HomeMy WebLinkAboutSpecial Committee of the Whole April 12 2011 pm1
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
Special Committee Of The Whole
April 12, 2011
CALL TO ORDER (10 :59:41 AM)
Council Chair Sam Crawford called the meeting to order at 11:00 a.m. in the Council
Conference Room, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
ROLL CALL
Present: Barbara Brenner, Sam Crawford, Kathy Kershner, Bill Knutzen, Ken
Mann, Tony Larson and Carl Weimer
Absent: None
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION - COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM
1. DISCUSSION WITH SENIOR DEPUTY PROSECUTOR KAREN FRAKES
REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION - RURAL LAND USE PLANNING ISSUES -
AB2010 -072B (10 :59 :45 AM)
Crawford stated that discussion of agenda item one may take place in executive
session pursuant to RCW42.30.110. Executive session will conclude no later than 11:30
a.m. If the meeting extends beyond the stated conclusion time, he will step out of the
meeting to make a public announcement.
Knutzen moved to go into executive session until no later than 11:30 a.m. to
discuss the agenda item pursuant to the RCW citations as announced by the Council Chair.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Crawford, Kershner, Knutzen, Mann, Larson and Weimer (7)
Nays: None (0)
(Clerk's Note: The Committee ended executive session at 11 :25 a.m.)
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION - COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1. DISCUSSION OF PUBLIC TESTIMONY RECEIVED AT THE MARCH 29, 2011,
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING AND PREPARATION OF A
DRAFT ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING CODE
TITLE 20, THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING MAP, AND THE
WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND MAPS, TO IMPLEMENT
CHANGES RELATED TO RURAL LAND USE PLANNING - AB2010 -072B -
(11 :29 :52 AM)
Crawford stated the Council will introduce the draft ordinance prepared today and
forward it to the Planning Commission for review, public hearing, report and
recommendations on any proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan that were not a
Special Committee of the Whole - Rural Element, 4/12/2011, 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
part of the original Planning Commission recommendation on this issue. A new ordinance
will be filed under AB2010 -072C. He referenced and the Committee discussed the staff
memo beginning on Council packet page 112.
The following staff answered questions:
• Gary Davis, Planning and Development Services Department
• Nick Smith, Planning and Development Services Department
• Samya Lutz, Planning and Development Services Department
Building Size
Knutzen moved to amend the building sizes per the staff example shown on
Council packet page 113, for a limit of 20,000 square feet with administrative approval in
the rural industrial manufacturing (RIM), rural general commercial (RGC), small town
commercial (STC) zones.
Davis stated the staff recommendation is to change the building size limit to 12,000
square feet in the RIM, RGC, and STC zones and to 20,000 in the general manufacturing
(GM) zone in the Laurel limited area of more intense rural development (LAMIRD). Any
request for a larger building size would go through an administrative approval process and
must be consistent with size, scale, use, and intensity of the area.
Knutzen amended his motion and moved to designate a building size of 20,000
square feet instead of 30,000 square feet in type I LAMIRDs in the RIM, RGC, STC, and GM
zones.
Crawford stated he is opposed to the motion. Based on staff research, they can
justify a 12,000 square foot building, but not a 20,000 or 30,000 square foot building. This
will test the validity of the County's plan. Staff presented a good alternative to allow folks
to go bigger.
Brenner stated she would like put into the record an ordinance sponsored by her and
Councilmembers Nelson and Weimer in 2007 regarding Whatcom County building sizes
compatible with the Growth Management Act (GMA). It shows that the last Planning
Commission supported a building size of 65,000 square feet for general commercial zones
and the last Council supported a building size of 35,000 square feet.
There was discussion of whether the document supported development that existed
July 1, 1990.
Kershner asked and there was discussion of the process for determining
development that existed in 1990 and why they reference uses.
Crawford asked and there was discussion on type II and type III building size limits.
Mann stated he originally supported a size of 30,000 square feet. However, larger
businesses can be successful. When they get bigger, they may need to move to a place
where larger scale businesses are more suitable. He's concerned about creating rural zones
that are more lenient than urban areas, which may take businesses out of the urban areas.
He will support a size limit of 12,000 square feet.
Knutzen stated they are losing businesses to areas such as Skagit County. He's in
favor of making it easier for businesses. There are existing businesses of 20,000 square
Special Committee of the Whole - Rural Element, 4/12/2011, 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
feet and which may want to expand. The permit process is too difficult and expensive in
this county. Don't make it more restrictive.
Larson stated he prefers to leave the size as it is, but will support the motion
because he doesn't have the votes for the existing size. It isn't common sense to not allow
an expanded manufacturing facility within a LAMIRD that is meant to contain growth, yet
allow multiple smaller buildings. Provide flexibility or folks will leave the LAMIRD and move
elsewhere. They'll leave the buildings empty.
Crawford stated he desires to see business expand and thrive. However, he is
concerned about lining up that concept with size, scale, use, or intensity in 1990 when there
were no buildings larger than 12,000 square feet in the type I LAMIRDs, other than in the
GM zone. They have to pass the litmus test of 1990. Staff has reviewed the existing
building sizes several times. The only examples they found were the Sudden Valley barn,
Seattle City Light power plant, and schools, which aren't commercial uses in commercial
zones. He can't make the connection.
Brenner stated it's about the LAMIRD, but not necessarily specific uses. It's about
size, scale, use, or intensity. The Sudden Valley Barn, Seattle City Light power plant and
the schools are in the LAMIRDs. The LAMIRD language doesn't say within a specific zone
within the LAMIRD. The language says within the LAMIRD. They don't have to consider the
use, just size, scale, or intensity.
Kershner stated she agrees with Councilmember Larson. Businesses in the rural
area get a reputation of being small businesses. However, many have large warehouses
and need large manufacturing buildings. She's not sure how to change it to be compliant.
Mann stated he agrees with making permitting easier. However, the motion isn't a
cure for the permitting process. He would support a future reorganization of the County
Code if staff were available.
Knutzen restated his motion to change the building size limit to 20,000 square
feet in type I LAMIRDS in the RIM, RGC, STC, and GM zones, allowing a larger size with
administrative approval, as shown in the staff example for 20.67.321 on Council packet
page 113.
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Larson, Knutzen and Brenner (3)
Nays: Weimer, Mann, Crawford and Kershner (4)
Crawford moved to change the building size limit to 12,000 square feet in type I
LAMIRDS in the RIM, RGC and STC zones, and 20,000 square feet in the GM zones, allowing
a larger size with administrative approval, as shown in the staff example for 20.67.321 on
Council packet page 113.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Weimer, Mann, Crawford, Knutzen and Brenner (5)
Nays: Larson and Kershner (2)
(12:02:53 PM)
Special Committee of the Whole - Rural Element, 4/12/2011, 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
53
Crawford asked and there was discussion about building size limits for type III
LAMIRDs. He moved to have a the maximum allowable floor area of 35,000 square feet for
Rural Business designations, the type III LAMIRDs. That is the current maximum except for
a rural commercial such as a grocery store, which is allowed a size of 65,000 square feet.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Crawford, Brenner, Weimer and Mann (4)
Nays: Kershner and Larson (2)
Absent: Knutzen (out of the room) (1)
Lake Whatcom, South Bay Zoning
Mann moved to remove the density overlay in the Lake Whatcom watershed and
zone those areas rural, one unit per five acres (R5A), including properties currently zoned or
scheduled to be zoned rural residential, two units per acre (RR2); rural, one unit per two
acres (R2A); or rural residential, one unit per acre (RR1).
Crawford stated he prefers the staff proposal for the watershed. Any further rezones
should be done independent of the rural element process. The overlay addresses concerns
regarding compliance on the rural element.
Brenner asked and there was discussion of the R2A potential for development.
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann and Weimer (3)
Nays: Crawford, Knutzen, Kershner and Larson (4)
Emerald Lake
Brenner moved to go back to the original staff recommendation for the Emerald
Lake map.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Kershner, Weimer and Larson (6)
Nays: Knutzen (1)
Birch Bay Lynden & I -5
Kershner moved to amend the Birch Bay - Lynden and Interstate 5 (I -5) map to
remove the lot from the type III LAMIRD. The lot is the southeastern most parcel on the
west side of I -5.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Knutzen, Kershner, Weimer and Larson (7)
Nays: None (0)
Knutzen stated he is not comfortable with the proposal for the 14 -acre property to
the southwest of the Birch Bay Lynden and I -5 interchange. The owners bought the
property when it was zoned industrial, and have paid taxes on it as industrial land. Their
investment will be lost.
There was discussion of this property and its owners.
Special Committee of the Whole - Rural Element, 4/12/2011, Page 4
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
Lake Whatcom Schools
Mann moved to amend policy 2MM -10 as recommend by staff, "Encourage the
location of public faeulities services such as schools in Rural Communities within the Lake
Whatcom watershed to that would likely reduce vehicle miles traveled within the
watershed."
Brenner suggested a friendly amendment to amend policy 2MM -10, "Encourage
the location of public `ages services, such as schools, libraries, and post offices, within
Rural Communities within the Lake Whateeng - ateFs„ea that would likely reduce vehicle
miles traveled in the watershed."
Mann accepted the friendly amendment.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Knutzen, Kershner, Weimer and Larson (7)
Nays: None (0)
Buffer Adjoining Resource Lands
Crawford stated the current proposal is to not address buffers beyond what the
current Code says.
Mann asked and there was discussion of what is the current proposal for buffers
between agricultural zones and commercial and industrial zones. He would like something
protective for the farmers.
Crawford stated the Agricultural Advisory Committee will make recommendations
this summer. There have been no actual complaints by the farming community about any
adjoining business activity. Complaints have only been about neighboring residential uses.
If this is a concern, it should be addressed through the Agricultural Advisory Committee.
Hinotes Corner
Crawford moved to remove the two parcels the Committee included a month or
two ago that is currently zoned R2A with a proposed zone of STC, a few parcels east of
Hannegan Road and on the north side of Pole Road. Revert to the current zoning.
Davis stated there was a small store nearby, but no development on those two
parcels in 1990.
Knutzen asked and there was discussion of chicken coops and apartment buildings
on the property in the 1960's.
Brenner asked and there was discussion of businesses that may have existed without
any physical buildings.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Crawford, Kershner and Weimer (4)
Nays: Brenner, Knutzen and Larson (3)
Agricultural Property in a LAMIRD
Special Committee of the Whole - Rural Element, 4/12/2011, Page 5
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
Davis stated there are two instances of agricultural zoning within a LAMIRD. The
first location is the school district property on the Laurel map. The second location is the
fire station property on the Acme map.
Crawford moved to amend the Acme map to remove the back half of the fire
station property from the LAMIRD and retain agricultural zoning.
Brenner asked and there was discussion of how the property is currently used.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Knutzen, Kershner and Weimer (6)
Nays: Larson (1)
Crawford moved to amend the Laurel Map to remove the school district property
from the LAMIRD and retain agricultural zoning.
Larson asked and there was discussion of how it affects the school district's ability to
expand.
Knutzen asked and there was discussion of the current criteria for rural land buffers
adjacent to agricultural land.
Crawford asked and there was discussion of running the LAMIRD boundary through
the school district building.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Weimer and Larson (5)
Nays: Knutzen (1)
Absent: Kershner (out of the room) (1)
Buffer Adjoining Resource Uses
Mann moved to create 25 foot buffers as staff suggests on Council packet page
116, to include non - landscaped building setbacks of at least 25 feet is applied adjacent to
lot lines adjoining lots designated for resource lands, including agriculture, commercial
forestry, rural forestry, or mineral resource land. Apply it to the GM, RIM, STC, and RGC
zones.
(12:57:29 PM)
Brenner stated she wants to hear from the Agricultural Advisory Committee. She
was persuaded by John Steensma's comments. However, there are existing buffer
requirements. She's never heard any farmland complaints other than about residential
uses.
Knutzen stated he's opposed to the motion. He's not heard that it's an issue. The
only properties next to agricultural land in a LAMIRD are already built out in the buffer
areas. This would make those areas nonconforming.
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann and Weimer (2)
Nays: Brenner, Crawford, Knutzen, Kershner and Larson (5)
Special Committee of the Whole - Rural Element, 4/12/2011, Page 6
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
Crawford asked if the Committee agrees to have a joint hearing with the Planning
Commission on a regular Planning Commission Thursday meeting night if the staff can
arrange it.
The Committee concurred.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 1:03 p.m.
Please contact the Council Office to obtain an
official, signed copy:
360- 676 -6690 or council &o.w hatcom .wa.us
Dana Brown- Davis, Council Clerk
Sam Crawford, Council Chair
Special Committee of the Whole - Rural Element, 4/12/2011, Page 7