Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources June 8 20101 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 June 8, 2010 CALL TO ORDER Committee Chair Carl Weimer called the meeting to order at 9:02 a.m. in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. ROLL CALL Present: Carl Weimer, Bill Knutzen and L. Ward Nelson. Absent: None. Also Present: Sam Crawford, Barbara Brenner, Ken Mann and Kathy Kershner. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION 1. DISCUSSION REGARDING A PROPOSED ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A FORESTRY ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR WHATCOM COUNTY (AB2010 -225) (9:03:59 AM) Nelson stated the Growth Management Act (GMA) require resource land protection. All these years there has been a mineral resource land advisory committee and agricultural advisory committee. There has never been a forestry advisory committee. Many Council actions have involved forestry practices. Many foresters are concerned that they have not had an opportunity to advise the Council on such issues. Recognize the people who work in the forestry industry and the economic contribution of the industry. Knutzen moved to recommend approval to the full Council. He asked about the Executive doing the appointment process. Nelson stated the appointment process is similar to that of the agricultural advisory committee. A forestry advisory committee should probably be appointed by the Executive. Sam Ryan, Planning and Development Services Department, stated there is no doubt this committee would be beneficial. However, revenue and staff levels are down. The Planning Department cannot take on any more participation in this arena. There is only a position less than a full -time equivalent (FTE) doing the work on the agricultural committee. She explained the current staffing levels. Nelson stated they might want to take a look at this again in light of the department's budget recommendations. Evaluate whether this is more important than Natural Resources Committee, 6/8/2010, 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 other things. One option is to put all advisory committees on hiatus to allow staff to get caught up on mandatory work. Keep it on the docket. He suggested a friendly amendment to hold into committee until Ms. Ryan can prepare a list of current staff assignments. Knutzen accepted the friendly amendment. Weimer stated he supports the ordinance. It's a good idea. Forestry is one of the few resource groups that doesn't have some kind of representation. The Council should talk about all the County's committees as they go through the budget process, and determine if there are any committees that can be restructured or eliminated. Nelson asked the administration to develop recommendations for reviewing and changing committees as necessary. Weimer asked if the County has designated forestry land similar to other designated resource lands. The County has zoning, but not a designation. Ryan stated she will look into this. Nelson stated only mineral resource lands have a designation. Crawford asked the value of the forestry industry and products sold in Whatcom County. Nelson stated he also has that question. The State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) would have information on their lands, but there are many forest practices done by small land owners. Crawford stated one purpose of this group could be to keep track of the forestry value to the community. 2. DISCUSSION REGARDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 20.38, AGRICULTURE PROTECTION OVERLAY (AB2010 -240) (9:17:09 AM) Nelson asked why they are still using the agricultural protection overlay (APO) program selection process on lands where they have little intention of purchasing development rights, in areas outside agricultural areas. Focus on areas that are necessary for agriculture. Give relief to those areas where agriculture will probably never happen. Make sure the APO is not directed at the purchase of development rights (PDR) study areas. Weimer stated they talk about saving 100,000 acres. Much of that is in agricultural zoning, and also in the targeted rural study areas. There are also the PDR study areas. He asked if the county can still protect 100,000 acres if they get rid of the APO soils. Henry Bierlink, Farm Friends, stated they won't, in his opinion. He explained the APO program. The program has not worked the way it was suppose to work. It's not a strategic tool. However, he is unwilling to give it up unless there are other tools in play and operational to fill the gap. If they just throw it away, they're back to only agricultural zoning. They haven't done anything to protect the rural study areas, other than develop the purchase of development rights (PDR) program. Weimer asked if Whatcom County has designated agricultural lands like other counties have done. Bierlink stated he's not sure what designation would do. Natural Resources Committee, 6/8/2010, 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 Brenner asked that Farm Friends give her a map that shows acreage not having APO soil and less than 20 acres in size. A lot of farming is happening on property less than 20 acres in size. She has not received any map. The map doesn't have to be perfect. She would like to see it on a map. Bierlink stated putting a map together would not show everything, because there are small tracts in the total 80,000 acres. Brenner stated she would like to see a map with farms that are less than 20 aces. Weimer explained she wants a map showing the 10 -acre to 20 -acre farms. Nelson stated the map they need to use is the one that identifies agricultural zones and the rural study areas. Cluster requirements harm small farm practices. They end up creating small urban areas or areas where parks exist with development. It isn't achieving agricultural preservation. It just puts more urban development into the rural area. Instead, use the zoning that is already there. People will engage in small farm practices. The APO doesn't make any sense to the public. Instead, identify areas that are essential and make sense for agriculture and use the PDR program rather than target the entire county. Bierlink stated clustering isn't always bad. There are times when it has worked, but more often it doesn't work. He approves of getting rid of the APO and replacing it with something more strategic. However, don't get rid of the APO without something to replace it. Crawford stated he advocates that the PDR program no longer be funded. He asked if the proposal is to remove the APO from parcels sized 20 acres or larger, in the rural zone, and not part of the PDR areas. He asked if Councilmember Nelson proposes keeping the PDR program for those targeted areas. Nelson stated those targeted areas would be subject to a PDR program. Crawford asked if Councilmember Nelson is thinking just of the target areas, or of keeping the APO in all the rural study areas. He asked who designated the rural study areas. Nelson stated the rural study area is extensive. Those areas will keep the goal of 100,000 acres. Keep APO in the rural study areas. He's trying to identify land areas that would be in the APO. The APO is too extensive and doesn't accomplish their original intent. Crawford stated overlay these areas outside the agricultural zone onto zoning, so they see what zone they will affect. Have the same overlay on APO soils. Look at the target areas, study areas, the APO soils, and zoning. Develop a map that will overlay all those areas. If this is the preferred route of the majority of people, he will be interested in sustaining the PDR program with some County involvement. This is a different approach. The County hasn't accomplished much with the current PDR program, relative to the millions they've spent. This new approach is more targeted. He asked what is the next step. This is not docketed, and staff is very limited. Nelson stated it's being addressed through other elements. Right now it's based on soils. There's no reason it can't be based on map delineation. Weimer stated the rural study areas came from the Agricultural Advisory Committee after some significant study. The rural study areas included enough acreage to provide hope that they would ultimately end up protecting 100,000 acres. There are APO soils that are being farmed, and they don't want to lose those. They can come up with some Natural Resources Committee, 6/8/2010, 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 quantification and discussion of those things that would allow them to move forward and decide how to make changes. Brenner stated there are parcels that are smaller than 20 acres, have excellent soil, and are currently being farmed. She would like to know how many of those acres exist so it can be factored in. Knutzen stated Farm Friends brought up the issue of a commodities bank. He asked if this would give some information as to what the parcel values are. Bierlink stated they have looked into it in some degree. There is an understanding of that issue. There is a hierarchy of soils. There is more market value for higher - valued soils. The PDR program looks at soils. Weimer stated they need to decide if this is a priority and whether it should be continued in the next Natural Resources Committee. Nelson stated he would like information on the study area designations, such as the rural study areas and APO. He would like a map. They also need information on the production value from lands smaller than 20 acres, per Councilmember Brenner's request. He would like information on APO areas that aren't in the rural study areas or zoned agriculture. Weimer stated he would talk with Sarah Watts to come up with some maps. Brenner stated the County Assessor will have information on land used for agriculture. Sam Ryan, Planning and Development Services Department, stated she would like to see what maps the department already has. Nelson stated he would like to know how much clustering has occurred. He asked for a map of those clusters areas. Roger Almskaar, Land Use Consultant, stated the APO is a very important issue, and they need to protect the farmland. The County needs to take a look at the APO. If a person has 20 or 40 acres with no prime farmland but with an agricultural open space designation, that property is automatically placed in the APO. He is willing to work on this issue if there is a technical committee involved. He hopes the County takes something less important off the Planning Department's work program and place this on it. Bob Wiesen, 3314 Douglas Road, Ferndale, stated clustering has worked well on very large acreage, over 100 acres. In one location, houses are built around the perimeter of hay acres. It's not prime farmland. The only farming use is growing hay. Many farmers in the county have custom hay operations. They should keep those. Clustering on smaller, 20 -acre parcels aren't of much value. Look at the size of the parcel in terms of clustering. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. Natural Resources Committee, 6/8/2010, Page 4 1 2 3 i 1 13 14 15 16 ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 9:52 a.m. Please contact the Council Office to obtain an official, signed copy: 360- 676 -6690 or council4o.w hatcom .wa.us Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk Carl Weimer, Committee Chair Natural Resources Committee, 6/8/2010, Page 5