HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning August 9 20051
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Planning and Development Committee
August 9, 2005
Committee Chair Seth Fleetwood called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. in
the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Present:
Barbara Brenner
Also Present:
None
Absent:
Dan McShane
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING
CODE, CHAPTER 20.80.800 — LIVESTOCK REGULATIONS (AB2005-
316)
Kraig Olason, Senior Planner, stated this started as a code scrub that went
awry because it became complicated. The people who tried to interpret the code
never got it right. They amended the code to make it easier for staff in the field to
use. This is not an animal- keeping ordinance. This is just a thumbnail review to
see if someone has too many animals on site. An animal owner could comply with
this section of the code and still have other problems that this section doesn't
address. The assumption was to have some protection through the critical areas
ordinance or the Department of Ecology on animal- keeping practices. This
ordinance says how to calculate the number of animals allowed on a given site.
This was originally written to get at hobby farms and people who didn't understand
the number of animal units they would be allowed. It also allows for the use of a
farm plan for commercial farms.
Brenner moved to amend Finding of Fact item 10 on Council packet page
244 "...on lands 10 aeFes e_ less than 10 acres in size and...." The language in the
ordinance is not consistent with the findings.
Motion carried unanimously.
Olason described the sections in the ordinance, including the animal unit
calculations. For animals they don't list, the ordinance includes the formulas used.
If someone has a question, they can contact the zoning administrator.
Planning and Development Committee, 8/9/2005, 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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Brenner asked what happens if someone with animals meets the total
allowed, but keeps all the animals on a small area of the parcel. Olason stated they
have to calculate the number of allowed animal units based on the acreage to which
the animals have access. Animals in confined areas have different requirements.
At one point, the ordinance listed the Conservation District as a resource, but the
Conservation District didn't have staff and funding.
Olason continued to read the ordinance. Subsection (3) applies to animals
that aren't yet weaned. One person commented that six month old calves aren't
weaned yet.
Brenner moved to amend Whatcom County Code (WCC) 20.80.805(3),
"...horses under one year, calves under sox Fnenths one year, and sheep...."
Motion carried unanimously.
Olason stated subsection (4) is how they determine net acreage. It does not
include the lawn, house site, driveway, fenced off areas, or any areas to which the
animals don't have access. People expressed a concern about the use of rental
property.
Brenner moved to amend WCC 20.80.805(4), "...is the "net acreage," which
can include leased land, is used in the above table...."
Motion carried unanimously.
Olason stated subsection (5) is controversial. There are a variety of livestock
keeping operations at Paradise Lakes. When they figure out on how small of a
parcel can allow animal units, they don't want to eliminate everything. The
Planning Commission thought the size of one - quarter acre or less should not have
any livestock.
Brenner stated she disagreed. Sometimes those rabbits and chickens are
Future Farmers of America (FFA) projects. They are treated like any other house
pet. Don't calculate by the size of the property at all. It's not fair.
Olason stated an animal unit of .05 would equal 50 pounds. The numbers in
the table are based on a stocking rate. It becomes an onerous process for staff to
regulate the small parcels. Someone has to complain before the County
enforcement will enforce the ordinance. However, one issue is whether the animals
are a noise nuisance or an animal- keeping livestock issue. That is different from
production and stocking rates.
Brenner stated some dogs weigh more than 50 pounds. It's not fair to say
someone can have a dog but not a chicken or rabbit. Olason stated the smell can
become a problem.
Planning and Development Committee, 8/9/2005, Page 2
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Brenner stated that if smell is a problem, it will be a nuisance problem.
Either way, there will be the same level of response. The nuisance law will cover
the problem.
Fleetwood asked if anyone with a lot in the urban residential areas in the
county would be able to get .05 animal units. Olason stated that is correct.
Fleetwood asked who proposed that there not be any animal units on small
acreage and the reason for the concern. Olason stated the Planning Commission
proposed it because they felt there was a size limit when the density is at an urban
level. They felt that at urban density, people shouldn't have to deal with the noise
and odor from livestock.
Fleetwood asked who was in favor of the one - quarter limitation.
Brenner stated she's had many calls about it from the public.
Fleetwood stated that small nuisances are a small problem for the Sheriff. It
would be difficult to get the Sheriff to enforce it. Private nuisance suits require that
complaints be filed. He would support the motion to amend. He asked if the
Council can amend this if it becomes a major problem for people. Olason stated
they can.
Brenner moved to amend WCC 20.80.805(5), "Lots which have net acreage
of less than one -half acre may keep up to .05 animal unit equivalent but On ne e,��
shall lovesteek be l(ept on a net acreage of j,4 aere or less on size."
Motion carried unanimously.
Olason stated the Council might need to have a public hearing because of the
change.
Fleetwood asked if the watershed protection overlay would be protective in
this circumstance. Olason stated the Council talked earlier about allowing half the
animal units allowed in a table like this.
Fleetwood stated the provisions in the water resource protection overlay
would supercede this ordinance.
Brenner moved to recommend approval to the full Council as
amended.
Motion carried unanimously.
Planning and Development Committee, 8/9/2005, Page 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 3:35 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Seth Fleetwood, Committee Chair
Planning and Development Committee, 8/9/2005, Page 4