HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning October 25 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
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
October 25, 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: Absent:
Barbara Brenner None
Dan McShane
Also Present:
Sharon Roy
Laurie Caskey- Schreiber
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
1. CONSIDERATION OF HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDED
APPROVAL OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, FILED BY BAY CLUB
PARTNERS, LLC., FOR " "HORIZONS AT SEMIAHMOO" (AB2005 -399)
McShane stated there is a fair bit of mitigation for the determination of non -
significance (MDNS). He asked for a description of the mitigation the planned unit
development (PUD) is providing, in addition to the fire district and school district.
Craig Parkinson, David Evans & Associates, stated mitigation as provided
under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) included traffic impact fees,
dedicated right -of -way for the connector road, wetland mitigation, and alleviation of
stormwater issues on Birch Point Road.
McShane asked if they are dedicating right -of -way for the connection
between Birch Point and Lincoln Roads. Parkinson stated that's correct. Selder
Road used to be on the County's six -year road program. The City of Blaine is not
interested in having Selder Road connect to Semiahmoo Parkway through the city
limits. The Planning Staff knew it was not a likely connection. He talked to the
County Engineering Division about some sort of connection. Ultimately, there is
potential for quite a bit of traffic. One possibility is a new road alignment through
this property to link to Lincoln Road. It would provide a good east -west connector.
This road was put on the six -year plan. The road is not required to develop this
property. They chose to include it because it's the right thing to do.
McShane asked if the developer assumes it will be a more attractive route
than Birch Point Road. Parkinson stated it would be. The County also put the
improvements to Lincoln Road, east of Blaine Road, higher on the six -year road
Planning and Development Committee, 10/25/2005, 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
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.
program. The route will allow the County to impose stricter speed limits on Birch
Bay Drive and still allow people to get out there.
McShane stated staff and the Hearing Examiner felt it qualifies as a PUD as
proposed. He asked if there were any density bonuses. Parkinson stated they did
not pursue it as part of the PUD. The PUD was pursued to shift the zoning around
to make more sense.
McShane asked if it more closely matches the underlying zoning, if there
were no environmental concerns. Parkinson stated the underlying zone is mostly
urban residential, four units per acre (UR -4). The northeast corner zoning is multi -
residential. The southeast corner zoning is neighborhood commercial. Without the
PUD, they wouldn't be able to have the mix as shown.
Roy stated she thanked Mr. Parkinson for incorporating the connector road.
It's a huge issue in the community. The Hearing Examiner gave them lots of kudos
for incorporating low impact development techniques. She asked about the pipe
going straight down the hill and out to the bay. She asked if it's possible to end up
with the kind of transport they're talking about through Birch Bay Village in a way
to also help the Village absorb some of the water and minimize the amount of water
that has to go through a pipe and down into Birch Bay. Parkinson stated they
intend to do both. This site has heavy soils that don't infiltrate well and is on a
slope. When there is a hard rain, there will be runoff. Birch Bay Village has two
flooding and drainage issues. There are two drainages. A topographical break west
of Selder Road brings runoff into the ditch along Birch Point Road and to Roger's
Slough. To the west of that, there is another drainage that comes from the area at
Birch Point that comes down through the village, which also experiences higher
flows.
This project is not in that basin. It's intended to do low impact development
techniques. Low impact means narrow roads, many roadside infiltration bio-
retention cells, and have higher flows be piped to a pond in the central portion of
the site. The pond will also serve as treatment. Low flows from the pond will be
directed to the stream where it currently goes. The high flows from bigger storms
will get into the pipe and outfall structure.
They have not been able to have a meaningful meeting with the Birch Bay
Village people to find out what their issues are. It's difficult to reach agreement
with them. He is looking for an alternative site for the outfall structure.
Roy asked if the water coming out of the outfall would not be treated, other
than through the pond. Parkinson stated the roadside runoff will be treated
through the bio- retention areas. The low flows will be treated in the roadside
things and the pond. The higher flows are more diluted. Treatment effectiveness is
very low.
Planning and Development Committee, 10/25/2005, 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.
Roy stated detention ponds don't filter out fecal coliform, which is one of the
biggest hazards to shellfish. That would be a concern of how that particular
pollutant may be dealt with.
Parkinson stated the amended soil filtration will help that a lot. A lot of that
issue comes from areas similar to the area west of Selder Road, which is all on
septic fields. The district is putting in sewer now because of the fecal coliform
issue. The PUD is all on sewer. There is no septic system. He'd be surprised if
there is an issue with fecal coliform.
Fleetwood asked how the bio- retention cells work. Parkinson stated they
look like a swale. There is a soil layer under the vegetation that is permeable.
Water sits in the swale, ponds up, and filters through the soil, which is underlain
with a washed rock lens with a perforated pipe to collect the water after it's filtered
through the soil.
Fleetwood asked if they have to redo this over time because pollutants
accumulate. Parkinson stated they can. They need to maintain vegetation and
occasionally redo the cell. Particularly during construction, build every other cell
without running water through it so it can become established. Every other cell, dig
out as a sedimentation pond during construction. As the first cells are established
and become functional, route the water through them to finish the others.
Fleetwood stated that the best of the best management practices only
capture up to 85 percent of the pollutants. He asked if they can predict the amount
of pollutants that will go into Birch Bay. Parkinson stated no development has zero
impact. He can't predict the impact.
Fleetwood asked if it's possible to be held hostage to Birch Bay Village or the
other property owner if they don't want to grant an outfall. Parkinson stated the
fallback mechanism is a standard onsite pond, which will be a large pond that bites
into their density. It does not solve the flooding issue that occurs on Birch Point
Drive right now.
Brenner stated this is a great project. She appreciates the extra work gone
into the development. The Hearing Examiner words his findings in the negative.
She asked if there is a reason.
Karen Frakes, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated there is no legal reason
for stating the findings in the negative.
Brenner asked why they prohibit accessory dwelling units. Parkinson stated
it's not that they're prohibiting them. They did not request that they be allowed.
According to the County ordinance, they are prohibited unless someone specifically
requests them.
Planning and Development Committee, 10/25/2005, Page 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
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 stated this is an urban area. Staff should revisit the accessory
dwelling issue.
McShane stated think about PUD's and what the Council might want to
change or not change regarding the PUD requirements and incentives. They are a
very powerful tool in some regards. They are a tool that can be improved. It is
worth taking a look at next year.
Brenner stated it is important for affordable housing.
Recommendation 14 is not legal. Frakes stated she is also concerned with it.
Incorporation occurs through a legal vote of the people. People can't give up their
right to vote. The finding is not legally enforceable.
Brenner stated they need to get it out of the Comprehensive Plan.
Brenner referenced the requirement that filling and grading being kept to a
minimum, retaining existing vegetation, and exposed soils. She asked what it
means and how much is supposed to be done. Parkinson stated it is a boilerplate
condition that is in the best interest of everyone to do this. It costs less to do it
right the first time, so no one has to pay to clean it up.
Brenner stated density is four units per acre. It could end up to be slightly
less. There is a comment about low density development encourages sprawl. She
asked why they are having things in the UGA's and going only with the maximum
density of four units per acre. Someday, they will run out of urban areas.
Troy Holbrook, Senior Planner, stated that is a newly adopted plan. They can
go back and look at that area, but it's not a good practice. Other UGA's they are
looking at now have higher densities. Bellingham has a density of six to 12 units
per acre as a minimum.
Brenner stated there is no wiggle room. That's the minimum, or it's not
urban.
Roy stated she agrees that if they are going to have urban growth areas,
then that's where they ought to have the density. However, the Birch Bay Subarea
Committee worked off of population projections that are very low and incorrect.
They used those projections to adjust the zoning and potential build out in the area.
It influenced how the zoning came forward. She would strongly not want to see the
Council go back and revisit it at this point.
Brenner stated there are places where it's densest in the middle and it gets
less dense.
She asked if the Council has any say on the shoreline management plan.
Planning and Development Committee, 10/25/2005, Page 4
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.
Fleetwood stated they do.
Brenner stated the shoreline management plan 23.100.180.14(c) regarding
solid waste says that garbage dumping should not be permitted. Change it to shall
not be permitted.
McShane moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
Parkinson stated there is one recommendation that they'd like to discuss,
number 24 on page 13 of the Hearing Examiner's report.
Doug Robertson, David Evans & Associates, submitted a corrected condition
No. 24 (on file). It has to do with fire impact fees. This is a complicated issue.
SEPA went through an MDNS, through which mitigation fees can be paid. That's all
been taken care of. When they get to plat approval, the County can impose a
variety of dedications, open space, and impact fees. The Hearing Examiner
referred to mitigation fees in his language. The fire district said the cost would be
determined after their formal capital facilities plan is adopted. Developers agreed
to include it, even though it wasn't adopted. He requested that the language be
changed to refer to impact fees, not mitigation fees, as required by the statute, and
also to require that the fire district formally adopt its capital facilities plan so it
becomes an impact fee that can be filed. He recommends that the language be
cleaned up.
Fleetwood asked if the fire district has seen the language change. Robertson
stated it has not.
Brenner stated it looks fine. She asked why the language says impact fee in
one location, but not the other. Robertson stated it is an issue of grammar.
Frakes stated she has looked at this. This language reflects what was
anticipated.
Fleetwood asked if staff objects. Frakes stated they do not.
Fleetwood moved to amend by approving the corrected condition number
24 as submitted by the applicant.
Roy stated she is slightly uncomfortable about not having input from the fire
district. She asked if staff is worried about that.
Holbrook stated they shouldn't hear an argument from the fire district. Right
before the public hearing with the Hearing Examiner, the fire department reached
an agreement with the applicant. They drafted language and a letter. The
language meets the intent of the agreement.
Planning and Development Committee, 10/25/2005, Page 5
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.
Roy asked how long it will take to develop the capital facilities plan.
Holbrook stated it depends on the fire department. The PUD won't be ready to
build for a year and a half or so.
Fleetwood stated nothing in the amendment changes the obligation to pay
the amount, which is what this is all about.
Brenner stated the fire district talked about impact fees.
Robertson stated the developers agreed to pay the impact fees, even if they
don't know what they will be yet. The language just clears up that it is not a
mitigation fee, which would be illegal at this stage. Make sure it's an impact fee.
Motion to amend carried unanimously.
Fleetwood moved to accept the recommendations of the Hearing Examiner.
Roy stated there is a committee of citizens working on design standards in
the UGA. She asked if they know anything about that and if the standards would
apply to this development. Holbrook stated it depends on how the design
guidelines are passed.
Roy stated it might be something in which the applicant may be interested.
Brenner moved to take out any reference to people having to commit their
vote regarding Birch Bay incorporation.
Motion to amend carried unanimously.
Motion to recommend approval to the full Council as amended carried
unanimously.
Parkinson stated he appreciates the thanks that went to the developers.
Marilyn Bentley and Troy Holbrook did an excellent job and they're great to work
with.
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING
CODE, TITLE 20, TO CLARIFY EXISTING CODE LANGUAGE (AB2005-
393)
Troy Holbrook, Senior Planner, stated this is the 2004 code scrub. Public
hearings started a year ago at the Planning Commission. There are twenty -two
minor changes.
McShane moved to recommend that the Council adopt the ordinance. A lot
of work went into this. He thanked staff for their work.
Planning and Development Committee, 10/25/2005, 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
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.
Elizabeth Olsen, Planner II, stated each change is minor. They are to
modernize Title 20 or to comply with the Uniform Building Code.
Motion carried unanimously.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
1. UPDATE ON THE FUTUREWISE GROWTH MANAGEMENT HEARINGS
BOARD DECISION AND BELLINGHAM'S SUBAREA PLAN (AB2005 -251)
Troy Holbrook, Senior Planner, stated the County got an extension of the
timeline until March 20, 2007. The department will request more staff to meet that
deadline and address those issues. Staff is working now on parcel records back to
1992. They are also looking at possible interim zoning regulations.
McShane stated one idea is for interim zoning regulations. He asked if an
option is looking at locations to simply do a moratorium. Holbrook stated a
moratorium could be an option. They would have to find a nexus for it. They are
starting to see a land rush.
McShane stated he's not too worried about the bulk of them. He asked if
there are some areas that are so out of compliance they should consider a
moratorium. Holbrook stated geographic information system (GIS) staff is looking
at it.
Holbrook stated he has an update on the Bellingham Subarea Plan update.
The planning commissions are working together. The deadline has been extended
to the first quarter of 2006. Staff will bring forward the interlocal agreement,
including the timeline, next month.
Fleetwood asked if the State agreed to the extension. Holbrook stated it did
not. He is not aware of the State's comment on the new timeline.
There is a joint planning commission meeting on November 10 to consider
many issues. The commissions have the same concerns about many things,
including neighborhood character, annexation, planned growth, open space, and
transportation. They've both been looking at the land use methodology and infill
numbers. Also, the two commissions had a joint tour of the urban growth area.
They are also looking at the five -year review areas, Bellingham's infill capacity,
annexation policies, and urban growth area expansion policies.
OTHER BUSINESS
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
Planning and Development Committee, 10/25/2005, Page 7
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
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.
McShane asked the length of time before a determination is made when
there is a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) application.
Karen Frakes, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated she doesn't know if
there is a time limitation. However, if it's not issued within a certain amount of
time, that doesn't mean the County can proceed without it. An option is to issue a
writ of mandamus to compel the SEPA official to issue a decision.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 3:55 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, 10/25/2005, Page 8