HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning March 11 20081 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
2 Planning and Development Committee
3
4 March 11, 2008
5
6 Committee Chair Seth Fleetwood called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m. in the
7 Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
8
9 Present: Absent:
10 Laurie Caskey- Schreiber None
11 Carl Weimer
12
13 Also Present:
14 Bob Kelly
15
16
17 COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
18
19 1. RESOLUTION INITIATING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING
20 AMENDMENTS FOR 2008 (A132008 -120)
21
22 David Stalheim, Planning and Development Services Department Director, stated
23 they will discuss all the items on the list. The code requires that this ordinance come before
24 the Council in March. It would be better to finish the discussion of the long range work
25 program before doing this, but this ordinance must come forward in March. When they talk
26 about these items, keep in mind that the workload may prevent some things from getting
27 done. Staff recommends that two items, 2008 -G and 2008 -H on the list, be removed. He
28 will discuss those reasons.
29
30 Fleetwood asked about last year's docket items that are still on the list. Stalheim
31 stated several of the 2007 items can be rolled over to 2008. If they can get those items
32 done sooner, they'll accomplish them under the 2007 batch, and they'll come off the 2008
33 list. There aren't many new 2008 items that weren't on the 2007 docket.
34
35 Weimer asked if the items listed include everything introduced this year by the
36 Council and public. Stalheim stated the only private amendment item from this past year is
37 2008 -H, the agricultural item. Some of the agricultural amendments were private but not
38 paid for.
39
40 Weimer asked if all the docket items from the past that haven't been done are on
41 this list. Stalheim stated he believes so.
42
43 Weimer stated docket items are supposed to be done the same year they're
44 docketed, according to the code. He asked if the County is liable for not meeting its own
45 code. Stalheim stated that's a question for the attorney. The purpose under the Growth
46 Management Act of doing them simultaneously is to look at the cumulative impacts. This is
47 the first jurisdiction in which he's worked that has a specific timeline.
48
49 Fleetwood stated there is one private application. Seven docket items are from the
50 past. There are three new docket items.
51
52 Stalheim described the history of item 2008 -A, the Bellingham Subarea Plan. Now,
53 he assumes it will take a limited amount of staff time to address issues resulting from the
Planning and Development Committee, 3/11/2008, Page 1
urban growth area land use designations and anything that affect land use in the Lake
Whatcom watershed. Those two areas are what they scoped for work on this task.
Staff talked with City Planning staff. The City and County must coordinate, according
to the Growth Management Act. The Planning Commissions have not yet coordinated, and
that will take a considerable amount of effort. In the next year, they should work towards
that and the 2011 update. The tasks here are minor amendments to the plan.
Weimer asked if the City of Bellingham is okay with putting it off until 2011.
Stalheim stated the Bellingham Planning staff are. They have a lot of work to do also. It is
not on their work plan for this year either. He's allocated time for County staff to do some
work to fill the holes to implement urban growth area decisions and the main policy issues.
Cathy Craver, Planning and Development Services Department, described docket
item 2008 -A, the Bellingham Subarea Plan. The potential zoning amendment is the urban
residential mixed use, 10 to 24 units per acre (UR -MX 10 -24) and the UR -MX 6 -12. Those
items are also considered due to a Title 20 rewrite. Now, it doesn't affect any development
applications. They're working with County geographic information system (GIS) staff to do
watershed analysis in terms of the remaining buildable lots. When that's done, they can
consider a potential Lake Whatcom urban zone. The new urban growth area boundary is
effective now. Staff will coordinate with the City about what the interlocal agreement will
need in the future.
Fleetwood stated they were going to work on land supply and boundaries, zoning
within the urban growth area (UGA). When they finish that, they will work on updating the
chapters and policies. He asked if that's not going to happen in 2008. Craver stated the
proposed chapters are in a different format from the 1997 plan. Staff proposed bringing
forward a subarea plan that mimics the chapters of the Comprehensive Plan. The plan was
to go through the policies and finish the chapters. However, there are coordination and
staffing issues that need to be addressed first. For now, they will hold back on updating the
chapters. They will update the necessary components, such as the zoning and interlocal
agreement.
Rebecca Craven, Council Policy Analyst, stated the proposed work plan from two
weeks ago included a. recommendation that the Bellingham Subarea Plan would not be done
this year. She asked about whether the recommendation is to docket this item.
Stalheim stated the work plan assessment is just what they anticipate as the hours
necessary to do all that work. Those tasks were put into priority order and drew a line at
what they could do with existing staff. He hopes they can do certain items quicker so they
can do more. The docketing element is a code requirement and a placeholder to deal with
these issues. If they don't docket the item now, it means that they don't have the ability to
bring it forward in the amendment process. He's assigned few hours to this project, so he
thinks they can get it done.
Craven asked if the 65 staff hours allocated in the work plan includes renegotiation
of the interlocal agreement.
Stalheim stated it does not. The work plan assesses all staff except the director and
supervisory staff.
Craven asked if something else has to fall off a staff person's workload to attend to
these docket items.
Planning and Development Committee, 3/11/2008, Page 2
Stalheim stated he doesn't have an answer to that question at this time. Everyone's
workload has been compiled. Overall, the tasks assigned to Ms. Craver are within her
available workload, including this item.
Weimer stated he would like to know which docket items the Council won't receive
according to the code's required timeline. Stalheim stated one of the first items on the work
plan is to amend the docketing ordinance to remove the timeline. They can reconsider the
timing issues. It's probably not a good idea for the Council to have a bunch of
Comprehensive Plan amendments in November, at the same time the Council addresses the
County budget.
Craven asked if they need to re- docket the 2007 items.
Fleetwood stated it couldn't hurt.
Caskey- Schreiber asked what happens to those items they don't re- docket. They've
already voted to docket those items, so they should be addressed. She's nervous about
setting the 2008 docket when there are past docket items that aren't done. Stalheim stated
all the items from the past are included on the 2008 docket list.
Caskey- Schreiber stated not everything docketed in the past is included on the 2008
list. Stalheim stated that right now, they are just dealing with Comprehensive Plan
amendments, not zoning code amendments or anything else. Zoning amendments that
require Comprehensive Plan amendments are done jointly. The other items on the list are
just zoning code amendments, dealt with separately.
Kelly asked how they separate out the Comprehensive Plan amendments from the
work identified in the work plan when they don't have enough staff to do all the work. The
assessment included a recommended priority. They now have a list of Comprehensive Plan
amendments, but the Council hasn't addressed this other list. Until they've addressed the
work plan, they won't be able to get at the docket items. He asked if the Council can
prioritize the work plan first, and then give Mr. Stalheim direction on what to work on first.
Maybe all, some, or none of the docket items would be at the top of the priority list.
Weimer stated that if they want some of the zoning items to have a higher priority,
make sure the staff time is available to address those, and leave off some of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Kelly stated that's correct. Past docket items shouldn't be forgotten.
Caskey- Schreiber stated that is her concern. She asked about the proposed text and
zoning amendments that are hanging out there. She asked what happens when the school
districts come forward with their capital facilities plans. The budget cycle has never stopped
them from doing Comprehensive Plan amendments in the past. They just held extra
meetings. She's surprised about putting the Parks Plan on hold. They spent a lot of money
on that plan. Not adopting it would be foolish. It will be dated by the time it's adopted.
Stalheim stated he doesn't recommend that.
Weimer moved to recommend docketing item 2008 -A to the full Council, although
he prefers to use the previous docket number from the previous year.
Motion carried unanimously.
Planning and Development Committee, 3/11/2008, Page 3
1
2 Stalheim referenced docket item 2008 -B. This item was held for a groundwater
3 study, which is now done. Roland Middleton has integrated this project into his work plan
4 for the coming year. This amendment includes code amendments. Staff can accomplish
5 this item in 2008.
6
7 Weimer asked if this would just incorporate the groundwater study into the subarea
8 plan, and doesn't include a rewrite of the plan. Stalheim stated that's correct.
9
10 Craven asked about needing consultant time, as identified in the long range work
11 plan.
12
13 Stalheim stated he doesn't think they will need a budget for a consultant. He had
14 hoped to complete this task soon. Mr. Middleton can conclude this item in the Fall, without
15 consultant resources.
16
17 Weimer moved to recommend docketing item 2008 -B to the full Council.
18
19 Motion carried unanimously.
20
21 Matt Aamot, Planning and Development Services Department, referenced docket
22 item 2008 -C. There is a draft plan. An environmental impact statement (EIS) for land use,
23 transportation, public services and facilities, water quality and quantity, and alternatives for
24 population projections and land use designations gives decision- makers alternatives. In
25 2008, staff will finish the EIS and adopt the plan. He recommends that this item be
26 initiated.
27
28 Weimer moved to recommend docketing item 2008 -C to the full Council.
29
30 Motion carried unanimously.
31
32 Aamot referenced docket item 2008 -D. The last update to the Capital Improvement
33 Program (CIP) was in 2006. The next update is due in 2008, for the years 2009 -2014.
34
35 Weimer moved to recommend docketing item 2008 -D to the full Council.
36
37 Motion carried unanimously.
38
39 Caskey- Schreiber moved to recommend docketing item 2008 -F to the full Council.
40
41 Motion carried unanimously.
42
43 Aamot referenced docket item 2008 -H. He described the location and attributes of
44 the site. The site has been used for agriculture as cropland. There is a wooded area and
45 home on the southern portion of property. The site is classified as Agriculture /Open Space.
46 The amount of land in farm production has been steadily shrinking over time. It's possible
47 that this site will be reviewed during subarea review. .Director Stalheim recommends not
48 docketing this item.
49
50 Caskey- Schreiber asked if the Agricultural Advisory Committee looked at this.
51 Aamot stated it did not.
52
Planning and Development Committee, 3/11/2008, Page 4
1 Bill Kamphouse, applicant, stated he is the applicant's son and described the
2 location. The Soil Conservation Service listed 17 acres of this 38.4 acres as agriculture.
3 The land is steep. He asks that ten acres be set aside for residential. Set aside 75 percent
4 of the property for agriculture.
5
6 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
7
8 Kamphouse continued to state that the property is too steep for agricultural use. He
9 indicated the location of the steep portion of the property on a map.
10
11 Fleetwood asked if the applicant considered rezoning only the steep portion of the
12 property, and leaving the rest of the property zoned agriculture. Aamot stated rezoning half
13 or less of the land would allow only two additional houses or less. A rezone of the entire
14 site would allow perhaps four densities.
15
16 Caskey- Schreiber stated she doesn't want to lose any more agricultural land in
17 Whatcom County.
18
19 Weimer moved to recommend docketing item 2008 -H to the full Council. Part of
20 the agricultural program discussion the Council is to have is to consider clustering on these
21 types of lands. This request is ahead of that discussion.
22
23 Kamphouse stated this is a steep hillside that has a beautiful view lot. It's not
24 agricultural land. It's too steep to farm. The soil Conservation Service has listed 17 acres
25 of the 40 acres total. The property is right against the mountain.
26
27 Motion failed unanimously.
28
29 Gary Davis, Planning and Development Services Department, referenced docket item
30 2008 -I. It is one of the 2007 docket items. The fire district requested this docket item to
31 address inaccuracies in the Birch Bay community plan regarding levels of service.
32
33 Weimer moved to recommend docketing item 2008 -I to the full Council.
34
35 Motion carried unanimously.
36
37 Weimer referenced docket item 2008 -3.
38
39 Fleetwood asked to reference the 2007 docket numbers on the appropriate 2008
40 docket items where applicable.
41
42 Weimer stated there are conflicting policies in that section. He moved to
43 recommend docketing item 2008 -3 to the full Council.
44
45 Motion carried unanimously.
46
47 Weimer moved to recommend docketing item 2008 -K to the full Council.
48
49 Motion carried unanimously.
50
51 Stalheim referenced docket item 2008 -L. This is a two -year project on the
52 department's work plan, through 2009, because of the expected public involvement. They
Planning and Development Committee, 3/11/2008, Page 5
are evaluating strategies to make that happen sooner rather than later, so include this on
the docket this year.
Caskey- Schreiber stated two years ago, the Council budgeted over $200,000 in
staff time to address this issue. She would like to know what happened to that money.
Hire a consultant if they can't do the work in- house. Stalheim stated he is exploring the
option of hiring a consultant. Mr. Davis has done a lot of background work already on the
policy issues.
Caskey- Schreiber moved to recommend docketing item 2008 -L to the full Council.
Motion carried unanimously.
Davis referenced docket item 2008 -M and stated this was a 2007 docket item.
Caskey- Schreiber moved to recommend docketing item 2008 -M to the full Council.
Motion carried unanimously.
Stalheim referenced docket item 2008 -E. Staff reviewed this item to see if it meets
Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements, and found that quite a bit of work has to be
done to make the plan compliant. The Parks Department is interested in having a plan that
meets the Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office requirement for adoption of
parks plans, which is an entirely different cycle that makes the department eligible for State
funding.
The plan is a policy document of the County that also directs some of the capital
facilities investments. The State Recreation and Conservation Office does not require the
plan be adopted as a part of the Comprehensive Plan. It can be adopted as a standalone
County document. Parks Department Director Mike McFarlane is therefore bringing the
document forward as a resolution for Council approval as a parks plan.
Including the Parks Plan into the Comprehensive Plan will take more time, specifically
on the level of service tables, facility inventory, and other missing information that would
make the document GMA - compliant. A lot of work would have to be done. There are not
staff resources to make the Parks Plan GMA - compliant.
Caskey- Schreiber asked if the County could hire a contractor to do that work.
Stalheim stated the County could.
Caskey- Schreiber asked if the County could use unspent salary funds from vacant
positions to pay for that contract. Stalheim stated the amount of salary recapture for this
year is a little over $100,000. There are also consultant dollars assigned to the zoning code
scrub. They have some funds available. However, they need to discuss spending those
dollars in the context of all the docket items and the Council's priorities.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she's fine with delaying this item if approval by resolution to
capture grant funds is acceptable. Stalheim stated Mr. McFarlane is fine with this strategy.
However, it doesn't address the issue of concurrency and impact fees.
Caskey- Schreiber stated concurrency and impact fees are goals of the Parks Plan.
She will support any contract and a budget amendment to get that work done.
Planning and Development Committee, 3/11/2008, Page 6
Weimer asked if they can go forward with the Parks Plan resolution now, and do the
Parks Plan GMA- compliance later, with an amendment to the Parks Plan. Stalheim stated
the Parks Plan is a wish list. The Comprehensive Plan will bring the list back down to the
issue of fiscal availability. They won't have to amend the Parks Plan when it becomes a part
of the Comprehensive Plan.
Weimer stated parks concurrency is important. There was significant money left
over from the 2007 Planning and Development Services Department budget. That money
has been lost. Now they're talking about having $100,000 left over so far in the
department's budget. Also, the Council is supposed to have a review of the two -year
budget, but the Council hasn't received that review. Recapture the money that was
budgeted, but never used.
Caskey- Schreiber stated the administration should spend the money budgeted for
certain things.
Craven stated the amount left over in the department is more than $500,000. To
have access to that money, there must be a request for continuing appropriation to the
Executive each year. Those continuing appropriations have been assigned. According to
the fourth quarter report, the Executive hasn't allocated those dollars. Part of the reason
may be that there was a revenue shortfall in addition to unspent salaries. There may not be
actual cash available.
Weimer stated the Council should add budget supplemental requests to those that
come forward.
Craven stated that to consider additional staff and contractors for this parks plan
item, it should be on the 2008 docket, so the department is obligated to address the item.
Caskey- Schreiber moved to recommend docketing item 2008 -E to the full Council.
Motion carried unanimously.
Fleetwood referenced docket item 2008 -G.
Caskey- Schreiber stated this is a big project. However, she's never heard of the
Agricultural Technical Review Committee. The Agriculture Advisory Committee spent at
least 18 months going through this and making solid recommendations. She asked what
this committee is, who is on it, how it was formed, and how it is qualified to process this
work program. Stalheim stated Kraig Olason called for the creation of a technical review
committee in 2006 to do this work. Funds were put into consultant resources. The County
contracted with Farm Friends to create a public involvement program to deal with the
agricultural program. That contract came before the Council in December. The Council
approved that contract. The technical review committee is in that contract.
Not all of the issues in this docketed item are within the purview of the technical
committee, including the issue of Whatcom LaBounty soils. The technical committee is
reviewing methods to maintain the agricultural land base, deal with rural lands, and effects
of cluster requirements for agriculture and rural lands. It will also look at the transfer of
development rights (TDR) program to conserve agricultural lands.
Executive Kremen appointed members to the technical review committee, which just
started meeting a month ago. Agricultural and development interests are both at the table.
Planning and Development Committee, 3/11/2008, Page 7
1
2 Caskey- Schreiber stated she would like to see a list of the members. She asked the
3 timeline. Stalheim stated the Farm Friends contract runs through 2008. The group meets
4 every two weeks. The department is providing some staff support. He and other staff
5 attend the meetings. There is also County geographic information system (GIS) support.
6
7 Weimer stated the agricultural program included three groups, the County Council
8 Natural Resources Committee, the Agricultural Advisory Committee, and the Technical
9 Review Committee, which was supposed to be made up mostly of Planning Department staff
10 who would advise the other groups on whether things are legal, up to code, and GMA-
11 compliant. Now, it looks like it's changed to another outside group that overlaps with the
12 Agricultural Advisory Committee. Mr. Stalheim should communicate with the administration
13 about when it will bring those appointments to the Council for confirmation. According to
14 the code, the Council is supposed to approve the Executive's appointments. Stalheim
15 stated that committee was appointed in 2007. They've been waiting for other things to
16 happen before convening. He doesn't know anything about that history.
17
18 Caskey- Schreiber stated she would like to revisit the Agricultural Advisory
19 Committee's recommendations for this program. That group spent a lot of time on it. She
20 would be willing to designate money for consultants to work on this item if they have to.
21 She is skeptical about this committee. She doesn't know who the members are and what it's
22 charge is. Don't hold this work up for that group.
23
24 Fleetwood stated he is also inclined to find resources to do this work. It's been going
25 on for years. Mr. Stalheim told them that a task of the Technical Review Committee is to
26 look at how they may address these problems. Comprehensive Plan proposals that were
27 included in the agricultural work program proposed solutions already. Staff was to look at
28 whether or not those proposed solutions were viable and appropriate, and whether the
29 Council has the political will to adopt them. This group has ready -made issues to consider.
30 He asked if they will get into those discussions. Stalheim stated some of those discussions
31 are also overall Comprehensive Plan discussions. Make sure that the limited resources they
32 have are put to the right place. It may be timely to ask Farm Friends to give the County an
33 update on its public involvement program and how that fits in with the agricultural program.
34
35 Caskey- Schreiber stated she agrees. She moved to recommend docketing item
36 2008 -G to the full Council.
37
38 Motion carried unanimously.
39
40 Weimer moved to recommend the resolution as amended to the full Council.
41
42 Motion carried unanimously.
43
44
45 OTHER BUSINESS
46
47 Weimer stated the Council received a resolution from the Bellingham Mayor last
48 week. There is some disagreement between the City and County about the zoning
49 definitions of rural and urban services. It comes out to the amount of density a certain size
50 pipe can serve. An 8 -inch pipe that can serve ten houses per acre isn't a rural level of
51 service. A two -inch pipe that services one house per acre can be considered a rural service.
52 The issue revolves around legal issues with the City and Water District. They will hear more
Planning and Development Committee, 3/11/2008, Page 8
1 as the issue works through the Hearing Examiner process. From talking with them, he now
2 understands where they're coming from.
3
4
5 ADJOURN
6
7 The meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m.
8
9
10
11 ]ill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
12
13 J% %111tiu►iii,1�
14 ATTF<y"�1`� C
�_.
16
17 �+ •
18
19 •
20 Cana B iva' " oun Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
AFleeX�oo4dComimittee e Chair
Planning and Development Committee, 3/11/2008, Page 9