HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning April 24 20071 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
2 Planning and Development Committee
3
4 April 24, 2007
5
6 Committee Chair Seth Fleetwood called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. in the
7 Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
8
9 Present: Absent:
10 Laurie Caskey - Schreiber None
11 Dan McShane
12
13 Also Present:
14 Barbara Brenner
15 Sam Crawford
16
17
18 COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
19
20 1. APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY LONG PLAT EXTENSION REQUEST FILED BY
21 LOIS MEYERS (AB2007 -194)
22
23 McShane moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
24
25 Motion carried unanimously.
26
27 2. RESOLUTION ADOPTING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OPEN SPACE /TIMBER
28 APPLICATIONS (AB2007 -192)
29
30 Elizabeth Olsen, Planning and Development Services Department, gave a staff
31 report.
32
33 Caskey- Schreiber moved to recommend approval of the resolution to the full
34 Council.
35
36 Motion carried unanimously.
37
38
39 COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
40
41 1. DISCUSSION REGARDING BELLINGHAM'S URBAN FRINGE SUBAREA PLAN
42 (AB2006 -309)
43
44 Fleetwood stated applicants have an opportunity to give presentations on their
45 proposals.
46
47 Heather Wolf, attorney, stated she represents Eric and Robin Hitz, the sole owners of
48 the Queen Mountain five -year review area. She submitted a presentation (on file). This
49 five -year review area can help the County achieve the County's and City's Comprehensive
50 Plan goals. She indicated the location on a map. The Bellingham Planning Commission and
51 City Council, and Whatcom County Planning Commission all recommend inclusion of the
52 Queen Mountain five -year review area in the urban growth area (UGA). She read from her
53 presentation. The actual development will be determined after a public process and after
Planning and Development Committee, 4/24/2007, 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
consultation with the City and County. They will achieve goals to density and provide all
types of housing. They will promote a sense of community. This property will be annexed
after inclusion into the urban growth area (UGA).
John Templeton, 3011 Hayward Court, Bellingham, stated he proposes the Lake
Padden urban village project. The City of Bellingham did not included this area in the
recommended UGA. However, the City said it should be a priority area and reviewed as a
seven -year review area. He discussed his history with this property and project.
Bellingham and Whatcom County are growing, but no land is available to purchase in
Bellingham. The area will continue to grow as Whatcom County continues to be listed as a
best place to live and retire. People will continue to discover Whatcom County as a result of
the 2010 Olympics. There will be an influx of people by 2012. People with moderate
incomes are being forced to buy in outlying towns and areas, and then have to commute to
Bellingham, which ties up roads and services. In Bellingham, people only can afford
condominiums. Bellingham and Whatcom County will not remain the same as it has in the
past.
He submitted and read from a presentation (on file). He described the location to
the nearby arterial roads and freeway. He is the sole property owner now, and plans to
annex into the City as soon as the property is included in the urban growth area. This
development would not be of just expensive homes. There would be smaller homes. He
will develop wider streets that lend themselves to walking. Within this urban developent, he
will have some subsidized housing for people in critical job areas like nursing, police, and
fire fighters. These people are important, but they don't make higher salaries. He will
develop housing acceptable to them. Within the community, include specific occupations.
The current City plan depends on infill, which neighborhoods will fight. His project is
a practical solution with little negative impact. There are many benefits to the area and the
project.
McShane stated this area does not drain to Lake Samish. It drains into Chuckanut
Creek.
Steven Meas, 10646 Sand Point Way N6, Seattle, submitted and read through his
information (on file). Include his property in the UGA. It will support Bellingham population
growth.
Fleetwood asked how Mr. Meas made a formal application to Whatcom County. Meas
stated he wrote a letter to the County Planning Department in 1993. Two years ago, he
spoke with Troy Holbrook about his application, which is how he got here.
Crawford asked if this area is in the five -year review area.
Hal Hart, Planning and Development Services Director, stated it is not currently in
the five -year review area, but the City included it in the. process.
Crawford asked the status of the Ralph Black King Mountain area. Hart stated it is
not in the five -year review area.
JoAnne Roe, 5041 Guide Meridian, Bellingham, stated nothing is going to take place
between the existing UGA and Smith Road without her property. The front yards of her and
her neighbors will be taken away due to the Guide Meridian expansion. Many of them have
Planning and Development Committee, 4/24/2007, Page 2
1 property that joins Cordata. Nothing can be done with it. They would like to be included in
2 the UGA.
3
4 Crawford asked if she would like to be included in the UGA, even if the Caitac
5 property is not. Roe stated that is correct. Her neighbors also want to be included. The
6 area is no longer a viable neighborhood.
7
8 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
9
10 Roe submitted and read from her presentation (on file). This has been zoned
11 agricultural land for many years, but there is no agricultural land there. Including this land
12 in the UGA and developing it would not destroy something that already exists. It's a logical
13 place to grow. The center of the county is right there at the intersection of Smith Road and
14 the Guide Meridian.
15
16 George Leonard, 247 Van Wyk Road, submitted a letter from his neighborhood (on
17 file). A large group of his neighbors would like to be included in the urban growth area.
18 They have wanted this for a long time.
19
20 Saran Meas, 10646 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, asked the County to include their
21 property in the urban growth area. There is a lot more growth here. It's going to continue.
22 Their land can support a lot of residential units, including affordable housing. There are
23 plans for a road extension that can help with traffic flow. The demand for these homes
24 exists. Seattle didn't plan well for its growth. They've worked with City and County officials
25 and hope to provide productive and efficient growth.
26
27 Hart stated they are looking at potential five -year review areas. Ralph Black is in a
28 five -year review area. This is a process of discovery. This process will help determine how
29 many units they might get out of one of these areas. If the Council wants to go forward
30 with one of these areas, the staff will bring forward information on the specifics of that area.
31 One of the Council's role is to shape the rate of growth and the overall future city.
32
33 Questions include the amount of density that can be achieved on these properties,
34 whether jobs can be created within this area, what other developments that are being
35 proposed adjacent to these areas, sewer and water availability, and preserving natural
36 features. They must figure out the associated real costs for things such as transportation.
37 Staff will put together information on existing and planned transit routes.
38
39 Caskey- Schreiber asked the criteria previously used to identify the five -year review
40 areas. Hart stated he would look for that information and bring it forward.
41
42 Caskey- Schreiber asked how the Growth Management Act handles the five -year
43 review areas and if the County has some flexibility. Hart stated they are a process specific
44 to Whatcom County. The County has flexibility.
45
46 Brenner stated she would like staff to do a more in -depth analysis of some of these
47 areas.
48
49 Fleetwood stated the committee will discuss the timeline of the rest of this process at
50 the end of the meeting. He asked staff to describe what a Lake Padden overlay zone may
51 look like.
52
Planning and Development Committee, 4/24/2007, Page 3
1 Cathy Craver, Planning and Development Services Department, submitted updated
2 aerial photos (on file). At Hillsdale, about 80 extra lots can be divided, creating 160 to 200
3 lots. She did a very basic analysis, with no detail. Because of the City's sewer extension
4 policy, those lots may not be created.
5
6 Fleetwood asked what an overlay zone would be for these lots.
7
8 Amy Pederson, Planning and Development Services Department, stated there is an
9 existing watershed protection zone for Lake Whatcom. The overlay district addresses types
10 of uses and surfacing options. In terms of zoning density, they are looking at the
11 underlying zone, which would be urban residential, three units per acre (UR -3). A density
12 of UR -4 is generally the minimum urban standard. Because they have a UR -3 zone in those
13 two sections of the watershed UGA, there are questions of whether it is acceptable.
14 Because the area is in a sensitive watershed, the Hearing's Board accepted the lower, UR -3,
15 density. If they go below that, there is some question as to whether it would pass muster.
16 An alternative would be to look at areas to zone rural, one unit per five acres (R5A) and
17 remove from the UGA.
18
19 Fleetwood asked how they would formally do the downzone to those sensitive areas.
20 Pederson stated that if they reevaluate the zoning, they need to concurrently consider the
21 Comprehensive Plan or urban growth area designation. That would all be done as a part of
22 this process.
23
24 Caskey - Schreiber asked the likelihood this area would ever been annexed.
25
26 Pat Carmen, City of Bellingham Planning Department, stated annexation is a State
27 requirement. The City has used the petition method for annexations. The landowners must
28 submit a petition for annexation. The City has not received a petition for annexation from
29 the Hillsdale area.
30
31 Fleetwood asked if the petition method is the only means of annexation. Carmen
32 stated it is not. There are about seven different methods for annexation.
33
34 Brenner asked for information on those annexation options. She asked for more
35 information on the City's annexation process.
36
37 Caskey- Schreiber stated that if this remains in the UGA, the density can't go lower
38 than UR -3. The question is whether they revoke the UGA designation. People in that area
39 have no interest in annexing. She asked if they can zone at a density lower than UR -3.
40 Pederson stated it would be difficult to zone at a density lower than UR -3. It would have to
41 be tested at the Hearing's Board level.
42
43 McShane stated all options seem to have GMA implications. One option may be to
44 lower the density, using the argument that it's a drinking water resource protection zone.
45 Similar things have been done by the City of Edmonds. It's a legitimate argument. That
46 makes the most sense for a variety of reasons.
47
48 There are alternative approaches, including removing the area from the UGA or
49 leaving it as a UGA. He asked if the City would run a risk of being challenged by agreeing to
50 the overlay zone, since they won't extend services to the area. Pederson stated they'd have
51 to ask the City that question. There are some larger parcels in the Hillsdale area that could
52 be considered. They could remove the southeast area of the Hillsdale area.
53
Planning and Development Committee, 4/24/2007, Page 4
1 Hart stated they are talking about two things to protect the drinking water. One is to
2 reduce the density in the urban growth area. Another is reducing the ability to further
3 subdivide those zones. From a planning standpoint, they need to do two things. Reduce
4 the UGA, which would be a significant downzone. They would have to discuss that with the
5 City.
6
7 McShane moved to remove the east - southeast portion of the Hillsdale UGA and
8 create a Lake Whatcom watershed zone for the remaining area, which would preclude
9 additional lots from being created in the UGA. This is not inconsistent with the City's policy
10 on water and sewer extension. This is a clearer way of achieving the goal. It is a better
11 long -term approach for protection versus a policy that the City could quickly change, which
12 could have implications for the County in terms of having to complete stormwater fixes
13 around the lake. He doesn't want to have to create any more of those.
14
15 Caskey- Schreiber stated she is nervous about the overlay. It sounds like it's really
16 not a designation that is usually associated with zoning. Remove the southeast area from
17 the UGA, and see if the Bellingham City Council will concur.
18
19 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side B.)
20
21 Caskey- Schreiber stated those development rights could be included in a transfer of
22 development rights (TDR) bank.
23
24 McShane restated his motion to remove from the UGA the u- shaped area at the
25 southeast corner of the Hillsdale area that includes larger lots.
26
27 Crawford asked if they can preserve some value in not developing by changing the
28 zone.
29
30 McShane stated it would be a mandatory TDR.
31
32 Crawford stated that removing the land from the UGA gives a mandatory density of
33 one unit per five acres.
34
35 Fleetwood asked if these people would still be entitled to a TDR.
36
37 Hart stated they would have to reopen the TDR program itself first, and make an
38 amendment to the program to allow TDR's to be recorded from these properties.
39
40 There was discussion on how to preserve the development rights on properties that
41 they downzone by removing areas from the UGA.
42
43 Crawford stated he recommends that the committee vote against this motion. First,
44 this will make an incongruous UGA boundary. He's concerned about property owners in the
45 area, Don't punish people for waiting to develop.
46
47 Caskey- Schreiber stated the City has offered these property owners sewer and water
48 if they agree to not subdivide. Ms. Carmen will bring that agreement and those results to
49 the next Planning Committee meeting.
50
51 Hart stated the Planning Commission has asked that the very southeast corner be
52 removed from the UGA.
53
Planning and Development Committee, 4/24/2007, Page 5
Caskey- Schreiber stated that if enough property owners participate, it won't be
necessary to create a mass of TDR's.
McShane stated that ultimately what's important is that they don't create any more
lots out there. That's his goal, however they get there. He will not withdraw his motion.
Fleetwood moved to hold this motion in committee for two weeks.
Motion carried unanimously.
Crawford asked if these property owners would be notified. Hart stated staff would
provide notice of a potential downzone to property owners. Staff will look at their zoning
tools, the City service agreement with landowners, and the overlay zone process to clarify
how to achieve the goal of not creating additional lots out there.
Fleetwood stated determine whether its necessary to do any adjustments at all on
the Hillsdale map.
McShane stated he doesn't have confidence that the City policy to withhold services
outside the city limits will last in the long run. That's a big deal in the County's perspective.
Because of those incremental decisions, the County ends up responsible for creating
stormwater protections and fixing a broken stormwater system in that zone.
Crawford stated the only new hookups being allowed are for a limited number of
folks who already had a promise from the City in writing. In addition, there must be
completion in one year.
Craver stated decisions on the Geneva area could be postponed until they hear from
the City on the agreements mentioned in the Hillsdale discussion. About 150 lots could be
created. Regarding the Padden map, a maximum of about 600 lots could be created. The
Padden /South Samish map would allow a maximum of about 1,100 lots. Given the
comments of Ms. Pederson, it's difficult to define any kind of overlay. Pederson stated the
Padden watershed hasn't been mentioned before in terms of sensitive watersheds. At this
point, analysis of the issues hasn't been done. She's not sure if it's appropriate to do that
evaluation in this process.
McShane stated an environmental impact statement (EIS) talks about harm to Lake
Padden. The language is specific. Concerns raised by its authors were not taken into
account in any of the proposals the County has received. There is some analysis
information they can consider.
Fleetwood asked staff to look at the process by which they can achieve what they're
trying to do, and determine the most appropriate means to get there if they want those
protections in place.
Caskey- Schreiber stated the question is whether this area is appropriate for a UGA.
If they can't do an overlay zone and want to reduce density, consider the options, including
shrinking the UGA.
McShane stated they should pull areas out of the UGA. The City provided some
maps of existing service areas. That should partially inform this process. Although he
wants to be aggressive about protecting this area, it is the City's lake. The City ought to
consider the consequences of that. Other areas are served and not totally developed. He
Planning and Development Committee, 4/24/2007, Page 6
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
would be less inclined to drop out areas that already have service. Where development has
already occurred, leave those areas in the UGA. However, many areas are not yet served.
There was discussion on the remaining schedule for getting through the Bellingham
urban growth area issue.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape two, side A.)
They continued discussion on the remaining schedule for this item.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
ADJOURN
yTtLe meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
� ��
C u � ffi
Dana B��v � s,q� � cil q erk
.48H AG. •
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
""/44,3
th Fleetw d, Committee Chair
Planning and Development Committee, 4/24/2007, Page 7