HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources March 27 20121
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
Natural Resources Committee
March 27, 2012
CALL TO ORDER
Committee Chair Carl Weimer called the meeting to order at 9:32 a.m. in the Council
Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
ROLL CALL (9:32:13 AM)
Present: Carl Weimer, Bill Knutzen, and Sam Crawford.
Absent: None.
Also Present: Barbara Brenner, Kathy Kershner, and Pete Kremen.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
1. DISCUSSION REGARDING A REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION FOR THE
COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM
COUNTY AND THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FOR A
PLANNING -ONLY LAND USE GRANT FOR WATERSHED PROTECTION AND
RESTORATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $358,472 (THIS ITEM IS ALSO
SCHEDULED AS A FINANCE /COUNCIL CONSENT ITEM) (AB2012 -133)
Samya Lutz, Planning and Development Services Department, submitted and read
from a staff report presentation (on file).
Brenner stated and there was discussion of her concerns about the loss of
agricultural land to protect the environment. She referenced the second paragraph of the
staff report dated March 13, 2012 on Council packet page 2. It mentions mitigation for the
loss of agricultural land. She referenced the Watershed Protection and Restoration Land
Use Grant Description of Project Benefits and Outcomes on Council packet page 3. Amend
the sentence, "This grant will fund two agricultural landowners to voluntarily implement
environmental enhancement projects and also furthers agricultural practices under a pilot..."
and "A policy restoring agricultural land and habitat at
the same time."
Crawford asked and there was discussion of the concept of governing the impacts to
agricultural land.
Knutzen asked and there was discussion of:
• Whether there are conditions to accepting the grant funds.
• Whether the County is protected against liability.
• Who controls the funding mechanism.
• Why it is limited to two areas and two projects.
Weimer asked and there was discussion of whether the process is important to set
the foundation for the future, and whether this would present solutions to problems
identified by the agricultural community.
Natural Resources Committee, 3/27/2012, 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
Brenner recommended changes:
• Add wording that the purpose is also to improve agricultural land practices.
• Delete the second bullet point, "
agr-eultuFal lands, inelHding Linder what eireHn9stanees what eest
• Allow buffer vegetation that can also provide a financial incentive.
• Change language, "Procedures te n9itigate that prevent the loss of
agricultural lands that and help achieve Comprehensive Plan goals for
resource lands."
• On Council packet page 30, items 1.2 and 1.3, don't use acronyms or clearly
define the acronyms.
• On Council packet page 32, item 2.1 uses the word "synergistic," but the
proposal is not synergistic.
• Delete item 2.2 on Council packet page 32.
• On Council packet page 34, item 5.3 should not include the phrase
"compensating for any loss of priority agricultural land."
Weimer stated he agrees that they should not prioritize one function over the other.
Crawford referenced Council packet page 40. He asked and there was discussion of
whether the grant funds are in addition to the contributions of other agencies and whether
this item fits within the existing budget for agriculture work already in terms of funds and
staff resources. He supports leveraging these grant funds.
Henry Bierlink, Whatcom Farm Friends, stated he supports this item and the
County's support. This grant starts to bring the water and land uses together in a smart,
coordinated way.
Weimer asked and there was discussion of whether the two projects have been
identified.
Kremen asked and there was discussion of whether Farm Friends agrees that there
needs to be emphasis on preserving agricultural land in the language of the contract.
Brenner stated and there was discussion language that mentions loss of priority
agricultural land, not just low grade agricultural land.
Steve Seymour, State Department of Fish and Wildlife, stated his department
supports this effort. It would take 2,000 acres to buffer all the low land streams in the
county. That's not a big ratio in the long run. The most logical approach is to restore the
buffers with native vegetation. This item will provide more tools to solve the existing
struggle. The threat to agricultural land is from urban development, not buffers.
Kremen stated the intent of the proposal has merits. Make changes to alleviate
Councilmember Brenner's concerns. The proposal is positive.
Crawford moved to recommend approval to the Finance and Administrative
Services Committee and full Council. He suggested replace the word "govern" with "provide
direction."
Lutz stated she would work with Councilmember Brenner to change the language in
the Description of Project Benefits and Outcomes to make sure they're adequately
communicating the intent of the contract.
Natural Resources Committee, 3/27/2012, 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 motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Weimer, Knutzen and Crawford (3)
Nays: None (0)
Crawford asked and there was discussion of whether reconfiguration of agricultural
parcels is contained in this proposal.
2. DISCUSSION OF THE BIRCH BAY WATERSHED ACTION PLAN (AB2012 -109A)
Peter Gill, Planning and Development Services Department, submitted and read from
a staff report presentation regarding low impact development.
Weimer asked and there was discussion of the Planning Commission
recommendation and the staff recommendation.
Crawford asked and there was discussion of parking requirements.
(10 :24 :01 AM)
Brenner asked and there was discussion of the review note on Council packet page
63.
Crawford asked and there was discussion of parking requirement reductions that the
County allows.
Weimer asked and there was discussion of the analysis used to determine the point
system. He referenced Council packet page 64, section 20.50.130(1)(c), the phrase,
"dedicated non - building parcel." He asked and there was discussion of the definition of a
dedicated non - building parcel.
Brenner referenced section 20.50.130(1)(a). She stated and there was discussion of
putting that language somewhere in the Code, not on the owner's title, because it is a
disincentive.
Crawford asked and there was discussion of whether the committee members are
prepared to move this forward.
Weimer referenced section 20.50.727(1) and asked why language in that section was
removed.
Gill continued his presentation on critical areas ordinance (CAO) changes in Whatcom
County Code (WCC) 16.16, habitat mitigation fund, and the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
Crawford stated and there was discussion of these provisions being voluntary and
being subject to review based on how it's working.
2017.
(10 :48 :14 AM)
Weimer asked and there was discussion of whether this goes away if not reviewed in
Natural Resources Committee, 3/27/2012, Page 3
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
Gill continued his presentation on the habitat mitigation fund and national pollution
discharge elimination system (NPDES) phase II permit.
Knutzen asked and there was discussion of whether anyone can use the habitat
mitigation fund to mitigate for impacts within the Cherry Point urban growth area (UGA).
Weimer asked and there was discussion of:
• Whether the optional low impact development (LID) program would meet the
State requirements for stormwater management if it were not optional.
• The chance that the Department of Ecology will approve the petition.
• How the Code allows someone to petition for an area to be included in the permit.
Christina McGinnis, Department of Ecology, answered questions about the petition
process.
Crawford asked and there was discussion about the County adding the Lake
Whatcom watershed.
Weimer asked and there was discussion of whether it makes sense to make changes
now, knowing they'll have to go through all this again in May.
Crawford stated get input from Dr. Hutchings. He moved to recommend to Council
to request staff to prepare an ordinance based on what's been submitted.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Weimer, Knutzen and Crawford (3)
Nays: None (0)
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 11:05 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.whatcorn.wa.us
Natural Resources Committee, 3/27/2012, Page 4