ ____ ___
I
i
I 1
1 I
, I
� 1
I I
I I
1
� I
� 1
1 I
I I
I 1
I I
I I
1
ll I
I' I
1 I
I I
___________
I '
I I
I
I
A�
Mi
J
K
^
J
0
z
c
z
z
0
-a
m
a
z
m
c
_
Y,
_
c
a
0
City of Bellingham
Findings for Recommended I UGAs Exhibit. B-1.
City of Bellingham
Whatcom County Council, Supplementary Findings for Adoption of Interim Urban Growth Area
for. City of Bellingham, January 1996.
On November 15, 1993, Bellingham City Council adopted Resolution 56 -93,
recommending the area previously established through Ordinance 9461 and
codified in Bellingham Municipal Code 15.36.030 -140 as Bellingham's Urban
Service Area to serve as Bellingham's Interim Urban Growth Area for purposes of
the State Growth Management Act.
2. Bellingham's Interim Urban Growth Area includes three separately described areas:
Geneva, Yew Street, and portions of the Urban Fringe Subarea. (See Exhibit B,
legal description attached to Resolution 56 -93)
3. Bellingham's Urban Service Area was established through Ordinance 9461 in June,
1985, identifying an area appropriate for urban services provided by the City,
including areas outside existing city limits.
This ordinance and its accompanying map identified areas that "might reasonably
be expected to develop at urban levels in the foreseeable future." Those areas
generally included "areas surrounding the city which are classified in Whatcom
County's Comprehensive Plan as Urban Reserve, Commercial or Industrial."
4. Whatcom County and the City of Bellingham jointly adopted an Interlocal
Cooperation Agreement in August, 1985.
This agreement recognizes that urban growth outside Bellingham should be
concentrated in the Urban Service Area. It recognizes the need for urban services
to facilitate development and Bellingham as the logical provider of urban services
in the area. It further recognizes that the City and County provide a "framework
for cooperative action toward orderly growth" with their respective plans and
policies, including the County's Urban Fringe Subarea Comprehensive Plan, the
City's Urban Service Area, and a proposed Comprehensive Plan for the Urban
Service Area.
5. Whatcom County and the City of Bellingham respectively adopted Resolution 90-
11/Resolution 6 -90 in February, 1990 endorsing the joint city- county production
of a new comprehensive plan for the Urban Fringe Subarea.
6. Development of a plan for the Urban Service Area was accomplished through the
Urban Fringe Subarea Plan Update and the update of Bellingham's Comprehensive
Plan. The Urban Fringe Subarea Plan has been developed jointly using staff from
Whatcom County and the City of Bellingham. It has been processed through the
city and county planning commissions with joint hearings and their
recommendations were forwarded to both jurisdictions' elected officials in a
City ojBellingham
Findings jorRecommended 1UGAs
January 1995. Draft.
7. Bellingham published its Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), 20 Year
Growth Alternatives For the City of Bellingham and Proposed Urban Growth
Areas in November, 1994. Four land use alternatives were analyzed (see pages 9-
23 FEIS):
Alternative #1, Infill. Emphasizes concentrating new development within City of
Bellingham and the existing Urban Service Area. Emphasizes infill, more compact
growth near employment centers, and redesignation of environmentally sensitive
areas where appropriate.
Alternative #2, Expansion. Proposes expanding existing Urban Service Area to
accommodate future growth, examining current county zoning to identify areas for
commercial, industrial, or higher density residential development. Major growth in
jobs and housing would be directed to an expanded urban growth area to the
north. These urban growth expansion areas are being evaluated in the city /county
Urban Fringe Subarea Plan Update. Most areas evaluated in the FEIS address
residential land use needs. Additional analysis of commercial/industrial land use
needs were examined in Bellingham's Comprehensive Plan and through the Urban
Fringe Subarea Plan process.
Alternative #3, No action. A no- change alternative which retains existing city
limits, urban service areas, zoning and regulations.
Alternative #4: Added after the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
was published to evaluate special study areas recommended by the Whatcom
County Council during their adoption of Interim Urban Growth Areas in May,
1994. Areas of study primarily involved Rural Residential areas (designations of
one to three units per acre) with some urban characteristics and large undeveloped
areas.
8. Whatcom County published a Proposed Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan in
November, 1994, including an analysis of Incorporated Urban Growth Areas for
"areas within and surrounding the seven cities in the county."
(See page 2 -11, November, 1994 Plan.) and addressing residential land use needs
for the 20 year period of 1990 to 2010.
Pages 2 -18 through page 2 -22 of the draft County Comprehensive Plan includes a
map on page 2 -20 illustrating the Bellingham Urban Growth Area that was
analyzed in Whatcom County's November, 1994 plan. This map includes:
a) Bellingham's Interim Urban Growth Area as recommended by the Bellingham
City Council in 1993 (see Resolution 56 -93) and adopted by Whatcom County
Council Ordinance 94 -033 in May, 1994; and
b) additional areas within the Urban Fringe Subarea Plan recommended by the
Bellingham and Whatcom County Planning Commissions for inclusion in
Page 2
City of Bellingham
Findings for Recommended IUGAs Page 3
Bellingham's Final Urban Growth Area as a result of the Urban Fringe Subarea
Plan Update process.
9. Bellingham's 1995 Comprehensive Plan, published in December, 1995 was acted on by the
Bellingham City Council on December 8, 1995 (third and final action/adoption scheduled
for January 16, 1996.) Pages lu.4 through 1u. 16 analyze land use and population needs.
Table III, page lu.6, illustrates Historic and Projected Population Growth from 1970
through 2015. Bellingham's population was 52,179 in 1990, while population in
Bellingham's city and Urban Service area was 59,128.
The 8 1, 000 population projection for Bellingham and its Urban Growth Area in
2010 is the same figure used by Whatcom County on Table 3, page 1 -5 and Table
6, page 2 -13 of the November 1994 Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. This
figure represents approximately 43 percent of Whatcom County's projected
population of 189,100 in 2010. The 2010 figure was based on projections in
Property Counselors, Population, Economic and Housing Projections prepared in
October, 1991 for Bellingham, Whatcom County, the remaining six cities in
Whatcom County, and Whatcom County Council of Governments. This 189,100
figure represents the mid -range between high (203,900) and low (169,600)
population projections. (See table 4a, Property Counselors report.)
Property Counselors projected that Bellingham's share of the countywide population
would be 38% in 2010 (projected for Bellingham city limits). Based on the 1990
population in Bellingham's Urban Service Area (outside city limits) and the same rate of
growth applied to the incorporated city (approximately 2 %), Bellingham and its Urban
Growth Area is likely to represent at least 43% of the countywide population in 2010 or
2015.
The projected population for Bellingham and its Urban Growth Area in 2015 is
projected to be 86,500, a population growth of 27,400. The figure of 81,000
people in 2010 represents an increase of 21,872 people.
10. Population projections used by Whatcom County and the cities to calculate
residential land needs are well within recent population projections provided by the
State Office of Financial Management (OFM). (See 1995 Growth Management
Act County Projection Review Materials, especially pages 19, 29 and 32.)
County -wide Planning Policies (adopted in April, 1993) call for Whatcom County
and its cities to "use the 189,100 projection as the planned projection" and to
avoid tightening of the urban land supply and rising housing costs," calls for a land
base accommodating 150% of the projected growth, or 215,000 (See Policy
B -6).
OFM projections indicate a range from 182,308 to 203,948 by 2010 and a range of
193,667 to 224,904 by 2015.
11. Based on the population projections and land supply analysis conducted in the
1995 Bellingham Comprehensive Plan, Bellingham does not have sufficient
City of Bellingham
Findings for Recommended IUGAs
residential land capacity inside its city limits to accommodate the projected
population growth. Demand is for 12,835 dwelling units by 2010 and 18,200
dwelling units by 2015. Bellingham's city limits contain capacity for between
9,100 and 11,500 dwelling units.
Considering population growth attributed only to the City (without its Urban
Growth Area population), Bellingham's population will add 19,679 people by 2010
and 27,887 people by 2015. Using a 1990 figure of 2.3 persons per dwelling unit
(1990 Census) and the 1.5 factor from County-wide Planning Policies, additional
demand calls for Bellingham to plan for 12,835 dwelling units by 2010 or 18,200
dwelling -units by 2015.
It is noteworthy that County -wide Planning Policies calling for a land base
accommodating 215,000 (150% of the projected 2010 population of 189,100) falls
within the recent OFM numbers. These OFM numbers are based on expected
population growth without the 50 percent factor required by the County -wide
Planning Policies for infrastructure needs, siting of essential public facilities, open
space, environmental and market factors. While OFM does not provide
projections for the cities within the County, it is safe to assume projections for
Bellingham incorporating the same 150% factor are similarly consistent with these
recent OFM numbers.
Bellingham's 2015 mid -range population projection for city limits area only of
80,066 (based on Property Counselors assumption of Bellingham at 38% of the
projected 2015 County-wide population) minus Bellingham's 1990 population of
52,179 results in growth inside the city of 27,887 people, multiplied by the 1.5
factor leads to a need to serve 41,830 people. Divided by 2.3 people per dwelling
unit (1990 Census) yields a need for 18,200 dwelling units by 2015.
A similar calculation for Bellingham -only population growth between 1990 and
2010 indicates 71,858 people by 2010, less 52,179 in 1990, for a growth inside the
city of 19,679 times 1.5 or 29,518 people. Divided by 2.3 people per dwelling unit
yields a need for 12,835 dwelling units during the 20 year period to year 2010.
12. Depending on factors affecting the residential land supply, Bellingham may have
sufficient land capacity to meet housing needs for the projected population growth
in its current Urban Service Area (including the City) by 2010 or 2015. Demand
for housing in the city and Urban Service Area is estimated at 17,850 dwelling
units in 2015 (14,265 in 2010).
Adding population growth attributed to Bellingham's current Urban Service Area
and residential land capacity in that area, there is net capacity for 6,540 to 8,280
additional dwelling units outside the city limits. Adding these figure to Bellingham
capacity provides for a total of 15,640 to 19,800 dwelling units inside Bellingham
and its current Urban Service Area.
Page 4
13. Bellingham's FEIS indicates additional analysis and evaluation of land to serve commercial
and industrial growth over 20 years would occur. Further evaluation was conducted in
City of Bellingham
Findings for Recommended IUGAs
Page S
Bellingham's Comprehensive Plan (see pages lu.10 through 1u. 16, as contemplated in the
FEIS, and is continuing in the Urban Fringe Plan Update process, scheduled for
completion in early 1996.
14. An estimated 700 to 1400 acres of land zoned for commercial/industrial use are
needed within Bellingham, its current Urban Service Area and an expanded.Final
Urban Growth Area. This land is needed to accommodate the projected demand
for economic activity and to adequately address adopted city policy'encouraging
economic development that maintains and creates family wage jobs (see page
1u.24, Land Supply Policies.)
Four different methodologies used to provide a range of land absorption estimates
for commercial and industrial land in Bellingham and the Urban Service Area to
the year 2010 resulted from a process Bellingham followed in adopting its
Comprehensive Plan. A panel including representatives from the
BellinghamAVhatcom County Chamber of Commerce reviewed the land absorption
estimates and agreed that the range produced by the various methodologies was
appropriate.
Using the mid -range estimate from the studies provides a range of land absorption
from 400 to 1200 acres. There are 625 developable vacant acres in Bellingham,
with an additional 845 developable vacant acres in the current Urban Service Area
for a total of 1,470 acres in the City and in areas already planned for urban
services.
If we are to maintain the current ratio of land zoned for commercial and industrial use to
land developed with commercial/industrial uses (1.82), an additional 700 to 1400 acres of
land would need to be appropriately zoned. Through the Urban Fringe Subarea Plan
Update process, Bellingham's City Council is currently analyzing and evaluating the need
for additional land in the city's northern urban fringe. The results of their analysis will be
forwarded to Whatcom County Council with their recommendations on the Urban Fringe
Plan and Bellingham's Final Urban Growth Area.
15. Zoned residential densities within the current Bellingham city limits range from two to
over 40 units per acre.. 48% of the land area within the city limits is zoned for single
family residential, 19 o multi - family, 10% industrial, 6% commercial, 2 % institutional and
15% public.
16. Current land uses within the Bellingham Interim Urban Growth Area include 60% zoned
for residential development at densities ranging from one to 18 units per acre. Other
zoned areas include 1% open space, 3% commercial, 19% industrial, 4% planned unit
development with a mix of residential, commercial and industrial uses and 13% for airport
operations.
17. Land within Bellingham's Interim Urban Growth Area is currently characterized by urban
growth in that it contains buildings, structures and impermeable surfaces to such a degree
that it is incompatible with the primary use of the area for the production of food,
City of Bellingham
Findings for Recommended I UGAs
Page 6
agricultural products and mining resources. This area has existing capacity for public
facilities and services to secure urban development. There are no agricultural or resource
lands within this area.
Based on the above findings the Council makes the following conclusion: .
The projected 20 -year growth for Bellingham cannot be accommodated within the existing
city limits. The most logical area to first locate additional urban growth to secure
Bellingham's projected population is the current Urban Service Area, which is already
characterized by urban development and is currently capable of being served by public
facilities and services.
City of Blaine
"THE PEACE ARCH CITY"
BUS: [3801332-B311
FA <: (360) 332.8330 344 °H" STREET - P.O. BOX 490 - BLAINE, WA 98231-0490
January 5, 1996
To: Vickie Woods, Whatcom County Planning
Exhibit. B -2
Past -W Fax Note 7671
Day-
#Q►
From
comept
Co. :
Phone a 3�7 �i 1Z
Phone p y `cG j 1 Irk
Fax* 7�00�e.���
From: Sylvia Goodwin, City of Blaine
RE: Finaings for Interim Urban Growth Area Ordinance
FINDINGS
1 _ The City of Blaine adopted a new Comprehensive plan in August, 1995, which meets the
requirements of the Growth Managerrterut, Act. This plan includes an analysis of land supply ruxd
demand, an Urban Growth Area to meet the projected needs for residential and business
development, and provisions for transportation, public services and utilities to serve the projected
population and business development within the Urban Growth Area,
2. The City of Blaine Comprehensive Plan projects and plans for a population of 6,700 by the year
2010 and 7,800 by the year 2015. This will create a demand for an additional 1,893 housing units
within the City of Blaine by the year 2015. The Blaine Comprehensive Flan also projects a
demand for an addWonul 160 acres of commercial land outsidc of the currCnt City Limim
3. The City of Blaine's location on the Canadian border, and the public land requirements of two
international border crossings and supporting federal facilities create a demand for public land
which is considerably larger than the demand for public land in an average community.
The City of Blaine and Birch Bay area are popular tourism destinations, which create a demand
for a large percentage of seasonal accommodations and housing which is not related to population
or employment projections. Tho City of Blaine cstimatcs that as much as 25% to 3070, of the
housing in the Blaine/ Birch Bay areal is occupied by people who are not U.S Citizens or are not
counted as residents in as residents in U.S Census counts. The resort retirement character of the
community also results in the private purchase of retirement lots for future development, which
increases the demand for residential land,
5. Approximately 20°10 of the land within the City of Blaine and Blaine Urban Growth Area is
constrained by wetlands, stream corridors and aquifer recharge areas which will impact the density
Of future &ve]oP1tien1-
CONCLUSIONS
The projected development, land use and development patterns, border location and natural features
of the land in the Blaine area create a demand fnr an Urban Gmwth .Area of 8,325 acres for the City
of B laine. The Urban Growth A= proposed in the City of Blaine Comprehensive Plan is a logical
location for the growth projected by the City of Blaine.
Exhibit. b -4.
City of Lynden
Findings forRecommended IUGAs
City of Lynden .
Information on which the City's Urban Growth Boundary is based
The following is a compilation of the facts and information that has been used as a basis for
the City of Lynden's recommended urban growth boundary (UGA).
RCW 36.70A.110 requires that all counties establish urban growth areas that are to
include each city within the county, and are to be of sufficient size as to accommodate the
projected growth within county for the succeeding twenty year time period. The City of
Lynden has taken steps to assist Whatcom County in meeting these requirements to
ensure that Lynden's issues and land needs are adequately addressed. This participation
has taken place both on an inter -local basis between Whatcom County and the City of
Lynden and as part of the Whatcom County Growth Management Oversite Committee.
2. Whatcom County, in association with the cities, has developed population projections for
the succeeding twenty year period: these local projections have been validated by the
projections developed by the Office of Financial Management in 1995. It has been
determined that the population of the City of Lynden will comprise approximately 6.5%
of Whatcom County's total population. This establishes Lynden's 2010 population at
12,513 and the 2015 population at 13,536.
3. The County -Wide planning policies, approved by Whatcom County and the cities within
the county, require that jurisdictions include land area within the urban growth boundaries
sufficient to accommodate 150% of the projected growth. Therefore the City of Lynden
has included sufficient land area within the City's urban growth area for a 2010 population
of 15,915.
4. The City of Lynden completed an environmental review of four alternative urban growth
areas and adopted a preferred alternative based on the results of the environmental
evaluation, the goals of the Growth Management Act, the County -Wide Planning Policies
and the goals and policies of the Lynden Comprehensive Plan. The preferred alternative
was favored by the community, Planning Commission and City Council as the alternative
that best balanced the land supply needs determined by growth, with the community's
established character and values and the preservation of Whatcom County's agricultural
resource lands.
The City of Lynden has completed a capital facilities plan that demonstrates the City's
ability to provide services for the projected population, and the preferred urban growth
area, at an adopted level of service. This plan references required improvements,
identifies funding sources and makes provisions for the re- evaluation of the adopted level
of service should that become necessary.
6. The City of Lynden has completed a land supply analysis to evaluate the proposed urban
growth area. This analysis was updated with the revised population projections provided
by the Office of Financial M; anagement. This analysis shows that Lynden has the gross
infill capacity for 1976 dwelling units within the city limits, and a potential demand for
443 7 dwelling units. The residential capacity of the proposed urban growth boundary
(incorporated and unincorporated) is estimated to be 4127 dwelling units with a density
City of Lynden
Findings forRecommended IUGAs
Page 2
range of six to eight units per acre. The units that have not been addressed in the supply
end of the calculation will be included in the urban growth area based on density transfers
from the rural areas of Whatcom County.
7. In agreement with Whatcom County and the County -Wide Planning Policies, the City of
Lynden has included sufficient land within the recommended urban growth boundary to
provide an opportunity for Lynden to develop as a viable economic center. This
allocation is based on the ratio of residential land to commercial/industrial land being
maintained at 2:1. Through the adoption of Lynden's development regulations, the city
has developed a zoning designation based solely on agriculturally related businesses. This
will provide relief from the pressure to locate these types of businesses on prime
agricultural land outside of urban growth areas.
8. In accordance with the goals of the Growth Management Act and RCW 36.70A110(3),
County -Wide Planning Policies and the goals and policies of Lynden's Comprehensive
Plan, the City of Lynden has recommended urban growth areas to be developed primarily
in areas characterized by urban level zoning and previous urban designations by Whatcom
County. Lynden is surrounded by agricultural resource lands and future growth will
precipitate the conversion of some agricultural land to urban uses.
9. The City of Lynden, with assistance from the Lynden Futures Task Force, has included
numerous opportunities for public input throughout the development of the
Comprehensive Plan and urban growth boundaries. This public participation included an
extensive values survey and several town hall meetings sponsored by the Lynden Futures
Task Force, a group of community leaders and citizens, who sought to establish a values
baseline for utilization by the City during the comprehensive planning process; an
intensive "visioning" process undertaken jointly by the City of Lynden and the Lynden
Futures Task Force to involve additional community members in developing a "snapshot
of the Lynden community to hold as a standard for the future-.and over 30 public
meetings, workshops and hearings held by the Planning Commission and City Council.
10. Based on the above referenced information, Lynden has recommended interim urban
growth areas as shown on the map referenced as Exhibit
Exhibit. B -3
SUGGESTED FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
FOR THE CITY OF FERNDALE PROPOSED
INTERIM URBAN GROWTH AREA BOUNDARIES
January, 1996
SUGGESTED FINDINGS:
1. The Ferndale IUGA was developed to exclude resource lands to the
greatest degree possible.
a. Approximately .20 acres or i/2 of one percent of the
total land area included in the proposed IUGA is
designated as agricultural land by Whatcom County.
b. No lands designated as forestry lands by Whatcom County
were included in the proposed Ferndale IUGA.
C. No lands designated for mineral resource production by
Whatcom County were included in the proposed Ferndale
IUGA.
2. The Ferndale IUGA was developed with consideration given to future
needs for industrial and commercial uses.
a. Areas within the proposed IUGA that contain existing
commercial or industrial land uses and /or existing
commercial or industrial zoning designations will be
retained for additional commercial and industrial
development.
b. Areas within the proposed IUGA that are near the
freeway, railroad and /or freeway interchanges are
considered to be logical locations for future commercial
and industrial development.
C. The majority of the land needed for commercial uses is
already located within Ferndale. Analysis completed by
the City of Ferndale indicates that a total of 35% of
land within existing city limits is zoned for commercial
purposes. In 2015, the City projects that 18.3% of the
total area included in the proposed IUGA would be zoned
for commercial uses.
d. The percentage of land devoted to industrial uses would
remain approximately the same. Presently, 12.2% of
property in existing city limits is zoned for industrial
purposes. The City anticipates that 15.8% of land
located within the IUGA would be zoned for industrial
uses.
e. The percentage of land devoted to residential uses would
increase from the 47.6% of the area included in the
existing city limits to 63% of the total area included
in the Ferndale IUGA.
3. The proposed Ferndale IUGA is consistent with local planning efforts
to date. Draft transportation, housing, stormwater, and wastewater
plans have been prepared by the City and are based on the population
projections and land use projections used in the development of the
proposed IUGA. Additionally, the Ferndale School District is
working to complete a draft capital facilities plan based on the
proposed IUGA and population forecasts.
4. The proposed Ferndale IUGA is largely comprised of areas with urban
zoning and /or urban uses.
a. The City of Ferndale has calculated that 640 of the
unincorporated portions of the proposed IUGA consist of
urban type zoning, including the following County zoning
designations: Urban Reserve 3, Urban Reserve 4, Light
Impact Industrial, General Commercial and Tourist
Commercial.
b. The remaining 360 of the proposed IUGA is comprised of
RR1 and R5A. These properties are located east of
Ferndale city limits and were included due to their
close proximity to existing city boundaries and the
presence of urban style residential development within
portions of these areas.
5. The population projections used to develop Ferndale's proposed IUGA
were based on the population projections and market factor
considerations explicitly listed in Section B6 of the County Wide
Planning Policies. These projections are consistent with the
population forecasts developed by the Washington State Office of
Financial Management.
6. The City designed its proposed UGA to avoid areas that are
designated as critical areas.
a. A total of 75 acres, or only 1.80 of Ferndale's proposed
IUGA is designated as part of a 100 year floodplain.
b. Analysis completed by the City of Ferndale assumes that
stream corridors and wetlands located within the
proposed IUGA will remain in open space.
C. Areas containing a high percentage of wetlands, as
identified in the National Wetland Inventory Maps, were
excluded from the proposed IUGA. (These wetland areas
are generally located to the south of Ferndale.)
d. Ferndale's analysis is based on the assumption that the
proposed IUGA contains only widely scattered, isolated
areas of steep slopes. Consequently, no adjustments
were made in the formation of the proposed IUGA for
topographic constraints.
7. Analysis completed by Ferndale indicates that infill of vacant and
underutilized land located within existing city limits would satisfy
approximately 390 of the 2015 demand for dwelling units within the
proposed IUGA.
a. Ferndale assumed that vacant residential land would be
developed to its maximum density permitted under
existing zoning regulations.
b. Ferndale assumed that the demand for manufactured
housing (756 new units by the year 2015, based on the
city's draft housing plan) would be satisfied through
development of manufactured housing parks within the
city's current supply of vacant commercially zoned land.
C. Analysis completed by Ferndale indicates that
residential densities within existing city limits would
rise from 1.7 dwelling units per residential acre in
1995 to 3.9 dwelling units per residential acre in the
year 2015; an increase of 129 %.
d. Ferndale assumed that densities within the
unincorporated portions of the proposed IUGA would be
less than densities in the existing city limits. An
average density of 2.6 dwelling units per residentially
zoned acre is predicted. When critical areas, public
spaces and rights -of -way are considered, net density
within the unincorporated portions of the proposed IUGA
is predicted to be 4.3 dwelling units per acre.
e. Overall density, including both incorporated and
unincorporated portions of the proposed IUGA is
predicted to be 3.09 dwelling units per residentially
zoned acre in the year 2015.
8. The proposed Ferndale IUGA is separated from any other cities
proposed IUGA and provides an opportunity for separation from other
cities within Whatcom County.
9. Areas within Ferndale's proposed IUGA exhibit some characteristics
of urban growth.
a. Some public facilities which provide an urban level of
service have already been extended in portions of the
proposed IUGA located east of the current city limits.
i. Sewer mains have been extended east of the
city limits on Smith Road.
ii. Water mains, capable of providing fire flow
have been extended to several neighborhoods
in the area.
b. Some public services which provide urban levels of
service are currently provided in the proposed IUGA
located east of the current city limits.
i. Whatcom Transit Authority provides some bus
service in the area.
ii. Whatcom County 'Fire District #7 maintains
a fire station that is manned by
professional staff on Northwest Road.
C. Some existing neighborhoods in the area east of the city
limits consist of lot sizes that are urban in nature.
SUGGESTED CONCLUSIONS:
1. The proposed Ferndale IUGA is consistent with the County Wide
Planning Policies.
2. The proposed Ferndale IUGA is based on population projections that
are consistent with the 1995 population projections issued by the
Washington State Office of Financial Management and are coordinated
with the projections used by Whatcom'County.
3. The analysis prepared by the City of Ferndale provides adequate
justification for the boundaries included in the proposed IUGA.
4. Ferndale's proposed IUGA is consistent with the requirements of the
Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.110(3)) related to the designation
of urban growth areas.
5. Ferndale's proposed IUGA will result in no significant impact to
identified resource lands in Whatcom County.
6. Ferndale's proposed IUGA has been developed to avoid floodplain and
wetland areas to the greatest extent possible.
7. Ferndale's proposed IUGA is consistent with local Growth Management
planning efforts undertaken by the City, the Ferndale School
District and Whatcom County.
Exhibit b -b.
Cities of Everson and Nooksack
Findings for Recommended IUGAs
Cities of Everson and Nooksack
Information on which the Cities' Interim Urban Growth Boundary is based
Whereas, the analysis of the proposed UGA for the City of Everson in the Draft Whatcom
County Comprehensive Plan indicates that the net residential density in Everson will increase from
1.26 dwelling units per acre to 3.5 units per acre in the interval from 1990 to 2014, a 177 percent
increase; and
Whereas, the analysis of the proposed UGA for the City of Nooksack in the Draft
Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan indicates that the residential density in Nooksack will
increase from 0.85 dwelling units per acre to 1.68 units per acre in the interval from 1990 to
2014, a 98 percent increase.
EXHIBIT C
ADOPTION SCHEDULE FOR WHATCOM COUNTY FINAL URBAN GROWTH
AREA BOUNDARIES
PLANNING COMMISSION
March, 1996 Complete Land Use Chapter Review, including Final Urban Growth
Area Boundaries
April, 1996 Forward Recommendations on Entire Plan to County Council
COUNTY COUNCIL
May, 1996 Schedule Hearings on Planning Commission Recommendation
June - August, 1996 Review and Discuss Planning Commission Recommendation
September, 1996 Adopt Final Urban Growth Area Boundaries
r -AMUII v I
January 16, 1996
PLANNING COMMISSION SCHEDULE FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE COMP PLAN
Meetings will be held at: Northwest Annex
5280 Northwest Road, Bellingham, WA 98226
DATE TIME TOPICS
Thursday, January 25 7:00 Finish Transportation Chapter
Finish Natural Resources Chapter
Begin Capital Facilities Chapter
Thursday, February 8 1:30 Finish Capital Facilities Chapter
7:00 Land Use Chapter
• Overall Land Use
• UGAs - Cities
Thursday, February 22 7:00 Land Use Chapter continues
• UGAs - Cities
Thursday, March 14 1:30 Land Use Chapter continues
• UGAs - Unincorporated Areas
7:00 Finish Land Use Chapter
• Rural Lands
• Land Use Map Descriptors
• Open Space
• Essential Public Facilities
• Action Plan
Thursday, March 28 7:00 Introduction Chapter
General Map Review
Thursday, April 11 1:30 General Comments
Wrap Up of Everything
7:00 Prioritize Action Items
Thursday, April 25 7:00
AUENC:Y REPORT January 16, 1996
camgc:fl%] File RetlUGA3.AR\ Page 1
WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
AGENCY REPORT
IN THE MATTER OF ADOPTING INTERIM URBAN GROWTH )
AREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ) FINDINGS, REASONS
ACT AS AMENDED ) AND MOTIONS
WHEREAS, on November 9, 1994, the Growth Management Hearings Board ordered the County
to establish IUGAs at municipal boundaries that were not to be extended without proper analysis of
current data and without appropriate public participation; and
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Hearings Board, further ordered the County to adopt
development regulations that prohibit new urban growth in areas outside properly established IUGAs;
and
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Hearings Board ruled on February 23, 1995, that the
County had taken no steps to rectify the noncompliance and that the original noncompliance continued;
and
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Hearings Board issued a second compliance order on
December 28, 1995, remanding the matter to Whatcom County with direction to achieve compliance
by January 19, 1996; and
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Hearings Board set a further hearing on January 30, 1996,
to address whether the County IUGA ordinance should be found invalid, pursuant to the standards found
in RCW 36.70A.300(2); and
WHEREAS, the representatives of the County Council and the County Executive met with officials
of the Washington State Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development and agreed to
work toward compliance with the order of the Growth Management Hearings Board; and
WHEREAS, the County Council, at a public meeting on January 4, 1996, expressed its intent
to comply with the Growth Management Hearing's Board order to achieve compliance in the matter of
IUGAs by adopting new IUGAs; and
WHEREAS, the draft Comprehensive Plan proposes final UGAs; and
WHEREAS, RCW 36.70.795 establishes a procedure for Counties to adopt interim official
controls; and
WHEREAS, in order to meet the date designated by the Growth Hearings Board, the Council
deemed it necessary to proceed with adopting an interim official control to establish new IUGAs based
on proposed final UGAs in the draft Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission at a public meeting on January 11, 1996 considered the
issue and prepared a report for the County Council on the proposal to adopt the draft Comprehensive
Plan proposed final UGAs as new interim UGAs.
AGENCY REPORT January 16, 1996
camgc:f1 \6] File Ref:lUGA3.AR\ Page 2
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR ACTION
1. A quorum of Commission members was present during the hearings and subsequent work
sessions.
2. The Planning Commission generally concurred with the staff FINDINGS and CONCLUSIONS as
presented below with changes to Finding #25 noted with red -line and strike -out shadings.
3. At the regular meeting: on January 11, 1996, the Planning Commission voted
unanimously to forward this report on tol Council.
Findings
1. Whatcom County has an extensive growth management based comprehensive planning history
including the adoption of 1979 County Planning Goals and the completion of ten subarea plans.
2. The draft Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan (Plan), completed November 17, 1994, includes
an analysis of urban growth areas that is based on the proposed boundaries by the cities of
Whatcom County. The Plan recommends final Urban Growth Areas that considers the in -fill
capacity of each city, twenty year growth needs, the in -fill capacity of proposed urban growth
areas, and the resulting densities. The analysis is based on the year 2010 as a target year, but
includes discussion of city projected needs and boundaries for a range of years from 2010 to
2015.
3. The Plan is based on a population projection of 189,100 in the year 2010, as adopted in the
County -wide Planning Policies (CWPPs).
4. Subsequent to adoption of the CWPPs and the completion of the Plan, the Office of Financial
Management issued revised population figures for the county. The new numbers projected a
mid -range population of 192,506 for the year 2010 and a mid -range population of 208,242 in
2015.
5. The City of Bellingham's findings support proposed interim UGA slightly smaller than the area
proposed in the draft Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan.
6. The City of Blaine's findings support a proposed interim urban growth area consistent with the
one proposed in the draft Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, and includes a conditional area
identified as a water resource protection area. Policy 2R -1 in the Plan requires adoption of a
Critical Aquifer Recharge Protection Plan as a prerequisite for inclusion of the conditional area
as part of Blaine's urban growth area.
7. The City of Ferndale's findings support a proposed interim urban growth area slightly different
from the one proposed in the draft Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. The findings support
Ferndale's UGA as a whole, but do not specifically address the differences from the proposed
Final UGAs in the Plan.
8. The Cities of Everson, Lynden and Nooksack's findings support an interim urban growth area
the same as the one proposed in the Plan.
9. The City of Sumas did not submit separate findings supporting a new interim urban growth area.
The Plan indicates that from 1990 to 2013, the residential density will decrease from 1.31 to
AGENCY REPORT January 16, 1996
camgc:f1\6] File Ref:lUGA3.AR\ Page 3
.96 units per residentially zoned acre, a 73% decrease. The City of Sumas is surrounded by
floodplain. Goal 2W states that Sumas should set an Urban Growth Area which accommodates
future growth needs and recognizes the unique constraints imposed by flooding of the Sumas
and Nooksack Rivers. The County proposed UGA includes a conditional area suggested by
Sumas as being inappropriately classified as floodplain. Policy 2W -2 requires completion and
adoption of a flood study for the area due east of Sumas prior to inclusion in the final urban
growth boundary.
10. The Plan categorizes County unincorporated UGAs as follows:
A) Areas which are already platted and will be allowed to continue to build out, but
will not be encouraged to expand;
B) Areas which are already platted and /or presently have zoning and adequate
provision for utilities which could allow future expansion;
C) Existing or proposed major industrial areas which, because of specific location
needs, are not contiguous to cities; and
D) Hamlets or small unincorporated urban areas with partial services which will be
designated and encouraged to grow subject to need and when a full range of
services are provided.
11. RCW 36.70A.110(3) suggest that urban growth should be located in the following priority:
A) Areas already characterized by urban growth that have adequate public facilities.
B) Areas already characterized by urban growth that will be served adequately by a
combination of both existing public facilities and .services and any additional
needed public facilities that are provided by either public or private sources.
C) Other urban growth areas.
12. The Planning Division's Staff Report, dated February 8, 1995, provided analysis of the capability
of water service provision to the County's Unincorporated UGAs and indicated that all urban
growth areas should include some strategy for the delivery of water services.
13. The proposed County Unincorporated UGAs were developed as a result of an extensive public
process specifically articulated in the Visioning Value Statements and reflected throughout the
Land Use Chapter of the Plan and were evaluated against the Growth Management Act
requirements.
14. The proposed County Unincorporated Residential UGAs reflect existing development patterns
which are a result of the unique location of Whatcom County adjacent to the Canadian border.
Large resort areas exist for Canadian citizens, making it difficult to predict market demands and
population projections.
15. The proposed County Unincorporated Industrial Areas include sufficient land area to cover a
reasonable market supply factor but do not propose any additional areas.
16.' The majority of developable acres within County Unincorporated UGAs are located in the Cherry
Point area which may be considered as a major industrial development in Final UGAs.
17. The existing pattern of zoning, representing prior zoning commitments to residents was an
important consideration in setting urban growth boundaries.
18. The Plan, including the proposed UGAs, developed in conjunction with and in response to a
lengthy public involvement process that included the creation of citizen committees, a Fair Booth
at the August 1993 Northwest Washington Fair, sixteen Town Hall meetings, 12,000 written
surveys, a statistically -valid phone survey, development of Community Value Statements and
Land Use Alternatives, and an additional fourteen Town Hall meetings.
AGENCY REPORT January 16, 1996
cam\[c:f1\6] File Ref:lUGA3.AR\ Page 4
19. RCW 36.70A.060 requires Counties to assure the conservation of agricultural, forest, and
mineral resource lands through the adoption of designations and development regulations.
20. Outside of proposed urban growth areas, the County has 86,619 acres of agricultural land
designation, restricting densities to one dwelling unit per 40 acres; 187,552 acres of forestry
designation with development regulations prohibiting residential development; 33,703 acres of
forestry designation, restricting development to one dwelling unit per twenty acres; and 1,200
acres of mineral resource land designation, restricting development to one unit per twenty acres.
21. Inside proposed urban growth areas, there are 1,759 acres of land presently zoned for
agriculture, no areas designated as forestry resource lands, and 120 acres of land designated as
mineral resource.
22. Whatcom County Code, Chapter 16, adopted in 1979, contains Planning Goals for Whatcom
County which require concentration of urban growth, elimination of sprawl, protection of
resource lands and rural character. Chapter 16 also requires adoption of land use regulations to
implement these policies. Title 20, Whatcom County Zoning Code, was revised specifically to
implement the Planning Goals.
23. RCW 36.70A 070 (5) requires Counties to include a rural element which permits land uses that
are compatible with the rural character of such lands and provides for a variety of rural densities.
24. Outside of proposed urban growth areas, the County presently has 26,834 acres zoned Rural Ten
Acre (131 OA), restricting densities to one unit per ten acres; 77,047 acres zoned Rural Five Acres
(R5A), restricting densities to one unit per five acres; 5,069 acres zoned Rural Two Acre (132A),
restricting densities to one unit per two acres; 824 acres zoned Rural Residential One (13131),
restricting densities to one unit per acre; 3,966 acres zoned Rural Residential Two (13132),
restricting densities to one unit per acre unless either public water or sewer is available, in which
case two units per acre is allowed; 542 acres zoned Rural Residential Three (11113), restricting
densities to one unit per acre unless public water or sewer is available, in which case three units
per acre are allowed; and 2,612 acres zoned Rural Residential Island (RRI), restricting densities
to one unit per five acres when located in an aquifer recharge area and one dwelling unit per
three acres when not in an aquifer recharge area.
25. Planning Commission and Council work schedules to complete the comprehensive plan, most
likely, will prohibit an further rezones from. revs u 5' <; i aj''> o i fi v . ..
before adoption of final UGA boundaries.
Conclusions
The analysis of proposed final UGAs included in the draft Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan
(Plan), in conjunction with the further analysis prepared for adoption of this ordinance, is based
on population projections, and market factors consistent with the requirements of the Growth
Management Act and is sufficient to meet the land capacity analysis required by the act.
2. The land capacity analysis findings submitted by the cities, and further findings by the County
support the size and location of the Interim Urban Growth Areas for cities. The Interim Urban
Growth Area adopted by this ordinance for the City of Bellingham is smaller than included in the
proposed Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. The Interim Urban Growth Area adopted by this
ordinance for the City of Ferndale is the same as that cited in the proposed Whatcom County
Comprehensive Plan, although Ferndale proposed a slightly different boundary.
3. The land capacity analysis and the policy basis of the Plan support the size and location of the
County unincorporated Urban Growth Areas (UGAs).
AGENCY REPOdT January 16, 1996
cam\lc:f1 \6] File Ref.IUGA3.AR\ Page 5
4. There has been sufficient public process to meet the requirements of the Growth Management
Act in considering the proposed final urban growth areas of the Plan. This process has included
the Comprehensive Plan Visioning Process, four public hearings, and multiple work sessions.
5. The existing Whatcom County Development regulations limit uses sufficiently to prevent new
urban development from occurring outside logically established IUGAs until the Plan is completed.
WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Gerald Landcastle, Chair Vickie Hardin Woods, Secretary
Date: % — �` 7 2z/,
Commissioners present at January 11, 1996 meeting: Dave Ernst, Clare Fogelsong, Danna Beech,
Richard Gilda, David Simpson, and Jerry Landcastle
Commissioners present for Vote: Ayes: Fogelsong, Beech, Gilda, Simpson, Landcastle.
Prepared by: Vickie Hardin Woods
¢ � ___ ___
O
Pd ...
e O t f yon
° Z Emmet
"
t
Pd autj de pd uain Y' z
c pd uotsstW
cc
H I
• � 1
° c U
U
U N��y
cc L Q I V
¢ to 1� 1 I •
° - 1 Y p
cc
E M 41 I T
^4 U
= ° ' c Pd wal�loaW
z 19
cr
'Pd G
O L
S
Newe4al y
00
U
r ,
Pd uooN
S i Pd poomg4JON r ¢
cc A Q
a 0 y Pd apun7
>y
_ v
t I Pd i 41 i v °; ti 0
t a Y v
w cc
o � L rz • pd� uFe�uno�
v
W,/// D a° \
i
F� ssed 4 JON
--------------
U
—
-
Pd IueO
"
El ;uejga-I
�d ---
--
--- ---- - - - - --
(
pd UTMp009
_ .. -.
I I
;
u+
a
Ei
a
¢
I
a
-Cc
N
a
C
�.
N
c
o
'Pd saloO IeO.
J
.
¢
¢
_____________
N
Cr
Pd. .
N
U
S
¢ � ___ ___
O
Pd ...
e O t f yon
° Z Emmet
"
t
Pd autj de pd uain Y' z
c pd uotsstW
cc
H I
• � 1
° c U
U
U N��y
cc L Q I V
¢ to 1� 1 I •
° - 1 Y p
cc
E M 41 I T
^4 U
= ° ' c Pd wal�loaW
z 19
cr
'Pd G
O L
S
Newe4al y
00
U
r ,
Pd uooN
S i Pd poomg4JON r ¢
cc A Q
a 0 y Pd apun7
>y
_ v
t I Pd i 41 i v °; ti 0
t a Y v
w cc
o � L rz • pd� uFe�uno�
v
W,/// D a° \
I � -
I
I I
� I I • I _ i I I
�I
i I •I
I I I
� I I •I
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ell—, Mll
SO
OVA
I i
�I
. I I • I ••I
• I .I
I I I
,I
t 1 irm yyrrn iiZoll
% A
owl
pg
-
•I � I I I ,I
,• I I I \11
i I �
I I
I
I I.
�I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I ,.I
I - /
6ES JJS ueTpTjaw apTnE)
.............
SIR
,
Ford
O'll
All,
Vnew
-
" w-
WAO,
- - it %�0,,�:�
— — —,
� -- -- - - -
�
—
6ES JJS ueTpTjaw apTnE)
a.
"
b aueJga-1
"
----------- _---------
________
Pb.utmpoos
¢
a
a
ob
v
Cr 13
' S�
a64 - m
"
O
d
�
'Pb s8100 -M
-- -
'0
¢
--- --- - - - ---
a
-- -- - -¢
I>
- - - - --
--- ---
- --
-- -- --- - - - - --
¢
I
O
O
N
.. -Pb AOeSAOON
D
O
Ao
°
O ,
Z
Emmecyo
tr✓/
i
�
py our-I de it
I
Y' f
z
v
¢
Pb uotsscw
H
G
°
1,1
y
Y
J
111
(7
i°
CO
Y
T
Q
1
E
Q
O O
^
z .o
¢
New - ;oig
��
c
v
-- - -
- - -- --
•pb uoON
Pb
POOMUaJON
D
¢
¢
Y
G1
O
V
LO
r
y°+
n
n
N >
¢
y Pb
apun-1
-.
'
a
+
1
'Pb Ia ?Ulf
- ---- --
--- - - - ---
°
U
n
x
¢
w
`
If
C�. •pb uTeaunoj
°
CL
i
i Pd SW ^
I �
¢ Pd 4s"A
o _
o
-
---------------------
- - - - -- - -- - + r --------------- +-- - - - - - --
Lo
. l
o s
O r
0
i
wI �r
¢ a C7 �N . cc
v D o a
' z
4- - - - -- -----------------------------------------
cc
sewnS ; L
aaz (0
c
k( sa ' Pd ssed
A� ,
6 � '
--- - - - - --
�6a ( Cl
i
P8 LI. L
H a�
i
i
�. 6 dS uosTijeg
6• ¢ � Cl
co
Z, o
C i (o 6, (a
ai c
r___________
r. I PH— NOeSNOON
J ¢
C I L 'Pd uosuemS
o
.,
? 1 e.7 ZCOSz/
Vo
:4'" `C
1 � �.'� �� \ . .