HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommittee of the Whole October 21 20081 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
2 Committee Of The Whole
3
4 October 21, 2008
5
6
7 Council Chair Carl Weimer called the meeting to order at 6:15 p.m. in the Council
8 Conference Room, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
9
10 Present: Absent:
11 Barbara Brenner None
12 Bob Kelly
13 Seth Fleetwood
14 Laurie Caskey- Schreiber
15 L. Ward Nelson
16 Sam Crawford
17
18
19 1. DISCUSSION WITH CHIEF CIVIL DEPUTY PROSECUTOR RANDALL WATTS
20 REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION (AB2008 -018)
21
22 Nelson moved to go into executive session to discuss this item.
23
24 Motion carried 6 -0 with Crawford out of the room.
25
26 2. DISCUSSION REGARDING WORK ASSIGNMENT PROPOSALS FOR THE
27 COUNCIL'S PLANNING AND POLICY ANALYST (AB2008 -059)
28
29 (Clerk's Note: The Committee came out of executive session at 6:20 p.m.)
30
31 Rebecca Craven, Council Policy Analyst, stated several flood - related items will be
32 introduced to the Council at this evening's meeting, and will go to the Natural Resources
33 Committee on November 12. By that time, she will have a staff report and an interlocal
34 agreement.
35
36 Brenner stated she's been hearing that the coordinating council, especially the
37 County representatives, seem to be pushing for the high end of the population numbers.
38 The Council may not want to leave open certain policies about where they're heading.
39
40 Weimer stated he thought County people voted for the lower population numbers.
41
42 Craven stated the risk they run by taking direction at this point is that it will come
43 back to the Council for a decision later. Unless they do it in a fully- informed, open process,
44 the Council will be accused of making a decision before they make a decision.
45
46 Brenner stated they need to keep their options open. Craven stated none of the
47 math or other analyses will occur before the Council makes a preliminary assessment on
48 population and allocation. That will come to the Council soon. The land supply analysis will
49 happen after that. Councilmembers Crawford and Fleetwood both voted for the lower of the
50 two numbers under discussion. There was a 90- minute argument about 5,000 people in 20
51 years.
52
53 Weimer stated the Councilmembers have received a work update from Ms. Craven.
Committee of the Whole, 10/21/2008, 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
Craven stated she will continue to work on subdivision - related issues in the urban
areas of the lake. Given the total maximum daily load (TMDL) study issues and its
relationship with other issues around the lake, that work is expanding. She will continue to
work on the ten -year urban growth area (UGA) review process. Other possible work items
include the agricultural program. The technical review committee is supposed to bring
forward a list of proposed options for agricultural land preservation. The options will fit in
nicely with allocation issues between rural areas and cities in the ten -year review process.
The 2011 Comprehensive Plan update is happening. She asked how much she should
participate in the workshops and meetings, and how often the Council wants an update.
There are visioning workshops in a related process. Another issue she can look into,
although she hesitates to, is the transfer of development rights (TDR) program. It could
end up being a huge black hole of time, without being particularly successful if they can't
figure out a way to create a market to sell the rights.
Nelson stated the challenge is that no one has spent the time necessary to put ideas
together and meet with realtors, Planning staff, and the City to coordinate an effort. A
question is how they get a program in which they can actually monitor, track, and sell or
receive those types of lands. He strongly supports Ms. Craven's efforts on that program.
Everything they do at Lake Whatcom will be related. When they talk about downzoning and
removing moratoria, they will need a TDR program.
Weimer stated he also supports that effort. It goes hand -in -hand with agricultural
work. Include something to retire development rights.
Caskey- Schreiber stated they have all prioritized agriculture over the years. That
overall effort is going nowhere. Give attention to that program. She would appreciate help
in making the TDR program viable. She would like to know if it's working and if there is
something the Council needs to do. Figure out what is going on with that issue.
Brenner stated that when they began to work on the concept of TDR's, they were
told about the process, but no one ever brought it up again. There may be other areas in
the country with a working program. Find out what is successful about their program and
why it's not working here. Craven stated there are places with successful programs,
including King County. They have limited success. It has to be established in a way to
create the requirement to use them in a way that builders want. They are using TDR's in
downtown Seattle for density credits for density increases they can't get under the zoning
code, without using them.
Brenner asked if the City of Bellingham has accepted any transfer inside the city.
Craven stated that after the TDR Program was established, the City changed its utility
extension policy. It doesn't allow use of the urban residential, mixed use (UR -MX) zone in
the urban growth areas until annexation. Developers can annex, rezone, and get whatever
zoning they want from the City with utilities. There is no more incentive to use TDR's to get
that higher density.
Brenner asked about the City accepting TDR's to infill the city in locations such as
downtown. It's unfair that they dump the density just in the UGA's. Spread the density
around.
Weimer stated it sounds like there is interest on having Ms. Craven work on the TDR
program and purchase of development rights (PDR) program.
Committee of the Whole, 10/21/2008, 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
Kelly asked if TDR's and PDR's go hand -in -hand. Craven stated they can set it up so
it's one or the other, or both. The PDR Program is just an outright purchase program.
Kelly stated Governor Gregoire has TDR and PDR programs in a program with Puget
Sound Partnership. That could lead to funding. If it does, he will do everything he can in
his other job to make sure Whatcom County has its piece of the pie.
The Cascade Land Conservancy (CLC) is also doing a lot of things. It is partnered
with Weyerhaeuser. The timber industry is partnered with an environmental group. That
will be powerful. It's the same thing as farmers. Small forested landowners are the same
as farmers. If they lose the small forested landowners, they may get (inaudible). Craven
stated the partnership proposal is probably focused on the central Puget Sound counties.
Kelly stated they are talking about using models that are successful. They are
hoping to fill the gaps that exist. It would be good for Whatcom County to position itself to
be ready to take advantage of anything that may become available.
Weimer stated the two issues for Ms. Craven include the TDR and PDR programs and
the agricultural program. He doesn't know if anyone is working on the moratorium. Craven
stated various people are working on the moratorium. The natural resources staff in the
Public Works Department and the Planning Department staff are working on the Lake
Whatcom Management Program, which is related. However, no one is working specifically
on a moratorium response.
Weimer asked if Councilmembers want Ms. Craven to work on the moratorium.
Fleetwood stated the County Council promised to convene a work session soon to
figure out what a response plan should be and get serious about that list.
Brenner stated talk about a countywide response to the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. They need more specific information about the
menu of options. Find out what leeway the County has. Craven stated some of that
information will come out of the discussion about creating the stormwater utility, including
how to fund the County's response to those requirements.
Jon Hutchings, Public Works Department, stated that as they begin to put together a
six -year stormwater program budget that could be used to build a stormwater utility, those
kinds of questions about NPDES will have to be addressed. They can respond with one of
several different levels.
Brenner stated she wants to know what the law is.
Weimer asked if the Council concurs with directing Ms. Craven to work on the
agricultural program.
Weimer indicated that the Committee concurred.
Weimer asked if the Council concurs with directing Ms. Craven to work on the PDR
and TDR programs.
Weimer indicated that the Committee concurred,
Committee of the Whole, 10/21/2008, 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
Weimer asked if the Council concurs with directing Ms. Craven to continue working
on Lake Whatcom, on such things as the moratorium.
Weimer indicated that the Committee concurred. He would like to find out the
status of the clustering moratorium in forestry lands.
Fleetwood stated Ms. Craven should work on big issues that are important. That
clustering is a small issue.
Crawford stated he has a client who is affected currently by the forest land clustering
moratorium. It make perfect sense to cluster five parcels together on a flat, and put a
permanent conservation easement for a forestry use on the forested mountainside.
However, they can't do that right now.
Brenner stated that if they get four or five people with nice homes in a rural area,
they will start to complain about forestry activities. She doesn't want Ms. Craven to work
on this issue.
Weimer stated there isn't enough support for Ms. Craven to work on forestry
clustering.
Nelson stated they can't do anything anyway. It has to go through the Planning
Commission.
Fleetwood stated Ms. Craven can work on how best to allocate future population. He
would like to know to what extent the small cities are open to the idea of thoughtful
densification. He predicts that the cities will want to expand their growth boundaries to
accommodate a density of four units per acre. Some councilmembers will want the existing
growth boundaries to remain and the cities densify. Have Ms. Craven put effort into
learning about what those people in the small cities are going to do.
Brenner stated they also need to understand the capacity of the small cities in terms
of planning. Initially, people didn't do planning right. She doesn't know if the small cities
will be able to afford to do certain things.
Crawford stated his impression is that the small cities are very interested in adding
capacity. They don't buy into the myth that growth doesn't pay.for itself.. They -know that
growth pays, and they're very interested in having that capacity. For the most part, they
will take all of what the County gives to them. For the final word on the issue, the Council
will hear recommendations from the coordinating council and staff. However, everyone
representing small cities voted against trimming down the population projections. They will
address the resources that the cities have to accommodate population.
Weimer stated the ten -year review is still on Ms. Craven's list of things to do. As
part of the ten -year review, the County must review capital facilities planning for any area
dedicated as a UGA. The information on how cities will provide urban services will have to
come from the cities.
Brenner stated there have been occasions where the County agreed to certain things
happening through plans and agreements, and the rules inside a city change as soon as an
area is annexed. The area becomes something else, which the County wouldn't have
agreed to.
Committee of the Whole, 10/21/2008, 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
Caskey- Schreiber stated the cities are allowed to do that. It's their jurisdiction.
Brenner stated it changes the makeup of allocation.
Caskey- Schreiber stated Councilmembers Crawford and Fleetwood are present in
that council to act as liaisons and transfer information. The County Council is the final
decision - maker. Hopefully, the Council will get a sense of what the community wants.
Hopefully, they'll get more background information on whether these cities can provide for
what they're asking for.
Crawford stated Columbia Valley and Birch Bay, which aren't connected to a city, are
concerned about not getting represented. However, the County Council represents the
concerns of those areas. This coordinating council is a mechanism by which Director
Stalheim is trying to coordinate the planning departments of the jurisdictions. The separate
urban growth areas and the farmers don't have planning departments, so there's no need to
coordinate. The County Council is elected to consider those concerns.
OTHER BUSINESS
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m.
r—
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcripti
The Council approved these minutes on November 12 , 2008.
ATTESTk,%%%%,`� *��
.. s•.
• 3N I H b �.
y
• •� 0 =
Dana Brown -D l rk
l•
N
-.0
old • �
"rr r r 111111/00
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Carl Weimer, Council Chair
Committee of the Whole, 10/21/2008, Page 5