HomeMy WebLinkAboutSpecial Committee of the Whole March 4 20111
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
Special Committee Of The Whole
March 4, 2011
CALL TO ORDER
Council Chair Sam Crawford called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m. in the
Courthouse Fifth Floor Conference Room 513, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
ROLL CALL
Present: Barbara Brenner, Sam Crawford, Kathy Kershner, Bill Knutzen, Tony
Larson and Ken Mann
Absent: Carl Weimer
1. DISCUSSION REGARDING A DRAFT 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 (AB2010-
072A)
Hinotes Corner Map
Knutzen moved to include in the limited area of more intense rural development
(LAMIRD) the two lots east of the current proposed boundary, north of Pole Road and
rezone the property to small town commercial (STC). The property has always been used
for some sort of commercial application.
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
There was discussion about the historical use of the property in the motion and the
ability to add property to a type I LAMIRD in the future, given proper documentation.
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Knutzen, Larson, and Brenner (3)
Nays: Kershner, Mann and Crawford (3)
Absent: Weimer (1)
Birch Bay- Lynden and Interstate 5 (I -5) Map
Kershner moved to amend the type III LAMIRD on the west side of the freeway to
remove the vacant lot at the very southern end, which the Council added at its last
meeting. It is an undeveloped property, not property with the storage units. She
withdrew her motion.
Special Committee of the Whole - Rural Element, 3/4/2011, 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
Knutzen moved to amend the map to remove the small properties on the east side
of the freeway. He withdrew his motion.
There was discussion about the best use of the property at Hinotes Corner and
whether it meets the LAMIRD criteria.
Zoning Code Amendments
Gary Davis, Planning and Development Services Department, submitted and read
from a presentation (on file).
There was discussion about how the Growth Management Act (GMA) defines "areas"
in terms of building size, scale, use or intensity being consistent with the character of the
existing areas; the rationale for removing groceries and coin op laundries as conditional
uses from the rural zone; allowing new rural, one unit per two acres (R2A) zones in
undeveloped rural areas; whether a future grocery or coin op laundry business will be
allowed to apply for a type III LAMIRD; why there is no LAMIRD at Badger Road and Guide
Meridian; which version of the proposed zoning code text amendments they are working
from; the general manufacturing (GM) zone in the Laural LAMIRD only; the reason for the
GM and light impact industrial (LII) zone, which are all in urban growth areas (UGAs);
whether the buffer issue is from State law or a local preference; the origination of the buffer
idea; whether businesses near agriculture complain about agricultural use impacts, and;
current setbacks.
Kershner moved to adopt the current setbacks, not the Planning Commission
proposed setbacks, (WCC 20.59.602,) in all zones listed in the presentation handout page
27, to delete sections:
20.60.553 Neighborhood Commercial (NC),
20.61.602 small town commercial (STC),
20.63.552 tourist commercial (TC),
20.64.552 resort commercial (RC),
• 20.67.552 general manufacturing (GM), and
20.69.552 rural industrial manufacturing (RIM)
Gary Honcoop, 5977 Guide Meridian, stated he is in favor of the motion.
Clayton Petree, 1132 Birch Falls Drive, Bellingham, referred to a letter from Elder
Properties, section three, which supports the 25 -foot buffers for parcels adjacent to rural
areas. Existing properties will become nonconforming. It will be difficult or impossible to
repair or rebuild. The existing buffer is consistent with the current development area.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Knutzen, Larson, Crawford, Kershner, Brenner and Mann (6)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Weimer (1)
Knutzen referenced presentation page 12. Many buildings in the rural general
commercial (RGC) and RIM zones were larger than the 12,000 square feet. He moved to
increase the building size limit to 30,000 square feet in the RGC, RIM, GM and STC zones in
Whatcom County Code (WCC) sections:
20.59.320 (RGC),
• 20.61.320 (STC),
• 20.67.300 (GM), and
Special Committee of the Whole - Rural Element, 3/4/2011, 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
53
20.69.300 (RIM)
There was discussion about nonconforming buildings and building sizes in certain
zones in 1990; the existence of buildings in the rural zones that are larger than 12,000
square feet, such as schools; defining what is a commercial use; the size of traditional rural
manufacturing and rural industrial uses; the reason for choosing 30,000 square feet as a
maximum building size; providing more flexibility for businesses so they survive; specific
buildings in 1990 that were larger than 12,000 square feet in the rural zones; staff rationale
of choosing 12,000 square feet as a building size limit, and; exempting building size
limitations in the type III LAMIRDs.
Chet Dow, 5491 Woodfern Way, stated the Growth Management Act (GMA) requires
consideration of opportunity for economic development. He is in favor of the motion.
Honcoop stated he is in favor of the motion. New business opportunities have been
lost in Laurel because of the proposed 12,000 square foot limitation.
Jack Swanson, 900 Dupont Street, Bellingham, stated the Growth Board requires the
County to conform to rural character. Building size is important to that consideration. He is
in favor of the motion.
Doug Campbell, Associated Project Consultants, stated he represents a business in
the RIM Zone. He supports the motion. The County needs businesses to stay here. The
building coverage issue should also be addressed.
Lauralee Brakke, Pleasant Bay Road, stated 30,000 square feet is about 75 percent
of an acre, and is all impervious surface.
Clayton Petree stated a 30,000 square -foot building on a five -acre lot would still
comply with lot coverage. They need to clarify which LAMIRD type they're talking about.
Jack Petree, 2955 Sunset, Bellingham, stated examples of buildings larger than
12,000 square feet include Krause Manufacturing in Laurel, Dodson's IGA, buildings in
Newhalem, and other buildings. Many properties have multiple buildings that add up to
40,000 or 50,000 square feet.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Knutzen, Larson, Kershner and Brenner (4)
Nays: Crawford (1)
Absent: Mann (out of the room) and Weimer (2)
(Clerk's Note: The Committee took a break from 12:34 to 12 :40 p.m.)
There was discussion about Councilmember Brenner's proposed amendments
submitted today (on file); about not making changes to regulations that currently exist in
the Code; the size of bowling alleys and similar facilities; allowing a plumbing in an
accessory building; the State's requirement regarding sex offender facilities; main and
ancillary uses allowed in professional offices; the appropriate amount of open space in the
RGC zone; the difference between lot coverage and open space; cleaning up confusing
language in Title 20 in the future; the zoning code triggering development regulations and
review for open space; justifying the amount of open space required on a lot, and; the
definition of travel plaza and the difference between motels and overnight accommodations.
Special Committee of the Whole — Rural Element, 3/4/2011, Page 3
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
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
Kershner moved to amend 20.59.056, "...fitness centers; previded, that sueh
Larson suggested a friendly amendment to change, "' ing�,,,,ted te such as."
Kershner accepted the friendly amendment, "Indoor commercial recreation
facilities ';Fn*ted a such as bowling alleys,...fitness centers; pFevided,
uses shall be !;Rg;ted te a tetal fleeF aFea ef 5,900 squaFe feet."
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Crawford, Knutzen, Larson, Kershner and Brenner (5)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Mann (out of the room) and Weimer (2)
Knutzen moved to add the language that is a permitted use in RIM zone section
20.69 to the RGC zone section 20.59 as a permitted use. "20.59.095 Construction
contractors' business offices and storage and equipment yards, including the assembly and
manufacturing of prefabricated wood buildings and components."
Swanson stated they should expand it to beyond construction contractors.
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Knutzen and Kershner (3)
Nays: Larson, Brenner and Crawford (3)
Absent: Weimer (1)
Kershner moved to amend 20.59.550, "At least 15 10 percent of the site...."
Clayton Petree referenced and read from a letter from Elder Properties dated January
25, 2011 regarding amending 20.59.500. It addresses why people are concerned about the
proposed lot coverage.
Honcoop stated the general manufacturing (GM) zone is proposed to have 15
percent open space. The only GM zone is in the rural area in Laurel. It's very challenging
to get more than 10 percent with existing businesses. Regarding stormwater, retention can
be built underneath a parking lot, but not the building.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Knutzen, Larson, Crawford, Kershner, Brenner and Mann (6)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Weimer (1)
Knutzen moved to amend 20.59 to allow rental storage establishments as a
permitted use and remove it as an administrative approval use in the RGC zone.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Knutzen, Larson, Crawford, Kershner, Brenner and Mann (6)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Weimer (1)
Knutzen moved to delete 20.59.500. He withdrew his motion.
Kershner moved to delete 20.59.500.
Special Committee of the Whole - Rural Element, 3/4/2011, 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
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Knutzen, Larson, Kershner and Mann (4)
Nays: Crawford and Brenner (2)
Absent: Weimer (1)
Kershner moved to amend 20.59.052, "Automobile service stations, car washes,
a-n-d public garages, tFavel plaza and commercial truck servicing facilities including vehicle
fueling, repairing, storage operations, overnight accommodations and restaurants when
located within Y4 mile of a freeway interchange which is part of Interstate 5."
Swanson stated a travel plaza is a glorified truck stop. Truck stops are now called
travel plaza's, which have expanded services than in the past. The travel plaza should be a
permitted use.
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Kershner (1)
Nays: Crawford, Larson, Brenner and Mann (4)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Jay Irwin, 214 N. Commercial, Bellingham, submitted a handout (on file) and stated
don't reduce the residential density in the RGC from 18 units per acre to zero.
Discussion included the lack of public water and sewer; whether an 18- family unit
and associated infrastructure are considered rural in nature, and; the existence of multi-
family units in 1990.
Kershner moved to amend 20.59.751, motor fuels in
service stations and truck stops."
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Kershner, Crawford, Larson, Brenner and Mann (5)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Kershner moved to request that Planning staff make the same language change in
all zones, °.. motor fuels in service stations and truck stops."
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Kershner, Crawford, Larson, Brenner and Mann (5)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Crawford moved to reconsider the previous motion
The motion to reconsider carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Kershner, Crawford, Larson, Brenner and Mann (5)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Kershner amended her motion and moved to apply that language to the GC
zone only, 20.62.701. motor fuels in service stations and
truck stops."
Special Committee of the Whole - Rural Element, 3/4/2011, 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
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Kershner, Crawford, Larson, Brenner and Mann (5)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
There was discussion about why they are limiting residential use to five acres in the
RGC zone.
Crawford moved to amend 20.59.257, "for residential purpeses the purpose of
creating new residential lots, the minimum lot size shall be 5 acres."
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Kershner, Crawford, Larson, Brenner and Mann (5)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Crawford stated the attorneys for Caitac asked the Council to address clustering
separation in this rural process. He asked for clarification.
Bob Carmichael, Caitac attorney, stated they are asking for a change as part of this
process. It's a key element of the rural element. It has nothing to do with the rezone
application or LAMIRD proposal that will go through the Planning Commission process
separately.
There was discussion about section 20.36.310 not being part of the LAMIRD issue;
clustering in rural lands; allowing stormwater detention facilities as an accessory use, and;
maximum building sizes for public community buildings in the neighborhood commercial
zone.
Brenner moved to amend the date in 20.61.066(3) to change the date to the date
of when the ordinance takes effect. She withdrew her motion and asked that all
references to December 1, 2009 be changed to the effective date of this ordinance.
Brenner moved to amend 20.61.320 and all other locations in these sections to
replace the 30,000 square foot building size limit to no limit at all.
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner and Kershner (2)
Nays: Crawford, Mann and Larson, (3)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Kershner moved to exempt type III LAMIRD areas from having a maximum
building size, except in Rural Business designations in which no building square footage
limit shall apply." Apply to WCC sections
20.59.320 (RGC),
20.61.320 (STC),
• 20.67.300 (GM), and
20.69.300 (RIM)
She withdrew her motion.
Special Committee of the Whole - Rural Element, 3/4/2011, Page 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
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 moved to amend 20.67.059, '...and remedies or other similar types of
products, when associated with derivatives from local agriculture or other local resources."
Crawford suggested a friendly amendment to amend 20.67.059, "...and
remedies or other similar types of products, when asseeiated with ,,,,Fivatives FF,,ng leeal
Brenner accepted the friendly amendment.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Kershner, Crawford, Larson and Mann (5)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Brenner moved to remove "light impact" from the first sentence of 20.69.010.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Kershner, Larson and Mann (4)
Nays: Crawford (1)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
There was discussion on the types of substrate processing and mushroom
composting.
Brenner moved to amend 20.69.051 "unless it is not made with animal waste."
(Clerk's Note: The committee did not vote on this motion.)
Crawford moved to amend 20.69.051(1), "except for
eperatiens commercial mushroom substrate production facilities as provided for in WCC
20.15, that directly provide...."
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Kershner, Crawford, Larson and Mann (5)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Kershner moved to delete 20.69.450.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Kershner, Larson and Mann (4)
Nays: Crawford (1)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Kershner moved to amend 20.69.500, "At least 4-5 10 percent...."
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Kershner, Crawford and Larson (4)
Nays: Mann (1)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Brenner moved to amend all sections as necessary, "consistent with existing use,
scale, a-n-d or intensity."
Special Committee of the Whole - Rural Element, 3/4/2011, Page 7
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
Carmichael stated that regarding the tourist commercial (TC) zone, this language
only applies to type I LAMIRDs. It does not apply to rural tourism or rural business.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Brenner, Kershner, Crawford and Larson (5)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Brenner moved to amend 20.63.051 and .705, "If located outside an urban growth
area, but within a rural community designation, design of the proposed use in the Tourist
Commercial Zone District shall be consistent with the scale aig-d or intensity of the existing
uses in the area and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan rural land use chapter."
Brenner withdrew her motion.
Crawford moved to amend 20.63.651, "If located outside an urban growth area,
but within a rural community designation, design of the proposed use in the Tourist
Commercial Zone District shall be consistent with the scale arrd or intensity of the existing
uses in the area and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan rural land use chapter."
Crawford amended his motion and moved to amend:
• 20.63.651, ° , If located within a Rural
Community designation, design of the proposed use in the Tourist
Commercial Zone District shall be consistent with the scale arrd or intensity of
the existing uses in the area and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
rural land use chapter." and
• 20.63.705, "Proposed new uses in districts located
aFeas within a Rural Community designation, will be consistent with the scale,
use, arrd or intensity of existing uses."
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Brenner, Kershner, Crawford and Larson (5)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Kershner moved to amend 20.84.220(3), "...in a Fu,� l area Rural Community (as
designated in the Comprehensive Plan), will be consistent with rural character and not
characterized by urban growth existing use, seale, or intensity, and On eenfern9ance with
rural eh-+.--+ete of the "
Brenner suggested a friendly amendment to reference Revised Code of
Washington (RCW) 36.70A.070(5)(c).
Kershner did not accept the friendly amendment.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Brenner, Kershner, Crawford and Larson (5)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Kershner stated fix the definition in 20.97.121(1). She asked why that definition
includes reference to "legally." She moved to amend, "...when referencing uses within a
Special Committee of the Whole - Rural Element, 3/4/2011, Page 8
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
Rural Community Type I LAMIRD - means legally established uses that existed on either
July 1, 1990 if ,
2005 Of inside a type 11 eF 11 LAMIRD aFea."
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Brenner, Kershner, Crawford and Larson (5)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Kershner asked that Planning staff look at the type III exemption from building size
and find language to pull the type III LAMIRD out of the building size requirement. Don't tie
up any future type III LAMIRD to the more restrictive type I LAMIRD.
Honcoop referenced a scrivener's error at the end of 20.69.066. He referenced
20.69.067(2) and suggested creating a definition of a pump island and dispensers. The size
of gas stations has been reduced from 3,000 square feet to 2,500 square feet.
Kershner moved to amend 20.69.067(1), 'x2,599 3,000."
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Brenner, Kershner, Crawford and Larson (5)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Carmichael referenced the Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 2, referring to isolated
small scale tourism. They overlooked removing the reference to "isolated" in the last line of
the paragraph under Rural Lands - Land Use - Rural Designation.
Kershner moved to remove the word 'isolated."
Lutz suggested moving "isolated."
Kershner amended her motion and moved to amend the last line of the
paragraph under Rural Lands - Land Use - Rural Designation, "...must meet GMA criteria for
+se+ated small -scale tourism or isolated business uses...."
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Brenner, Kershner, Crawford and Larson (5)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Kershner moved to amend 20.60.301, "Unless located in a Rural Business
designation, maximum allowable floor area shall not exceed:"
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Kershner, and Larson (4)
Nays: None (0)
Abstain: Crawford (1)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Mann moved to reconsider the motion.
The motion to reconsider carried by the following vote:
Special Committee of the Whole - Rural Element, 3/4/2011, Page 9
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
Ayes: Crawford, Brenner, Mann, Kershner and Larson (5)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen and Weimer (2)
Kershner withdrew her motion.
There was discussion of a letter from a Futurewise Board Member and options for
another extension; limiting the first public hearing to receiving testimony only, and; the
upcoming schedule for addressing this item.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 4:25 p.m.
Please contact the Council Office to obtain an
official, signed copy:
360- 676 -6690 or council@7.o.whatcorn.wa.us
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
Sam Crawford, Council Chair
Special Committee of the Whole — Rural Element, 3/4/2011, Page 10