HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning April 11 2006WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Planning and Development Committee
April 11, 2006
Committee Chair Seth Fleetwood called the meeting to order at 3:06 p.m. in the
Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Present:
Barbara Brenner
Alsa Present:
None
OTHER BUSINESS
Absent:
Dan McShane
Mary Heinricht, Ag Prospects, 717 -16th Street, Bellingham, stated the
councilmembers are invited to attend a regional agricultural summit on Friday, April 28,
2006 at the Best Western Cottontree Inn in Mt. Vernon. She would also like to do telephone
interviews with the councilmembers to get consensus on issues.
Brenner stated she hopes this is something really productive. She's been to past
regional functions that didn't result in anything. She would like to hear specifics. Heinricht
stated she is interviewing everyone. The meeting will be just for elected officials and key
staff. It's not open to the public. The meeting is to see what they can do for the next step.
Brenner stated that if a majority of councilmembers attend, it will have to be open to
the public.
Fleetwood asked Ms. Heinricht's background. Heinricht stated she is self - employed.
She has a contract with Snohomish County to facilitate this effort. She also has a contract
with Skagit County to do a feasibility study for transfers of development rights. She is a
consultant and mediator. She was the keynote speaker at the statewide agricultural
conference two years ago. Previously, she lived in Virginia, New York, and Colorado. She
has been working for 20 years on agricultural issues. In the last seven years, she got
legislation through on major funding packages for purchases of development rights and
other agricultural programs. Depending on the county, transfers of development rights may
or may not be a good tool. She is doing a feasibility study for Skagit County on whether it
will help or hurt their market. She's found that some of the most successful programs
ended up in 25 -acre hobby farms, not commercial agriculture.
Brenner stated she is in favor of small acreage farming. Heinricht stated the success
depends on the community. Skagit County is looking specifically at commercial -scale
agriculture. This is not all about commercial agriculture. It may work in some areas that
have a higher rate of growth. It depends on the market.
Kraig Olason, Senior Planner, asked if the meeting is closed to the public, or just that
the public is not open to comment.
Heinricht stated the meeting is by invitation only.
Planning and Development Committee, 4/11/2006, Page 1
Fleetwood stated they will consult with the Clerk of the Council to make sure the
councilmembers can attend.
Olason stated this is a broad discussion about agriculture regionally.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO
AMENDMENT #6 TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM
COUNTY AND THE CITY OF LYNDEN, ALLOWING THE ANNEXATION OF
APPROXIMATELY 104 ACRES ON WEST MAIN STREET AND BERTHUSEN
ROAD WITHIN THE CITY OF LYNDEN'S URBAN GROWTH AREA (AB2006 -178)
Elizabeth Olsen, Planner II, stated this is straightforward annexation. She presented
a map.
Brenner asked if it's their right to annex if in the short-term planning area, and if this
is more of a courtesy. Olsen stated this is more of a courtesy. The only question she has is
due to the fact that the City of Lynden has land designated as open space agriculture within
the city limits that is also zoned light industrial. The people who own the land are not
willing to give it up. In this case, it makes a very useful addition to the city of Lynden.
Some of the land will be used as a recreational trail because it goes to the Bertheson Park.
The amendment is just to update the interlocal agreement.
Kraig Olason, Senior Planner, stated one question on these types of items is
timeliness. Even if in a short-term planning area, the County will consider whether the
annexation is timely. Regarding interlocal agreements, although it's not the case with this
case, this is the time to have a conversation with the City. If the City and County can't
come to an agreement, the County could have a hearing. In this case, with light impact
industrial, it's hard to say the annexation is premature. In the future, they will look at more
upfront notice. This case is a done deal.
Brenner asked if the County doesn't have the right to stop the City from annexing
anything in the short-term urban growth area (UGA). Olason stated it's still County
property. Until annexed, it's still the County's right to enforce conditions and ask for a
hearing if something in the interlocal agreement isn't being followed. If a city is using up all
its short-term planning area, the County has rights.
Brenner stated she's not sure the County has that discretion, unless there is
something in the interlocal agreement that a city isn't following. Olason stated the County
is always a party to the discussion of timeliness. Comprehensive Plan policies say that up to
90 percent of the UGA boundaries should be in short-term planning areas. If a city is doing
lower density than established in the Comprehensive Plan, the County can ask whether the
city is performing to expectations when the density was divided up.
Brenner stated the interlocal agreement says a city must be in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan. Olason stated they are tied together. There is an issue if the
agreement isn't followed.
Brenner stated a city may decide when to develop the property. The County has a
say in how property is developed, but not when.
Planning and Development Committee, 4/11/2006, Page 2
Fleetwood stated the question is if the City of Lynden has an unequivocal right to
proceed with annexation if in a short-term planning area. Olason stated the City has a right
to proceed. However, it doesn't preclude the County from requesting a hearing on an
unresolved issue.
Fleetwood asked if what is gleaned from the hearing may or may not result in them
not being able to go forward. Olason stated it also may result in conditions.
Brenner stated the County has some discretion if a city doesn't adhere to the
interlocal agreement. If a city is doing its densities, nothing in the interlocal agreement
restricts the rate of development. The County should be extremely careful and only say
something when a city doesn't adhere to the interlocal agreement.
Olason stated staff has been trying to have more upfront conversations with the
cities before they bring annexations forward. Also, if the time period isn't met, they can
invoke a hearing and revoke the request if the issue is resolved ahead of the hearing date.
The County is not contesting this annexation.
Fleetwood stated the Council doesn't see these cases very much. He asked the role
of the Boundary Review Board. Olsen stated the owners looked for industrial land for their
project. There wasn't any land available. Therefore, the owners got some land in the
short -term planning area. The owners then approached the City of Lynden Planning
Department. The City Planning Commission held a hearing and made a recommendation to
the Lynden City Council. The case then went to the Boundary Review Board, which
distributes the issue to the County and various other agencies. In that time, there is a 45-
day review. The County received notice late, but there isn't anything of concern. If
everything is fine, an amendment to the interiocal agreement is put forward to the County
Council.
Olason stated the Boundary Review Board reviews for logical boundaries and other
issues. Recently, there were questions about whether the Board must evaluate whether an
annexation is compliant with the Growth Management Act (GMA). Now, they consider the
GMA. As cities start to do more annexations, the County will have to interact with the cities
about how the areas are developed. The County may be in front of the Board at some point
to discuss some of the policy issues if it can't resolve the issues with a cities ahead of time.
Brenner moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
Motion carried unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS
Hal Hart, Planning and Development Services Director, stated he dropped off a
portion of the annual report to the Council on growth last week. It included a map of all
new housing projects in the county. It also included the old subarea categories. He hopes
to break down the information into the urban growth areas next. He is trying to provide
that information in anticipation of the urban growth area discussion.
Also, the Council has not scheduled a work session of the agricultural issues.
Planning and Development Committee, 4/11/2006, 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
Kraig Olason, Senior Planner, stated the Council decided not to schedule a follow up
discussion since Councilmember McShane is gone. He believed they would talk about it
next week.
Hart stated they talked about scheduling a special meeting on an off - Tuesday. Staff
is trying to coordinate with the Council.
Olason stated they talked about bringing in other folks. Councilmember Crawford
talked about getting a facilitator. They were going to talk about the structure of the work
session at the next meeting.
Hart stated that if the staff needs additional money for the work session, the
Executive's Office will need to be brought in. The issue of agricultural protection ties into
many other programs. As they move forward, make sure the focus is on agriculture, but
understand the other programs and issues.
Brenner stated the Council received a letter from the City of Blaine. She asked how
long the Council has to wait until docketing. Hart stated the process is that the Council
would say there is an additional item to docket. He has to talk to legal counsel about
docketing something outside the docket process. The issue will become important in terms
of coordinating with the City and staff. It makes a lot of sense to do it this year.
Fleetwood asked if a councilmember will initiate the docket item through a
resolution. Hart stated one would. He wants to talk to legal counsel first, then the Council
can approve a resolution tonight or in two weeks.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 3:39 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
fCr0,�
awl.idw.&M
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
na kdWb-Cr5KfV,;Coun0� Clerk / /Seth Fle% ood, Committee Chair
slip! f I INNS;
Planning and Development Committee, 4/11/2006, Page 4