Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources February 12 2008WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Natural Resources Committee February 12, 2008 Committee Chair Carl Weimer called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Bob Kelly Also Present: L. Ward Nelson Sam Crawford COMMITTEE DISCUSSION Absent: Seth Fleetwood 1. STATUS REPORT ON THE MOA BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES FOR THE LAKE WHATCOM WATERSHED RECONVEYANCE (AB2008 -074) This item was withdrawn from the agenda. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL 2. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE'S RANKING OF APPLICATIONS AND AUTHORIZATION TO CONTINUE WITH PURCHASE OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS ACQUISITIONS FOR ROUND 6 (AB2008 -087) Samya Lutz, Planning and Development Services Department, stated the Council is asked to approve the five properties in the purchase of development rights (PDR) program. Also, the Ebe property closed in January. This allows them to proceed with due diligence and get appraisals to move forward with purchases. She indicated the locations of the properties on maps. She described the five applications. Rod Erickson, PDR Committee Chair, stated the top three properties are in areas they're trying to preserve and protect direct agricultural use. The bottom two properties are not directly in agricultural areas. One committee member said nursery agriculture is in the area, which is becoming more and more important to Whatcom County. They have considered the VanderWerrff property in the past. Weimer asked the soil types for the Carbee and VanderWerff properties. Lutz stated the soil is primarily LaBounty silt loams. The soil is wetter, but still productive. Erickson stated it's a good soil, but a wetter soil. Weimer stated it seems like there's not a lot to choose from this year. He asked why there aren't more applicants. Erickson stated people may not want to tie up their property. Farmers may keep the idea in mind that their property is their retirement. Agriculture seems to be its own worst enemy. Each individual has their. reasons. They've had trouble Natural Resources Committee, 2/12/2008, Page 1 over the years getting applicants in target areas. Some applications have been turned down due to high costs. Weimer asked if they will eventually look at the balance in the Conservation Futures fund as this process moves forward. Lutz stated funding this program is primarily driven by the U.S. Department of Agriculture grant funds available for matching funds. Weimer moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION 2. DISCUSSION REGARDING LAKE WHATCOM MANAGEMENT PROGRAM POLICY DISCUSSION ITEMS (AB2008 -081B) Rebecca Craven, Council Policy Analyst, referenced her memo in the Council packet, page three. The City of Bellingham identified all potentially developable parcels, predominantly from the Assessor's database and based on the underlying zoning. Her memo includes a list of additional geographic information system (GIS) layers she's working on with County and City staff. It will further clarify the City's information. The final product will be useful to the County Council in making land use regulation decisions. They will put together information on permanent restrictions on some parcels from local acquisition programs. The utility local improvement district (ULID) restriction is for 25 years for those parcels whose owners didn't buy into the sewer district expansions. Lots in Hillsdale are outside existing utility service areas, so can't develop below a density of rural, one unit per five acres (R5A). She will identify each of those layers and number of parcels affected to provide a better idea of actual potential build out. She will explain each of the restrictions. She hopes to have that information in about a month. The amendment to the work plan is in the Council packet and coming to full Council tonight. This Committee is interested in looking at the first three policy discussion items. However, they need to wait to get the additional parcel data. The stormwater staff reviewed the special stormwater district restrictions and work plan. Staff will explain how those policy items are already covered. Weimer asked if there are fewer lots than they thought available in Sudden Valley. Craven stated she needs to clarify with the City. She understands the City's estimate did not take permanent restrictions into consideration. Nelson referenced basin three, which has a sizeable amount of potential build out. Craven stated the $10,000 figure is an improvement figure. If there are fewer than $10,000 worth of improvements on a parcel, the parcel is considered developable. If the improvement value is higher than $10,000, the lot is considered already developed. Nelson asked where they would find 789 potential lots in basin three. Craven stated this is the City's estimate, based on the County Assessor database only. Nelson stated he doesn't understand where there are 789 buildable lots in basin three. Craven stated that's why the staff wants to go through the layers. Natural Resources Committee, 2/12/2008, Page 2 Nelson asked if all the lots are buildable. Craven stated the City's analysis didn't account for whether or not the lots were buildable. It also didn't account for things like critical areas reductions, shoreline reductions, or anything similar. The analysis was for the City's acquisition program and only included the base information from the Assessor's Office. They wanted to know the maximum amount of money the City had to have to acquire any and all lots. Weimer asked if roads count in the $10,000 value. Craven stated she doesn't know if the Assessor considers that an improvement. John Hutchings, Public Works Department, stated this committee previously talked with County and City stormwater staff about policy discussion items. One item was the idea of a requirement for on -lot infiltration systems for all new construction in the watershed. It would capture and infiltrate stormwater runoff. Stormwater infiltration is preferred over treatment on sites with permeable soils. The stormwater special district standards address this issue. They call for onsite infiltration on lots of two acres or less when the soils are appropriate. That issue is addressed for the County. It doesn't go so far to address the question of whether or not the requirements produce their desired result. As they go through the work plan, staff will have a discussion and review stormwater plan designs for new development and others to look at these special district standards to see if they can review how well they work, and make recommended changes if necessary. In short, the County already has rigorous requirements for infiltration. The second policy item is stormwater retrofits on developed lots. The policy discussion is aimed at individual lots rather than groups of lots. They will move forward with work plan program area 2.4 to contemplate high priority areas of the watershed. The third policy item is exploring options for combining City and County national pollution discharge elimination system (NPDES) obligations. That activity is already identified in program area 2.6. Discussions are underway. It was added to the work plan. It's important to leverage efforts between the County and City. For the most part, the stormwater policy discussion items exist in regulation and work plans. He recommends moving forward with the work plan as it exists. Weimer stated their main points of interest were the retrofits of existing properties. The City is doing some pilot projects. Much of the information they wanted is about whether going after individual properties is feasible and beneficial. Nelson stated work with the community to find ways to educate people and improve their properties. They need cooperative, collaborative efforts. Find things to help individual property owners. Hutchings stated they seem to have come to the end of the discussion of what's in the work plan for 2008. This committee added one recommendation to make sure they have the appropriate level of government involved in discussions by creating a joint subcommittee in addition to the joint council meetings. He submitted a summary of the work plan (on file). Kelly asked the relationship currently and in the future once the total maximum daily load (TMDL) study comes out. He asked if they will be able to change the work plan when Natural Resources Committee, 2/12/2008, Page 3 the TMDL comes out. Hutchings stated they will have to change the work plan. They will probably discuss those priorities in the context of next year's priorities. Kelly stated they have all the right tools in the work plan. It's a good start. Hutchings stated he agrees. The City, County, and Sewer District are investing in a lot of activity in the watershed. Weimer asked if they are still discussing unified management instead of joint management. Hutchings stated he doesn't know the answer to that. Everyone is interested in acting as unified as they can in the watershed. They still desire some sort of unified program, but he doesn't know what that will look like. Nelson asked if that means they don't have a unified program now. Hutchings stated that's not what he's saying. Some folks would like to have a single entity be responsible for what's going on in the lake. Most people recognize that local government can't abrogate a large portion of its authority. They can collaborate uniformly. They can even collaborate on regulatory activities, but the County can't give up its authority. Staff are working well together. There is always opportunity to do a better job. Nelson stated people want one source to go to for solutions. It's frustrating for the public to have a variety of authorities. They can't take away jurisdictional responsibilities. Perhaps the staff team can come up with a model to help with that endeavor. If something can't be done, find a mechanism that can be done or have the State fix the process. Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the Executive's Office met with the new Bellingham Mayor. The City has been aggregating survey data regarding Lake Whatcom. When that information is collected, they will determine next steps, which may include recommendations to the County Council and City Council. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL 1. RESOLUTION TO FORMALIZE THE COUNCIL'S PROCESS FOR PRIORITIZATION OF INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (AB2008 -066A) John Hutchings, Public Works Department, stated the Council and administration commissioned staff to create a database of current and anticipated water resource activities. The staff has created that database, which will be the basis on which future funding would be decided. They've developed a way that this could be integrated into program development and budgeting. The resolution recognizes the work done thus far and the need for this kind of approach to be institutionalized and made permanent. They intend to have a transparent, standard, defensible process. Kelly moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. Natural Resources Committee, 2/12/2008, Page 4 1 2 AD30URN 3 4 The meeting adjourned at 10:10 a.m. 5 .� 6 7 8 Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription 9 10 11 ATTEST: ```,,�Nt�t�ttlttgt��' 12 o Y Cd" 14 15 16 17 Dani Brawn -Davis Council CleB< • 'ok STATJ OF Z ;�� ••9sy! NN Gip' `��`. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Carl Weimer, Committee Chair Natural Resources Committee, 2/12/2008, Page 5