Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning November 23 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 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Planning and Development Committee November 23, 2004 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 Laurie Caskey- Schreiber Also Present: Sharon Roy Dan McShane COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL= COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CHAPTER 2 — CHERRY POINT URBAN GROWTH AREA (AB2004- 395) Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, stated the amendments proposed are all very minor, to update factual data, such as to the names of businesses and references to projects underway. She and the Planning Commission recommend approval without a public hearing. Fleetwood stated he and others are interested in preserving a portion of the land in the urban growth area (UGA) to be used for a public park. The area has the most incredible views of the gulf and San Juan Islands seen anywhere from the Washington State mainland. The area is along Point Whitehorn and Aldergrove Road. He asked if this proposed plan would make a park impossible. Goodwin stated it would be no more impossible than it is now. It's a matter of price and funding. If the County has the money to purchase the property, or of the property were donated or traded, staff can bring forward a Comprehensive Plan amendment and re- designate the area as recreational open space. At that time, they would want to balance the industrial land supply by looking for additional industrial land supply farther inland. Until there is funding, keep the area designated as industrial land. A recreational open space designation is for public land, so they couldn't designate that area now. The Committee could add a goal if it wants to work toward acquiring land in the area. Staff can draft a goal. An amendment to the chapter would require a public hearing. The committee concurred to add a goal to the chapter of working toward acquiring land in the area for recreational open space. Planning and Development Committee, 11/23/2004, 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 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 moved to schedule a hearing for December 7, 2004 that includes the additional goal. Motion carried unanimously. 2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CHAPTER 2 — CUSTER PROVISIONAL URBAN GROWTH AREA (AB2004 -396) (THIS ITEM TENTATIVELY SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON DECEMBER 7) Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, stated the Custer area is a provisional urban growth area (UGA). The current Comprehensive Plan requires review of that provision in five years to determine whether or not the UGA is still viable or whether it should be returned to a rural designation. The owner of 209 acres has made some progress on creating a master plan for the area, but it's not adequate to be considered or approved as a master plan yet. There are good reasons for the area to remain a provisional UGA, including its location along the freeway, railroad tracks, and deep water port at Cherry Point. Staff did not want to leave it open -ended for the property owners. Staff recommends a final sunset clause for two years, to the end of 2006. At that time, the area would return to a rural designation. Fleetwood asked what they say to people who believe the area designated is too big. Goodwin stated it is a big area. The area was specifically drawn big, to include over 400 acres. It was intended that, through the master planning process, they would look at wetlands, critical areas, and California Creek to determine how to site the railroad facility without impacts. The master plan is supposed to look at transportation in greater detail. There will have to be access to the railroad. They'll want to work around the wetlands and critical areas. They will have to have a large looping track for the trains to turn around. When done, they probably won't need 400 acres, but until the plan is done, they won't know which lands they'll need. Fleetwood stated these are some of the most spectacular rural lands in the county. Transforming it into an industrial park saddens him. Roy asked which designation would give the most environmental protection to California Creek, which is a major issue. It runs right through the middle of this area and drains into Drayton Harbor. It's critical that the creek be protected. There is not much language in the chapter that acknowledges that need for protection. Goodwin stated that if returned to a rural designation, the zone would be rural, one unit per ten acres (R10A), and it could be divided into about 40 residential ten -acre lots. Because it's subject to the agricultural preservation overlay, those lots would have to be clustered, but there would be 40 homes built there if returned to rural. If the area remains an industrial area and the owners move forward with a master plan, the master plan is required to protect wetlands. Planning and Development Committee, 11/23/2004, 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. A large tract would be set aside for wetlands and buffers, and stormwater would be planned as part of the master plan. If the area wasn't adequately protected, the Council would deny the plan or send it back for redesign. The wetlands would be as well protected in a large industrial complex as they would with individual houses. The wetlands are identified in the draft master plan, but there's not detail yet to how they would be protected. Hal Hart, Planning and Development Services Director, stated any industrial development is not vested to any older regulations. Over the next 18 months, it will be interesting to see how the new code would apply to that site. It could potentially be more restrictive in a year from now. Caskey- Schreiber stated she likes that this is close to a lot of major infrastructure. Her biggest concern is that they will keep investing in this area, and then Ferndale will annex it. Goodwin stated the area is not in the Ferndale UGA, and is a long way from Ferndale. This area cannot be annexed. Hart stated Delta Tech is at the northern edge of Ferndale's UGA. This area is beyond that UGA. Caskey- Schreiber stated the area already has a provisional UGA. See whether or not the project works out. If they remove industrial lands from Cherry Point, she doesn't want to have to find more. They can use this land. Goodwin stated the question to consider now is whether or not to extend the sunset date for two years, which staff recommends. If they don't continue the provision, the zone reverts to R10A, and the property owners cannot move forward with an industrial project at all, unless they come forward with a new Comprehensive Plan amendment. It would take a year to consider that amendment. Fleetwood asked if a new Comprehensive Plan amendment would be of a lesser scope. Goodwin stated it may, it may be a greater scope, or it may not be approved at all. When this plan first came forward, it was approved, then appealed. It battled for several years in court. It may be that the County cannot get it approved because it is outside of an existing city UGA. Caskey- Schreiber asked if the sunset has been extended before and how long the owners have had to get this going. Goodwin stated the area was designated as a provisional UGA un 1997. The owners had five years to get it going. About two years of that five years was spent in an appeal. A prudent landowner would not have spent a lot of money on a master plan knowing it was under appeal and might not go anywhere. The owners' timeframe to get the master plan done was shortened because of the appeal. However, they had an extra two years during which the County reviewed the Comprehensive Plan. The landowners have had a total of about five years to get the master plan done. They Planning and Development Committee, 11/23/2004, 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. have done two draft plans. Neither were detailed enough to meet the County's criteria. Brenner suggested allowing a one -year extension. This is a sensitive area and the proposal is for heavy industry. People were against the designation, and the Council should respect that. She would like the area to go back to a rural designation. Fleetwood stated the owners were put on notice that they had a timeframe to comply with the terms to submit the master plan, and they have not done that. Goodwin stated that's not entirely correct. The owners did submit a master plan. Staff believed it was very inadequate. Fleetwood asked if the master plan neglected to include information that the owners knew was required. Goodwin stated it's marginal. The master plan does not specify how the railroad would go through the area, how transportation would get in and out of the area, or where the water would come from. The plan included ideas for possibly getting water from Birch Bay or Custer, but there wasn't clear evidence of water rights. There wasn't the detail they should expect in a master plan for an industrial complex. Fleetwood asked if the owners were put on notice that they were expressly required to include those components. Goodwin stated that is right. This master plan is dated January 2000. Staff pointed out the inadequacies at that time, and the owners have not completed it yet. There are multiple owners to the total area. There is a legal issue now on 209 acres. Ownership now is questioned. It was foreclosed upon by the tribes, who now own it. There is one year for the owner to pay back the debt. Councilmember Brenner's suggestion for allowing only one year for the master plan isn't likely for the owners to complete it because the ownership is in question. Roy asked who protested the provisional UGA. Brenner stated a group called CUSTER, comprised of local people, opposed the designation. Roy stated this project raises red flags in terms of environmental impacts. Brenner stated this group provided information to the community. She doesn't know if they know this is going on now. Goodwin stated the group is aware. One of the leaders, Dr. Hruby, came to the hearing and said he didn't have a problem with tightening the criteria and giving the owners a firm two years. Several property owners preferred that the land go back to rural. She recommends a public hearing. Not everyone felt they got an opportunity to speak to the Planning Commission. Planning and Development Committee, 11/23/2004, 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 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. Eric Laschever, Stoel Rives, LLP, 600 University Street, Suite 600, Seattle, Attorney for Grand Ronde Tribe, stated there was a Sheriff's sale in early November. Within one year from that date, the owner has the right to redeem the property. The Tribe was the bidder at the Sheriff's sale. Caskey- Schreiber asked if the Tribe acquired the property with a vision in place. Laschever stated the vision is still to have an intermodal facility. The Tribe waited to see if anyone would be a higher bidder. There were other bidders experienced in intermodal facilities, but the Tribe was the highest bidder. Fleetwood asked if the Tribe would hire its tribal members in Oregon or people in the local community. Laschever stated he assumes the Tribe would hire local people. The Tribe hopes that other parties would put forward the master plan. Jim Trull, 7878 Birch Bay Drive, Blaine, stated he is one of the 209 -acre property owners. One barrier on the master plan was that the Custer water district did not have the capacity to provide water. However, the Public Utility District (PUD) has agreed to supply water to the Custer project. There are individuals the owners have worked with to put in an intermodal facility. In the last two or three years, rail has come back. Getting trucks off the road is major. There are companies now doing short -line rail to take goods from Bellingham to Seattle more efficiently and less costly than trucks. Right now, there are now facilities in Whatcom County to put goods onto rail, and there is a local company that needs that service. A short -line rail carrier has been doing great rail work in Eastern Washington. He is talking to the management of that carrier. There are advantages in the marketplace to short -line rail. He submitted letters and information in support of the project (on file). One study shows that trucks going across the border have significantly increased. When the program was extended, there were significant meetings with Planning staff. The most critical thing is that they were dealing with a small water district. No new homes have been built around Custer. They will enhance California Creek. They'll be able to safeguard the environment. This is a critical piece of infrastructure. They know that the cascade corridor is going to grow. The cost of moving goods is a critical component in whether or not industry will survive in the United States. This property is uniquely tied to all the ports in the region. Cherry Point may become a major port facility with a deep - water capacity. They're close to financing the project, based upon negotiations with the Tribe. He's confident the project will come on line. It will be a major employer for the County. Caskey- Schreiber asked about the property sold to the Tribe. Trull stated the Tribe agreed to be a partner at one point. Since the Tribe's change in leadership, it's taken back some of its property. He's confident that he'll be able to redeem the property within the year. Planning and Development Committee, 11/23/2004, 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. Roy asked if the two -year extension is something they can work with. Trull stated they can. They know what needs to be done. Another $25,000 study will pinpoint everything they need. Two or three years ago, they didn't understand where this would play a transportation role. Now they know. In addition, he has overcome medical problems that prohibited him from working on the project. Louis Leclezio, 10021 N.E. 16th Place, Bellevue, stated he is an adjacent property owner. (Clerk's note: End of tape one, side A.) Leclezio stated Planning commissioners asked if this is still a valuable proposition. There is clear development progress in that area. He looks forward to working with the Tribe to make something of the project. Fleetwood asked if the designation would automatically revert to rural if the property owners don't achieve a plan by the sunset date. Goodwin stated it would revert automatically. Doing the 2006 Comprehensive Plan document, the staff would bring forward an ordinance to make that happen and to change the wording in this section by striking all mention of the Custer provisional UGA from the plan. They would put the zoning back to rural and remove the area from the map. The sunset date would direct that to be done. The ordinance would make it official. Caskey- Schreiber moved to grant the two year sunset extension. Look at the original intent. The property owners have been through a lot of work. The area was designated seven years ago. She would like to allow one last final try, otherwise it will come forward again. Brenner stated they've let it play out for a lot of years already. The people in the area deserve closure. McShane stated goal 2CC is to recognize the need for industrial land near Interstate 5 for a major intermodal facility. He asked how this is a need for and benefit to Whatcom County. He's not sure it's a particular benefit to the community as a whole at this location. Caskey- Schreiber stated she would like to hear from the citizens at a public hearing. Goodwin stated that if they want to remove it from the plan and UGA, the committee would make a motion to remove all the text in Exhibit A from the Comprehensive Plan and remove the Custer provisional UGA on the map. They could have the hearing on the amendments proposed and removal of the whole UGA. They don't want to alarm people and cause a bunch of people to attend a public hearing on something the Council isn't interested in doing. Poll the councilmembers at the evening meeting to see if there is a serious interest in eliminating this area as a UGA. They are trying to get the Comprehensive Plan Planning and Development Committee, 11/23/2004, 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 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. amendments adopted on December 7. Thousand Friends of Washington will appeal the amendments. Caskey- Schreiber withdrew her motion for the sake of process. She's leery of making Cherry Point an international shipping point. Brenner moved to delete all the wording from Exhibit A and to remove the Custer provisional UGA from the map. McShane asked if they can have both options before the Council at the hearing. Goodwin stated they wouldn't have to have a hearing on what came from the Planning Commission. As long as they don't take it off the docket and replace it, they can also have a hearing on an ordinance to eliminate UGA entirely. The Council couldn't adopt both ordinances. One would have to fail. Roy stated she is interested in environmental issues. She disagrees that Cherry Point would become a major shipping area. She is concerned about California Creek. She wants to hear what the neighbors have to say and both sides of the issue. Fleetwood stated he would not support the motion, based on Councilmember Roy's reasoning. He would recommend the Planning Commission recommendation and retain the right to have a public hearing. Brenner stated that if they don't change anything, they won't have a public hearing. Goodwin stated a public hearing is scheduled on the Planning Commission text, even if they don't change the Planning Commission recommendation. Caskey- Schreiber stated that if they change the text of the Planning Commission recommendation after the public hearing, the Council will have to have another public hearing. She'd rather approve the motion and have a hearing on that option. table. Brenner stated they could leave the current version of the ordinance on the Fleetwood restated the motion to delete all the text from Exhibit A. Motion to amend carried unanimously. Brenner moved to recommend a public hearing on the amended version. Goodwin stated they would need to come up with findings and an ordinance by the evening meeting. Planning and Development Committee, 11/23/2004, 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 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 for a public hearing as amended carried unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 4:06 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, 11/23/2004, Page 8