HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil February 10 20041
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
Regular County Council
February 10, 2004
Council Chair Dan McShane called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Present:
Barbara Brenner
Laurie Caskey- Schreiber
Sam Crawford
Seth Fleetwood
Sharon Roy
L. Ward Nelson
FLAG SALUTE
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Absent:
None
McShane announced that there was discussion with Senior Deputy
Prosecutor David Grant regarding pending litigation (AB2004 -018) in
executive session during the Committee of the Whole meeting.
McShane also announced that the tax -title properties that are scheduled for a
public hearing will be held due to the fact that the Council still has not received the
covenant information on the properties.
SPECIAL PRESENTATION
PRESENTATION BY TOM WESTERGREEN AND JAKE STRAUSS
REGARDING WHATCOM COUNTY'S TREE FARM PROGRAM AND
FORESTRY ASSOCIATION (AB2004 -106)
Tom Westergreen, Washington Farm Forestry Association, stated the Washington
Farm Forestry Association represents small forestland owners in Washington State. The
Whatcom County chapter was formed in the late 1960's. He introduced the members
present. The State Association has approximately 1,300 families that manage parcels in
size from ten acres up to several hundred acres. The average is 20 to 40 acres. The
association is involved in education and legislation. The Whatcom County chapter
education and outreach program includes activities in Lynden and with schools.
The American Tree Farm System program has over 65,000 certified tree farms in
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, 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.
the country. The program started in 1941 in Washington State. Each tree farm has a
management plan that guides the stewardship of the farm, including factors such as
wood production, wildlife habitat protection, water resources protection, recreation, and
other forest benefits. The program recognizes those tree farmers who really do
outstanding work. He's proud of Jake Strauss, who was selected tree farmer of the year
for Washington State. He's the first from Whatcom County.
He showed a video on tree farming from the Washington Farm Forestry Association
and the American Tree Farm System program.
Jake Strauss, Washington Farm Forestry Association, thanked the Council for the
opportunity to speak. The Whatcom Farm Forestry Association has had an association
with the Agriculture Preservation Committee for several years. Many issues facing the
forestry community are not much different than those facing the agricultural community.
Sixty percent of the Whatcom Farm Forestry Association have land outside of forestry
zoning. The only protection for operating a tree farm is Whatcom County Code chapter
14.02, the Right to Farm ordinance. A key element of this chapter is a requirement for
disclosure advising a buyer that activities permitted under the Right to Farm ordinance
are nearby and may not be compatible with residential development. The County has no
mechanism to enforce this requirement. Too often, new residents are offended by these
agricultural and forestry operations. He encouraged the Council to not water down the
ordinance. It is vital for farmers and forestry operators to survive. There is a
misconception that trees are permanent. They raise a furor when trees are cut. The
reality is that trees have a finite lifespan. As owners of forested property, they've
invested countless hours in planting and nurturing trees. They expect to harvest their
trees. They have to wait 35 to 50 years before the crop is ready. Much can happen in
that interim, including a changing regulatory environment. For some state members, up
to 65 percent of their crop was wiped out by increasingly stringent regulations. They
have no assurance that trees planted today can be harvested in the future. Whatcom
County does not need a forester on staff. The State already provides enough guidance
without the County getting involved in non - conversion forest practices. Their acreages
are buffers for development. The trees contribute to favorably air quality. They provide
a mechanism to improve water quality. A managed mix stand of conifers and hardwoods
provides excellent wildlife habitat. These islands of forests cost the County nothing, and
provides a service that benefits the public. There needs to be incentives to maintain the
forests. The promise of some financial payout needs to be there. There needs assurance
for future generations to continue. Sadly and all too often, it's easier to turn farmland
and forestland to development. Once converted, it will never return to natural resource
activity.
Westergreen thanked the Council for an opportunity to give their presentation.
Brenner stated there's a Whatcom County timber tour sponsored by the Women in
Timber each Friday before the annual Deming Logging Show. She encourages people to
go. She goes every year, and always sees something new. It's exciting to see the
different ways tree owners are cultivating the forestland.
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, 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.
MINUTES CONSENT
Brenner moved to approve Minutes Consent items one through five.
Motion carried unanimously.
1. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR JANUARY 13, 2004
2. REGULAR COUNTY COUNCIL FOR JANUARY 13, 2004
3. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR JANUARY 27, 2004
4. REGULAR COUNTY COUNCIL FOR JANUARY 27, 2004
S. WATER RESOURCES WORK SESSION FOR JANUARY 20,
2004
OPEN SESSION
The following people spoke:
Ben Hinkle, 2582 Northshore Road (submitted Exhibit A), stated he attended
the last Council meeting. During that meeting, he asked a question of the Council,
and received a unanimous answer of no regarding the United Nations. He proposed
that the County Council take a stand for House Resolution 1146, which takes the
United States out of the United Nations. The Council can't serve two masters. One
is sovereignty of the U.S. Constitution. The United Nations charter will do away
with the Constitution. They will be governed by the U.N. Charter and have lost the
U.S. sovereignty. He wants to rephrase the question, which is whether the Council
supports the U.S Constitution or the United Nations Charter.
McShane stated the Council has to follow a process. Any decision the Council
makes should be included in the Council packet before the meeting so the Council
can receive input from people on both sides of the issue. It's not appropriate for
the Council to make a decision on something that has not been brought to the
public. It's not appropriate to take up an issue that's not on the agenda. It's not
fair to others who might have various opinions on this issue. He will not indicate
his position on this matter. He encouraged the councilmembers to do the same.
Hinkle stated it's his right as a sovereign citizen to have a yes or no answer
to his question. He must hold the councilmembers accountable to their oath to
uphold the Constitution.
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, 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
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.
Nelson stated that there is a public process specified by the Whatcom County
Charter, which states that no decision will be on an issue that has not gone through
that process. Mr. Hinkle is asking the Council to forego the Constitution and the
County Charter, which was voted on by the public.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she will abstain from answering Mr. Hinkle's
question because she is unfamiliar with the subject. She supports the United
States being involved in the United Nations.
Crawford stated he has shared his views with Mr. Hinkle personally.
Grandstanding like this debases Mr. Hinkle's credibility. If Mr. Hinkle wants to be
more effective in getting his message across, he will work with him. If Mr. Hinkle
wants to continue making a sham of the public process by continuing to do this
each week, he is not going to accomplish much. He's not giving any comment on
this issue.
Roy stated this is not appropriate. Mr. Hinkle should not attempt to force
councilmembers to give their personal opinion on any issue. Mr. Hinkle is not
asking the question of the Council, but of each councilmember personally. That's
not appropriate.
McShane stated Mr. Hinkle must sit down. The Council is not going to reply
to this question because it has not gone through the public process. Mr. Hinkle is
asking the Council to violate the County Charter, which it will not do. If a
councilmember brings a resolution forward, the Council can go through the public
process at that time. This is not the way to have a public process.
Nick Solberg, 5381 Belair Way, Belfern Water Association President,
Bellingham, (submitted Exhibit 8) spoke on the City of Ferndale request to
expand the Ferndale Urban Growth Area (AB2004 -082, Comprehensive
Plan docket #2004 -D). He requested that Council deny the Comprehensive Plan
application and read his letter into the record (on file).
Henry Loggergren, 324 Sudden Valley, thanked the Council for promoting
bicycle safety and bicycle facilities. He finds it difficult to ride his bicycle in certain
urban areas because of the volume of cars. He urged the Council to continue to
pursue grants and other funding for further upgrades and improvements. Hire a
technical level staff person at the Parks and Recreation Department of the Public
Works Department to write grants and improve the County's adopted plans for
bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The position could be split between the two
departments.
Max Legg, 3844 South Bay Drive, spoke about banning boats on Lake
Whatcom. The current accusation is that boats discharge benzene, and that all
boats must be removed from the lake to remove the threat. The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) maximum contaminate level is five parts per billion, which
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, 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.
is a very small number. Chris Spens, City of Bellingham, stated the highest test
benzene level was .22 parts per billion. That is 4.4 percent of the maximum
allowed by the EPA. Don't ban boats on the lake.
Gary Lysne, 2472 Northshore Road, stated the issue of banning two -cycle
carbureted motors and personal water craft on Lake Whatcom will come before the
Council. The Lake Whatcom Management Committee participated with a citizens
advisory committee. The Management Committee statement was to follow the
recommendations of the advisory committee to ban these motors on the lake. This
issue will come up at the March 17, 2004 joint meeting. There is an initiative from
the people to get this issue on the ballot.
Another issue for this March 17, 2004 meeting is the closure of Bloedel
Donovan park and the boat launch. The question is where those boats will go if
they close Bloedel. Don't close it. If the city closes it, those boats will go to the
county. It's a larger impact for the County. Last, follow the EPA guidelines for safe
water as Mr. Legg stated.
Dennis Jones, 1487 Sudden Valley, spoke about the joint Lake Whatcom
resolution. He read goal four from the joint resolution.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
Jones continued to state that the he will volunteer with the Whatcom Farm
Forestry folks. There are state bills that say Whatcom County agencies control the
watershed. He foresees an impervious shoulder on Lake Whatcom Boulevard for
bikes. Bellingham High School has a forestry program. The City knows what the
problems are on the lake. Don't panic about it. Before the County Council is a
resolution supporting the Lake Whatcom Landscape Plan as recommended
by the Lake Whatcom Landscape Planning Committee (AB2004 -087).
Approve the resolution. He thanked Trillium Corporation. Don't let big foresters
such as the State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) take control.
Linda Marrom, 485 Sudden Valley, stated she supports the resolution
supporting the Lake Whatcom Landscape Plan as recommended by the
Lake Whatcom Landscape Planning Committee (AB2004 -087). This
resolution is different from the State Department of Natural Resources
recommendation with regard to the formation of an Interjurisdictional Committee
(IJC). Her recommendations were dependent upon the formation of this technical
advisory committee. The IJC should be independent and consist of technical
experts in the fields of geo- morphology to address the hazards involved with DNR
clear- cutting on potentially unstable slopes. The DNR does not support an IJC that
has equal weight in the decision - making process.
Doug Robertson, 900 DuPont Street, stated he represents the Freeburg
family on the issue of the City of Ferndale request to expand the Ferndale
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, 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
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.
Urban Growth Area (AB2004 -082, Comprehensive Plan docket #2004 -D).
He spoke during the day's committee meeting. There was no public process by the
City of Ferndale. It is an incomplete application. He asked the Council to deny the
application based on his comments made during committee.
In addition, he also represents Pacific Highlands LLC, which is developing a
160 -lot subdivision on the edge of the city limits. The City already required his
client to upsize all the water and sewer to service the urban growth area (UGA).
Lauren Legg, 3844 South Bay Drive, stated she is opposed to banning boats
on Lake Whatcom. She is a lake steward and drinks water directly out of the lake.
Her water is tested yearly and is safe. This Council should not be about making
decisions based on emotions or future political agendas. They can make sound
judgments to provide all with the quality of life they now enjoy. They've already
decided this issue in the past. The federal government mandated changes that are
already in effect. Her tax dollars are being wasted on a non - issue. Removing the
boats will reduce recreation that benefits them all locally and tourism; reduce
property values and property taxes collected to fund more important issues; have
an environmental impact to alternative navigable bodies of water in the county,
and; lose businesses, quality of life, rights, and recreation. Other issues are more
relevant to the water quality of the lake, such as stormwater runoff, mercury levels,
and loss of oxygenation. There are many opportunities to protect these rights. Use
reasonable and responsible judgment. Make decisions based on truth, not fear and
political agendas. Just move the City's water intake, creating a win -win situation
for them all.
Dan Sturtz, 3006 Alvarado Drive, Bellingham, stated he grew up on the lake.
Don' t ban boats on the lake. There's no clear and present danger of the drinking
water. If they're going to consider banning boats, even two - stroke engines, they
are going to have to face hundreds of young people and say why the Council took
away their use of the lake. There is a rich heritage of water sports and fishing on
Lake Whatcom. People's rights will be taken away.
Joe Scott, Northwest Ecosystem Alliance representative, stated he supports
the resolution supporting the Lake Whatcom Landscape Plan as
recommended by the Lake Whatcom Landscape Planning Committee
(AB2004 -087). He supports having a strong interjurisdictional committee and not
allowing oil or gas leasing on land within the watershed. It's been 12 years since
the DNR and Whatcom County signed an interagency agreement to manage these
lands jointly. In the early 1990's, there was a land exchange between the County
and DNR for environmental reasons. There was to be a joint planning process to
produce a formal forest management plan for public lands in the watershed. This
formal plant will accomplish County and DNR goals. However, DNR moved forward
and began logging, in violation of the agreement. In 2000, the State legislature
stopped the DNR and required them to develop a landscape plan that doesn't
present a risk to the reservoir or nearby residents.
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, 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
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.
Kris Ungern, 2095 Northshore Road, discussed his background.
Environmental issues raise emotions and polarize things. Often, misinformation
scare tactics seem to be rather predominant. The tendency is to work on the easy
things. In doing so, they overlook long -term core problems. A boat bans may be
the wrong problem. They should work on runoff, pesticides, and other big
problems. Many homeowners on the lake are portrayed as elites. However, this
group is highly productive members of society that are well informed. If anything,
they're more concerned about water quality because they see the impact every
day. Keep an eye on the science and use common sense.
Dan Dahlgren, 2502A Northshore Road, asked the Council to evaluate
information on water quality on Lake Whatcom based on science, not emotions.
Society can measure very low concentrations in the water. Being able to measure
it doesn't mean it's injurious to the citizen. Rational people would compare it with
the EPA standards. The benzene levels are low. It is mostly below the detectable
level. Boats have a minimal effect, at most. Instead, work on the sewers,
stormwater runoff, waterfront roads, and moving the water intake. If they choose
to remove boats from the lake, they will generate a divisive situation with no
significant net benefit.
Kristie Lysne, 2472 Northshore Road, Lake Whatcom, stated she is opposed
to banning boats on Lake Whatcom. A small group of people want to impose
control over Lake Whatcom in a way that will take away the rights of a huge
number of people who love to use the lake for recreation. Their excuse is that the
water quality of the drinking water is compromised by the presence of motor craft,
even though there is no scientific data to confirm this accusation. In fact, the water
exceeds the safe and pure standards set by the federal government. The City of
Bellingham reports that the water is safe to drink. Stormwater runoff, automobile
traffic, lead leaching into the lake, septic systems, and oxygenation are all problems
that need to be addressed. Use the elected office to solve problems that really do
exist.
Laurie Hanson, 419 Lakeside Drive, Glenhaven, asked the Council to support
the resolution supporting the Lake Whatcom Landscape Plan as
recommended by the Lake Whatcom Landscape Planning Committee
(AB2004 -087). She is concerned about the Interjurisdictional Committee being
weakened. It needs to have experts on slope stability. There are lives at stake in
Glenhaven.
Larry Quinliven, 2327 Northshore Road, stated he attended the City Council
meeting about the boating issue. One of the council members wanted to change
the letterhead from Lake Whatcom to Whatcom Reservoir. Lake Whatcom is the
fourth largest navigable waterways in the state. He is concerned about converting
it to a reservoir. It will depreciate property values. If there was a legitimate
reason to give up his boat, he would. However, but he doesn't see the evidence to
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, 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
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.
support it. There are benzene peaks in the summer and at holidays. However,
there aren't any boats on the lake at Christmas and New Year's. Therefore, the
problem is cars. Traffic and stormwater runoff affect the lake. The older cars put
out ten times the pollution than the newer cars.
Ellen Shea, 1050 Larrabee Avenue, #104, Bellingham stated she wants to
create a mental, physical, and spiritual growth facility. Her proposal is in the Birch
Bay Subarea Plan. She asked the Council to hold a public hearing on the Birch
Point rezone.
Jo Slivinski, 3920 Silver Beach Avenue, (submitted Exhibit C) stated she
would speak on the Birch Point rezone. It was rejected by the Whatcom County
Planning Commission. This project has nine clear non - compliances with the Growth
Management Act, County Comprehensive Plan, and Birch Bay Subarea Plan. Reject
the project of rezone and spa. She represents Neighbors for Birch Point, which
opposes the rezone amendment and spa. Their petition has 135 signatures and is
growing. They are challenging several things about the petition circulated by Ellen
Shea. Some of the signatures on her petition are from people who thought they
were signing a guest list at an open house. She's not alleging purposeful
misconduct, but there was confusion. The petition does not represent a significant
number of residents and property owners who would be affected. Verify the validity
of the petition before accepting it for consideration. Her petition should also be
subject to the same type of scrutiny.
Steve Martini, 2149 Northshore Road, Bellingham, stated he lives on Lake
Whatcom. Properties in the downzone lost substantial amounts of equity, for which
they received nothing. The downzone is now directed to larger portions of the
county. He asked how the County government can talk seriously about taking
boats off the lake and downzoning property. There's no apparent voice of
opposition on the County Council. He looked at the County Charter and electoral
process of the county representatives. The two - tiered electoral process dilutes the
interests of voters within districts. People are nominated within their districts, and
then the general election is countywide. In many instances, the will of the district
voters is overridden by the larger community. This is a situation in which many
people feel unrepresented and powerless. The balance of government is a larger
issue than banning boats on the lake. Reforms to the electoral process are
necessary.
Janice Shook, 1411 West Axton Road, Ferndale, stated she opposes the City
of Ferndale request to expand the Ferndale Urban Growth Area (AB2004-
082, Comprehensive Plan docket #2004 -D). There have been no hearings in
Ferndale. This will cause urban sprawl into the rural area. The people in this area
east of the city limits don't want to be included in the city. The City says it has
provided services into this area, but all the City has done is extend a water line.
She is also opposed to boats on the lake. People can still boat without having
motors. It provides good fitness, and is peaceful and quiet.
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 8
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
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.
Julie Marx, 5948 Longdin Road, stated she is opposed to the City of
Ferndale request to expand the Ferndale Urban Growth Area (AB2004 -082,
Comprehensive Plan docket #2004 -D). She asked what kind of planning
would make this switch. It attempts to create two Ferndales, one on each side of
the freeway. It creates urban sprawl. It will increase congestion over the freeway
overpass and one -lane bridge. Sewer and water services cannot be provided
cheaper to the east side. Retrofitting sewer and water systems would cost North
Bellingham residents. Ferndale's past and current plans to fix their admitted error
should not be inflicted on the citizens.
Patrick Alesse, 4825 Alderson Road, Birch Bay, asked the Council to please
keep in mind the amount of money Whatcom County has spent on water issues the
last few years.
Norm Chamberlain, 2532 Lake Whatcom Boulevard, stated there is a
potential firestorm brewing about the boating issue on Lake Whatcom. Make the
decision based on facts and science, not on emotion, and then stand by that
decision in the future. Legal questions need to be answered before making a
decision.
Dean Rogers, 1712 High Noon Road, Bellingham, stated he is in favor of
Initiative 490, passed by the citizens in 1990, which limits the citing of high
powered transmission lines in the county to existing corridors or industrial lines.
When passed, the power company was forced to find a solution to the problem they
had. The solution was to place new power lines in the existing corridor.
Subsequently, it saved the ratepayers in the county millions of dollars because they
didn't have to build a new corridor. Now, State House Bill 2340 seeks to substitute
the citizen initiative. If approved, it will cut the guts out of I -490. He asked the
Council to support I -490 and let the State government know that the people in
Whatcom County can take care of their own power lines.
Carl Weimer, 1055 W. Laurel Road, North Bellingham Community
Association, asked the Council to reject the City of Ferndale request to expand
the Ferndale Urban Growth Area (AB2004 -082, Comprehensive Plan docket
#2004 -D). The application is clearly incomplete. Part of their reasoning for the
switch is that it would be good for the environment, but the City provided no
evidence to that effect. The creeks in that area have cleaned up significantly.
There aren't massive failures of septic systems. The City has no power to require
people to hook up to those septic systems. People would probably choose to use
their current septic systems because it would be cheaper. The application uses the
highest population growth numbers.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side 8.)
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 9
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
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.
Weimer continued to state that the reasoning is questionable why they would
want to swap a UGA that can accommodate future growth for a UGA that can't
accommodate much future growth. The City of Ferndale's application is faulty and
incomplete. Reject the application.
Bob Wiesen, 3314 Douglas Road, Ferndale, stated encourage forestry. There
is an economic benefit to having these farms in existence. The timber harvest in
the county seems to be reducing. There is only one good sawmill left. If they
reduce the timber cutting in the rest of the county, these farm forestry people may
lose their sawmill. The Dana Beech property was managed for timber for many
years. Because of regulations, the property is now clearcut and sold to a larger
timber operation. Small farmers will continue to drop away.
Alan Soicher, 3231 Hillside Road, Van Zandt, stated he was a member of the
State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Lake Whatcom Water Quality
Advisory Committee and the Lake Whatcom Landscape Planning Committee. The
County is wise to seek greater public ownership of the watershed. Protect the
benefits that come from the forests while also generating some money by doing
sensitive logging in places where it makes sense. Keep the lands forested. The
DNR and planning committee almost reached consensus. Disagreements were
about different levels of acceptable risk. The Interjurisdictional Committee will be a
group of local experts to agree with DNR that a site - specific activity does not create
too great a risk to public health and safety. Support the landscape plan.
Fred Bettner, 53 Strawberry Point, read from Dr. Matthews' study, which
says that the activities of boaters are insignificant to the causes of the dissolved
oxygen trend. There are 19,000 trips per day that go up and down Cable Street,
which ends 400 yards from the intake system. Heavy crank case fuel oils are
detected. Fuel oils from cars make a bigger impact by far. Boats do not pollute the
lake. He challenged the City and County councils to form a stormwater runoff
advisory committee to study runoff. Lake Whatcom is not a reservoir or watershed.
The City of Bellingham has a permit to take water from the lake. It doesn't own the
lake. It's reprehensible that elected officials are promoting their own personal
agendas.
Bill Hinely, 26776Donovan Avenue, Bellingham, stated he supports the
citizens plan for the Lake Whatcom watershed. Diseases such as cancer have
increased dramatically in this country and civilizations such as this. They have
chosen to be a chemical -based culture. They each carry at least 500 molecules
that did not exist 100 years ago. They don't know the effects of these molecules.
Every time they put more of anything in the food, water, or air, they are playing
with fire. They don't know the effects of these things. There is good scientific
evidence that more growing things makes them better off. He recommends that
they do the minimum. They don't have to choose between logging and not having
schools. This is one of the wealthiest countries in the world. There are plenty of
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 10
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.
resources in the country to afford them to have clean air, water, and soil without
starving. Err on the side of caution.
Chuck Unknown, 184 E. Kellogg Road, stated he opposes the boat ban. The
science is conclusive. Nothing's broken, so don't try to fix anything. Even when
the benzene levels spike, they're still well below the national limit. He doesn't know
why this is even an issue.
Roger Unknown, stated there was a border incident today when he was
stopped by a border agent and put in a vehicle and hit with a billy club by an
officer. This is stuff that is going on.
James Stanford, 1841 Front Street, Lynden, stated he asked the Council to
initiate the Pole Road Comprehensive Plan amendment 2004 -G. There were three
positions put forward in the Natural Resource Committee today. One was a
question of whether now is the time to assess mineral resource land (MRL)
designation in prime agricultural lands. A second was the observation that
reclamation plans in this area result in overly saturated areas fit for only a corn
crop. Last, the question was whether this test study is best tried somewhere else.
This application is in full compliance with Chapter 8 of the Resource Lands
Mineral Lands section of the Comprehensive Plan. They meet all of the general
criteria and additional criteria. There is a need to consider aggregate in prime
farmland because that's where the majority of the commercially significant
aggregate is located. There is a need for the aggregate. Only ten years of
aggregate is available. This application can meet the best interest of the County
and his client by letting the County assess the application and raise the bar. They
have an expert in soil conservation and farming who will work in tandem to
develop, implement, and manage a plan. They will provide the research and
development money needed to put the project forward. Docket the application.
Nelson stated he represents district one in the county, which includes Lake
Whatcom. He has worked hard on the issue. He is opposed to banning boats on
Lake Whatcom. They need to work on issues that really impact water quality. This
Council has focused on those issues, including stormwater implementation,
effective transfers of development rights, the quality of water evaluation standards,
the effective use of land use decisions, transportation impact evaluation, and
preservation of forestry practices to prevent conversion.
McShane stated he's not aware of any effort by the Council to move forward
a proposal to ban boats on Lake Whatcom. The Council has no authority over
where the City of Bellingham chooses to put its water intake.
PUBLIC HEARING
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 11
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.
1. RESOLUTION TO SELL TAX -TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION,
REQUEST #09 -03 (AB2003 -412A)
McShane stated the public hearing has been held open from previous
meetings. The language for these resolutions is final. He addressed public hearing
items one through ten concurrently.
No one spoke.
McShane stated the public hearing would be held open for two more weeks.
2. RESOLUTION TO SELL TAX -TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION,
REQUEST #10 -03 (AB2003- 413A)
See public hearing item one.
3. RESOLUTION TO SELL TAX -TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION,
REQUEST #11 -03 (AB2003 -414A)
See public hearing item one.
4. RESOLUTION TO SELL TAX -TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION,
REQUEST #12 -03 (AB2003- 415A)
See public hearing item one.
S. RESOLUTION TO SELL TAX -TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION,
REQUEST #13 -03 (AB2003- 416A)
See public hearing item one.
6. RESOLUTION TO SELL TAX -TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION,
REQUEST #14 -03 (AB2003- 417A)
See public hearing item one.
7. RESOLUTION TO SELL TAX -TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION,
REQUEST #15 -03 (AB2003- 418A)
See public hearing item one.
S. RESOLUTION TO SELL TAX -TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION,
REQUEST #16 -03 (AB2003- 419A)
See public hearing item one.
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 12
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.
9. RESOLUTION TO SELL TAX -TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION,
REQUEST #17 -03 (AB2003- 420A)
See public hearing item one.
10. RESOLUTION TO SELL TAX -TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION,
REQUEST #18 -03 (AB2003- 421A)
See public hearing item one.
11. ORDINANCE ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE ENVIRONMENT
CHAPTER OF THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
(CHAPTER 11) (AB2003 -075D)
Jeff Chalfant, Senior Planner, gave a staff report.
McShane opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
Mary Dickinson, Building Industry Association Governmental Affairs Director,
thanked the Council and staff. She submitted a letter (on file) regarding
supplemental testimony to the Whatcom County Environment Chapter update.
Previous written testimony expressed her concerns. She has grave concerns about
Growth Management Act compliance and legal liabilities. According to the Growth
Management Act (GMA), areas must be designated as urban growth areas (UGA's),
which Whatcom County has done in Kendall and Birch Bay. Due to recent
amendments of this chapter about Kendall being a volcanic area and bird habitat
designations, it will be difficult to expand in these areas as a practice. The GMA
does not favor any one goal more than another. A concern is that enough land be
available for housing and that private property rights be considered. The entire
Comprehensive Plan must be GMA - compliant. The term 'private property' was
stricken from the chapter, which is puzzling. Legally, land is designated either
public or private.
By declaring large tracts of Whatcom County as Endangered Species Act
(ESA) bird areas, the County has opened itself up to legal liability. ESA
requirements place many regulations on areas where these species are declared to
be. That will have an effect on property owners and the County. The County
cannot place infrastructure in these areas without ESA mitigation, which will cost
the taxpayers more money.
She also questions best available science. If this chapter is approved, the
County will be open for liability from affected property owners and environmental
groups. The actions in one chapter of the Comprehensive Plan has a broader effect
on the plan as a whole when it becomes time to draft and enforce codes and
regulations.
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 13
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.
Tim Trohimovich, 1,000 Friends of Washington Planning Director, stated his
organization works to keep over - development from destroying farms, forests, and
rural areas while making cities and towns great places to live. He supports the
improvements to the chapter. All the chapters need to comply with the Growth
Management Act. These changes do comply. It provides adequate protection for
critical areas, which the Hearings Board has upheld. Density is important to
accommodate growth. They can protect the environment and provide adequate
land for housing and jobs.
Hearing no one else, McShane closed the public hearing
Roy moved approval.
Brenner stated the Building Industry Association has raised interesting legal
issues. She would like legal counsel to review their letter.
Roy stated references to ESA are not legitimate. The committee didn't
designate areas for ESA. All the committee did was say that in certain areas, there
are birds on the ESA listing. The reference made about Kendall being in a volcanic
areas is not true. That's not at all what it says.
Brenner read from information from BIA about it being dangerous for a
government to require someone to enhance something, and there's a difference
between mitigation and enhancement. The BIA claims that the County is opening
itself up for a legal challenge.
McShane stated the reference to the term enhancements' reflects the
Shoreline Management Program that the County will need to have. That change
was made to the environment chapter in advance of changes the County will need
to make in the Shoreline Management Program. The State law requires that
enhancement be part of the Shoreline Management Program.
Nelson stated he saw that language throughout the chapter. He recognizes
the concern about shorelines, however, the language in the chapter is expanded to
include economic, ecological, aesthetic, and cultural benefits. He asked how they
put a value on aesthetic enhancement, which has nothing to do with shoreline
protection.
Brenner stated she wants a legal opinion. None of these are requirements,
but are something that the County promotes and encourages.
McShane stated it makes sense to have aesthetic values as a goal. There
are policies to achieve those. There was very little change made to the policies.
There's not much change to that section.
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 14
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
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 about the committee's discussion on the issue of aesthetic.
Fleetwood stated he had noted that local governments police power includes
the right to legislate for the welfare of the citizenry, including aesthetics. It's
clearly stated in the law, and should be noted. The environmental chapter talks
about natural systems and the beauty of Whatcom County and the Pacific
Northwest. One of the things they're concerned with is aesthetics.
McShane stated he recalled a court decision that took aesthetics into account
in a land use decision.
Nelson stated there may be elements of the code in which they have to
review aesthetics, such as the Birch Bay Subarea Plan. It was clearly defined
within that plan. Throughout this chapter, they're leaving the definition of
aesthetics open.
Fleetwood stated aesthetics is reflective of community standards based on
the beliefs of existing councils that make decisions.
McShane stated it is subjective, as a lot of this is. The language doesn't tie
their hands from doing certain actions, but allows them to consider aesthetics in
those decisions.
McShane restated the motion to forward the ordinance to the concurrency
meeting.
Crawford moved to amend policy 11G -10 on chapter page 11 -21, "Develop
and administer regulations and incentives = ueh that there is ~^ ~ ^} to minimize loss
of areas that function as wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat." First, that policy is
hard to read. A land use decision guided by this policy needs to be weighed against
other issues of public benefit. They need to consider all the impacts of land use
decisions. Environment is a big one.
Fleetwood asked if that is a recipe for incremental loss.
Crawford stated it has that potential over time.
Roy stated they are living with incremental loss right now. They need to
stand up for the environment in the environment chapter, which means no net loss.
It needs to be their goal. They've lost so much habitat already. It's a reasonable
standard. It doesn't mean they can't make changes or impacts to the environment.
It just means the changes will balance.
Brenner stated they require this kind of proactive tradeoff now with
developments. The County requires people to enhance wetlands in another area
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 15
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.
when they are destroyed or minimized in the area being developed. She hasn't
heard any complaints about that from developers.
Dave Grant, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated the no net loss concept is
built into the shorelines program guidelines. It doesn't necessarily relate to all
wildlife habitat. It would be addressed in the wetland component of this provision.
Councilmember Brenner's concern is valid.
Caskey- Schreiber stated the concept reflects goal 11G. They do know,
based on available science, that wetlands function as a great system to filter
stormwater runoff. They're finding out more and more about the different duties
wetlands serve. That's why they decided to adopt some of the language the State
is using for shorelines, such as the no net loss concept. Recognize that these are
important systems and the County needs to protect them.
Brenner suggested a friendly amendment to amend policy 11G -10 on
chapter page 11 -21, "Develop and administer regulations and incentives such that
there is no net loss of areas that functions as of wetlands and fish and wildlife
habitat." They're concerned about the functions.
Crawford accepted the friendly amendment as a compromise, and
amended it further, "Develop and administer regulations and incentives such that
there is no net loss of areas thai functions as supporting wetlands and fish and
wildlife habitat."
Fleetwood asked the difference between the two versions of the motion.
Brenner stated one could take a low -grade wetland and trade it for another
low -grade wetland that can be enhanced to a higher -grade wetland. The higher -
grade wetland might be smaller, but enhancing it to a higher -grade would make it
perform the same functions as the lower -grade wetland.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape 2, side A.)
Brenner continued to state that they could trade function - for - function,
without the areas being the same size.
Roy asked if substituting function for area makes sense. Chalfant stated the
amendment will be easier for staff to interpret and administer. It's more consistent
with the shoreline management guidelines. He suggested,
McShane stated the motion to amend policy 11G -10 on chapter page 11 -21,
"Develop and administer regulations and incentives such that there is no net loss of
areas th ecological functions and values as of wetlands and fish and wildlife
habitat."
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 16
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
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.
Motion to amend carried unanimously.
Crawford moved to amend policy 11H -13 on chapter page 11 -25,
"...individual habitat or fishery should shall be mitigated." This is a comprehensive
plan. The County code, Title 20, and Title 21 are the place for the word shall.' The
word should' is consistent with the rest of the Comprehensive Plan.
Nelson agreed. Don't be too restrictive in the Comprehensive Plan.
Mitigating cultural impacts may be very difficult if it's required by this.
Brenner stated she suggested the change from should' to shall.' Staff
reminded her today that policies use 'should' and the codes use shall.' She's fine
with the motion as long as the code says 'shall.'
Motion carried 6 -1 with Caskey- Schreiber opposed.
Crawford moved to amend chapter page 11 -35, action item seven,
"...endangered species within ene yeaF." The item is commendable, but this is a
policy document. It's inconsistent with the direction of the Comprehensive Plan,
that they put a specific time frame in developing any particular thing. He endorses
the concept. They all know that the County needs to know what's going on in the
sensitive areas.
Chalfant stated the language is fine either way. The Shoreline Master
Program update will require the County to have mechanisms in place to track these
things.
Brenner asked if they can get it done in one year. Chalfant stated the
Shoreline Management Program won't be ready to go through the public process for
another 18 months.
Crawford stated he thought the program is to give the County a better
picture of what is happening. Item seven is different. Tracking development
means recording change over time and understanding the impact of that change.
Roy stated she agreed with Councilmember Crawford. There's no necessity
to put a timeframe on this goal. She trusts staff to take care of the policy.
McShane restated the motion to amend chapter page 11 -35, action item
seven, "...endangered species within ene yeaF."
Motion carried unanimously.
Crawford moved to amend action item 62 on chapter page 11 -44,
"Consider mitigation strategies, landowner compensation strategies, or rezoning in
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 17
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.
areas of the County that are largely comprised of critical areas." He's concerned
about just saying rezoning. Soften the action item.
Roy stated she is not in favor of the language "landowner compensation
strategies." She would support something that referred to the transfer of
development rights. Don't reference a compensation program they don't have.
Crawford stated he was thinking specifically of Canyon Creek. That is the
strategy that seems to be working best.
Roy stated that was for a different purpose.
Brenner suggested a friendly amendment to substitute "landowner
compensation strategies" with "incentives."
Crawford accepted the friendly amendment and restated the motion to
amend action item 62 on chapter page 11 -44, "Consider mitigation strategies,
incentives, or rezoning in areas of the County that are largely comprised of critical
areas."
Caskey- Schreiber stated she is uncomfortable with the term "mitigation
strategies." They've learned it's very difficult to mitigate wetlands. The language
is fine as it is.
Brenner stated she supports the amendment. They're not talking about
high -grade wetlands. They're talking about all critical areas. Low -grade wetlands
are still considered critical areas. Those three options are valid.
McShane stated he is against the motion. Consider zoning in the context of
the constraints of the property. Zoning should be reflective of how the county will
grow in the future. If they identify areas he refers to as fantasy zoning, where they
won't realistically achieve the density zoned, which creates a problem for areas
where growth should occur.
Crawford stated he would like to have the confidence that they can create a
land supply that would be adequate, fully taking into account and removing critical
areas from the buildable land inventory. However, he's skeptical they can do that
well.
Brenner stated this is the chapter that talks about low- impact development,
which could be considered a mitigation strategy. It opens up those options. The
language isn't contrary to rezoning.
favor.
Motion to amend failed 3 -4 with Brenner, Nelson, and Crawford in
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 18
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.
Nelson stated many times there is controversy about water quality
measurement. They need to be sure they are getting quality measurement
standards. He asked if the committee considered how they would measure results.
Caskey- Schreiber stated the committee did not consider it.
Nelson moved to amend language action item 37 on chapter page 11 -42,
"Work with the Technical Advisory Committee... process, with the inclusion of
measurement and evaluation."
Roy stated there are water bodies other than Lake Whatcom. There are
different measurements for what is ailing those bodies of water. There are different
institutions involved in those measurements. She asked if they're only talking
about Lake Whatcom.
Nelson stated there are a lot of regulatory proposals, incentives, and ideas
they want to include. He's trying to find out where the evidence will come from to
support those policies. They should make a policy that recognizes the decisions
would be based upon good monitoring information.
Caskey- Schreiber stated there is so much information out there. It's there
for the asking. There isn't a need to have the Technical Advisory Committee screen
whatever, and come up with whatever standards it deems appropriate. She'd
rather get the information from a variety of available entities. Seek out the
information. It's out there.
Fleetwood suggested a stand -alone provision that expresses an aspirations to
attempt to monitor and measure when they can, rather than incorporating it into
this provision.
McShane that within action item 31, there is an indication that monitoring
will occur. He asked about any monitoring that would occur through the County's
programs.
Jeff Monsen, Public Works Director, stated it's possible there will be a
monitoring requirement of the National Pollution Discharge and Elimination System
( NPDES) program. The NPDES program would not include Drayton Harbor.
Nelson stated it's a weakness they should look at. There is question about
the various sources of monitoring that comes forward. Don't assume they'll have
information that won't be challenged. A goal in the past was to have standardized
monitoring.
Chalfant suggested language, "Work with the Technical Advisory Committee
and other appropriate agencies in revising or developing standards necessary to
ensure watershed protection and coordinate the effort with the Lake `" hatee
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 19
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.
Management pree within sensitive watersheds for ongoing monitoring and
evaluation."
Nelson accepted the suggested language and amended his motion to
amend language action item 37 on chapter page 11 -42, "Work with the Technical
Advisory Committee and other appropriate agencies in revising or developing
standards necessary to ensure watershed protection and coordinate the effort w+t#
within sensitive watersheds for ongoing
monitoring and evaluation."
Motion carried unanimously.
Motion to forward to concurrency as amended carried unanimously.
12. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAND USE CHAPTER OF THE WHATCOM
COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CHAPTER 2), WHICH INCLUDES
RURAL LANDS (AB2003 -075E)
Matt Aamot, Senior Planner, gave a staff report and summarized the
changes the committee made. In 1997, the State allowed counties to recognize
established rural communities and pockets of development in rural areas called
limited areas of more intense rural development (LAMIRD) that existed as of 1990.
An organization called 1,000 Friends of Washington has taken a position that
the County must review all zoning districts in rural areas that allow more than one
unit per five acres for compliance with the LAMIRD provision. Legal counsel
believes the County is not required to downzone these areas. The County's
decision was adopted seven years ago. The appeal deadline has passed. They've
been upheld by the court. The Council could make a policy decision to review those
areas.
The Growth Management Act (GMA) has a definition of rural services and
criteria for when urban services can be extended to rural areas. That has been
included in the Comprehensive Plan. Sewer is not considered a rural service.
Urban services such as sewer can only be extended into rural areas if there are
health and environmental hazards and the services are supportable at rural
densities.
Fleetwood asked if most of the land zoned rural residential, one dwelling unit
per acre (RR1) is located in suburban enclaves and, if that's true, whether it's
already limited by a logical outer boundary. It seems many of the RR1 areas are
already gone. Aamot stated there has been the treat of challenging this. Staff has
not done an exhaustive analysis of that.
McShane opened the public hearing, and the following people spoke:
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 20
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.
Tim Trohimovich, 1,000 Friends of Washington Planning Director, submitted
a letter (on file). He thanked everyone for the work done on the land use element
and other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The attorney general representing
the State Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development agrees
with his organization about the legal issues. By December 1, 2004, the County
needs to review the entire Comprehensive Plan and development regulations for
compliance with the goals and requirements of the Act, including the LAMIRD
position.
Even if it's legal, it's bad policy. The growth boards have held that these
areas are the exception to urban development, and they're supposed to draw the
boundaries tightly. He showed an 1998 aerial photograph of an existing LAMIRD.
There are probably available 500 acres in this LAMIRD that are zoned RR1.
Gary Reid, 5651 Mission Road, Bellingham, referenced the newspaper article.
When they talk about downzoning the rural area, it does the opposite of protecting
the forest, agriculture, and the environment. Downzoning uses up land, which is
the definition of sprawl. They push development into the agricultural areas and
forestry areas. Services are diluted over a large area and paying more for them.
That isn't good policy. The interim zones are used to make transitions between
urban areas and agriculture and forestry areas.
Lincoln Rutter, 8373 Semiahmoo Drive, Blaine, stated he is concerned about
the alarming expansion of urban growth areas in Whatcom County.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape two, side B.)
Rutter continued to state the rural section of the County's Comprehensive
Plan needs major revisions. Oregon began to deliberately decrease zoning density
through progressive land use ordinances in the 1980's. Exclusive farm use (EFU's)
passes on the benefits of dramatically reduced property taxes for those willing to
reclassify their lands into 80 acre parcels with development restrictions. The
transition back to higher density categories involve retroactive tax penalties that
restrain the flow of supply and demand. Whatcom County might investigate
Oregon's technique to address the growing urban sprawl problem.
There is a rapidly expanding urban growth area in Birch Bay. The Birch Bay
Subarea Plan uses an occupancy rate of less than one to postulate that 100 acres of
rural land need to become urban, and an additional 200 acres of long -term UGA
need to become short -term UGA. This is in an area that has more urban zoned
land than it could develop. Throw out the UGA expansion recommendation in the
Birch Bay Community Plan. It doesn't represent a consensus of opinion of the
people in that area. Dependence on the automobile is the essence of urban sprawl.
Patrick Alesse, 4825 Alderson Road, Birch Bay, submitted information (on
file) from the Assessor's tax booklet showing the distribution of the 2003 tax dollar.
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 21
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.
1 Thirteen percent of the property tax for local services benefit 46 percent of the
2 unincorporated houses. Every time they put someone on a five or ten acre lot, it
3 costs more for them to live there and it costs everyone money to support them.
4
5 Roy asked the basis for the housing units percentage. Alesse stated the
6 percentage is of all the housing units, as estimated from the State of Washington
7 for 2003.
8
9 Bob Tull, attorney, submitted a letter (on file) and stated there is an action
10 item regarding the piers at Cherry Point. That item could be reworded. In the
11 paperwork, it's clear that there is a concern that being able to form industrial jobs
12 is needed. He suggested including the following sentence into the action plan,
13 "Work in conjunction with industrial owners to support appropriate infrastructure
14 and permitting processes at Cherry Point."
15
16 The changes suggested by 1,000 Friends will have to be addressed in due
17 course, but can't be done the night of the public hearing at the end of the process.
18 The changes are very sweeping. The Council will have to go through the hearing
19 process all over again.
20
21 Bob Wiesen, 3314 Douglas Road, Ferndale, stated the State says they have
22 to review the Comprehensive Plan, not throw it out or change it. Taking the
23 suggestions made by 1,000 Friends would discount the rest of the citizen input
24 they've had into the Comprehensive Plan over all these years. Affordable housing
25 is a concern. There has been pressure for housing to go to the rural areas. The
26 land available today in urban areas is nothing, which automatically escalates the
27 values. If they downzone the rest of the county, they're giving it another boost.
28 The Planning Commission went through this process already, but the Council has
29 reworked it, so the public can't provide input. People are getting frustrated by the
30 process. The Council is taking on too many issues at once, and not doing a good
31 job on them.
32
33 Lonnie Smith, 7335 Dexter Road, Lynden, stated downzoning will make
34 housing much harder to afford. Don't downzone something that has already been
35 zoned. It will change the structure of how things function, which is doing pretty
36 well right now.
37
38 David Grant, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated he urged council to
39 reject Bob Tull's suggested amendment. The provision he addressed is limited in
40 scope to marine facilities, specifically docks. There is a prohibition of building
41 additional docks given the litigation surrounding that use. The County has involved
42 itself in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) process on the siting of
43 the Georgia Strait Crossing pipeline. The County has intervened in the process for
44 the British Petroleum cogeneration plant. Mr. Tull's proposed language would put
45 future developers in the position of arguing that the County is not in compliance
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 22
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.
with its Comprehensive Plan if it wants to intervene in issues like that. It's a
dangerous path to walk down, and would tie the hands of future councils.
Hearing no one else, McShane closed the public hearing.
Fleetwood moved to adopt the ordinance.
Crawford moved to amend chapter page 2 -66, policy 2CC -2, "Adopt
mandateFy and incentive programs...." It requires the City of Bellingham to
purchase a transfer of development right before getting water and sewer
extensions. If someone meets all the development requirements, it's wrong to
require them to buy someone else's development rights. He won't support
mandatory programs in the Comprehensive Plan.
Brenner stated an incentive is built in. Development rights can be increased
through other options.
McShane stated the language should stay as it is. Incentive programs can
only go so far. They may need to do more than simply offer incentives. Some
areas will have to require mandatory programs. Don't tie future councils' hands
from making that change to preserve the rural lifestyle in Whatcom County.
Caskey- Schreiber stated there are good examples of mandatory programs.
Motion to amend failed 2 -5 with Nelson and Crawford in favor.
Crawford moved to amend chapter page 2 -67, policy 2CC -10,
"Rezones... should be discouraged, unless the rezone is for the purpose of replacing
density reductions in other areas to satisfy buildable land inventory requirements
meeting population projections." In the context of the Lake Whatcom and Lake
Samish downzones, there was merit in asking where people go to find buildable
land to replace the land that was downzoned. Replace density in other areas, even
rural zoned areas outside urban growth areas (UGA's).
Brenner stated don't create any more rural, one unit per five acre (R5A)
zones. They've zoned a lot of it. Do this through small acreage densities such as
rural residential one (RR1) or two (RR2) units per acre. There is not an
overabundance of that type of smaller zoning.
Motion failed 1 -6 with Crawford in favor.
Crawford asked about the justification for the language on chapter page 2 -71
at the bottom of the page. The Glacier community has hopes that tourist activities
can continue to develop. He's concerned about the strength of the statement
discouraging further development.
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 23
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.
McShane stated the unstable land in the Glacier area is very significant.
There's a desire to do tourist and development in that area. They should think
about the long -term consequences of that. Evaluate the risk. There are many very
bad risks. Some day, Glacier may no longer exist.
Nelson moved to strike the last sentence of the first paragraph in the
Northeaster Towns section on the bottom of Chapter page 2 -71. It conflicts with
their economic goals. If they are going to discourage development, then they can't
encourage economic viability.
Motion failed 2 -5 with Nelson and Crawford in favor.
Crawford moved to amend chapter page 2 -75, Policy 2HH -4 to delete the
last sentence of the paragraph. It goes too far. The policy up to that point is
appropriate. The concepts of preserving, protecting, enhancing, and promoting will
be done through land use decisions. Requiring businesses to do those things is
going too far.
Caskey- Schreiber stated this is language she recommends because of the
1,000 Friends recommendations. Crossroads commercial areas can be considered
limited areas of more intense rural development (LAMIRD). She offered a
friendly amendment, 'Businesses must be eempatible with the use ef the land by
wildlife and Fe, fish and wildlife hab;tatifoster the private stewardship of the land
and preservation of open space; and enhance the rural sense of community and
quality of life."
Crawford accepted the friendly amendment.
Motion carried 6 -1 with McShane opposed.
Crawford moved to amend the next to last bullet point in item 34 on chapter
page 2 -109, "cities shall should show evidence...."
Motion carried 5 -2 with Caskey- Schreiber and Fleetwood opposed.
Crawford moved to insert a new action item 37 on packet page 2 -110,
"Work in conjunction with industrial owners to support appropriate infrastructure
and permitting processes and Cherry Point."
McShane offered a friendly amendment to add "marine" before the word
infrastructure. It gets more to the point.
Crawford did not accept the friendly amendment.
Motion failed 2 -5 with Nelson and Crawford in favor.
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 24
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.
McShane moved to amend goal 2B on chapter page 2 -8, "Encourage the
continued viability of existing resort communities
"".,, teF Planned Resorts On the f t He doesn't think it's in the interest of the
unincorporated county to be allowed to do master planned resorts.
Motion failed 1 -6 with McShane in favor.
Motion to move to concurrency as amended carried 5 -2 with
Crawford and Nelson opposed.
McShane stated the Council has been amenable to using the LAMIRD process
for dealing with suburban zoning in rural areas. There isn't anything within the plan
that will preclude them from doing that in the future. The Council would take
proposed changes into consideration. The Comprehensive Plan gives the Council
the ability to do that. The Council is not ignoring valid concerns from 1,000
Friends. He's concerned about delaying their ability to move forward.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she got a lot of information from 1,000 Friends.
She will keep and review the information when they do this again.
Crawford stated he is against the ordinance. They're going too far.
COUNCIL "CONSENT AGENDA" ITEM
Crawford reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee
and moved to approve Consent Agenda items one through eight.
Brenner withdrew item one.
McShane withdrew item four.
Motion to approve Consent Agenda items two, three, and five
through eight carried unanimously.
1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND RE
SOURCES, TO DESIGN AND IMPLEMENT A TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM FOCUSING ON WASTE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING FOR
WHATCOM COUNTY BUSINESSES, IN THE AMOUNT OF $35,000
(AB2004 -089)
Crawford moved approval.
Brenner stated the Council originally approved $50,000 for this item.
RESources originally provided a program bid in that amount. This request is a
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 25
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
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.
reduction. There won't be any promotion. The number of businesses included is
reduced by 20.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape three, side A.)
Brenner continued to state this is an example of being penny -wise and
dollar - foolish. The County has contracted with RESources in the past. RESources
has always been reputable and given the County more benefits for the dollars.
She's offended that they're cutting corners with this contract. She won't support it.
RESources already has a track record, and the County doesn't need to wait to see
how the program does. Support the program at the $50,000 level.
Motion carried 4 -2 with Brenner and Roy opposed and Nelson out of
the room.
2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND NORSTAN
FOR REPLACEMENT OF PHONE SYSTEM AT HEALTH DEPARTMENT'S
STATE STREET FACILITY, IN THE AMOUNT OF $49,406.99 (AB2004-
090)
3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND
NORTHWEST YOUTH SERVICES TO PROVIDE SERVICES RELATED TO
TEEN COURT, IN THE AMOUNT OF $18,500 (AB2004 -091)
4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY
AND SHEARER DESIGN LLC, FOR THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF FROST
ROAD BRIDGE, IN THE AMOUNT OF $43,457 (AB2004 -092)
This item was moved for approval with the Consent Agenda items.
McShane stated this item has been before the Council before with a
recommendation that the County build the bridge. He opposed it. This is the first
of many contracts for this project. He will vote against all the contracts.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she is also against the project.
Motion carried 5 -2 with Caskey- Schreiber and McShane opposed.
S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY TO PROVIDE MATCHING FUNDS FOR
SOLID WASTE PROGRAMS INCLUDING EDUCATION FOR SCHOOLS
AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC, FUNDING FOR THE DISPOSAL OF TOXICS
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 26
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.
FACILITY, RECYCLING HOTLINE, AND SOLID WASTE AND LITTER
ENFORCEMENT, IN THE AMOUNT OF $495,505 (AB2004 -093)
6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND
PICTOMETRY INTERNATIONAL CORP. FOR LICENSED USE OF
SHORELINE ORTHOGONAL AND OBLIQUE IMAGES, IN THE AMOUNT
OF $145,000 (AB2004 -094)
7. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
PURCHASE OF THREE REPLACEMENT LIGHT UTILITY VEHICLES
USING THE WASHINGTON STATE CONTRACT, FROM BUD CLARY
CHEVROLET FOR A TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE OF $65,141.14 (AB2004-
095)
S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
PURCHASE OF FOUR GAS /ELECTRIC HYBRID SEDANS USING THE
WASHINGTON STATE CONTRACT, FROM BUD CLARY OF YAKIMA FOR
A TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE OF $85,681.60 (AB2004 -096)
OTHER ITEMS
1. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE LAKE WHATCOM LANDSCAPE PLAN
AS RECOMMENDED BY THE LAKE WHATCOM LANDSCAPE PLANNING
COMMITTEE (AB2003 -087)
Roy reported for the Natural Resources Committee and moved to
recommend approval.
McShane stated he would propose an amendment that would recognize the
role of the Forestry Advisory Forum. It will play a more important role if the
landscape plan is adopted. He moved to amend to add language, "BE IT
FURTHER RESOLVED that Whatcom County recognizes the continued need for the
Lake Whatcom Forestry Advisory Forum, particularly in regard to public process,
logging techniques, and coordination of logging plans on private and publicly -
managed lands in the watershed in conjunction with the Interjurisdictional
Committee."
Nelson stated the Forestry Advisory Forum agrees with most of the language
in the motion. The Forestry Forum has also worked on things such as pesticide and
herbicide management and road construction. However, remove the list because
the Forestry Forum may want to work on other issues in the future. He suggested
a friendly amendment, "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Whatcom County
Council favors an effective community process that will include the contribution of
the Lake Whatcom Forestry Advisory Forum."
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 27
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.
McShane accepted the friendly amendment.
Roy stated she agreed with the motion with the language Councilmember
Nelson suggested.
Motion to amend carried unanimously.
Motion to approve the resolution as amended carried unanimously.
2. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE LAKE WHATCOM WATERSHED
FORESTRY ADVISORY FORUM AS THE INTERJURISDICTIONAL
COMMITTEE UNDER THE LAKE WHATCOM MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
(AB2004 -086)
Roy reported for the Natural Resources Committee and stated this item was
held in committee for two weeks.
3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO RENEW WHATCOM COUNTY'S
PROPERTY INSURANCE POLICY (AB2004 -067)
Crawford reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee
and moved to approve the substitute version of option two with option B for
earthquake coverage, for a total premium of $141,088.
Motion carried unanimously.
4. DISCUSSION REGARDING WHATCOM COUNTY SOLID WASTE
ADVISORY COMMITTEE'S REQUEST FOR DIRECTION REGARDING THE
DRAFTING OF PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE MANDATORY
COLLECTION ORDINANCE (AB2004 -085)
Brenner reported for the Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and
stated this item is held in committee.
S. UPDATE AND DISCUSSION REGARDING THE WHATCOM CHIEF - LUMMI
ISLAND FERRY 20 -YEAR PLAN AND PARKING ON LUMMI ISLAND
(AB2004 -098)
Brenner reported for the Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and
stated this item was presented to the committee. The Public Works Department
will continue working on the issue.
6. ORDINANCE ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE WHATCOM
COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 20) CHAPTER 20.85
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, CHAPTER 20.89 DENSITY
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 28
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.
TRANSFER PROCEDURE, CHAPTER 20.90 AMENDMENTS,
AND CHAPTER 20.71 WATER RESOURCES PROTECTION
OVERLAY DISTRICT (AB2004 -081)
Fleetwood reported for the Planning and Development Committee and
moved to adopt the ordinance.
Motion to adopt carried unanimously.
7. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF
BRUCE DAY AND KARL RITTER TO THE AMERICAN'S WITH
DISABILITIES ACT COMPLIANCE COMMITTEE (AB2004 -099)
Brenner moved to confirm the appointments.
Motion carried unanimously.
S. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF
GERRY MILLMAN TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INVESTMENT
(EDI) BOARD (AB2004 -100)
Brenner moved to confirm the appointment.
Motion carried unanimously.
9. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF
CYNTHIA FLOYD, JOAN DOW AND MICHAEL PASSO TO THE
BICYCLE/ PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB2004 -101)
Brenner moved to confirm the appointments.
Motion carried unanimously.
ADDENDUM:
10: RESOLUTOIN OPPOSING SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 2340 (AB2004-
108)
Nelson moved to amend the resolution, "WHEREAS, senge of the
nelude, but are net lingited te, falling lines and peles, pessible negative health
affects frem eleetremagnetie fields eFeated by large amperage leads, stray veltage
That may have been a
statement of concern from some on one side of the argument. There are concerns
expressed by others that aren't expressed. Just leave it out.
Caskey- Schreiber agreed, but she likes the language the way it is.
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 29
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.
Crawford stated the language says this is one of many concerns.
Motion to amend carried 5 -2 with Caskey- Schreiber and Crawford
opposed.
Crawford stated he supports the resolution. He asked the motivation of
doing this bill in Olympia.
Caskey- Schreiber stated Representative Morris proposed the bill, but she
doesn't know why. The Washington State Association of Counties also has concerns
about his bill. This affects other counties.
McShane stated that some power lines involve multiple jurisdictions.
Whatcom County is stuck by the policy that it will have to intervene. It puts a huge
burden on the jurisdictions. This is a classic unfunded mandate.
Motion to approve as amended carried unanimously.
2003 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
1. ORDINANCE ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE WHATCOM COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE RELATING TO
ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES (AB2003 -075B)
Brenner reported for the Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and
stated this item is held in committee.
2004 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT DOCKETING
1. RESOLUTION INITIATING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING
AMENDMENTS FOR 2004 (AB2004 -082)
Docket #2004 -F: MRL - Northstar /Brown Road
Roy reported for the Natural Resources Committee and moved to docket.
Motion carried unanimously.
Docket #2004 -G: MRL - Pole Road
Roy reported for the Natural Resources Committee and stated the
recommendation is to deny docketing.
Crawford moved to docket, for the sake of procedure.
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 30
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.
McShane stated he is in favor of the motion. The proponent is establishing
a high bar by making the mineral resource land contingent on a very thorough
reclamation program. The gravel study indicates that the majority of the
aggregate is in the agricultural zone, which worries him in the long term. The
pressure to mine those areas in an inappropriate manner is growing. The winds of
politics change. Several years ago, the Council was more open to mining in those
areas. He's not comfortable entirely with the criteria for mineral resource lands
(MRL's) in the agricultural area. However, this item works if it's highly
constrained, which the applicant is in favor of.
Brenner stated the Agricultural Advisory Committee recommended against
this proposal. That committee keeps a close eye on what's going on. She has to
go with the committee's recommendation.
Nelson stated he was also reluctant about this, but he agrees with
Councilmember McShane. This vote puts the proposal into the hearing process
when the Council can get good criteria put in place. They are going to see more of
these proposals coming forward.
Caskey- Schreiber stated this sets a horrible precedent. They're losing
agricultural land just as fast as land zoned rural, one unit per ten acres (R10A).
She's totally opposed to this proposal.
Crawford stated the applicants talked about having discussions with Henry
Bierlink. The applicants are attempting to stay in an agriculturally - related
business, but are struggling to ways to mine the aggregate in a responsible way
that also allows them to sustain their agricultural operation at the same time. In
reality, it's a powerful statement for agriculture. Much of their mineral resources is
under agricultural soils. This is an opportunity to see someone do it right.
Caskey- Schreiber asked the enforcement regulations the County has to
reclaim the land to its original use. The County has no enforcement of
reclamation. She's not convinced that it can be done. Practice reclamation on an
area that is already mined out, not prime farmland with water rights.
Fleetwood asked if the Agricultural Advisory Committee had heard about the
reclamation plan when it recommended against this.
Kraig Olason, Senior Planner, stated it was discussed. This issue has come
up numerous times. When they looked at this site and the impact on agriculture,
the committee decided that it was untimely and would set a precedent because
there is a lot of raspberry ground that has sand or gravel under it.
McShane stated this is an opportunity for the County to see if one can
reclaim land to a high end use. It can be a study the County can oversee and hold
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 31
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
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.
the applicant responsible for. The applicant's offer to mine only a small area
before moving on to another area and reclaiming the area to raspberry production
level is attractive. They may find out that it doesn't work, and then the County
can close the door on that question and option. They may find it works, and it can
set the standard to mine in agricultural land.
Roy stated staff thinks the chances of this reclamation happening is next to
nothing. If they're going to experiment, go find a place that has already been
mined. A person can't farm without land. If they have to decide between
aggregate supply and farmland, she will choose farmland. They can buy gravel.
They can't replace that farmland. When someone takes away all that drainage
under the soil, it's not likely that the land can be reclaimed to raspberry level
production.
Caskey- Schreiber stated that once the land is mind, the level of the land will
be lower than surrounding land. The first thing berry growers will do is fumigate
the soil. Nasty chemicals will go in closer than they should be to an aquifer
recharge area, without any of the filtration that exists now.
Motion to docket failed 3 -4 with Nelson, Crawford, and McShane in
favor.
Docket #2004 -A: 2004 Comprehensive Plan update
Fleetwood reported for the Planning and Development Committee and
recommends docketing. He moved to docket.
Motion carried unanimously,
Docket #2004 -13: Ferndale Urban Growth Area
Fleetwood reported for the Planning and Development Committee and
recommends denial of docketing the item. He moved to docket.
Motion failed unanimously,
Docket #2004 -C: Bellingham Urban Growth Area
Fleetwood reported for the Planning and Development Committee and
recommends approval. He moved to docket.
Motion carried unanimously.
Docket #2004 -D: Point Roberts - Rural to Commercial
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 32
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 reported for the Planning and Development Committee and
recommends denial. He moved to docket, and is against the motion.
Motion failed unanimously.
Docket #2004 -E: Guide Meridian - Rural to Commercial
Fleetwood reported for the Planning and Development Committee and
recommends denial. He moved to docket, and would speak against the motion.
Crawford stated there are subdivision possibilities to create a five acre tract.
This item deserves a look by the Planning Commission. The applicant should
elaborate more on the merits of expanding that pocket of commercial into the
entire tract. He has sympathy for someone who has a zoning line bisect the
property.
Motion failed 1 -6 with Crawford in favor.
Docket #2004 -H: Hazardous Material Policies
Fleetwood reported for the Planning and Development Committee and
recommends denial. He moved to docket.
Motion failed unanimously.
McShane moved to approve the resolution as amended.
Motion carried 6 -1 with Crawford opposed.
INTRODUCTION ITEMS
Brenner moved to accept the Introduction Items.
Motion carried unanimously.
1. ORDINANCE ORDERING THE CLOSURE OF A PORTION OF DELTA LINE
ROAD NORTH OF GRANDVIEW ROAD AND SOUTH OF THE PROPOSED
NEW ROAD ALIGNMENT (AB2004 -097)
2. ORDINANCE REGARDING INSTALLATION OF STOP SIGNS AT
VARIOUS INTERSECTIONS ON CERTAIN COUNTY ROADS (AB2004-
102) (HEARING TO BE SCHEDULED)
3. ORDINANCE REGARDING ESTABLISHMENT OF SPEED LIMITS ON
CERTAIN COUNTY ROADS (AB2004 -103)
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 33
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.
4. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 12.44 TO CLARIFY
PROCEDURES FOR FILING OF APPLICATION SUMMARIES AND OTHER
MISCELLANEOUS CLARIFICATIONS (AB2004 -104)
S. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2004 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET,
SECOND REQUEST (AB2004 -105)
ADDENDUM:
6. RECEIPT OF REQUEST FOR COUNCIL TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON
THE DEVELOPER REIMBURSEMENT APPLICATION FOR MISSION
ROAD (AB2003 -369A)
OTHER BUSINESS
Nelson stated there is a request from the Regional Support Network for the
Council to send a letter of support for not taking monies that are intended for a
five - county region and distribute it to the counties individually without
supplementing funds to the entire region for regional mental health needs. Send a
letter expressing opposition to all the funds the four other counties are losing for
mental health crisis services.
Brenner stated the Mental Health Advisory Board voted unanimously to
support the letter.
(Clerk's Note: There was no motion.)
Motion to send a letter carried unanimously.
REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
There were no reports or other items.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 11:43 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
The Council approved these minutes on March 9 , 2004.
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 34
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.
1 ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
2 WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
3
4
5
6
7 Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk Dan McShane, Council Chair
8
9
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2004, Page 35