HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning January 26 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
Planning and Development Committee
January 26, 2010
CALL TO ORDER
Committee Member Bill Knutzen called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
ROLL CALL
Present: Ken Mann, Bill Knutzen and Barbara Brenner
Absent: None
Also Present: Carl Weimer, Kathy Kershner, and Sam Crawford
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS
1. ELECTION OF COMMITTEE CHAIR (AB2010 -021)
Brenner nominated Bill Knutzen.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Knutzen and Brenner (3)
Nays: None (0)
OTHER BUSINESS
Crawford stated he sent an email to councilmembers and County staff (on file) on
December 31, 2009 about a number of issues carrying over from last year regarding the
urban growth areas (UGA). His concern is that the urban growth area (UGA) discussion and
ordinance lacked a rationale for some UGA's. He would like to revisit those things. His
December 31 email contained suggestions about what UGA topics they should discuss. He
asked Director Stalheim to talk about how UGA's can be revisited if a majority of the Council
wishes.
David Stalheim, Planning and Development Services Director, stated a
Comprehensive Plan can be amended in a number of ways. He explained three
Comprehensive Plan amendment processes, including annual amendments, planned
updates, or appeal requirements. The zoning code can be amended anytime, through a
docketing process. The urban growth areas are a Comprehensive Plan amendment.
Councilmember Crawford applied to put Yew Street on the docket. They received an
application from Caitac for an amendment. They received two applications in the Blaine
Planning and Development Committee, 1/26/2010, 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
area for the Harbor Shores property and for a property on Shintaffer Road. Councilmember
Crawford also submitted Ferndale Vista Malloy and West Blaine /Trillium UGA requests. Both
of those require Comprehensive Plan amendments, but a zoning amendment was
submitted. Those were not filed in the sequence required by the Code. Those are the
different options for revisiting the urban growth areas.
Crawford stated it sounds like they currently have docket proposals for Yew Street,
Caitac, Harbor Shores, and Shintaffer. In addition, he expressed an interest in reviewing
Vista Malloy in Ferndale and West Blaine. They also have zoning items regarding drive -
through windows and rural; a change from one unit per ten acres (R10A) to rural, one unit
per five acres (R5A) zones around Birch Bay; removal of the provisional requirements in the
general commercial (GC) area of Birch Bay, and; other things that fall under zoning. In the
month of February, all of those things will be on the table, including the Vista Malloy and
West Blaine areas. It's still up to the Council to determine what will be on the docket. That
assumes they work in coordination with the administration regarding staff time and
resources. Therefore, he understands that all these items will come back to the table in the
month of February, plus anything the councilmembers themselves want to bring up. The
Council and administration will decide together what will move forward, based on available
resources. Stalheim stated that is the next step in the process. Staff has already begun
the process of looking at all the applications and all the old, unfinished docket items. Other
things have been brought to his attention through other mechanisms. In the month of
February, he will present a work program for the next two years. The Council will be given
an opportunity to prioritize that list.
Crawford asked if there is no going back on the November 24, 2009 ordinance by the
Council for the existing UGA's. He asked if it is what is in place now, there is no opportunity
for going back to reopen that aspect of the discussion, and now they have to talk in terms
of new docket items. Stalheim stated the exception to that is they can do things to resolve
appeals.
Karen Frakes, Prosecuting Attorney's Office, stated they will receive appeals that will
cover all these issues. They can be considered outside the docket process.
Discussion included the length of the docket process; required environmental review
for each subject; whether the County can deal with each appeal separately; resolving an
appeal without continuing the appeal process, and; getting an extension from the Hearings
Board.
Rebecca Craven, Council Policy Analyst, stated the original ordinance adopted in
November will stand and won't be held in the case of an extension.
Crawford stated he hopes they give due reconsideration to the UGA items when they
come forward again, in whatever form.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
1. RURAL ELEMENT UPDATE, DISCUSSION OF STATUS AND FUTURE PROCESS
(AB2010 -072)
Gary Davis, Planning and Development Services Department, submitted and read
from a presentation (on file).
Planning and Development Committee, 1/26/2010, 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
The following people answered questions:
• David Stalheim, Planning and Development Services Department Director
• Karen Frakes, Prosecutor's Office
• Rebecca Craven, Council Policy Analyst
Discussion included whether the County has lost much grant funding due to
sanctions; whether the public notice postcards included information about a potential loss of
property value; how the Supreme Court decision may affect the staff and Planning
Commission recommendations; whether a 2006 appeal went to Superior Court; whether the
only reason the County was noncompliant was because one of the city's UGA was grossly
too big, and because certain boundaries weren't exact; County policies not being consistent
with State law; a mailing list for notification; how to proceed with this item; potentially
receiving a scheduling order from the Hearings Order, and; the original reason for the
limited areas of more intense rural development (LAMIRD) issue.
Brenner stated schedule Planning Committee work sessions, and see where that
takes them.
Mann stated have one work session to have the Planning Commission
recommendation explained to them, then have a public hearing, and then go into work
sessions. They need a good background before a public hearing.
Weimer stated he agrees with Councilmember Mann. Have a work session on the
information binder that's been provided, then have a public hearing, and then this
committee can work out the issues.
Stalheim stated he suggests that they walk through the maps and answer questions
during a first work session, and then look at the ordinances in a second work session with
the committee.
The committee concurred.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
1. ORDINANCE REPEALING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 2.125, UTILITIES
PLANNING AND ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB2010 -045)
David Stalheim, Planning and Development Services Director, gave a staff report.
Brenner moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Knutzen and Brenner (3)
Nays: None (0)
4. ORDINANCE CLARIFYING THE APPLICABILITY OF AGRICULTURAL
PROTECTION OVERLAY (APO) BY INCLUDING THE AREA OF ADJOINING
ROAD RIGHTS -OF -WAY IN THE CALCULATIONS OF PARCEL ACREAGE FOR
APO ZONE (AB2010 -049)
Planning and Development Committee, 1/26/2010, 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
53
Tyler Schroeder, Planning and Development Services Department, gave a staff
report. Create consistency between the agricultural protection overlay (APO) and the
definition of lot size and clustering requirements.
Discussion included whether this parcel is a misapplication of the overlay; the
presence of forestland on land designated APO; what happens if they don't change this
code, and; whether lakes are included in the parcel acreage calculation.
Brenner stated she would like to hear from the agricultural community before voting
on this. There are many more than 100,000 acres if they include small, niche farms.
Weimer stated he supports the staff report. This isn't just for one forested parcel.
They're trying to set policy for all the other lots that may fall under this. When talking
about APO, they are talking about 20 acres either way. Make this consistent to protect
potential agricultural land in the future.
Mann moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann (1)
Nays: None (0)
Abstain: Knutzen and Brenner (2)
Mann stated he wanted to hold this item in committee.
Brenner moved to hold in committee.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Knutzen and Brenner (3)
Nays: None (0)
Brenner asked if this has been vetted through the agricultural community. She
would like to talk to the agricultural committee.
Crawford stated invite Mr. Vaca to discuss how this applies to his property.
Mann stated this applies to the entire county.
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20, TO
CLARIFY AND REVISE THE DEFINITION AND STANDARDS OF HOME
OCCUPATIONS (AB2010 -047)
Wain Harrison, Planning and Development Services Department, gave a staff report
on this item and item three, and read from his memo on Council packet page 298. Further
amend the Code to allow more than one occupation on site, as long as it doesn't exceed the
intent of size and scale and minimizes impact to the neighborhood. He referenced his
memo dated January 22, 2010 to the Council, which includes a substitute Exhibit A.
Brenner stated get stakeholder input from people who have home occupations.
The following person answered questions:
Michelle Stiles, Planning and Development Services Department
Planning and Development Committee, 1/26/2010, 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
Discussion included notifying people who have permitted home occupations; whether
this proposal is more restrictive; the effect of subjective code language being inconsistency
in how the code is applied versus the effect of a specific, inflexible code, and;
grandfathering those with existing home occupations.
Crawford stated insert a sentence that says something like, "Any business that
operated prior to the date of adoption of this ordinance, and that complied with the previous
code, will be allowed."
Knutzen stated they would work from the substitute Exhibit A submitted in the
January 22, 2010 memo from Mr. Harrison.
Brenner asked what happens to businesses legally operating now. She also wants
to get into the very specifics. A home occupation should not be required to have an extra
space for an employee, if the space has already been screened. She moved to remove the
requirement for one parking space for a nonresident employee, Council packet page 306,
line 15, item 20.84.150(7), "(7) ... in this title. At least one additional space shall be provided
for each nonresident on -site employee.
(Clerk's Note: The committee did not vote on this item.)
Crawford stated that language in the packet has been changed, per the substitute
ordinance.
Knutzen asked for a definition of item number six. It seems like that opens up
possible complaints from neighbors.
Crawford stated he supports item 20.84.150(6). Neighbors should be able to
complain if a ton of additional traffic is generated.
Brenner moved to hold these items in committee, and asked that councilmembers
receive additional information no later than the Friday before the meeting.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Knutzen and Brenner (3)
Nays: None (0)
Stalheim stated the next meeting includes a two -hour conversation on (LAMIRDs).
Councilmembers should come prepared with amendments to these ordinances.
3. ORDINANCE CLARIFYING AND REVISING THE DEFINITION AND STANDARDS
OF ACCESSORY APARTMENTS AND SECOND COOKING FACILITIES WITHIN
WHATCOM COUNTY'S ZONING CODE, TITLE 20 (AB2010 -048)
(Clerk's Note: See item two for the staff report on this item. This item was held in
committee.)
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
Planning and Development Committee, 1/26/2010, Page 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 5:04 p.m.
Please contact the Council Office to obtain an
official, signed copy:
360- 676 -6690 or council(g-.o.w hatcom .w a.us
16 Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk Bill Knutzen, Committee Chair
17
18
Planning and Development Committee, 1/26/2010, Page 6