HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning March 12 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
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Planning and Development Committee
March 12, 2013
CALL TO ORDER
Committee Chair Bill Knutzen called the meeting to order at 1:20 p.m. in the Council
Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
ROLL CALL
Present: Ken Mann, Bill Knutzen and Barbara Brenner.
Absent: None.
Also Present: Carl Weimer, Pete Kremen and Sam Crawford.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
I. DISCUSSION RELATED TO A PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING THE
WHATCOM COUNTY CODE TO ALLOW AGRICULTURAL SLAUGHTERING
FACILITIES IN THE AGRICULTURE ZONING DISTRICT (AB2012 -300A)
Josh Fleischmann, Planning and Development Services Department, referenced and
read from the staff memo beginning on Council packet page 24.
Brenner stated the Committee didn't include language that says agricultural
slaughtering facilities shall not include poultry. They said this ordinance does not cover
poultry. She would like to see a separate poultry ordinance. The existing small facility is
legal because it is under a certain threshold. Fleischmann described the poultry thresholds
and statutes. The exclusion of poultry under agricultural slaughtering facilities would be for
larger scale facilities that process more than 20,000 United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) poultry. Those facilities are not considered agricultural slaughtering
facilities.
Mann stated make it clear that they are not prohibiting the use, just that this
ordinance doesn't cover poultry.
Knutzen stated he met with a number of farmers last night, including Ben Elenbaas.
He referenced changes recommended in an email from Ben Elenbaas (on file). The County
Code says slaughterhouses and mushroom substrate facilities are non - permitted uses in the
agricultural zone. Therefore, change the definition from agricultural slaughterhouse facility
to agricultural packinghouse facility. The federal definition of a packinghouse is a plant that
both slaughters animals and subsequently process carcasses into cured, smoked, canned,
fresh, and /or other prepared meat products. A packinghouse is not defined as a non -
permitted use in the agricultural zone. Change the references throughout the entire
ordinance.
Crawford stated they need to first amend the definition.
Planning and Development Committee, 3/12/2013, 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
Knutzen moved to delete the current language in 20.97.010.2 and replace with
"Agricultural Packinghouse Facility. A plant that both slaughters animals and subsequently
processes carcasses into cured, smoked, canned, fresh, or other prepared meat products."
Crawford stated that is the definition the Environmental Protection Agency uses for
packinghouse. Cite specifically where the definition comes from. Staff needs to research it.
Mann asked and there was discussion of whether they are referencing the USDA
definition. He likes the concept of taking an established definition from a higher level
agency, whether it's the USDA or EPA.
Mark Personius, Planning and Development Services Department, stated staff does
not object to changing the definition.
Weimer stated EPA definitions have to do with regulating things for pollution and
water runoff, not for food. It would be nice if the FDA has a definition of packinghouses.
The FDA is the agency responsible for food preparation.
Kremen stated it's also the USDA.
Mann stated the changes sound good, but his vote is meaningless if he spends hours
researching the issue and then changing his mind or not giving staff time to consider the
effect to the overall picture.
Crawford stated the definition comes from the EPA guidelines, 40 CFR 432.2(h).
Mann stated he will support the changes because it's useful to have a document that
includes them all, but he clearly hasn't done any research. His approval is provisional,
pending further research.
Brenner asked and there was discussion of whether this new definition would be
just for food products for human consumption or also for other things such as processing
hides. She proposed a friendly amendment to the motion, "...prepared meat products
for human consumption."
Knutzen accepted the friendly amendment and moved to delete the current
language in 20.97.010.2 and replace with "Agricultural Packinghouse Facility. A plant that
both slaughters animals and subsequently processes carcasses into cured, smoked, canned,
fresh, or other prepared meat products for human consumption."
(1:42:14 PM)
Crawford stated they may be opening up a menu of regulations, in terms of how that
thing operates and the allowed discharges. They define a certain category of processors, so
they can impose certain standards. He doesn't know if it's appropriate to use the EPA
definition, exclusive of the rest of the standards.
Brenner asked and there was discussion of people who want to do a simple operation
having to follow rules that apply to a more complicated operation. Personius stated the
County Code doesn't distinguish between those two uses. The EPA and USDA do distinguish
between the two. There isn't much difference for the County between a slaughtering facility
and a packing house. Staff would have to look into that.
Planning and Development Committee, 3/12/2013, 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
Crawford stated the EPA is regulating the process wastewater, not anything going on
inside the facility.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Knutzen and Brenner (3)
Nays: None (0)
Crawford stated it would be good to have staff review and comment on the proposal
from Mr. Elenbaas and come back in two weeks.
The Committee concurred.
Weimer stated engage the Health Department to address what they do with the
discharges. There is no permitting requirement. It would have to be complaint driven. It's
unclear to the Health Department.
Wes Kentch, farmer, stated he doesn't like slaughterhouses, but he likes
packinghouses. The EPA deals with waste outside the facility. The USDA or Washington
State Department of Agriculture deals with what goes on inside the building. Running the
material through a digester will meet processing requirements for coming off the
agricultural land. Everyone thinks a digester will be on the property or nearby.
Slaughterhouses don't process. They only cut and quarter. Carcass parts have to be
moved out, which means there will be a lot of truck traffic. Have a packing plant that is
local so they can do away with the highway travel of the materials.
Jack Petree stated the whole point of the Growth Management Act (GMA) is to set
aside agricultural land and forestry land to support the industry. Dairy accounts for 57
percent of all the agriculture done in Whatcom County. Cattle and calves account for
another seven percent. Most of the animals produced in Whatcom County have to be
shipped out of the county. County farmers are losing money because remote packing
houses can bid anything they want on the cattle, which have to be shipped out. The farmer
here is paying the transportation to wherever they go. It's important that these facilities
are allowed. There are many areas in the county where it's not allowed. The agricultural
land is the only sensible place to put the facilities. State law requires they maintain the
economic viability of the agricultural sector in the long term. There's no point in setting
aside land if they don't have the ability to farm the land.
Brenner asked and there was discussion of how many heads of cattle are being
shipped out of the county. Kentch stated he estimates about 50,000 head of cattle leave
the county each year.
Mann asked if Mr. Petree is concerned they are considering not allowing the facilities
in the agricultural zone. Petree stated there is no place else the use is allowed other than in
agricultural land.
Brenner asked about the rural industrial manufacturing (RIM) zone and HII zone.
Fleischmann stated four areas are zoned RIM. The use is only allowed in one of those
zones, which is the I -5 /Portal Way RIM zone. The use is not allowed in heavy impact
industrial (HII) zones.
OTHER BUSINESS
Planning and Development Committee, 3/12/2013, Page 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
1
1
1
i
2
There was no other business.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 2:00 p.m.
ATTEST:
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Please contact the Council Office to obtain an
official, signed copy:
360- 676 -6690 or council(g-.o.w hatcom .wa.us
Planning and Development Committee, 3/12/2013, Page 4