HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources March 26 20131
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
54
55
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Natural Resources Committee
March 26, 2013
CALL TO ORDER
Committee Chair Carl Weimer called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. in the Council
Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
ROLL CALL
(9:32:05 AM)
Present: Carl Weimer, Bill Knutzen and Sam Crawford.
Absent: None.
Also Present: Kathy Kershner, Pete Kremen and Barbara Brenner
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
1. DISCUSSION REGARDING A PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING THE
WHATCOM COUNTY AGRICULTURE PURCHASE OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS
PROGRAM APPLICATION PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES (AB2013 -115)
Samya Lutz, Planning and Development Services Department, submitted and read
from a presentation (on f/le). The purchase of development rights (PDR) program is one of
several tools in the Agricultural Strategic Plan. There are about 3,500 to 4,000 estimated
development rights. Some development rights in the agriculture zone should be
accommodated, and some should be retired by a variety of methods. She described the
current program.
One reason purchases haven't been done in the target area is the appraisal process,
specifically the difference between the agricultural value and the development value. When
there is a high agricultural value and modest development value, and the property's highest
and best use is agriculture, there will be zero value of the conservation easement. There
may be an opportunity to do some purchases in this area. The first step would be to make
changes to the ordinance and program guidelines. She described the proposed changes to
the code.
Weimer stated they are getting rid of the idea of having rounds. He asked and there
was discussion of whether properties with higher ratings will move to the top of the list.
Knutzen asked and there was discussion of County appraisals versus federal
appraisal standards.
Weimer asked if they must use federal appraisals to continue getting matching
money. Lutz stated they do.
Brenner asked and there was discussion about targeting properties according to
value rather than their location within the core area.
Crawford asked and there was discussion of whether location is as big an issue as
the value of the overall program, given the agricultural use history of a lot. He asked and
there was discussion of whether these changes are in response to that issue.
Lutz continued the presentation and described the proposed program guideline
changes.
Natural Resources Committee, 3/26/2013, 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
54
Weimer stated and there was discussion of making changes about when the Council
makes decisions versus when the Executive makes decisions and not having to seek Council
approval on more than one occasion.
Knutzen asked and there was discussion of whether contracting with a third party to
manage the easements is required.
Weimer asked and there was discussion of scoring, the alternative evaluation
system, receiving matching funds, and using conservation futures funds for purchasing
easements.
Crawford asked and there was discussion of the proposed guideline changes in
Exhibit B of the proposed ordinance, whether a reason for some of the changes is due to
properties considered in the past that may not have been used entirely for agriculture, and
scoring for historic use for agriculture.
Kershner asked and there was discussion of the multiplier used in the point system
and the maximum number of points in the category for special considerations.
Crawford moved to recommend Introduction to the full Council as presented.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Weimer, Knutzen and Crawford (3)
Nays: None (0)
2. PRESENTATION BY WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY ON
LAKE WHATCOM TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD (TMDL) DRAFT REPORT
(AB2013 -109) (10 :12:15 AM)
Steve Hood, Department of Ecology, submitted a presentation and the public review
draft of the Lake Whatcom watershed total maximum daily load (TMDL), Volume 2. He
described what has happened since the last report was published. They looked at a number
of things including development regulations, how much developed land exists, and what's
been developed since the initial report and calibration were done. They tried to determine
credit for all the forest canopy that was reserved due to developments that have lower
impacts from updated development regulations. Phosphorus coming off the landscape is
modeled. He described the modeling process. Of the current developed area, measured in
2010, 86.5 percent needs to function like a forest to meet water quality standards. Lots
exempted from meeting the standard and producing more runoff must be mitigated.
Knutzen asked and there was discussion of how to handle naturally forested areas
that produce a large amount of phosphorous.
Kremen asked and there was discussion of when this data was collected and of
County and City projects already done in these areas to reduce phosphorous levels. Hood
stated those projects count toward achieving the 86.5 percent reduced levels. Of the land
within the city limits, 70 percent is developed, but the entire watershed is developed 30
percent.
Brenner asked and there was discussion of a project in the Wildwood area.
Hood continued the presentation on the Silver Beach and Northshore areas. It will
take multiple decades to accomplish this job. The first five years will be to lay out the plan.
The County, not the Department of Ecology (Ecology), will define the timeline for meeting
Natural Resources Committee, 3/26/2013, 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
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
the requirements. One plan will be to get things done in 50 years. A second plan will be to
determine how long it will take to get things done given existing resources.
Brenner asked and there was discussion of Ecology creating a system of incentives
for homeowners to do retrofits.
Hood concluded the presentation on the timeline for continuous improvements. He
admits that the modeling answer is almost certainly wrong. The answer is close to being
right, but he can't say if they're over or under. The biggest difficulty of getting the EPA to
approve the TMDL is finding a margin of safety in case they are under. He's trying to find a
way to do that in a way that doesn't dramatically change the targets.
Crawford asked and there was discussion of whether phosphorous is bad on its own,
and if they would care about phosphorous at all if it didn't cause algae blooms, given that it
occurs naturally. He asked and there was discussion of whether they can neutralize the
effect of phosphorous on algae, such as pumping in cooler water to prevent stratification,
which may cost much less than retrofitting. Consider investigating engineered solutions or
other alternatives to this solution, which will cost hundreds of millions of dollars.
Knutzen asked and there was discussion of whether modeling was done when
Georgia Pacific was moving water through the lake, which seemed to happen at a time
when there was less algae in the lake.
Weimer stated public comments on the TMDL go to Mr. Hood at Ecology.
Brenner stated she supports the use of aerators.
Weimer stated County staff can look into alternative ideas and options.
Hood stated they are going to reevaluate and take advantage of new information
every ten years. They can spend the next few years reviewing alternatives and then revise
the targets.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 11:01 a.m.
ATTEST:
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Please contact the Council Office to obtain an
official, signed copy:
360- 676 -6690 or council &o.w hatcom .wa.us
Natural Resources Committee, 3/26/2013, Page 3