Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning February 26 2008WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Planning and Development Committee February 26, 2008 Committee Chair Seth Fleetwood called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Absent: Laurie Caskey- Schreiber None Carl Weimer Also Present: Sam Crawford Bob Kelly COMMITTEE DISCUSSION I. REPORT FROM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR DAVID STALHEIM REGARDING THE STATUS OF PREPARING A LONG RANGE PLANNING DIVISION WORK PLAN (AB2008 -075) David Stalheim, Planning and Development Services Director, handed out and read a presentation (on file) on Long Range Planning Assessment of work Demand and Resources Necessary. Planning used to be just about long -range planning. Now it's about all planning issues, including zoning, permitting, and long -range issues. The new Natural Resource group deals with shorelines, critical areas, and watershed issues. Code enforcement is organized under the Planning Department Assistant Director. Those tasks that cross all divisions are organized under the administration. The work groups are smaller and more focused. Look to the 2001 Growth Management Act (GMA) update to roll all those issues into that process as much as possible. Caskey- Schreiber asked if the staff could do a small Comprehensive Plan docket item she submitted a couple of years ago. Stalheim stated that the Council could make that a .priority for staff, but now it's not one of the recommended tasks. Caskey- Schreiber asked if the Council had budgeted money for consultants to do a code scrub about a year ago. Stalheim stated Bob Martin is assigned to do the code scrub. They are trying to identify and deal with emergent issues right now rather than an entire re- write of the code. Fleetwood stated his 2006 proposed Comprehensive Plan docket items were morphed into an agricultural protection program. He asked when those efforts will happen, based on staff's recommendation. Crawford stated that program is scheduled on page 22 of the draft Assessment of Resources and Priorities to Address the Long Range Planning Work Program handout. Stalheim stated that work is scheduled as part of the comprehensive agricultural program update. Part of that work is also being done through the contact with Farm Friends and Technical Review Committee. Planning and Development Committee, 2/26/2008, Page 1 1 Fleetwood stated the councilmembers should take some time to review this handout 2 and meet again to discuss it further. 3 4 Caskey- Schreiber stated she would like to take the time to do a close review of the 5 draft priorities. She's nervous about not being able to docket any more amendments until 6 they're caught up. Making amendments is one of the Council's jobs. That doesn't provide 7 service to the public. 8 9 Fleetwood stated councilmembers used to believe that docketed Comprehensive Plan 10 review items would be addressed. They know now that it depends on staff availability. 11 Now, the Council has not just the duty to put forward Comprehensive Plan amendments, 12 but they also must have a proposal to ensure there is sufficient staff to do the amendment. 13 Adequate staffing is also a Council responsibility. 14 15 Caskey- Schreiber stated she is used to the system where the Council dockets four to 16 six items per year, and they worked with the staff throughout the year to get those items 17 done. It fell apart during the Bellingham urban growth area (UGA) review. Some of the 18 staff hour estimates aren't realistic. She's in favor of adding more staff and raising property 19 taxes if necessary to get out of this hole, rather than not getting anything done. 20 21 Weimer stated some of the staff estimates are off. His proposed Cherry Point Pier 22 Policy won't take as much time as estimated, for example. He asked Mr. Stalheim to be 23 more specific in his estimates. He'd also like to see how so much staff time is spent on 24 vacations and training. Stalheim stated there is no such thing as anything being simple. 25 Everything they do has to go through State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review; the 26 State Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development (CTED); staff; and 27 Planning Commission. He wanted to make sure the estimates were conservative. The 28 numbers should be high. Put the items in priority order so the staff knows which items to 29 start on first. If the actual hours is less, it only means they can start on other projects 30 earlier. He doesn't want to promise something he can't deliver. Each item has potential 31 public involvement, which may increase the amount of staff time required. 32 33 Crawford asked if they can speed up building permit processes by some means. 34 Stalheim stated he doesn't know that answer. 35 36 Crawford stated there used to be a system where people could apply and pay a fee 37 for zoning text and Comprehensive Plan amendments. Stalheim stated they still have that. 38 There are two or three paid applications on this list. One of them is delayed through the 39 Foothills Subarea Plan process. 40 41 Crawford asked if an applicant can pay to have a lot of the staff work done. The 42 docket process was to collect all the private applications and deal with them at once. The 43 Council docketed 12 to 15 applications per year. The applicants spent money on those 44 docket items. 45 46 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) 47 48 Crawford asked if a private person can hire a consultant and present a finished 49 packet to the County, then pay a nominal fee for a limited amount of staff review before 50 forwarding to the Planning Commission. Stalheim stated they can do that. Staff will still 51 spend time on the proposal to analyze the proposition, prepare and present a report to the 52 Planning Commission, and then report the Planning Commission's findings to the Council. Planning and Development Committee, 2/26/2008, Page 2 It's not realistic that applications come in that are perfect. More likely, applicants want to sit down and talk with staff a number of times to flesh out ideas. Kelly asked the criteria used to prioritize the tasks in each category. Stalheim stated they first divided tasks into bins. They have to do legal mandates and other core functions, for example. After that, the natural resource issues are implementation tasks, which is the next priority. The special projects are ongoing. Staff prioritized planning projects and regulatory amendments. Kelly asked if the second question for Council means that the Council should possibly also consider reprioritizing the core functions. Stalheim stated the core functions and legal mandates are givens. They can reprioritize everything except core functions and legal mandates. Kelly stated staff identified deficits. He asked if he attached costs to the deficits. Stalheim stated he did not. Kelly asked staff to get the full -time equivalent (FTE) employee costs to the committee members. Stalheim stated he can do that. Rebecca Craven, Council Policy Analyst, stated she had asked Mr. Stalheim what she can do to help the Council clarify its priorities. Mr. Stalheim suggested that she take on some of the projects. That's something they'd have to talk about. Page four of the handout references a supervisor with assigned project duties. The union representatives may have an issue with unrepresented employees and supervisors doing project -level work. Stalheim stated there is so much work that the supervisors could deal with larger policy issues and staff could deal with follow -up. Many of the hours are spent going to meetings and dealing with policy issues and community outreach. That may not be a conflict with the bargaining unit. Craven asked how they account for current vacancy levels, and whether the accounting of staff levels assumes staff is hired. Stalheim stated they assume 75 percent of the total effort for 2008. All vacant positions are advertised and should be filled by March. Any staffing deficits are with permitting activities. Weimer asked if there is money available for consultants due to unfilled staff positions. Stalheim stated he doesn't know how much they've saved this year so far. It's only February. Some of that he is planning to allocate to consultants. Weimer stated he would like more information on savings. Money budgeted and not spent in 2007 is still part of the current budget and should still be available. Caskey- Schreiber stated she doesn't know what she's supposed to tell people about new projects coming forward. For instance, the Lummi Nation would like to redo the archeological sequence of events that happens when someone discovers something. In the past, she would have worked out proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments for people. Stalheim stated those are issues they must flesh out. The Growth Management Act (GMA) 2011 update is only three and a half years away. The staff can start working on those issues and begin to make sense of them. Specific work tasks can be added to the work program. He asked if there are other tasks to add to the work program. Regarding the question about more detail about the hours, time is allocated to non - program projects. The Planning and Development Committee, 2/26/2008, Page 3 Council can prioritize the tasks, and staff can work down the list of priorities. Now, there are too many things that aren't being worked-through logically. Crawford stated the handout is very well done. This is a great, comprehensive starting point. Fleetwood asked about the idea of a one -time contract with consultants to wrap up projects, with the assumption that they could take care of six or seven things and then stabilize. The administration has indicated there are problems with the budget. The committee can also prioritize the projects that can go to consultants. The committee will need to know how much that will cost. He asked if the committee should prioritize those projects now. Stalheim stated he can scope out projects for consultants. Most of his consultant focus has been on the 2011 GMA update. Weimer asked if there is a way to streamline the Comprehensive Plan process. He asked if some of the easier projects can short- circuit the process. Stalheim stated the annual amendment process for Comprehensive Plan amendments is set by State law. However, the process for regulatory amendments is in the County Code, not State law. The County Council annual docketing process for amending the zoning code is not a State mandate. Weimer asked if a hired consultant can prepare the staff report for a Comprehensive Plan amendment that would go directly to the Planning Commission. Stalheim stated they still have to have staff review and staff time spent at the Planning Commission. That time can be lessened. Fleetwood stated this item can be held in committee for two weeks. Caskey- Schreiber moved to recommend to the full Council to have the Council Policy Analyst review the document and provide Council feedback on reprioritizing the projects. Weimer stated they can address that option at the Committee of the Whole meeting. The committee did not vote on the motion. Fleetwood stated this will be held in committee for two or four weeks. Stalheim stated he will provide information on expenditures in 2007 and 2008, more detail on hours available, and more detail on how they came up with task hours. Let him know which tasks specifically they want more detail on. Craven stated she would like to know where authorized positions have ended up as a result of the reorganization. She would like to know if the same number of people and the same seniority exist in the reorganization chart. Stalheim stated he can provide that information. The 13.5 FTE's don't include the managers. They have transferred planner levels to different levels. He will provide a chart. He will also provide the cost for the FTE's. OTHER BUSINESS Planning and Development Committee, 2/26/2008, Page 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 There was no other business. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 4:17 p.m. ::� Lt__� Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription ATT§4 . .••• �cl J 't! '.� _ •4 s ,A - lerk WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON G eth Fleet Wood, Committee Chair Planning and Development Committee, 2/26/2008, Page 5