Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutord1989-092FILE REF: 08- 89:CZTM INTRODUCED BY. • Consent _ +. PROPOSED BY. PLANNING DATE. 10 -5 -89 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .1 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 ORDINANCE NO. 89 -92 AN ORDINANCE IN THE MATTER OF READOPTION OF THE LAKE WHATCOM SUBAREA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS AND TITLE 20 ZONING DISTRICTS FOR THE URBAN DESIGNATIONS AND ZONES IN THE SUBAREA, UPDATING THE ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS AND CLARIFYING ON THE ZONING MAP THE DENSITY LIMITATIONS AND TRANSFER OPPORTUNITIES IN THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY ZONE DISTRICTS AND MODIFYING WCC 20.22.252 TO MORE CLEARLY REFLECT THE DENSITY RESTRICTIONS IN THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY DISTRICTS WHEREAS, when the Lake Whatcom Subarea planning and Title 20 zoning were adopted by ordinances 82- 56 and 82 -58 the urban plan designations and zones were adopted on an interim basis only, pending further study of the watershed; and WHEREAS, these designations and zones were extended by ordinances 84 -3 and 84-4 to July 1, 1985, because the water studies had not been completed; and WHEREAS, there was no follow -up after the watershed studies were completed apparently allowing these plan designations and zones to revert to the 1970 plan designations and interim zoning; and WHEREAS, upon discovery of this problem Council passed emergency ordinance No. 89 -73 to retain Title 20 zoning for 60 days until the Planning Commission could review the Lake Whatcom Subarea planning and zoning in light of the watershed studies and additional environmental review; and WHEREAS, SEPA review has been completed and a Determination of Nonsignificance was issued by the Deputy SEPA Official on September 28, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Planning staff reviewed the Lake Whatcom Water Quality Protection Study completed by URS Consultants in 1985 and the Lake Whatcom Watershed Management Plan completed by the Institute for Watershed Studies, Western Washington University, In 1987, and concluded no evidence existed for modifying the planning and zoning as proposed in 1982; and WHEREAS, it was concluded that the zoning map designations needed to be updated to conform to current nomenclature and that the zoning maps and text need to be modified to more clearly reflect the density transfer provisions for the Sudden Valley area as originally established; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.70.590 legal notice was published in the Westside Record Journal on September 6, 1989 and in the Bellingham Herald on September 9, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 19, 1989, and after presentations from the Planning staff and Prosecutor's office, and after due deliberation, concurred with the staff findings, conclusions and recommendations as modified at the hearing; and WHEREAS, the Council held a public meeting on October 19, 1989, to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL 1. The Lake Whatcom Subarea Comprehensive Plan is readopted in Its entirety as proposed in 1982 including subsequent amendments. This includes the urban designations which were only adopted as an interim basis by ordinance 82 -56. 2. The Title 20 zoning is readopted in its entirety for the Lake Whatcom Subarea as proposed in 1982 including subsequent amendments. This includes the urban zone districts which were only adopted on an interim basis by ordinance 82 -58. ' FILE REF: 08-89:( 'M Pa.9e 2 0 3. The zoning map designations for the Lake Whatcom Subarea are hereby updated to read as follows: the 1 Urban Residential (UR) zone is designated as Urban Residential -three units per acre (UR -3); the Urban 2 Residential Medium Density (URMD) zone is abbreviated as (URM). 3 4. The zoning maps for the Lake Whatcom Subarea are modified by footnoting the Urban Residential Medium 4 Density zones in the Sudden Valley area to clarify that the base densities in accordance with the Lake 5 Whatcom Subarea Comprehensive Plan Urban Reserve Policy 1.05.2 are three (3) or eight (8) units per acre 6 depending on the location, and that with density transfers the maximum density is ten (10) units per acre. 7 5. The Whatcom County Code, Chapter 20.22.252(2) is hereby amended to read: 8 "Where the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan policies call for restricting 9 densities and allow for the transfer of densities, and where the provisions of WCC 10 20.89 are met, then the maximum allowable density shall be equal to that established 11 by the comprehensive plan; PROVIDED that public sewer and water is available." 12 6. The Council finds the public health, safety and general welfare are promoted by this change. 13 7. The Council adopts the following findings and conclusions developed by the staff and the Planning 14 Commission: 15 II FINDINGS 16 A. When the Lake Whatcom area subarea planning and Title 20 zoning were adopted the urban designations 17 were adopted with a sunset clause because of potential impact of the zoning densities on public drinking 18 water and because a lake restoration study was underway that might result in some conclusive information 19 '0 B. The deadline of July 31, 1984, in the original ordinances had to be extended because the restoration study .1 could not be completed in time. 22 C. A new deadline of July 1, 1985, was established by ordinance. This deadline also could not be met; 23 however, apparently an interpretation was made that the zoning and planning became permanent at that 24 date without requiring further formal action. 25 D. The original zoning and planning established a density transfer provision for certain areas in Sudden Valley. 26 There are problems with the Implementation of this transfer, and In researching the history of it the question 27 of having firm zoning in place arose. 28 E. The language in the original ordinance indicates certain steps are required prior to establishing subarea 29 planning and Title 20 zoning on a permanent basis. These steps include: 30 (1) completion of a lake restoration study; 31 (2) further environmental review that would presumably use the information from the study; and 32 (3) further formal action. 33 F. Studies have been completed and accepted by the Council Including a Lake Whatcom Water Quality 34 Protection Study by URS Corporation and a Lake Whatcom Watershed Management Plan by the Institute 35 for Watershed Studies, Western Washington University, with assistance from the Whatcom County Planning 36 Department and a local Lake Whatcom Advisory Committee. 37 G. These reports indicate a number of problems regarding the watershed and make a series of 38 recommendations including further monitoring but do not indicate a need for planning or zoning changes. 39 H. Separate environmental review is underway as a parallel process that does not indicate the need for zoning 40 modifications. 41 I. A serious restudy of the area could indicate the need for change and individual environmental review of 42 particular projects might require mitigation including lower densities. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ,7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 FILE REF: 08 -89:( M Page 3 J. Ordinance 85 -21 adopted in April 1985 corrects the density transfer policy in the subarea plan. Adding a notation on the zoning maps to flag the assigned densities should correct the density transfer problems. K. Some of the zoning map designations used in 1982 are obsolete. CONCLUSIONS The Lake Whatcom Subarea is a multi -use area including a water supply for the majority of county residents. Development in the area needs careful monitoring. Additional studies either underway or proposed need to be completed and implemented. Because of both the problems and the pressures, the subarea may be a logical next candidate for review of subarea planning after the Urban Fringe Subarea. However, at this point there is no evidence to Indicate that the zoning and planning as basically completed in 1982 should not be readopted with minor modifications to update the nomenclature for several map designations. The density transfer provisions that have problems as originally adopted should also be corrected so they will function as envisioned. 4. 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. PASSED this 19th day of October '1989. ATTEST: Clerk of the Council AS TO FORM: Civil Deputy Prosficuting Attorney WHATCOM CQLkNTY COUNCIL JATCOM COY, WA$kiINGTON Donald (APPROVED () VETOED �u Al VC.,, �_ Z'E Shirley Van Zan n, Coun xecutive Date *r September 27, 1989 Agency Report File Ref: 08- 89:CZTM WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING AGENCY REPORT IN THE MATTER OF READOPTION OF THE LAKE WHATCOM ) SUBAREA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS AND ) TITLE 20 ZONING DISTRICTS FOR THE URBAN DESIG- NATIONS AND ZONES IN THE SUBAREA, UPDATING THE ) REASONS, FINDINGS ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS AND CLARIFYING ON THE ) AND MOTIONS ZONING MAP THE DENSITY LIMITATIONS AND TRANSFER ) OPPORTUNITIES IN THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM ) DENSITY ZONE DISTRICTS AND MODIFYING WCC 20.22.252 ) TO MORE CLEARLY REFLECT THE DENSITY RESTRICTIONS ) IN THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY DISTRICTS WHEREAS, when the Lake Whatcom Subarea planning and Title 20 zoning were adopted by ordinances 82 -56 and 82 -58 the urban plan designations and zones were adopted on an interim basis only, pending further study of the watershed; and WHEREAS, these designations and zones were extended by ordinances 84 -3 and 84 -4 to July 1, 1985, because the water studies had not been completed; and WHEREAS, there was no follow -up after the watershed studies were completed apparently allowing these plan designations and zones to revert to the 1970 pl.an designations and interim zoning; and WHEREAS, upon discovery of this problem Council passed emergency ordinance No. 89 -73 to retain Title 20 zoning for 60 days until the Planning Commission could review the Lake Whatcom Subarea planning and zoning in light of the watershed studies and additional environmental review; and WHEREAS, SEPA review has been completed and a Determination of Nonsignificance was issued by the Deputy SEPA Official on September 28, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Planning staff reviewed the Lake Whatcom Water Quality Protection Study completed by URS Consultants in 1985 and the Lake Whatcom Watershed Management Plan completed by the Institute for Watershed Studies, Western Washington University, in 1987, and concluded no evidence existed for modifying the planning and zoning as proposed in 1982; and WHEREAS, it was concluded that the zoning map designations needed to be updated to conform to current nomenclature and that the zoning maps and text need to be modified to more clearly reflect the density transfer provisions for the Sudden Valley area as originally established; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.70.590 legal notice was published in the Westside Record Journal on September 6, 1989 and in the Bellingham Herald on September 9, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 19, 1989, and after presentations from the Planning staff and. Prosecutor's office, and after due deliberation, concurred with the staff findings, conclusions and recommendations as modified at the hearing. 1 - Agency Report M NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: September 27, 1989 File Ref: 08- 89:CZTM FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR ACTION 1. A quorum of vCommission members was present during the hearing and.;: subsequent discussion. 2. Statutory requirements were met regarding legal notice and SEPA review. 3. The Planning Commission unanimously concurred with the findings and conclusions as developed by staff including the modifications proposed, during the hearing. 4. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended: (1) the adoption of the Lake Whatcom Subarea planning as proposed in 1982 including any subsequent amendments; (2) the adoption of the Title 20 zoning as proposed A n 1982 including any subsequent map amendments and updated map designations, and the text as it exists-at the date of adoption of the enabling ordinance; (3) modification of the zoning maps by footnoting the URM -12 zoning districts in Sudden Valley to clarify that the base densities in accordance with the Lake Whatcom Subarea Comprehensive Plan Urban Reserve Policy 1.05.2 are three or eight units per acre depending on the location, and that with density transfers the maximum density is ten units per acre; and (4) amendment of WCC 20.22.252(2) to read: "Where the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan policies; call for restricting of densities and allow for the transfer of densities, and where the provisions of WCC 20.89 are met, then the maximum allowable density shall be equal to that established by the comprehensive plan; PROVIDED that public sewer and water is available." WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION 401 Grand Avenue Bellingham, Washington 98225 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Plannin mmission FROM: Dan Tay r, Director DATE: September 14, 1989 Land Use & Economic Planning Scan: 644 -6756 Fax., 676 -7727 2061676 -6756 2061398 -1310 RE: File #08- 89:CZTM Readoption of the Lake Whatcom Subarea Plan and Zoning This memo will constitute the staff report for this action which is to readopt the planning and zoning for the Lake Whatcom Subarea that had defaulted back to interim zoning but which has been temporarily resurrected by an emergency ordinance. There are two issues. One is whether to readopt the original subarea plan and Title 20 zoning as proposed in 1982, or to make changes. The other issue is the density transfer procedure incorporated in the original zoning and planning which the staff considers to be flawed. This memo will discuss both issues. BACKGROUND On August 5, 1982, the County Council adopted Ordinance 82 -56 amending the 1970 Comprehensive Plan. Two weeks later Council adopted Ordinance 82 -58 that adopted the Title 20 text and zoning map for Lake Whatcom Subarea. (See Exhibits 1 and 2.) These were companion ordinances that reinforced each other (in those days separate ordinances were used to adopt subarea plans; we do not do it that way anymore). Because the planning for the area was controversial, Lake-Whatcom was a public water supply source, and a Lake Whatcom Restoration Study was underway, it was determined that the planning and zoning should not be permanently installed until the restoration study was completed. Therefore the ordinances permanently adopted the planning and zoning for only the non urban areas, i.e. those areas designated as Forestry, Recreation Open Space, Rural and Rural Residential -One dwelling unit per acre. Those areas considered to be urban, i.e. those with the zone designations Urban Residential Low, Urban Residential Medium, Resort Commercial and Rural Residential -Two dwelling units per acre) were adopted on an interim basis with a sunset to occur December 31, 1984, when it was assumed the restoration study would be completed. The planning ordinance also placed a moratorium on public sewer, water, storm drainage and transportation improvements and creation of water associations until December 31, 1983, when Phase I of the study was to be completed. File #08- 89:CZTM Staff Report September 13, 1989 -- Page 2 In January 1983, a major storm that created significant debris torrents and consequent siltation affected the ability for the consultant to do adequate base line water quality monitoring for the restoration study. This affected the schedule and a nine month extension was formally granted by Council in January 1984. In January the Council also adopted Ordinances 84 -3 and 84 -4 extending the zoning and planning for the urban areas of the watershed until July 1, 1985. Council also extended the services and facilities moratorium for the North Shore area of the subarea until December 31, 1984, with an automatic cutoff at that time whether additional studies were completed or not. By July the study was still not completed to the satisfaction of the local watershed committee and the county administration and another extension was granted. Meanwhile, there was an apparent interpretation that the subarea planning and zoning automatically became permanent by default. The consultants finally completed the study in April 1985, incorporating Ecology ,and the Watershed Advisory Committee comments. However, the study was still not acceptable as it lacked a management plan. The County withheld some of the consultant's fees and contracted with the Institute for Watershed Studies at Western Washington University to complete a management plan. This was completed in December 1986, revised in July 1986, and finally accepted by the County Council in September 1987. As I was doing research on chronology of the restoration study and management plan in 1987, I discovered the apparent problem with the zoning and planning having lapsed. I did some preliminary checking including contacting Bill Trimm, previous Planning Director, and ended up accepting the interpretation that the zoning and planning had become final with a mental note to pursue it further when there was time. In May 1989, the density transfer issue surfaced. The question that came up to the Division of Buildings and Code at that time was whether the URM -12 zoning at Sudden Valley really allowed 12 units per acre or could only achieve full density with density transfers. Staff interpretation. (Buildings and Code, Planning and Prosecutor's Office) was that the zoning map prevailed and the URM -12 zone districts had their full zoning despite the transfer concept. But this also resurrected my concern about the overall zoning and planning. This time I discussed it with Buildings and Code and the Prosecutor and looked up the old ordinances, but again let it drop until there was more time. Finally, the density transfer issue came up again in August, this time from the point of view of a party that may hold transfer credits. Private attorneys in researching the density transfer issue discovered the problem with the overall zoning and the word was out that we may only have interim zoning in the subarea. This required immediate action. The Council adopted an emergency ordinance establishing Title 20 zoning for the Lake Whatcom Subarea for 60 days and directed the staff to pursue establishing the zoning and planning on a permanent basis. FINAL ADOPTION OF TITLE 20 ZONING AND SUBAREA PLANNING FOR LAKE WHATCOM SUBAREA When the original ordinances were adopted for subarea planning and Title 20 zoning for the Lake Whatcom area there was an assumption that the density being approved, even though basically downzoning from the old GP zoning, might be too high to "maintain a safe and adequate water supply ". If an indepth analysis such as a second round of subarea planning were undertaken today there might indeed be concerns about the capability of North Shore Road and utilities to handle the File #08- 89:CZTM Staff Report September 13, 1989 -- Page 3 densities as proposed. There would also be major pressures to open up new higher income residential areas around Lake Whatcom, again particularly in the North Shore area. However, nothing in the original URS reports or the subsequent management plan indicates a direct causal relationship between the densities as proposed and drinking water degradation. The consultants did find high fecal col iform levels in several urban streams. Watershed management planning is called for. Development on steep slopes and alluvial fans need to be addressed. Septic systems need to be inventoried and possible stricter regulations imposed. Development standards may need to be strengthened for the watershed. There are a myriad of other activities that are being or need to be addressed and have been recommended in the Lake Whatcom Watershed Management Plan. As these actions are undertaken including further studies and on -going monitoring the net result may lead to a reduction in density. Environmental review for individual projects may also lead to reduction in density. However again, at this stage, there is no evidence that the plan designations or zone districts need to be modified to protect the public water supply. DENSITY TRANSFERS When Title 20 zoning was originally adopted for Lake Whatcom, the zoning text was amended to introduce a density transfer procedure. This was a procedure similar to what is being proposed for Point Roberts. It was developed for the Sudden Valley area and was designed to implement comprehensive plan policies (see Urban Reserve policy 105.2 of the lake Whatcom Subarea Plan). There were apparently also some private agreements to accomplish this. Basically the URM - 12 designated areas were actually supposed to have lower densities assigned with density transfers allowed between multi - family tracts or from single family areas where lots were determined to be unbui1dable or consolidated. Unfortunately none of this showed up on the zoning map. Therefore as stated in the background information we have to conclude that if a property has a URM -12 designation then that is how it must be allowed to develop unless private covenants override. It is certainly how staff at the counter will portray the zoning because they have no other basis of information. Between now and the hearing we will be pursuing this further and if simple changes can be made within the context of the legal notice to make the transfer work this will be recommended. If this can not be done I would recommend we pursue whatever avenue necessary to make the transfer work within the next few months, or as soon as Point Roberts and shorelines work. is completed by the Commission. Whatcom County created a density transfer and if anyone is holding density transfer credits, it is certainly incumbent on us to make the transfer work. ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS While readopting the official zoning map we should update several of the designations on the official map that as a practical matter we have already done on the working maps. The Urban Reserve (UR) zone districts should become Urban Reserve -Three units per acre in accordance with the comprehensive plan and present practice, and the Urban Residential Medium /12 du /acre (URMD -12) districts should have the designation simplified to URM -12 in conformance with present practice. Staff Report FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS File #08- 89:CZTM September 13, 1989 -- Page 4 In summary I am recommending the Planning Commission adopt the following findings, conclusions and recommendations. FINDINGS 1. When the Lake Whatcom area subarea planning and Title 20 zoning were adopted the urban designations were adopted with a sunset clause because of potential impact of the zoning densities on public drinking water and because a lake restoration study was underway that might result in some conclusive information . 2. The deadline of July 31, 1984, in the original ordinances had to be extended because the restoration study could not be completed in time. 3. A new deadline of July 1, 1985, was established by ordinance. This deadline also could not be met; however, apparently an interpretation was made that the zoning and planning became permanent at that date without requiring further formal action. 4. The original zoning and planning established a density transfer provision for certain areas in Sudden Valley. There are apparent problems with the implementation of this transfer, and in researching the history of it the question of having firm zoning in place arose. 5. The language in the original ordinance indicates certain steps are required prior to establishing subarea planning and Title 20 zoning on a permanent basis. These steps include: a. completion of a lake restoration study; b. further environmental review that would presumably use the information from the study; and C. further formal action. 6. Studies have been completed and accepted by the Council including a Lake Whatcom Water Quality Protection Study by URS Corporation and a Lake Whatcom Watershed Management Plan by the Institute for Watershed Studies, Western Washington University, with assistance from the Whatcom County Planning Department and a local Lake Whatcom Advisory Committee. 7. These reports indicate a number of problems regarding the watershed and make a series of recommendations including further monitoring but do not indicate a need for planning or zoning changes. 8. Separate environmental review is underway as a parallel process that does not indicate the need for zoning modifications. 9. A serious restudy of the area could indicate the need for change and individual environmental review of particular projects might require mitigation including lower densities. File #08- 89:CZTM Staff Report September 13, 1989 -- Page 5 10. 11. Some of the zoning map designations used in 1982 are obsolete. CONCLUSIONS The Lake Whatcom Subarea is a multi -use area including a water supply for the majority of county residents. Development in the area needs careful monitoring. Additional studies either underway or proposed need to be completed and implemented. Because of both the problems and the pressures, the subarea may be a logical next candidate for review of subarea planning after the Urban Fringe Subarea. However, at this point there is no evidence to indicate that the zoning and planning as basically completed in 1982 should not be readopted with minor modifications to update the nomenclature for several map designations. The density transfer provisions that have apparent problems as originally adopted should also be corrected as so they will function as envisioned. RECOMMENDATION The Planning staff recommends: (1) the adoption of the Lake Whatcom Subarea planning as proposed in 1982 including any subsequent amendments; (2) the adoption of the Title 20 zoning as proposed in 1982 including any subsequent map amendments and updated map designations, and the text as it exists at the date of adoption of the enabling ordinance. The staff further recommends modification of the zoning maps by footnoting the LIRM -12 zoning districts in Sudden Valley is ten units per acre; and amendment of WCC 20.22.252(2) to read: "Where the Whatcom Countv Comprehensive Plan policies allow f—or tho trams -fer 4 call for restricting densities, and where the provisions of WCC 20.89 are met, then the maximum allowable density shall be equal to that established by the comprehensive plan; PROVIDED that public sewer and water is available."