HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning June 5 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
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Planning and Development Committee
June 5, 2012
CALL TO ORDER
Committee Chair Bill Knutzen called the meeting to order at 3:04 p.m. in the Council
Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
ROLL CALL (3:04:34 PM)
Present: Ken Mann, Bill Knutzen and Barbara Brenner.
Absent: None.
Also Present: Carl Weimer, Pete Kremen, Kathy Kershner, and Sam Crawford.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
1. DISCUSSION REGARDING TIMBER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (AB2012 -201)
Jack Louws, County Executive, gave a staff report and stated he has a suggestion for
engaging the forestry industry. Make the existing Surface Mining Advisory Committee a
joint advisory committee with the forestry industry. Rename and restructure the committee
and appoint new members.
Brenner stated and there was discussion of diluting the surface mining committee
with forestry committee. Find out first if there is enough interest in a forestry - exclusive
committee.
Kremen stated he approves of the suggestion. He stated and there was discussion of
many people who are involved in both industries.
Kershner asked and there was discussion of whether it would be a Council- or
Executive - appointed committee.
Crawford stated and there was discussion of the committee discussing in particular a
50 -year supply needed for forestry, the best way to preserve forestry for the 2016
Comprehensive Plan update, and coming up with a forestry management plan for the 8,700
acres in the Lake Whatcom watershed reconveyance.
Kremen asked and there was discussion of whether the Executive talked to timber
industry representatives about the proposal. Create a forestry subcommittee from the
overall joint committee.
Louws stated he asks for permission to work with the Council Clerk and remaining
members of the Surface Mining Advisory Committee.
Brenner stated she would like to hear first from the forestry industry about the
proposal.
Planning and Development Committee, 6/5/2012, 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
Kremen asked the Executive to contact leaders of the forestry industry to get more
input on the proposal.
Knutzen submitted and referenced a map (on file). He asked and there was
discussion of how much acreage is harvestable.
Brenner asked and there was discussion of defining the non - commercial
forest /reserves item on the map.
Sam Ryan, Planning and Development Services Department Director, stated it's a
classification of the Assessor.
Eric Jacoby submitted and read through a handout (on file) and stated the timber
forestry has an economic impact to the community. The reconveyance process involves
qualitative discounting. The State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) timberland is a
valuable economic asset to Whatcom County. The reconveyance of 8,700 acres of trust
land would affect the economy.
(3 :26:11 PM)
Kremen stated and there was discussion of:
4,700 of the 8,700 acres in the Lake Whatcom reconveyance not being land that
can be logged.
• The DNR's hesitancy to harvest timber in the watershed.
The likelihood that DNR will harvest more timber in the watershed than it has in
the past.
Mann asked and there was discussion of the number of timber harvest industry jobs
lost per year.
Jacoby referenced the letter in his handout that discussed the value of timber land.
The value is not small.
Knutzen asked and there was discussion of the money the County received in 2011
for the junior taxing districts.
Jacoby stated timber land in Washington is the greenest source of timber land
products possible. The value never depreciates, and ultimately benefits everyone. A lot of
private timber land is bought up by pension funds because it always provides value and
income.
Knutzen stated and there was discussion about the amount of harvestable timber left
in Whatcom County. Any timber advisory board they create should come up with a number
for the amount of land it will take to sustain the timber industry in Whatcom County.
Crawford stated and there was discussion of the amount of land in the County that is
in timber production right now.
2. DISCUSSION REGARDING A PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM
COUNTY ZONING CODE TITLE 20, THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING
MAP AND THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND MAPS, TO
IMPLEMENT CHANGES RELATING TO RURAL LAND USE PLANNING (AB2012-
193) (3:41:05 PM)
Planning and Development Committee, 6/5/2012, 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
Gary Davis, Planning and Development Services Department, submitted and read
from a presentation (on file).
Brenner asked and there was discussion of why certain areas, such as Welcome,
Hinotes Corner, and Fort Bellingham, are designated rural neighborhoods.
Davis continued the presentation regarding Issues 8, 10, and 12, visual
compatibility, water quality, critical areas, and wildlife.
Brenner asked and there was discussion of defining structures.
Davis continued the presentation about the Planning Commission recommendations.
Crawford asked and there was discussion of the history of a wildlife corridor.
Kershner asked and there was discussion about the push to make so many non-
conforming lots through this process. She stated it's been a complete waste of time for the
County staff, Planning Commission, and Council to go through this process.
Knutzen asked and there was discussion of the density overlay around Cain Lake.
Davis continued the presentation on South Bay, Wickersham, issues 13 and 14
Kershner asked and there was discussion of calling Eliza Island a rural neighborhood.
Knutzen asked and there was discussion of how to account for the lot coverage in the
Eliza Island (EI) zone.
Crawford stated and there was discussion of the controversial Hearings Board
membership and appointment process.
Davis continued the presentation on issue 15.
Kershner asked the different staff recommendation and Planning Commission
recommendations between the rural neighborhood and the limited area of more intense
rural development (LAMIRD).
Brenner asked and there was discussion of whether the rural neighborhood category
is used elsewhere.
Mann asked and there was discussion of whether this area can be a LAMIRD.
Karen Frakes, Prosecutor's Office, stated the direction to legal staff was to postpone
the appeal and try to come up with a solution that would satisfy the Board. They talked
earlier about this solution. The appeal has been put on hold until after this process.
Davis continued the presentation on issue 16.
Knutzen asked and there was discussion of whether they addressed the split zoning
on a property on Smith Road.
(4 :42:22 PM)
Planning and Development Committee, 6/5/2012, 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
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Brenner stated and there was discussion of a rezone not being outside this process
and the issue of adjacent ownership.
Knutzen stated they are putting all the commercial property in rural areas, which
doesn't promote sustainable economic development. Don't change those commercial
properties to rural properties.
Brenner stated the Smith and Guide Meridian area has a history of fluctuating
business use. She asked and there was discussion of why they can't allow this area to be a
business hub.
Davis continued the presentation on issues 17 and 18.
Crawford stated this is a clear mistake in the Hearings Board decision. He asked and
there was discussion of the reason for the decision at Emerald Lake.
Davis continued on issues 19 through 22.
Brenner asked and there was discussion about being required to have the same type
of use.
Davis continued on issue 22 regarding the type II LAMIRD and type III LAMIRD and
issues 22 through 24.
Kershner asked and there was discussion of why they are limiting the building size
for a type III LAMIRD.
Davis continued on issues 23 and 24.
Knutzen asked and there was discussion of how the new census information applies
to the population projections.
Brenner asked and there was discussion of what the projections are based on.
Crawford stated he recommends:
1. That this Planning and Development Committee recommend that the full Council
move this item to the Committee of the Whole.
2. Scheduling this item at a special Committee of the Whole meeting at 1 p.m. on
Tuesday, June 12, 2012.
3. That staff prepare a document that shows the language they started with, with
the staff proposal in one color and the Planning Commission recommendation in a
different color, all in one document.
4. That the Prosecutor's Office staff and Planning staff work on a different way to
handle item 12 than what is being presented here.
Brenner asked and there was discussion of what the State can do if the County
misses its deadline.
Davis concluded his presentation on the recommendations from the Planning
Department.
Planning and Development Committee, 6/5/2012, Page 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2
2
2
2
2
2
3. DISCUSSION REGARDING A PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING THE
WHATCOM COUNTY CODE TO ADD CHAPTER 20.51 LAKE WHATCOM
WATERSHED OVERLAY DISTRICT (AB2012 -117)
This item was not discussed.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 5:36 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@�.o.w hatcom .wa.us
Planning and Development Committee, 6/5/2012, Page 5