HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning October 27 20091
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
October 27, 2009
Committee Chair Laurie Caskey- Schreiber called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m. in
the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Present: Laurie Caskey- Schreiber, Bob Kelly, and Carl Weimer.
Absent: None.
Also Present: Barbara Brenner, Seth Fleetwood, and Sam Crawford.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO SIGN AN
AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF EVERSON INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR
ANNEXATION OF APPROXIMATELY 9.83 ACRES (SKILLMAN EAST EVERSON
ANNEXATION), PER THE CONDITIONS OF ORDINANCE 2007 -049 (AB2009-
407)
Kate Blystone, Planning and Development Services Department, gave a staff report.
Rollin Harper, City of Everson, stated he is working on the annexation ordinance that
includes land use restrictions and an agricultural buffer to meet the Council's satisfaction.
Weimer moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Caskey- Schreiber, Kelly and Weimer (3)
Nays: None (0)
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
1. URBAN GROWTH AREA 10 -YEAR REVIEW: CITY RESPONSES TO COMMITTEE
QUESTIONS AND BEGIN REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS (AB2009 -052F)
Bellingham
Tim Stewart, City of Bellingham, submitted and read through a handout of
questionnaire responses (on file). They only process annexations through the petition
process. He described the City's capital facilities planning process.
Discussion included current annexation requests for Geneva; using other methods for
annexation; how the City can best protect the watershed and its stormwater rules; how the
Silver Beach ordinance would apply to urban growth areas (UGA's); whether the City can
adopt standards that are lower than urban level, to protect the watershed; why the City
likes the urban reserve concept; the City's opinion of the County Planning Commission
recommendation to keep the Dewey Valley area in the UGA, and; the Dewey Valley work
plan.
Planning and Development Committee, 10/27/2009, 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
Blaine
Michael Jones, City of Blaine Community Development Director, submitted and read
from a handout (on file). He referenced a letter from the Mayor dated October 12, 2009.
The City is concerned about potential loss of UGA areas.
Everson
Andy Rowlson, City of Everson Councilmember, referenced question 1.a for the City
of Everson and stated much of the land in the UGA is wet. To use land wisely, they would
like to swap agricultural land for other lands that can be developed more efficiently.
Rollin Harper, City of Everson, stated the area the City asked to add is outside the
flood plain, but encircled by the flood plain. The UGA won't expand any farther in this
direction, toward Lynden. He referenced question 1.b for the City of Everson, and stated
Everson proposes a net contraction out of agricultural areas. The City prefers the reserve
area over removal from the UGA.
Discussion included whether the land swap benefits farmland and the claim that
certain areas will always remain in agriculture.
Rowlson stated he does not agree with the urban reserve concept. It creates
uncertainty for the property owners. There is no value to urban reserves.
Ferndale
Dennis Rhodes, City of Ferndale Community Development Director, stated the City
submitted it's questionnaire answers last week (on file). He is available for questions.
Caskey- Schreiber asked for a summary of the City's answers.
Jori Burnett, City of Ferndale Senior Planner, stated they don't dispute the numbers
that the Growth Management Coordinating Council (GMCC) recommended. They dispute
how the numbers are distributed throughout the City and UGA. The County land capacity
analysis overstates the City's existing capacity by approximately 3,000 people. The City
acknowledges that it's existing UGA is double the capacity of what it needs to be currently.
The City proposes cutting it's UGA by half. They have identified four specific changes to the
land capacity inputs, which is documented in its proposal. The land capacity analysis
doesn't look at the distribution of employment capacity.
Discussion included aggregation; the buildable lands inventory; the City's request
regarding areas 16 and 17, including the residential and commercial components; where the
City expects residential growth to occur in areas one through four; whether including areas
16 and 17 line up with employment projections and whether those areas are planned to be
developed by big box stores; the City's project to reassess all commercial lands and their
distribution; how design standards will prevent unfettered growth of big box stores; the
City's plans to update its Comprehensive Plan, and; the City's conclusion that it needs UGA's
and the County's conclusion that the City can accommodate growth with the land it has
already.
Planning and Development Committee, 10/27/2009, 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
Lynden
Amy Harksell, City of Lynden Planning Director, referenced and read from the memo
from the City of Lynden dated October 27, 2009 regarding Lynden's response to questions
from Council Planning and Development Committee (on file), questions 1.a and 1.b. When
the agricultural plans are developed, the City would like to provide input in the process. If
they do the things they say, such as transfer of development right (TDR) sending areas, the
County must allow the urban reserve area to become a UGA.
She referenced and read from the memo from the City of Lynden dated October 27,
2009 regarding Lynden's response to questions from Council Planning and Development
Committee (on file), questions 3.a through 3.c. They have increased their density
throughout the city. They are doing infill and reducing development standards. However,
Lynden is different from other cities in the county. Residents need housing choices
throughout the county. They are allowed to preserve their character. They are slowing
their consumption of land. They have a logical outer boundary. By the time they fill their
population, another huge investment of money for infrastructure will be required. At that
time, they will have to decide how or why they should go beyond that boundary. They want
to preserve their agrarian lifestyle.
Bob Carmichael, City of Lynden Attorney, stated the City of Lynden can be a
powerful ally to preserve agricultural land in Whatcom County. Lynden is committed to an
agrarian lifestyle.
He referenced and read from the memo from the City of Lynden dated October 27,
2009 regarding Lynden's response to questions from Council Planning and Development
Committee (on file), questions 2.a and 2.b. regarding water rights.
Discussion included why the County should accommodate growth rates higher than
what the Executive and Planning Commission have recommended.
Nooksack
Rollin Harper, City of Nooksack, stated the area proposed for removal is Nooksack's
only industrial area. If removed as the Executive proposes, there is no place for industrial
job growth in Nooksack, according to Nooksack City Council members. They must maintain
a Nooksack job base.
Regarding question 2.b, the City identified a Swift Creek sedimentation area inside
the city limits of 18 acres. If that area were accounted for, it would take the land capacity
analysis surplus of two acres to negative territory. The City can work with the Nooksack
River flood plain if the UGA remains. If the UGA is removed, they will be in deficit for both
industrial and residential capacity. They would be pleased to stick with the existing UGA.
In the next two years, do public process work to find other options that don't include going
east.
Discussion included a letter from the Nooksack School District regarding retaining all
of the UGA; whether the northern part of the UGA will be residential and the southern part
of the UGA will be industrial; the City's small margin of error for land supply;
Sumas
Planning and Development Committee, 10/27/2009, 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
Rollin Harper, City of Sumas, described the City, Executive, and Planning
Commission recommendations.
Bob Bromley, Sumas Mayor, described the history of flooding in the Sumas area.
Sumas River has never flooded the city of Sumas.
Harper stated the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) maps show that
area as a flood plain.
Bromley referenced question two and stated the hydrology is reduced and
topographic data is improved. Regarding the urban reserve areas, they would like to keep
the UGA areas, but are agreeable to reserves if necessary. They can show during the next
Comprehensive Plan review that the areas should be included. They've spent a lot of money
in these areas on sewer and other utilities. When planning infrastructure, it's best to serve
both sides of the road.
Harper referenced question three and stated the average rate of people who have
moved to Sumas in the last eight or nine years, extended another 20 years, results in a
higher population than allocated. Every city in the county has seen their historic share of
growth increase from the 1990's and to the 2000's. Employment numbers have also gone
up. The County staff used assumed densities higher than those in the Sumas
Comprehensive Plan, which means the area has less capacity. There are areas in the
existing city limits that include steep slopes and historically large lots that won't subdivide,
yet capacity is being counted. If the urban reserve concept stays, they won't need right
now an industrial reserve to the north.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m.
Please contact the Council Office to obtain an
official, signed copy:
360- 676 -6690 or council(g-.o.w hatcom .wa.us
Dana Brown- Davis, Council Clerk
Laurie Caskey- Schreiber, Committee Chair
Planning and Development Committee, 10/27/2009, Page 4