Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil April 8 20031 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 Regular County Council April 8, 2003 The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Council Chair Dan McShane in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Absent: Barbara Brenner L. Ward Nelson Laurie Caskey- Schreiber Sam Crawford Seth Fleetwood Sharon Roy FLAG SALUTE ANNOUNCEMENTS McShane announced that there was discussion with the Administration regarding a possible land acquisition (AB2003 -018) in executive session and discussion regarding the Council's letter writing policy (AB2003 -157) during the Committee of the Whole meeting. The Council decided that in the future, letters that were approved by a majority of the Council and sent out, but not discussed during a Council meeting, would be published in the following Council packet. Along with the letter, the Council will include in its packet an explanation of the urgency of sending out the letter before discussion during a Council meeting. SPECIAL PRESENTATION 1. PRESENTATION BY THE CITY OF LYNDEN REGARDING THE PROPOSED PDR TARGET AREA PROGRAM (AB2003 -143) Jack Louws, City of Lynden Mayor, read a letter into the record (on file) explaining the process the City went through in developing its proposed boundaries for the purchase of development rights (PDR) program. Bill Verwolf, City of Lynden Administrator, stated the proposal is meant as a compromise that reflects a future need for commercial and residential growth in Lynden. The PDR process is a permanent process. This is not a request to change any zoning rules or Comprehensive Plan boundaries. Whatcom County Council, 4/8/2003, 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. The city population forecast to 2067 shows a potential of about 40,000 people. The build out of the current urban growth area (UGA) at six units per acre would allow a population of about 19,000. The City requests that the County not target an area to the north of the city, as shown on his map. They are trying to reserve the area for long -term consideration. If that area to the north were developed, it would allow a population of about 33,000 at a density of six units per acre. They considered certain constrictions and conditions when the City developed the proposal. The possibilities for expansion to the south are limited because of the Nooksack River and flood plain. There are wetlands, critical areas, and habitat conservation areas that restrict expansion to the east of the city. The Badger Road is a natural barrier north of the city. In the long -term future, the City would look at the ability to go north of the Badger Road for development of agricultural enhancing industries. To the west is the area with the biggest potential for long -term development in the city. The areas the City of Lynden requests be removed from the PDR target areas are identified as the piece of target area ten between the Guide and Berthusen Road and south of Badger Road, and in target areas eleven and twelve, they've identified the first 1,320 feet north of Badger Road to accommodate the potential for future agricultural related business. Crawford asked if there will be recommended PDR purchases coming up, and if any are in these areas. Kraig Olason, Senior Planner, stated they did not include these areas in round one of the program. The applications they have are vested if the County rearranges the PDR target areas. There aren't any inside these areas. Roy asked when the second round begins. Olason stated staff agreed to put off the second round until there was some decision on removing these areas. Roy asked if no action by the Council would mean that the original boundaries would remain. The Council removed these areas for the first round only. Olason stated that may have been the intent. The guidelines document included a map of the target areas. It was amended and adopted, with the statement that the first round wouldn't include those areas and the Council would look at and decide upon those areas later. The Council would have to make a decision to amend the map. 2. PRESENTATION OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT OFFICIALS (NAHRO) AWARD OF EXCELLENCE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITH AMENITIES FOR SENIORS (AB2003- 151) Whatcom County Council, 4/8/2003, 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 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. John Harmon, Whatcom County Housing Authority Executive Director, stated the Bellingham Housing Authority and Whatcom County Housing Authority are two different agencies, with a common staff and administration. The members of the boards are on both housing authorities, which works very well. Tonight they are talking about an elderly housing development in the City of Lynden. The County's role is the creator of the Whatcom County Housing Authority. The County was one partner who put this project together. He gave a photo presentation of the development. Downtown Lynden is nearby. They keep the development landscaped and well maintained. There are views of ponds, the river valley, and Mount Baker. There are several amenities in the units. He presented a plaque to the Executive and the County Council for the River House project. Pete Kremen, County Executive, accepted the plaque. The real credit goes to the Housing Authority and local community organizations that have worked to address the issue of affordable housing in Whatcom County. Brenner asked if there is an elevator in this development, since it is for seniors. Harmon stated there are elevators. Caskey- Schreiber thanked Mr. Harmon for building attractive stormwater retention ponds in the development. Harmon stated most of the land is in the flood plain. The building is two feet above the flood plain. MINUTES CONSENT Roy moved to approve Consent Agenda items one through four. Motion carried unanimously. 1. WATER RESOURCES WORK SESSION FOR MARCH 18, 2003 2. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR MARCH 25, 2003 3. REGULAR COUNTY COUNCIL FOR MARCH 25, 2003 4. BOARD OF HEALTH FOR APRIL 1, 2003 OPEN SESSION (20 MINUTES1 The following people spoke: Charles Antholt, Whatcom County Agricultural Advisory Committee Chair, stated he wanted to speak about Lynden's Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) Whatcom County Council, 4/8/2003, Page 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. proposal. Presentation by the City of Lynden regarding the proposed PDR Target Area Program (AB2003 -143). The letter from the Agricultural Advisory Committee speaks for itself. The committee agrees with the City of Lynden. Their projections are dubious, at best. A problem with Lynden's long -term growth projection is that there is a profound demographic change going on in the country. The long -term U.S. fertility rate is at two, just below the replacement level. It will continue to decline. That means that by 2030 or 2040, the U.S. population will begin to decline. The problem is that growth will occur. They can argue about the rate. Whatever the rate, Whatcom County can accommodate the growth without using up prime farmland. That is the appropriate thing to do. Let the farmers in the disputed PDR areas have a choice. Put those areas back into the PDR program. Mike Kaufman, 1620 Huntley Road, stated the electric moratorium is coming up in the middle of June. Start moving forward with solving the problem before that date arrives and they have to have another moratorium. He will provide a handout of the new changes. Ray Tryzynka, Puget Sound Energy Local Government and Community Relations Manager, stated he agreed with Mr. Kaufman. He provided the Council and Executive the latest executive summary of Puget Sound Energy's least cost plan. It is part of their overall larger resource planning strategy. They are in the midst of taking public comment to the Utilities Commission for a ten and twenty year horizon for resource planning. At Puget Sound Energy, they will try to maintain and enhance a balanced portfolio that consists of conservation and energy efficiency measures. Those measures will double what they have done over the last ten -year period of the previous least cost plan. They will also look at renewables, which they are actively pursuing. They want to have about ten percent of the load covered by renewables during the next ten -year planning period. They are looking at five percent of the load coming from wind power resources. They are also looking at thermal power and long -term purchase power agreements. The full report is available on the Puget Sound Energy website. The forecast is for a 1.4 percent average growth over the next ten to twenty years. The issue is the change in the ability of the resource mix to cover that growth. Typical long -term contracts will be coming off. They can renegotiate those contracts, but they also have to look at other resources that may be available. Brenner asked if the five percent wind power is in addition to the ten percent renewable. Tryzynka stated it is. Mark Marshall, Lummi Island Transportation Committee, stated he supports the parking proposal for Gooseberry Point. Request authorization for the Executive to enter into a Use of Premises agreement with Lummi Commercial Company for Lummi island ferry parking area at Gooseberry Point, in the amount of $35,227 (AB2003 -144). The Lummi Island Transportation Committee (LITC) has been working closely with the County and Whatcom County Council, 4/8/2003, 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. Lummi Nation to improve the system during a time of limited resources. This parking area is critical. Many more people are walking. Sylvia Thorpe, 5079 Everson - Goshen Road, stated the animal control contract is up for bid. She submitted a letter earlier in the day (on file). Whatcom County has a growing population of both animals and shelters. They need two shelters to provide animal control. More animals are now euthanized at the Humane Society and more animals receive homes through Security Specialists Plus (SSP)- Preferred Animal Care, which is different from what people feared. She is encouraged by what SSP and the Humane Society do. Both agencies work with the public, educational institutions, and guide dogs and medical service dogs. Classrooms are working with SSP. A lot of things need to be considered by the decision makers. It is about more than just how people feel. She presented the facts and figures for both SSP and the Humane Society. Both agencies must continue to operate. John Sarich, Ferndale, stated he would talk about urban growth areas and the Hearing Examiner. The State of Washington developed urban growth areas as part of the Growth Management Act. They are very confusing in terms of who has control of them. The City of Sedro - Woolley voted two weeks ago to eliminate its urban growth area. Skagit County was allowing development without services. In Whatcom County, another confusion is that a development in the urban growth area must go through the hearing examiner process for a rezone. They are frustrated with the system. The Council can't get input about an issue unless it's through letters sent in the quasi - judicial process. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) Sarich continued to state that some facts were never brought out. Mistakes of the Planning Department and opinions of the City of Ferndale were never brought before the Council. John Steensma, 9295 Axling Road, Lynden, stated he is a dairy farmer. Presentation by the City of Lynden regarding the proposed PDR Target Area Program (AB2003 -143). Recent trends show that the average dairy herd in the State of Washington doubles every 15 years. If he is to be ecologically correct and maintain a small farm atmosphere, he will need one acre per cow, or 3,200 acres in 60 years. He asked the Council to establish a no -build zone of five - square miles for him to accommodate his 60 -year growth projection. This zone would extend to the south and east of his farm, toward Lynden, since there are wetlands and critical areas to the north and west of his farm. This should ensure him an adequate land supply for affordable grazing. Landowners in the zone may be allowed to continue living in the zone as long as they don't build more housing. This will save him the need of buying their improvements and removing them later. When he needs the land, he would pay those landowners the full agricultural value. Whatcom County Council, 4/8/2003, Page 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. This request could encompass the entire Whatcom County herd of dairy cattle, approximately 60,000 cows today. In the next 60 years, it will grow to 960,000 cows. They will need almost a million acres in the county just for dairy. He asked if this proposal is any more outlandish than the City of Lynden's proposal to block farmers free use of their land because someday the City might need it for future growth. It is not. The real issue is a question of property rights. The question is whether the City of Lynden should be allowed to dictate what a farmer can do with his or her land outside of the city limits and outside the urban growth area. These farmers cannot even vote for those on the City Council who control their fate. Let the farmers decide what is best for their lands. Deny the Lynden proposal. John Belisle, 231 Ten Mile Road, stated he is an apple farmer. Presentation by the City of Lynden regarding the proposed PDR Target Area Program (AB2003 -143). The document the City of Lynden wrote is fiction. He asked what gives the City of Lynden the right to say what should be done to other landowners. The Agricultural Advisory Committee, Lummi Nation, Agricultural Preservation Committee, Purchase of Development Rights Committee, and numerous citizens want this to stop. Stop spending resources on this project. Growth may come to Whatcom County, but it needs to go to the right place. Lynden may just be in the wrong place. Robert Verhoeven, 7098 Atwood Road, gave his time to John Sarich. Sarich stated he would speak about economics and income tax. He prepares tax statements for people. It is disturbing that Canadian businesses use Whatcom County to get around Canada's environmental and minimum wage laws. By doing that, a lot of jobs that come here are minimum wage jobs. He's been to many meetings at the County lately. He complimented County staff persons Peter Sim, Martha Blakely, John Guenther, and Carole Magner who have been very helpful. The Hearing Examiner and many of the planning people who are stakeholders in development are not quite as receptive. The City of Ferndale and Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife have also been very helpful. Frank Eventoff, 7086 Atwood Road, Ferndale, stated the Growth Management Act and Comprehensive Plan disallow unsightly or continuous development along a major transportation corridor. The County Council is the aesthetic police. Nelda Stite, 9005 Benson Road, Lynden, stated she owns a dairy farm that has been in the family nearly 100 years. Presentation by the City of Lynden regarding the proposed PDR Target Area Program (AB2003 -143). She was very surprised by Lynden's PDR program proposal. She attended three meetings with the City of Lynden. At all three, 90 percent of those who attended were Whatcom County Council, 4/8/2003, 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. against the proposal. The City did not listen to the people. Lynden has enough land to accommodate 30,000 people. If Lynden wants development rights, it should buy them, like the County has proposed. Lynden should not have the power to deny sale of anyone's development rights. Ten years ago, the City had a proposal to annex 80 acres north of the Badger Road and into the city limits. The long range planning commission voted unanimously against it. The City Council also voted against it. At that time, the East Badger Road was the development boundary. With the increase in traffic, she can't imagine the City of Lynden wanting the East Badger Road to run through it in the future. She urged the County Council to not accept the proposal from the City of Lynden. Rod Erickson, 6343 Church Road, Ferndale, stated he is a dairy farmer. Presentation by the City of Lynden regarding the proposed PDR Target Area Program (AB2003 -143). He is the Purchase of Development Rights Committee Chair. He is opposed to the City of Lynden's PDR proposal. They need more time to study it. It has not come to his committee, which is trying to negotiate with interested farmers. They are just beginning to work with an appraiser on costs. He has lived in the county for over 60 years. The farm has been in his family for 100 years. He has no intention of giving up farming. The growth from Ferndale is at his southern boundary. He is in the Ferndale urban growth area, and he cannot sell his development rights. He is strongly against the City of Lynden crossing the Badger Road. Sherm Polinder, 670 Polinder Road, Lynden, stated he is a dairyman and a former member of the Agricultural Advisory Committee. Presentation by the City of Lynden regarding the proposed PDR Target Area Program (AB2003- 143). His family has been farming here since 1901. Whatcom County is blessed with a variety of excellent farmland, adaptable to many crops. There are misconceptions and myths tossed around the last couple of months. The first myth is that the County has boxed Lynden in and prevents the city from expanding. They have already excluded the farmland south of the Badger Road, between Benson Road and the Guide Meridian. That is about 500 acres. The area east of the Guide Meridian, south of the Badger Road, and west of the Northwood Road can fit about 30,000 people without excessive density. Lynden's vision statement is to maintain a small town atmosphere and its agricultural roots. The second myth is that the City of Lynden needs more room for industry. Lynden has industry, the agricultural industry, which brings in an excess of $200 million each year. Save that industry. The third myth is that agriculture is dying in Whatcom County. He does not know of one farmable acre that is going to waste. There is a tremendous demand and competition for farmland. There are new crops coming into the county. Organic farming compliments dairy farming. Whatcom County Council, 4/8/2003, 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 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. The fourth myth is that PDR's are not the way to go. It is one of the best tools they have. The best tool is a strong County Council that has a backbone. Saving farmland is not an exact science. The farmers need the County's help. Washington State has already covered up thousands of acres of farmland, a non - renewable natural resource. Have the courage and foresight to keep agriculture viable in Whatcom County. Russell Simonson, 1191 E. Smith Road, spoke on the Presentation by the City of Lynden regarding the proposed PDR Target Area Program (AB2003- 143). He is an old Dutchman. If they were in Holland, the PDR program would be in effect up to the main street of Lynden. Karen Steensma, 9295 Axling Road, Lynden, stated she is a third generation farmer and teaches college biology. Presentation by the City of Lynden regarding the proposed PDR Target Area Program (AB2003 -143). She would discuss the area west of the Guide Meridian, an area of about 800 acres. This area is outside the city limits and the urban growth area. That land has amazing soil. The food produced there includes dairy products, potatoes, and raspberries, which are the top three agricultural commodities from Whatcom County. This climate and these soils produce these foods more efficiently than any other place in the world. The top dairy herd in the county is located in this area. Berthusen Park, the only remaining example of an old growth forest in lower Whatcom County, is also in this area. This parks size and habitat make it a refuge and island for wildlife. There are salmon in Bertrand Creek. The park and Bertrand Creek are havens for wildlife because they are not urbanized, and are surrounded by farmland. The area also makes Lynden and Whatcom County a desirable place to live. Progress is inevitable, but it is not progress when they waste prime food producing soils in a world that is losing these soils to urban sprawl and erosion while people are hungry in the world. The soils are a finite resource that must be protected. The City of Lynden proposal is the situation the PDR program was designed to prevent. Let farmers decide what is best for their farms. Jeff Canaan, 9706 Depot Road, Lynden, Presentation by the City of Lynden regarding the proposed PDR Target Area Program (AB2003 -143). He has a small organic fruit and vegetable farm. He is opposed to Lynden's PDR proposal. This is really affecting farmers. His father -in -law sold his land to pay off debts because his land had been removed from the PDR area. The last couple of years haven't been good. The PDR program would have given him the capital to continue farming and protected his land from what is going on in Lynden. There is a new housing development going in across Badger Road. If the land is removed, farmers will no longer have the choice. His father would have applied for the first round. Whatcom County Council, 4/8/2003, 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 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. Robin Dexter, 3726 Broad Street, Bellingham, stated he agreed with most of the speakers about keeping land in the PDR program. Presentation by the City of Lynden regarding the proposed PDR Target Area Program (AB2003- 143). His concern is connected with two years of updates they have coming on the growth management documents. He reminded the Council that there are growth management goals that need to be addressed. All County planning documents from the past ten years call out for the preservation of agriculture. Two primary statewide goals are to reduce sprawl and encourage fish and transportation are not being addressed by Lynden's request. Efficient transportation isn't rationalized until there is a density of ten per acre. Lynden is at 1950 levels. It is difficult to imagine a scenario for Lynden's growth that can't be accommodated by an increase in density. If they can't insist on that, where the reward is the preservation of farmland, then the question is how Bellingham would contain itself. He is concerned about how they are going to update the urban growth areas. Roger Van Dyken, 145 East Cedar Drive, Lynden. Presentation by the City of Lynden regarding the proposed PDR Target Area Program (AB2003- 143). He encouraged the Council to stay on the PDR program course, and allow farmers to volunteer for the program. This has been a good process. The City of Lynden has raised some good questions. He suggested they honor the questions that Lynden has raised. They do have needs for people to live, yet the agricultural lands are an important commodity. The City of Lynden focused the agricultural community and residents' thoughts on who the people of Lynden are and what they want to become. He is probably one of the first of all his ancestors, going back to Holland, to move off the land. He suggested it is time to build some dikes around the precious resources in Whatcom County. Don't cover over the farmland with asphalt and cement because it will be permanent. CONSENT AGENDA Crawford reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved to approve Consent Agenda items one through five. Item one was recommended for approval with a substitute contract. Motion carried unanimously. 1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A USE OF PREMISES AGREEMENT WITH LUMMI COMMERCIAL COMPANY FOR LUMMI ISLAND FERRY PARKING AREA AT GOOSEBERRY POINT, IN THE AMOUNT OF $35,227 (AB2003 -144) 2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN AMENDMENT TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 1 REGARDING Whatcom County Council, 4/8/2003, 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. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND PROJECT OVERSIGHT FOR THE WRIA 1 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PROJECT, IN THE AMOUNT OF $38,500 (AB2003 -145) 3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND REGION 3 AIDS SERVICE NETWORK TO PROVIDE HIV /AIDS PREVENTION ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING COUNSELING AND TESTING, OUTREACH, VOLUNTEER SERVICES, CASE MANAGEMENT AND EDUCATION, IN THE AMOUNT OF $132,940 (AB2003 -146) 4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE BIRCH BAY LIONS CLUB TO OPERATE A HOSTEL FACILITY AT BAY HORIZON PARK, AS A RESULT OF RFP #03 -07 (AB2003 -147) S. RESOLUTION AMENDING COUNTY ROAD PROJECT (CRP) NO. 900905, " LUMMI VIEW DRIVE" TO INCLUDE CONSTRUCTION FUNDING OF $1,000,000 (AB2003 -148) OTHER ITEMS 1. DISCUSSION OF THE LUMMI ISLAND FERRY OPERATION AND COMPLETION OF THE 20 -YEAR FERRY PLAN (AB2003 -149) Brenner reported for the Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and stated the Public Works Department is working with the Lummi Island Transportation Committee to finalize the draft plan. The County purchased property to put in parking areas. There were some concerns raised by the neighbors, and the administration looked at other properties. However, the administration decided that there is no better property for a parking area. The parking area may not be developed this year because of the permits that are needed, but the project is moving forward. 2. RESOLUTION DECLARING INTENT TO VACATE A PORTION OF LUMMI VIEW DRIVE / LUMMI SHORE ROAD (AB2003 -150) Brenner reported for the Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and stated this resolution is an approval for the Engineering Division to go ahead with studying the possibility of a road vacation. It is not to actually vacate the road yet. Brenner moved to approve the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. Whatcom County Council, 4/8/2003, 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. 3. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE POSSIBLE INSTALLATION OF CITY - LEVEL SERVICES (SIDEWALKS) ON COUNTY ROADS (AB2003 -155) Brenner reported for the Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and stated she is more concerned than she was before this discussion. The County Road Standards Manual is in conflict with the Growth Management Act. Outside of an urban growth area, the County is going to widen West Smith Road and install wide road shoulders and sidewalks. The location is near a school, but it is a lot of concrete. It will take a lot of money to maintain drainage. The Road Standards Manual says that they can put in sidewalks anywhere there is a density of one house per acre or more. That is too extravagant. It's too late to do anything about this project, but the Council should review the road standards and other regulations to make sure they are consistent with the Growth Management Act. 4. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING MAP FROM RURAL (1115A) TO LIGHT IMPACT INDUSTRIAL (LII) FOR 50.3 ACRES ON ATWOOD ROAD NORTH OF THE I- 5 /GRANDVIEW INTERCHANGE (SITE SPECIFIC REZONE) (AB2003 -104) (PAPERWORK INCLUDES DECISION ON REMAND FROM COUNCIL FILE AB2003 -1048) McShane asked if any councilmember had any communication outside the record and, if so, that councilmember must place on the record the substance of any such communication so other interested parties may have a right at this hearing to rebut the substance of that communication. Roy disclosed that she had a conversation with a fellow councilmember regarding a communication that councilmember received. Dave Grant, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated that any disclosures made at previous meetings should also be made at this meeting. Brenner disclosed that she had conversation with several opponents and proponents who called her. She told them she couldn't discuss it with them because it was ex parte' communication. She mentioned that the issues were environmental and regarding buffers. Since the first time it was remanded, she received another phone call from someone who was upset about urban growth areas overall. That person bought light industrial zoning, and felt that this is anti- competitive for someone to get a rezone this way. She can be fair and impartial in making her decision. Roy disclosed that she received two phone calls from proponents, which she reported last time. Brenner disclosed that she received a phone call from the developer, and spent some time talking to him before she found out this is a quasi - judicial matter. Whatcom County Council, 4/8/2003, 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. The substance of the conversation was an invitation by the developer to give her a tour of the proposal, which she didn't do. Roy disclosed that the substance of the phone calls she received was a request that she approve the request. The proponent gave reasons to vote in favor of the proposal, and wanted to know what she thought about it. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side 8.) Roy continued to disclose that the reasons proposed were that they needed that business opportunity in the county. There was access to the freeway. She can be fair and impartial in her consideration of the decision. McShane stated he received and read a number of emails from opponents and proponents. Those emails went into the record. He can be fair and impartial in his consideration of the decision. Fleetwood disclosed that he read everything in the record and everything presented to the councilmembers. He hasn't had any contact that he hasn't already reported. There was communication with neighbors who are opponents. He met with them before he understood the substance of the proposal. He can be fair and impartial in his consideration of the decision. Caskey- Schreiber disclosed that she had discussion with a Ferndale City Council Member regarding whether or not the City of Ferndale supported the request. The Ferndale Council Member felt that it is premature because there were no infrastructure services yet. She emailed another person and suggested that the person come to the Council and testify, not knowing it is a quasi - judicial matter. She recently had a conversation with Councilmember Roy about an email regarding Mr. Jansen moving a creek that affected a property owner. She can still make a fair and impartial decision. Crawford stated he had no disclosures. McShane stated that any parties who wanted to rebut the statements made in the councilmembers' disclosures could do so. (Clerk's Note: No rebuttal comments were offered.) Fleetwood moved to go into executive session for approximately ten minutes to have substantive discussion regarding legal issues. Motion carried unanimously. (Clerk's Note: The Council went into executive session from 8:40 p.m. to 8:53 p.m.) Whatcom County Council, 4/8/2003, 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 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. Crawford moved to approve the Hearing Examiner's decision based on the Hearing Examiner's original summary, findings of fact, and conclusions, including the remanded requirements and additional modified conditions. Motion to adopt carried 5 -1 -0 with Fleetwood opposed and Nelson absent. Caskey- Schreiber stated she only voted in favor of the ordinance because it is an urban growth area. It was a mistake to ever put the area in an urban growth area, but the County is bound by that action. McShane stated this was a very confusing and frustrating issue. The civil manner in which the residents of the area conducted themselves is very admirable. He understood that people may not be happy with the decision process. Caskey- Schreiber stated one of the comments has prompted her to try and draft legislation to increase the notification area to 1,000 feet for anyone who is going for a conditional use, variance, rezone, or Comprehensive Plan amendment. Brenner stated she really appreciated the information the Council received. It wasn't a comfortable resolution for anyone. She felt that the Council was in a legal position with little flexibility, which is why she voted in favor of the ordinance. INTRODUCTION ITEMS McShane moved to accept the Introduction Items. Fleetwood withdrew item one. Motion to accept items two through five carried unanimously. (Clerk's Note: Continued below.) 1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, CHAPTER 20.71 — WATER RESOURCE PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT, CHAPTER 20.80 — SUPPLEMENTARY REQUIREMENTS (STORMWATER AND CLEARING), CHAPTER 20.85 — PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS, AND CHAPTER 20.97 — DEFINITIONS, TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL REGULATORY PROTECTION FOR SENSITIVE WATERSHEDS (AB2002 -222B) 2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2003 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET, FOURTH REQUEST (AB2003 -152) 3. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING TEXT, CHAPTER 20.40, AGRICULTURE DISTRICT (AB2003 -153) Whatcom County Council, 4/8/2003, 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. 4. RESOLUTION REGARDING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION FOR PLANNING OF THE KENDALL COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER IN WHATCOM COUNTY (AB2003 -154) S. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF LIMITED TAX GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS (AB2003 -156) OTHER BUSINESS and REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS McShane stated the Council approved sending a letter to the State Health Board this evening, during the Committee of the Whole meeting. Because of the short timeframe, the letter will be included in the next Council packet, according to the new letter- sending policy. Brenner stated there would be a workshop at the Skagit County Public Utility District regarding farmers versus salmon, and whether they can save both. She is going. Roy stated she testified before the Natural Resources Committee in Olympia about grizzly bears, and showed her photographs from her camping trip at McNeil River in Alaska. It was rewarding to talk with people who had the scientific information. Crawford stated the County Council has been invited to attend a workshop series on visioning for an area that is a candidate for being included in the Bellingham urban growth area. The Mayor of Bellingham will be the keynote speaker for the workshop series. He recently got a letter from someone who questioned whether it is appropriate for the County Council to participate in a workshop to do visioning for a development that could occur in an urban growth area when it will be in the position of deciding whether or not it should be an urban growth area in the first place. He asked for some guidance on the issue. Pete Kremen, County Executive, asked who is paying for the workshops. Roy stated Caitec is paying for it. Crawford stated the developer who is making the application to get the area into the urban growth area is paying for it. Brenner stated it is disturbing because the workshop panelists include City of Bellingham staff. It's like doing an end run around the public process. She told Pat Jones she was uncomfortable. Whatcom County Council, 4/8/2003, 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 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. Crawford stated he wants to be a part of the visioning process if that is where they are headed. Until he got the letter questioning the appropriateness of the Council's attendance at the workshop, he didn't realize that they may have the cart before the horse. Dave Grant, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated this is not a quasi - judicial matter. It is a legislative matter. He's concerned about a quorum of the Council participating in the workshop. They may have to put out a notice of a public meeting, but the people hosting the workshops may not want to turn it into an open public meeting. He will discuss it further with the councilmembers. Crawford stated it doesn't sound like there is a quorum of councilmembers who are interested in attending. He would like to know whether it would be appropriate for an individual councilmember to attend, when they have to make the decision on the urban growth area. INTRODUCTION ITEMS S. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF LIMITED TAX GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS (AB2003 -156) (Clerk's Note: Continued from above.) McShane moved to pull the acceptance of Introduction Item five. The Council has not received any paperwork on it yet. Motion carried unanimously. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription These minutes were approved by Council on April 22 , 2003. ATTEST: Dana Brown- Davis, Council Clerk WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Dan McShane, Council Chair Whatcom County Council, 4/8/2003, Page 15 1 2 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, 4/8/2003, Page 16