HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning November 12 20141
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Planning and Development Committee
November 12, 2014
CALL TO ORDER
Committee Chair Ken Mann called the meeting to order at 2:36 p.m. in the Council
Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
ROLL CALL
(2:36:56 PM)
Present: Ken Mann, Barbara Brenner and Rud Browne.
Absent: None.
Also Present: Barry Buchanan, Pete Kremen, Sam Crawford
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
1. ORDINANCE APPROVING A REZONE REQUEST FOR FIVE ACRES AT THE
INTERSECTION OF SLATER ROAD AND ELDER ROAD FROM NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL (NC) TO RURAL GENERAL COMMERCIAL (RGC) (AB2014 -331)
Gary Davis, Planning and Development Services Department, submitted information
(on file), gave a staff report and stated staff reviewed the maps and documents given to
them by the applicants. The auto sales license is also included in the packet.
Mann asked if it would still go forward if denied. Davis stated it would.
The committee discussed whether work was done to the car lot, work that has to be
done if the zone changes and the use is permitted, the permits that would have been
required at the time the car lot was created, and whether permits are required for allowed
uses.
Jon Sitkin, attorney, stated he represents the applicant and answered questions.
There should have been a land disturbance permit when the area was graveled. Nothing
was done to the property to get it ready to sell cars.
Larry Stoner stated he represents Mr. Boulos. He described the plan for future
landscaping.
Larry Daugart stated he lives next to the site. He is opposed to the request. He and
the committee still do not have a site plan that outlines what uses will be on the property.
Brenner asked if Mr. Daugart would still have concerns if the committee received the
information he wants to see. Daugart stated he may be less concerned. He supports
landscaping along Elder Road and an appropriate driveway, but not future access from Elder
Road.
Planning and Development Committee, 11/12/2014, Page 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
Massaad Boulos stated he's tried to communicate with Mr. Daugart. The property
allows a house. He's not sure what the issue is with Mr. Daugart's opposition. He needs to
understand why Mr. Daugart is opposed. They are allowed to have a storage area,
recreational vehicles, U -Haul rentals, cars, boats, and the gas station. The area is
developing. He provides jobs and pays taxes from his business.
Stoner stated there are no specific plans to build a house. Future development to
the north can occur today in the current zone. The rezone will allow them to sell
automobiles and build separate housing.
Daugart stated the neighborhood commercial zone does not allow a used car lot.
The committee discussed the residential use as an accessory use, what uses are
allowed with the rural general commercial zone, approving rezones to allow existing uses
that weren't allowed in the existing zone, whether the car lot owner provides financing to its
customers, whether the proposal is to actually make the car lot size smaller, whether the
Council can put conditions on the rezone, whether a future buyer of this property would be
subject to the concomitant agreement, the site plan approval process, and the value change
of the property with the changed zoning.
Mann stated it's difficult for him to approve something that wasn't allowed in the first
place.
Brenner stated she would be more interested in approving the request if there was
more common ground between the proponent and the neighbor.
The Committee discussed why this is different from a spot zone, type 3 limited areas
of more intense rural development (LAMIRDs), lighting requirements, whether the car lot
offers financing for its customers, the ultimate size of the car lot after landscaping is
installed, whether the Council can add conditions to the concomitant agreement, the value
of the property after the rezone, concomitant agreement and future owners,
Crawford stated ensure that things aren't that bad, such as nighttime activity, noise,
smell, lighting before approving the request. Make sure there is no more impact to the
neighbors than what happens today. He wants to know the actual impacts to the neighbors.
Move it forward for a hearing to approve. That doesn't commit them to approve right now.
There is an opportunity to satisfy both parties.
Mark Personius, Planning and Development Services Department, referenced and
described the concomitant agreement beginning on Council packet page 230, section four.
The applicant must go through a formal process with the County to get the site plan into
compliance. The staff know what issues need to get into compliance. If necessary, the
Council can amend the concomitant agreement to address lighting. Access is worked out
through the site plan approval process, which can't be done unless the concomitant
agreement is approved. The Council can rescind the rezone if the County and applicant
can't work out a site plan agreement.
Brenner stated she would like to know if the Council can add to the concomitant
agreement after the hearing.
Browne stated the rezone creates a windfall for the applicant. He would like to know
the change in the value and whether they need to retain existing uses or expand uses for
economic viability.
Planning and Development Committee, 11/12/2014, Page 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Mann stated let this go forward for introduction with no committee recommendation.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 3:34 p.m.
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Ken Mann, Committee Chair
Planning and Development Committee, 11/12/2014, Page 3